It's cold. It's January.

Child in cold weather, 1912.

Apparently this is news.

I don't really believe it is.

Every year it seems the national news comes on with some absurd story in December through February about it being record cold.  As in this is the worst stretch of cold since the Pleistocene.

Bull.

American soldiers in Arachangel, 1919.

It gets cold every year in the winter. Some winters are a lot colder than others, and we can debate the trends and why that is, but just because some person with a Metro Geo can't get out of his driveway in New Jersey in January doesn't mean its the coldest January since the history of Januaries.  It's just January.

Some of this, by this point, I'm pretty sure is due to confirmation bias, which gets me to another topic.

I've read more than one account that claims the World War One years or the World War Two years were the coldest years in Europe in eons.  I don't believe it.

American ambulance stuck in the snow, Europe 1917.

I do believe that if you spent four years rotating in and out of sodden trenches it would seem to be the wettest and coldest four years you'd ever seen.  Sure, if you otherwise spent January in your hovel in Dusseldorf or Wickham, it's freaking cold.  Likewise, if you walked from Omaha Beach to the Rhine in 1944 and 1945, much of that would have seemed really, really cold, particularly if you'd otherwise been working in a Bethlehem Steel plant where it's as hot as the surface temperature of the sun in January.

American soldier drawing water from a stream, December 1944.

But that doesn't mean it was the coldest set of years in all time.

Moroccan soldier in Italy, 1944.  Bet the weather seemed really cold to him.

But, you are saying.  I don't live in Dusseldorf and haven't been sent to the trenches.  Hah!

Nope, the logic still applies.

Unless you live in a draft house insulated with newspaper and heated by wood or chunks of coal, and spend the better part of your day working outdoors everyday, or walk to work from your ill heated apartment to work in an ill heated office and walk home at the end of the day, you really don't experience the cold weather that much anyhow.

You would have, if you'd lived a century or more ago.

You don't.  You probably live in a nicely heated home and travel in a nice warm car or nice warm train and don't actually get out that much.  So a cold snap is really remarkable for those short periods of time in which you are out.

But its not really novel, in a real sense.

Ending Budget Sessions

As most Wyomingites know, ever session of the legislature isn't a full session.  Every other year is a budget session. This year is a regular session.

A bill is in the legislature to eliminate budget sessions and make them regular sessions. 

There's solid logic to this.  The budget sessions have become regular sessions in spite of themselves.  They're more constrained in time, but legislators nonetheless try to run through a bunch of regular bills through them. Why bother with the charade is the logic, and it's pretty solid logic.

Having said that, for careful observers there's always a certain sense of dread about the full session as the legislature has more time to monkey with stuff.  Making that occur only every other year provides a little relief.  And on that, the legislature isn't actually required to have a budget session, its just allowed to.

It'd be nice, in an odd way, to have the legislature actually skip the budget sessions for awhile before just giving up on them. That would make the general session really packed, but maybe that would also keep out a lot of the bills that really waste time by being simply unpassable.  But passing on budget sessions is asking for more restraint than most deliberative bodies can muster.

Anyhow, there's a bill out there.

SF159. The good faith effort to sell act

There have been a lot of interesting bills in this legislative session.

Of course, I suppose there are in every session, really.  But this has seen some unusual ones.

SF159 would require companies that are closing coal fired power plants to make a good faith effort to sell them or it would deprive them of the ability to pass the cost of building a new power generation facility on to the consumers. 

Obviously, this is a bill designed to keep coal fired plants in operation in Wyoming.

This caused me to realize I don't actually know how many coal fired power plants there are in Wyoming.  More than I likely know of, I'm sure.  I can think of several, but I'm sure that more exist.  There has been a national trend towards closing them, although there has not been in Wyoming so far, which of course features power plants that are close to their source of coal, at least by rail, no matter where they are.

National trends are likely to determine the long term outcome of these plants in Wyoming.  For the time being they're likely safe from being closed except in the case of obsolesce or material decline, which is always a concern for older plants.

2019

STATE OF WYOMING

19LSO-0701

SENATE FILE NO. SF0159

New opportunities for Wyoming coal fired generation.

Sponsored by: Senator(s) Dockstader, Bebout and Driskill

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to public utilities; limiting the recovery of costs for the retirement of coal fired generation facilities; providing a process for the sale of an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility; exempting a person purchasing an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility from regulation as a public utility; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 37‑2‑133 and 37‑3‑116 are created to read:

37‑2‑133.  Exemption for purchase of coal fired generation facilities that would otherwise have been retired.

