Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Did you ever wonder why your Social Security card was not laminated when issued?



Did you ever wonder why your Social Security card was not laminated when issued?
 
By David McClelland
 
The US government mandated that all legal residents and citizens must have a valid Social Security card. The card is used by the IRS to track an individual's yearly earnings and the taxes owed. It is used by employers, among others, to assure that you are you.
 
My Social Security card ("card") has become quite worn over the years and I guessed that it hadn't been laminated when issued because that was back "in the olden days" and well before lamination was invented. I investigated and learned that the cards are still not laminated when issued and that there are valid reasons.
 
It turns out that our government placed several security features in our cards so that
it would be obvious if they have been tampered with. They wanted to make it impossible to make a counterfeit card. Laminating the card would hamper the government's ability to use these features.
 
The features are:

-       A blue tint marbleized random pattern. Any attempt to erase or remove data is detectable because the tint is erasable.

-       Small, multi-colored discs are randomly placed on the paper stock and can be seen with the naked eye.

-       Intaglio printing of the type used in US currency is used for some printing on the card and provides a raised effect that can be felt.

 
The government will replace your card free in case you lose it or if it becomes damaged for any reason, including because you decided to have it laminated before you learned that it isn't to be laminated.
 
In summary, you should not laminate your Social Security card and if you have done so before you read this, your government will give you a new one, identical to the original, at no cost to you.
 
For further details regarding our Social Security system, contact:
            http://www.ssa.gov/and Social Security Office Locator
 

Monday, June 28, 2010

Did you ever wonder which is the predominant color of storefront sign?

Did you ever wonder which is the predominant color of storefront signs?

By David McClelland

While driving by Bloomfield Town Square Shopping Center on Telegraph Road, just north of Square Lake Road, I was struck by the predominance of red storefront signs. That made me wonder if the signs in this Center are typical or are an aberration.

In that shopping center, there are 13 stores. K-Mart is at the north end and Costco is at the south end and both have red signs. In between, there are 11 stores and 9 have red signs or 82%. If we include the stores on each end, the percentage increases to 85.

I also checked the Tel-Huron Shopping Center at Telegraph and M-59 or Huron Road. There, I found only 7 open stores and 5 have red signs or 71%

My very small sample of only two small shopping centers revealed that 80% have red signs. If my sample were representative, and it is too small to be statistically significant, I would conclude that, indeed, red is the predominant color of storefront signs.

Other stores that I know of that use red storefront signs are Meijers, Tim Hortons, Save-On Drugs, Fitness USA, GMC, Bell Tire, Footlocker, Office Max, Michaels, Office Depot, Happy's Pizza, Mitsubishi and All Star Pizza, to name just a few.

Why are red signs used so often? Clearly, the sign companies will make signs in any color that their customers require. I expect that red is requested so often because the executives of the companies that buy them believe that red attracts more attention then other colors. I think that they may be correct.

Check it out where you shop to see how many red signs you notice.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Did you ever wonder what part "smells" play in our dreams?

Did you ever wonder what part "smells" play in our dreams?

By David McClelland

I have no memory of ever having experienced odors or smells during a dream. I was curious and found the following research that had been done on this subject.

Scientists have known that there is some kind of relationship between our dreams and external stimuli, including smells. They learned that different smells can influence dreams too. A German study tested 15 women while they slept who were exposed to various smells while asleep. Some were exposed to the scent of roses while others with the smell of rotten eggs. A minute after awaking, the women were interviewed about their dreams. The ones exposed to the smell of roses said they had pleasant dreams. The ones exposed to a rotten egg smells said they had correspondingly bad dreams; i.e., stressful dreams or nightmares. Although the smells themselves weren't "in" the dreams, they did influence how the women felt about their dreams.

I wasn't able to find research that concluded that we do experience odors or smells while we dream. What has your dream experience been as they relate to smells?

Monday, June 21, 2010

Did you ever wonder which professional athletes make the highest incomes?

Did you ever wonder which professional athletes make the highest incomes?

