What Caught My Eye Today - Air Travel, Oil, Guantanamo Bay, Currency, Monogamy
Air Travel - British low-cost airline Ryanair says fuel has become so expensive that it makes up 47% of its total operating costs, so it is going to slow down in order to rein in those fuel costs. I'm sorry, but I think I must have read that wrong, then again this is Ryanair we're talking about, so I guess anything is possible (click here). Passengers probably won't notice since the slower speeds will only add about two minutes to every hour of flying time. Ryanair has been so desperate to save on fuel costs that it even reduced the size of its in-flight magazine and printed the in-flight menu on it as well. Just how big was that in-flight menu to begin with? If fact, one wonders why a menu is necessary for complimentary pretzels or peanuts in the first place? That move alone cut thousands of dollars off of annual fuel costs. Personally, I think they did this more for the PR than any material savings. That 47% of total operating costs works out to just shy of 1.1 billion euros (which works out to almost 1.5 billion dollars). Let's say the airline saved $99,000 (the upper limit of "thousands of dollars"), that represents 0.00009% of its total costs. Ryanair is also moving ahead with plans to charge passengers to use the lavatory. The airline is considering charging 1 euro or 1 British pound (about $1.33 to $1.52) to use the restroom. I'm thinking if you are out of spare change, that extra two minutes could feel like an eternity.
Oil - The Saudi Arabian ruling class is worried that the Persian Gulf state, which is the world's largest oil exporter, is too dependent on petroleum and that it needs to take the threat posed by the boom in U.S. production seriously. I get the concern about having all your eggs in one basket. Diversification is never a bad thing. But I'm not too sure about this U.S. production threat (wouldn't that be nice change of pace?). As long as there are nations the likes of China, India and Brazil to prop up demand, I'm not sure the Saudis need to concern themselves too much over the fact that the Americans finally figured out how to build fuel-efficient cars. Although the Saudi government is trying to diversify the kingdom's economy, its dependence on oil is near absolute with it's petroleum sector accounting for roughly 80% of budget revenues, 45% of GDP and 90% of export earnings. Because of the growth in U.S. supply, the kingdom won't be able to raise its production capacity as planned to 15 million barrels of oil per day. Earlier this year, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said monthly domestic oil production is forecast to exceed 8 million barrels per day in the fourth quarter of 2014, its highest level since 1988. Net crude oil imports are expected to fall below 7 million barrels during that period, the first time that has happened since 1995. The recent increase in oil production, ranks the U.S. as the third highest producer of oil (8.5 million barrels) and the tenth highest exporter of oil (1.9 million barrels). which makes no sense to me at all considering that we consume 19.2 billion barrels of the stuff. Even if we kept all that extra oil we're producing, we'd still be importing more than the next largest importer (the entire European Union). So please explain to me what it is exactly that has Saudi Arabia so worried about declining U.S. demand for oil?
Guantanamo Bay - According to reports from a recent U.S. congressional delegation visit the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, rather than the Koran, the book that is requested most by detainees is "Fifty Shades of Grey." I can sort of empathize with the inmates. After all, they do have a lot of time on their hands and what could be better than the kinky exploits of Christian and Anastasia to take your mind off those horrible forced feedings? Journalists are not allowed to visit that part of the detention camp but can tour the other prisons and the library that provides books, magazines and DVDs to all 166 captives. Guantanamo librarians have said in the past that they screen reading material for sexual content, even blacking out photos of scantily clad women in the advertisements in sports magazines. On one hand, I think it is laudable that the librarians are doing their due diligence to respect the religious values of the detainees. Then again, is anyone absolutely positive that there will be a whole bunch of enthusiastic virgins will be waiting in the after-life?
Currency - Arizona Senator John McCain has re-introduced legislation to phase out dollar bill. Haven't we been down this road before? According to a consumer advocacy group, eliminating the dollar bill in favor of the coin would save $13.8 billion over 30 years. The group said printing dollar bills may be cheaper than minting coins, but they last only about four years compared with 30 years for a coin. The savings would nearly triple other recent estimates of the $1 coin’s impact. Yeah, I'm pretty sure I heard this argument too. Even though most other countries, such as Canada, Britain and Japan, have replaced smaller currency denominations with coins, Americans love their greenbacks and have never warmed to dollar coins. That's right. Never let it be said that us Americans could be deterred by common sense logic. This dislike of coins by Americans contrasts with currencies of most other developed countries, where denominations of similar value exist only in coin. These coins have largely succeeded because of a removal of their corresponding paper issues. The U.S. government has taken no action to remove the one-dollar bill, due to intensive lobbying. Being a lobbyist must be fascinating work. And how nice must it be to have a career where good or bad, right or wrong, are mostly irrelevant. It's all about whatever position you are been paid to advocate for.
Monogamy - Only a few species of mammals are monogamous, and now dueling scientific teams think they've figured out why they got that way. This should be good. One team looked just at primates, the animal group that includes apes and monkeys. The researchers said the exclusive pairing of a male and a female evolved as a way to let fathers defend their young against being killed by other males. The other scientific team concluded that mammals became monogamous because females had spread out geographically, and so males had to stick close by to fend off the competition. Where's the love here, people? All I get from this is a bunch of male insecurity issues. But both teams discounted a long-standing explanation for monogamy, that it provides two parents rather than one for rearing offspring. And there goes family values. Researchers said they hesitated to apply their conclusions to humans but said they wouldn't quite put humans in the monogamous category. That's scientific jibber jabber for, "it's not that we're on the same level as apes and chimps...no, we're probably much worse."