(a)  Except as otherwise provided in this section, the provisions of this chapter and chapters 1 and 3 of this title shall not apply to a person who is not a public utility and who contracts to purchase an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility from a public utility under W.S. 37‑3‑116. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the provisions of this chapter and chapters 1 and 3 of this title shall not apply to a person who is not a public utility and who contracts to purchase an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility from a public utility under W.S. 37‑3‑116 and who further contracts to sell electric generation services from that facility to a retail customer of a public utility, provided that the retail purchaser of the electric generation services remains a customer of a public utility for purposes of obtaining backup service. As used in this section, "backup service" means an electric service provided by a public utility that replaces electricity ordinarily generated by the person who purchased an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility under W.S. 37‑3‑116. Backup service provided to a person who also purchases electric generation and associated transmission service from a person who purchased an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility under W.S. 37‑3‑116 shall not include charges for transmission service to the extent the person who purchased an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility under W.S. 37‑3‑116 already pays the public utility for transmission service to deliver electricity to that customer.

(b)  The person who is selling electric generation and associated transmission services to a retail customer of a public utility through a contract entered into under this section shall not be subject to regulation as a public utility under this chapter and chapters 1 and 3 of this title except that:

(i)  The person who is selling electric generation and associated transmission services through a contract entered into under this section to a retail customer shall file a copy of any such contract with the public service commission in a manner consistent with W.S. 37‑3‑111; and

(ii)  The intrastate retail revenues received by any person who is selling electric generation and associated transmission services through a contract entered into under this section shall be subject to the uniform assessment provisions of W.S. 37‑2‑106, 37‑2‑107, 37‑2‑108 and 37‑2‑109.

37‑3‑116.  Limitation for recovery of costs associated with electric generation built to replace retiring coal fired generation facility.

(a)  Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the rates charged by an electric public utility shall not include any recovery of or earnings on the capital costs associated with new electric generation facilities built, in whole or in part, to replace the electricity generated from one (1) or more coal fired generating units or plants located in Wyoming and retired on or after January 1, 2022, unless the commission has determined that the public utility that owned the retired coal fired electric generation facility made a good faith effort to sell the facility to another person prior to its retirement and that the public utility received no reasonable offer to purchase the facility.

(b)  In determining whether the public utility made a good faith effort to sell the retired coal fired electric generation facility under this section the commission shall consider:

(i)  Whether the public utility provided sufficient time prior to the facility's retirement for potential purchasers to evaluate purchasing the facility;

(ii)  Whether the public utility used reasonable efforts to make potential purchasers aware of the opportunity to purchase the facility; and

(iii)  Whether the public utility reasonably evaluated any offers received by the public utility for the purchase of the facility.

(c)  In determining whether an offer to purchase a coal fired electric generation facility under this section was reasonable the commission shall consider:

(i)  Whether accepting the offer to purchase the retired facility would have reduced costs to the public utility's customers as compared to retiring the facility;

(ii)  Whether accepting the offer to purchase the retired facility would have reduced risks to the public utility's customers as compared to retiring the facility including any diminished environmental remediation risks; and

(iii)  Whether accepting the offer to purchase the retired facility would have been in the public interest.

(d)  In determining whether an offer to purchase the retired electric generation facility was reasonable the commission shall not consider any impacts to the public utility associated with potential lost revenues from the sale of electric generation to customers who could have elected to purchase power from the person purchasing the electric generation facility under W.S. 37‑2‑133.

(e)  Upon application by a public utility, the commission may approve procedures for the solicitation and review of offers to purchase an otherwise retiring electric generation facility in advance of a proposed retirement. If the public utility follows the procedures approved by the commission to solicit and review offers to purchase an otherwise retiring electric generation facility under this subsection, there shall be no limitation under this section for recovery of costs or earnings associated with electric generation built to replace a retired coal fired electric generation facility.

(f)  Any agreement between a public utility and another person for the sale of an otherwise retiring coal fired electric generation facility shall be approved by the commission. In reviewing the agreement the commission shall consider:

(i)  Whether the proposed purchaser has, or has contracted for, financial, technical and managerial abilities sufficient to reasonably operate and maintain the facility;

(ii)  Whether the proposed purchaser has, or has contracted for, financial, technical and managerial abilities sufficient to reasonably decommission and retire the facility if and to the extent the facility is decommissioned and retired;

(iii)  Whether the proposed purchaser has, or has contracted for, financial, technical and managerial abilities sufficient to reasonably satisfy any environmental obligations associated with the operation, maintenance or potential retirement of the facility; and

(iv)  If the coal fired electric generation facility is comprised of one (1) or more generation units at a larger power plant where the public utility will continue to own and operate one (1) or more generation units, whether the proposed purchaser and the public utility have made reasonable contractual arrangements for the sharing of thecosts associated with any joint or common facilities at the plant.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2019.