By David McClelland

You probably know or could guess that professional golfer, Tiger Woods, had the highest income last year. He made a whopping $127,902,702 from his golf winnings and his endorsement contracts, which massively exceeded what he made from golf. He recently became the world's first athlete to have cumulative, lifetime earnings of over one billion dollars from prize money and endorsements. That is impressive! How about the rest of the top 10?

Phil Mickelson, another professional golfer, had the second highest income at $5.9 million with another $40 million in endorsements or $45.9 million total.

Number 3 was NBA Miami Heat professional basketball player, Shaquille O'Neal, who earned $20 million with another $14 million in endorsements for $34 million.

Number 4 was Kobe Bryant, who was on the 2010 NBA Championship team, the Los Angeles Lakers, and earned $33.7 million in salary and endorsements (S&E).

Number 5 was Carson Palmer, the Cincinnati Bengals' professional football quarterback with a nine-year, $119 million contract and a $24 million signing bonus for an average of $31.6 million per year.

LeBron James, of the Cleveland Cavaliers NBA team, came in at No. 6 with $28.6 million in S&E.

Number 7 was Derek Jeter, the New York Yankees all-star shortstop, who made $28 million in S&E. And, Jeter's teammate, Alex Rodriquez (A-Rod), was No. 8 with $27 million in S&E.

Number 9 was NASCAR champ, Dale Earnhart, Jr. who earned $26 million S&E.

The 10th top money earner was the former Atlanta Falcons' quarterback, Michael Vick, now with the Philadelphia Eagles, with S&E of $25.4 million.

The top earning female professional tennis player was Maria Sharapova with earning of more than $20 million, primarily as the marketing engine for nine companies, including Land Rover, Cole Haan, and Tiffany & Co.

English professional soccer player, David Beckham, signed a $250 million, 5-year deal with the Los Angeles Galaxy, including S&E.

Now that the data is in for 2009, I have decided that I will come back as a pro golfer with extraordinary talent and will blow Tiger Wood's record out of the water. Have you decided what you would like to be next time around?

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Did you ever wonder why our government doesn't outlaw tobacco products?

Did you ever wonder why our government doesn't outlaw tobacco products?

By David McClelland

If the use of tobacco products is as harmful as it appears to be, why doesn't our government just ban their use nationally and unconditionally? The Surgeon General of the United States began to require that a strong warning be printed on each pack of cigarettes in 1966.

That first Surgeon General warning stated, "Cigarette smoking may be hazardous to your health." The warnings have become progressively stronger and, in 1985 stated, "Smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and may complicate pregnancy." More recently, the warning added, "Smoking by pregnant women may result in fetal injury, premature birth and low birth weight."

Concerning cigars, the warning states. "Cigar smoking may cause cancers to the mouth and throat even if you do not inhale." And there are others, including, "Tobacco smoke increases the risk of lung cancer and heart disease, even in non-smokers."

Beginning this year, the warnings on smokeless tobacco products include, "…may cause mouth cancer; …can cause gum disease and tooth loss; …is not a safe alternative to cigarettes, and …is addictive."

Several states, including Michigan, have banned smoking indoors in most public places.

One strong reason to ban tobacco products that emit smoke is the danger to nonsmokers who happen to be near to smokers and involuntarily inhale the smoke. Since the Surgeon General's warnings include nonsmokers, one would think that would be adequate incentive to ban all such products.

However, not only has our government not banned these products, it provides tobacco subsidies to about 89,000 farmers to the tune of about $200 million per year.

With all of the negatives about the use of tobacco, why do you suppose such a ban hasn't happened? Could it be that our government simply can't AFFORD to ban them because it collects about $50 billion in taxes from the sale of cigarettes each year? Hmmm.

Also, think what would happen in the U.S. if tobacco were made illegal? We couldn't expect addicted smokers to just quit smoking. They would probably be able to find cigarettes on the black market, even if they have to pay higher prices.

Think about the enforcement issues. Can you imagine the police trying to arrest all of those addicted smokers? That would be a nightmare for law enforcement.

