I can’t say I 100% believe that weather changes are all because of things like global warming but what I do know is that humans generate a lot of waste. Everyone doesn’t recycle, many people litter, and our air isn’t always the cleanest to inhale. I understand that upgrading to new types of resources for powering things like cars will affect other industries. However, that shouldn’t be the reason why we don’t look for ways to improve our processes and way of life. Businesses and brands like Kodak, Xerox, Blockbuster, Blackberry, and others have been left in behind due to the evolution of technology and the human experience. No one feels sorry for them so why should we be trying to protect the feelings of oil and gas companies. At some point, everything or person will be replaced but something newer, faster, bigger, smarter, and or better. To help with the transition to reducing our impact on the planet I would do several things.
- Require that companies have at least 25% of their product lines to be comprised of solutions with reduced impact on the environment. I would use organizations like EPA and OSHA to create the standards and enforce the regulations.
- Tax credits or incentives would be provided for companies that go above and beyond their bare minimum requirements for cleaner planet.
- A portion of financial savings that companies experience from making planet eco-friendly changes would be matched and credited back to the company.
- Reward recyclers. I would allow recycling companies to provide trackable containers that could be linked to families so that if a family recycled a lot, they would get financially get credited for some of the further trash processing they’ve prevented.
- Create a fund for companies or individuals to get grants to fund eco-friendly initiatives. This would be funded by some government taxes and or some of the state lottery revenue.
The process for hiring a new NFL head coach when your previous one has failed is a mess. So, I’ve put some thought behind how I would improve the process. First off, the idea that candidates have to get permission to interview for promotions is a joke. The fact that candidates on NFL playoffs teams can only interview in limited windows and can’t be hired until their team is eliminated isn’t fair. The league is basically rewarding teams that fail with first dibs at supplying candidates. The playoff teams that probably have the most promising candidates basically get the leftover opportunities. Here’s what I would look to do.
- Teams must allow a candidate that a team is interested in to apply and be interviewed for a job.
- If a team prevents someone from applying and or interviewing, they will have to give the candidate a promotion.
- Whatever decision a team grants on allowing a candidate to interview or not stands for all interested teams.
- For example, the Bears can’t say that their offensive coordinator can’t interview for Green Bay Packers’ head coaching job but say yes to identical opportunity with Cleveland Browns.
- No teams can interview candidates for jobs until after super bowl is over.
Nothing groundbreaking with these 3 simple changes. At same time, I think if these rules were implemented the better candidates would get opportunities and it would create more even playing feel for candidates and teams.
Seems like we have mass shootings now weekly. Whether they are confrontations at parties that result in bodies being dropped, random encounters at stores, or retaliation from workplace incidents. We’ve almost gotten used to them. We know that folks are going to send thoughts and prayers, create hashtags, and that congress isn’t going to execute any substantial legislation that brings about change. If I ruled the world there are several things I would recommend. First, I would prohibit the sell of any military grade or mass assault style weapons to the everyday person. Whatever lists that currently exists that civilians can’t purchase over the counter, add military and or mass assault weapons to it. Second, I establish psyche evaluations that registered gun owners would have to take every 3-5 years. If person fails the evaluation and gets flagged for sketchy answers they have to hand over their guns for 6 month period. They would only get them back after passing a psyche evaluation. Third, I would limit the number of guns that someone can own. Probably isn’t a reason for someone to have 10 types of guns just to pick a number. Fourth, any time someone purchases a gun they need to pass a background check. If they don’t pass, they can’t purchase anything. Fifth, registered gun owners would have pass background check every 3 years to maintain gun ownership. Lastly, if someone is reported to authorities for specious behavior and or accused of planning a mass shooting that person shall lose their guns for designated period of time. Additionally, they must pass psyche evaluation. I must admit I don’t have much experience with guns, I’ve held one in my hand several times. Got to shoot one a several times back in a college ROTC class with terrible aim. However, that’s where my experience stops. The above actions recommended prevents mass assault style guns from being sold over the counter, requires passed psyche evaluations on regular basis for gun owners, limits the number of guns someone can own, requires background any gun purchase, requires registered gun owners to pass background checks every 3 years, and takes away guns from specious people temporarily. Maybe some of these laws exist a less useful forms but this is what I would do. Again, the ideas are listed as bullet points below.
- Restriction the sale or military grade or mass style assault weapons for over-the-counter purchase
- Require passed psyche evaluations on regular basis for registered gun owners.
- Limit the number of guns someone can own.
- Require background checks on any gun purchase.
- Require registered gun owners to pass background check on regular basis.
- Take away guns from people reported for specious behavior temporarily.