Although banning the use of tobacco products would appear to be the healthy thing for all Americans, I don't look for it to happen in my lifetime. I was lucky to be born of parents who did not smoke. I credit that for the fact that my sister and I never smoked and not a single member of my family has ever smoked. I will just have to count my blessings and continue to watch the unfolding story of tobacco and its products. How about you? Where do you stand on this issue?

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Did you ever wonder why we get goosebumps?

Did you ever wonder why we get goosebumps?

By David McClelland

Did you ever wonder why we get goosebumps?

Tiffany, my twelve-year old granddaughter, suggested that I research this question.

I did the research and here is what I learned. Actually, it is quite interesting.

Think about the last time that you remember getting goosebumps. It may have been on a warm summer day when you were swimming in warm water, but there was a breeze and the moment you left the water you felt a chill and got goosebumps. Or, maybe you heard a song from long ago, the song your grandmother used to sing to you when you were a child. Again, you felt a chill on your back and, again, you got goosebumps. Why would such unrelated events cause you to have the same physical reaction?

I learned that goosebumps are a physiological phenomenon inherited from our animal ancestors. They are tiny elevations of the skin that resemble the skin of poultry after their feathers have been plucked. These bumps in humans are apparently caused by a contraction of miniature muscles that are attached to each hair. Each contracting muscle creates a shallow depression on the skin's surface, which causes the surrounding area to protrude. The contraction also causes the hair to stand up whenever the body feels cold.

Apparently, in animals with a thick hair coat, this rising of hair expands to a layer of air that serves as insulation. The thicker the layer of hair, the more heat is retained. In humans, this reaction is useless because we do not have a hair coat, but we still get the goosebumps.

People may also get goosebumps during emotional situations, such as walking down the aisle during a wedding, standing on a podium listening to the national anthem after winning in sports or from watching horror movies.

Finally, the reason for these responses is the subconscious release of a stress hormone called adrenaline. In humans, adrenaline is produced in two small glands that sit atop the kidneys and not only cause the contraction of skin muscles, but also influence many other body reactions. Adrenaline is often released when we feel cold or afraid.

The next time you get goosebumps, remember that you have our animal ancestors to thank for getting them and Tiffany to thank for suggesting that we learn about them.

Friday, June 11, 2010

Did you ever wonder if the Detroit Lions football team will ever win again?

Did you ever wonder if the Detroit Lions football team will ever win again?

By David McClelland

Did you ever wonder if the Detroit Lions football team will ever win again?

I have to tell you that I sometimes wonder exactly that. Why? Well, as we all know, the Lions haven't won it all since they did it in 1957. What is that, 53 years ago? The championship in 1957 was their 4th. The 1950's was the best decade for the Lions. They won the first of their four championships in 1935 (the year after they moved to Detroit), and again in 1952, in 1953 and in 1957. With Bobby Lane as their QB, they beat the Cleveland Browns in each of those games. But, they lost to those same Browns in the 1954 championship game. Since that time, the Lions have only a single playoff win to their credit.

The Lions are one of only four NFL teams that have yet to win a Super Bowl. 1957 was way too long ago. Have they come close since? Not really, but they hold the record for the second longest regular season losing streak at 19 games. Second only to the Tampa Bay streak of 26 games. Then, in 2008, the Lions became the only team in NFL history to lose all 16 regular season games. And, they are currently riding a 20 away-game losing streak. Enough already!!!

Wait. The Lions have had what many considered to be even worse seasons. In 1942, the Lion's offense was so bad that it scored only 5 touchdowns all season and never scored more that 7 points in a single game. During the four seasons from 1946 – 1949, the Lions won a total of 10 games. And, the 1943 Lions and New York Giants played to a 0-0 tie, the last time that an NFL game ended in a tie.

I, for one, am more than tired of waiting for the Lions to have a winning season and I want you to know that I have taken action. I have never been a Lions season ticket holder, preferring to watch most games on TV, but, this year, I was offered the opportunity to split some really good season tickets on the 30 yard line with a friend and I "invested" $900 to do so. I have home game tickets to the following games this year: A preseason game in late August vs. the Cleveland Browns, the Nov. 7th game vs. the New York Jets, the December 5th game vs. the Chicago Bears, the December 12 game vs. the Green Bay Packers and the January 2nd game vs. the Minnesota Vikings. I don't know the exact date of the game with the Browns because the Lions don't deliver season tickets until mid-July and it may not be a Sunday game.

What are my chances of seeing the Lions turn it around this season while I am in attendance? That isn't at all clear and it depends who you listen to or read. Recently, Pat Caputo, The Oakland Press' sports writers that I consider most knowledgeable, said, "Despite winning just two games by six points the past two years, I expect the Lions would garner between six and eight victories this coming season." (They need to win 9 games to have a winning season since they have a 16 game schedule.) Other sports writers are not as optimistic. If the Lions could meet or beat Caputo's prediction, most Lion's fans would probably consider it a great turn-around season. I would be one of them and, of course, I would take at least partial credit for their success since I will have attended 5 home games and cheered them on to those victories. I will have much greater credibility if the Lions win all 5 of "my games." I do look forward to this Lions season. How about you?

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Did you ever wonder what might make a Utility bill suddenly jump by over 500% ?

Did you ever wonder what might make a Utility bill suddenly jump by over 500%?

By David McClelland

Did you ever wonder what might make a Utility bill suddenly jump by over 500%?

I never did until it happened to us. It was our Bloomfield Township Water and Sewer Division bill. Our normal water bill for a three-month period during the winter (when our sprinkler system is turned off) runs about $190, or about $63 per month. For the first quarter of this year, we were shocked to see that it was $951.68 or about $317 per month, a 500% increase.

We couldn't believe the usage because we had not been away at all during that period and had not heard the sump pump or the toilets running. We asked the Township to have someone come out and see if they could determine what was causing the problem.

They did send a man to our house and he was here for about an hour. While he was here, the meter showed no water usage at all and he said that we were not then experiencing any sort of a leak. He could come up with no explanation, but said they would remove and test the meter.

We left for a two weeks vacation in Europe and asked our son to let the worker in to take out our water meter and to install a new one. When we returned, we got a letter from the Township saying that they had tested our original meter and found that "the meter has been certified to meet the accuracy requirements as specified by the American Waterworks Association (AWWA) standards. They attached the results: 16 GPM full flow @ 100%; 3 GPM intermediate flow @ 100% and ½ GPM low flow @ 95%.

So far, all we knew was that the Township was convinced that it wasn't their problem. I felt that their experts should have done more to assist us in locating the problem. They would not, but offered to allow us to pay the bill off over 12 months at 0% interest and no late payment fee because they were testing the meter. We decided we'd better agree to that and went to the Water and Sewer Division to sign the paper work. That turned out to be more than we expected. First, we had to sign an "Installment Agreement for Water Charges" and make the first payment. Fair enough, but when we saw the agreement, the amount to be repaid was $2,099.18 rather than the $951.68 we expected. They explained that our metered usage as of that date was the $2,099.18 amount and they figured we'd want to pay the whole thing on installments. We did. They next thing was that the agreement would cause a lien to be placed on our home and, if we failed to meet the terms of the agreement, we wouldn't be able to sell our property until we did.

As an attorney, I had to read all of the language of the agreement and, when I did, I determined that we could not sign it as written. The problem was that it provided for 12 payments of $174.93 each month (in addition to paying whatever our then current bill happened to be), but said that 50% of the entire payment had to be paid by September 10, 2010. Clearly, that provision was wrong. That date was only three months away and it would not be possible to pay 50% of the total by that date at the agreed to rate. When I explained this to them, they redrafted the agreement such that the September deadline was in 2011.

OK, we were on the way to paying off this unexpected debt, but we were no closer to finding the cause of the extreme water usage. What should we do next? I'm not sure, but what we did do was to hire a plumber/handy man to come out and replace all of the working parts in all three toilets and to check our sump pumps for leaks. We did this because we were told that one leaking toilet could waste up to 200 gallons of water a day.

The Township suggested that our back-up, water-powered sump pump (WPSP) might be the culprit. In the eight years since it was installed, we had never heard it run except when it was being tested. It would kick on only if we had a bad storm that knocked out our electricity such that the water level in the sump pump rose high enough to trip the float in the back-up, WPSP, causing it to come on to pump out the water to keep our basement from flooding. The problem with these back-up pumps, we recently discovered, is that they use huge amounts of water; i.e., about 2 gallons of water for every gallon of sump water pumped out.

Our plumber/handy man checked both sumps and found them to be operating correctly. What next? We thought about, but ruled out, our sinks, showers, dishwasher, clothes washer and ice machine. Still no answer.

We are monitoring usage every day by going to the basement and recording the reading. We have been doing so for almost a month and the usage has never been excessive on any day. We are still baffled and will continue to watch usage daily so that, if there is another spike, we will know it and may have more information to locate the area of concern. It is frustrating not to have been able to say for certain what caused us to have to pay over $2,000 in water/sewer bills. We may never know. Where is the justice in that?

Friday, June 4, 2010

Did you ever wonder when "dollar stores" began and how they make a profit?

Did you ever wonder where "dollar stores" began and how they make a profit?

By David McClelland

Did you ever wonder where "dollar stores" began and how they make a profit?
I am always amazed at what one can buy for a dollar in these stores when we must pay much more for seemingly the same merchandise elsewhere. Just how do they do it?

First, lets look at the history of the "dollar" store. The earliest one seems to have been, Family Dollar Stores, founded in 1959 by 21 year-old, Leon Levine in Charlotte, North Carolina. Levine was from a retailing family. His father, Harry Levine, operated a department store in Rockingham, North Carolina and, when Harry died in 1947, Leon and his brother inherited the store. Leon thought that he could make a more profitable business out of stores that sold all merchandise at a low price. Today, his chain, Family Dollar, comprises over 6,600 stores nationwide. Other large U.S. dollar store chains are Dollar Tree, Dollar General and Fred's Super Dollar. They all appear to be successful.

That explains where such stores originated, but how do they manage to make a profit? The owners have to build or lease large stores (they average 20,000 square feet), buy the merchandise, play labor costs, pay property taxes (either directly or indirectly), pay state and federal income taxes and pay all of the other costs associated with doing business. All of those costs wouldn't seem to leave much for profit.

I spoke with a manager of one such store and he told me that he is able to make a nice profit because he sells every product at a 50% mark-up. That means that he buys in such large quantities that he consistently pays at least 50% less for each item than the $1 that we pay when we buy it from him. He said that other cost-savings are that the stores are strictly self-service, have few employees and that they don't advertise. One usually sees no more than two or three employees in dollar stores.

Dollar stores have been around for over 50 years. They appear to be destined to be around for quite a while longer. And, if you decide to shop in one, you won't have to go into debt or go broke filling your bag or basket. Now, you probably know more than you did about dollar stores.

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Did you ever wonder how many species of birds can't fly?



Did you ever wonder how many species of birds can't fly?
 
            By David McClelland
 
            Did you ever wonder about the various species of birds in our world which can't fly? Wait a minute, doesn't a bird have to fly to be a bird? You would think so, but not all species birds are able to fly.
 

What birds that don't fly come to mind for you? You may think of the domestic chickens and turkeys, but it turns out that chickens and turkeys are naturally able to fly, but the farmers have bred them for their meat and they get too heavy to fly. Some farmers may also trim their wings, so that they won't "fly the coop". If you go online, you can find videos of chickens flying good distances, especially when a dog comes barking nearby. So chickens and turkeys aren't correct answers.

 

            The Penguin may come to mind and that is one type of bird that can't fly even though Penguins possess a pair of wing-like appendages. They make up for their inability to fly with their ability to swim. Their "wings" make great flippers for propelling themselves through the water. The next time you visit The Detroit Zoo, be sure too visit their Penguinarium for a real treat. It opened in 1968 as the first such exhibit in the United States and is continually being improved upon. Did you know that there are 17 different species of Penguins? There are three such species at the Penguinariam? The three are the king, the macaroni and the rockhopper Penguins. Check them out. You won't be disappointed. The Penguin is our flightless bird No. 1.
 
            We lived in the "out-back" of Australia for over two years while I was in the USAF in the early 1970's and I know from living there that their largest native bird, the Emu, in not able to fly. Emus can be as tall as 6'6" and weigh over 100 pounds. Emus can run over long distances at about 31 miles per hour. They do possess small wings, but not nearly the muscle strength to allow them to fly. They are farmed for their meat, oil and leather. The Emu is our 2nd flightless bird.
 
            Then, there is the Emu's cousin, the Ostrich, which also can't fly. The Ostrich is native to Africa. An Ostrich can grow to over 9' tall, weigh as much as 345 pounds, run at 43 miles per hour and live up to 40 years in captivity. They also have the largest eyeballs (2 ½ inches in diameter) and lay the largest eggs (3 pounds) of any bird. As is the case with the Emu, humans eat Ostrich meat and use their oil and leather. In addition, Ostrich feathers are used for boas and pen quills. Artists like to paint pictures on their large egg shells. Some of our zoos have live Ostrichs on display. You will find them in zoos in Los Angeles, California and in The Bronx, New York. The Ostrich is our 3rd flightless bird.
 
            Have you come up with another one yet? It may not come immediately to mind, but there is a small, flightless bird, about the size of a chicken, that weighs between 3 & 9 pounds and is native only to New Zealand. It is the Kiwi. The Kiwi lays large eggs. A Kiwi egg may weigh up to half of the weight of the bird which laid it. The Kiwi has a long, slender, flexible bill with nostrils on the end that allow it to find food in the ground. Kiwis are nocturnal, have no tail and possess tiny, two-inch, wings. There are five species of kiwi, including the most common: Brown Kiwis, Little Spotted Kiwis and Great Spotted Kiwis. The New Zealand native people are also known as Kiwis. It is interesting to note that Kiwi shoe polish began in 1906 when a man in Melbourne, Australia, whose wife was from New Zealand, first produced it. You can still buy it today in about 180 countries. The company is now owned by Sara Lee. The Kiwi is our 4th flightless bird.
 
            Do you think we have them all now? Well, not quite. There are still the Cassowary and the Rhea. Never heard of them. Neither had I. It turns out that the Cassowary is native to New Guinea, nearby islands and to N.E. Australia. The Cassowary is the third tallest (up to 71") and second heaviest ( up to129 pounds) bird. The Cassowary is a shy bird which lives 40 – 50 years and stays deep in forests. The Cassowary is our 5th flightless bird.
 

Finally, we have the Rhea which is native to South America. It is smaller than, but looks similar to an Ostrich. Rheas can weigh up to 80 pounds and be nearly 5 feet tall. The Rhea does have wings, rather large ones for a flightless bird, and they spread them while running so that their wings act like sails. The Rhea is our 6th and last flightless bird. 

 

Can you believe it? Six birds that can't fly. And there were others, but the others have all become extinct. If you should learn of any additional such species, kindly advise.

Did you ever wonder which books, written in English, are the longest ever written?

Did you ever wonder which books, written in English, are the longest ever written?

By David McClelland

I was re-reading one of my favorite books, “Atlas Shrugged,” by Ayn Rand, which I thought was long and remembered some other long books that I have read including: “The Stand” by Stephen King and “Les Miserables” by Victor Hugo.

Then, I wondered about the really long books and which are the longest. When I began to research this subject, I found that I first had to determine what criteria should be used to decide. One could base it on word count or page count. I decided that word count was the more appropriate indicator.

Based upon word count, the longest books ever written in English in order are:

Rank Words Title Author

1 17 million “Marienbad My Love” Mark Leach
2 11.3 million “The Blah Story” Nigel Tomm
3 9 million “The Story of the Vivian Girls” Henry Darger
4 2.2 million “Trial by Tenderness” Cevn McGuire
5 1.2 million “Mission Earth” L. Ron Hubbard
6 1.1 million “Sironia, Texas” Madison Cooper

12 645,000 “Atlas Shrugged” Ayn Rand
14 560,000 “War and Peace” Leo Tolstoy
15 513,000 “Les Miserables” Victor Hugo

I thought the books I remembered were long, but they pale by comparison to the others, especially the longest three. Care to take a few months and read one of those?