(END)

Wednesday, January 29, 1919. Colonies in issue, Secret Treaties Exposed, Immigration to be halted, State Prohibition Bill Advances as 18th Amendment Certified, Mexican Rebels reported defeated again, and Yanks can Marry By Mail.

English Inns at Court being used as an American Navy rest barracks, Red Cross supplies being unloaded.  January 29, 1919.

There was a lot to report on on this Wednesday, January 19, 1919.

The Peace Treaty was struggling on what to do with the colonies of the defeated.  Giving them nation status, unless they were European, seemed out of the question, so League of Nation mandates were being argued about instead.

The 18th Amendment was certified by Congress as ratified, but the State was still going to pass a prohibition bill anyhow, showing that the desire to act on the already acted upon purposelessly already existed. There was no reason to pass any Prohibition bill in Wyoming, but the Legislature was going to do it anyway.

And American soldiers could marry their sweethearts by mail, it was decided, exchanging vows by correspondence, apparently.  The validity of that in certain faiths, it might be noted, would be questionable.

As, in most cases, would be the purpose.  Separated by an ocean, the couples were not going to reunite until Johnny Came Marching Home anyhow.  And if he was going to instead find the Belle de France in la belle France. . . well that was probably going to happen anyhow as well.  About the only reason to do this would be to resolve questions of impending legitimacy, which perhaps would have been a concern in some instances.

And the economy was tanking while there were vast numbers of Europeans who were refugees, which no doubt put focus on immigration and which was accordingly being addressed in Congress.

Among the refugees were the Armenians.  Their plight was well known but it had not been addressed.

Apparently, to my huge surprise, leaving for Florida in the winter was already a thing.  I would not have guessed that at all, once again showing the application of Holscher's First Law of History.

Elsewhere, Mexican rebels were reported as defeated, once again.

New counties were a hot issue in the Legislature as well.

And a Laramie policeman was compelled to draw his pistol when in s scuffle with somebody who was thought to be speaking German.

Laramie, fwiw, had a German language church early on and, I think, at this time, so a Laramie resident who could speak German wouldn't be that odd.  Let alone that its a university town where, presumably, some people were still learning the language.

"An American soldier wounded by shrapnel is being given blood plasma transfusion by Pfc. Harvey White, Minneapolis, Minnesota, in Sicily" July 1943. But the reason that I posted this photo was. . .

for the Italian villagers behind the scene.

What a change between 1945 and now.

I've commented on it before, but the Italian women and girls behind the soldier aren't shoeless because there's a war on.  They're shoeless because they're Italians.  Italy was dirt poor.

And far from glamorous.  Indeed, Italy had the reputation as a backwater with spectacular architectural and cultural exceptions.  But by the 1950s that view was changing and by the 1960s Italy was thought of as glamorous. And rather obviously something changed not only in the depictions of Italy, but in Italy itself.

January 28, 1919. The rights of small nations. . . Near Beer. . . and Girls.

French refugees receiving Red Cross materials on this day in 1919, in Riems.

One of the things that the Allies claimed to be fighting for, during World War One, was "the rights of small nations".

Not too surprisingly, which of those nations had rights, in the views of colonial powers, which all of the European powers were, including tiny Belgium, came to be an immediate topic of the Paris Peace Conference.  Indeed, in some ways, it went right off the rails, right from the start, for that reason.

Japan was going to be getting former German colonies, and it had the backing of other colonial nations in that.

This would be in the form of mandates, ultimately, meaning that they didn't really have colonial status.  But for nations that would be subject to that status, the difference wasn't really particularly clear.

A rosy glow was being put on the Red defeat of the Allied troops in norther Russia as well.  They were retreating, hardly a cause for celebration.

Well, at least there'd be Near Beer to drink anyhow.

And the troops would soon be back at Ft. D. A. Russell, which was good news for Cheyenne.

Although, if the Wyoming State Tribune was correct, those returning American troops might not be as enamored with the girl next store as they once had been. . .

Lex Anteinternet: The National Retail Fairness Act advances. Picking up opposition.

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised.

We ran this item last week:

Lex Anteinternet: The National Retail Fairness Act advances.: The Tribune attempted to report on a bill gaining traction in the Legislature this morning that's quite interesting. I say attempted, ...

At that time, the bill was advancing rapidly, suggesting that the movers in the legislature liked the bill and wanted to get it passed.

Well, not everyone does, this bill in the form of an editorial from one Joe Rinzel.

Now that in and of itself is significant.   Rinzel isn't your next door neighbor.  He's head of a national organization entitled Americans for a Modern Economy and associated with another called Employers for Renewable Energy).  Americans for a Modern Economy states, about itself,

Our Mission

Americans for a Modern Economy is committed to ensuring that local, state and federal policies reflect changing technologies that are reshaping the way consumers, businesses and communities operate in the 21st century economy.

We work with consumer advocates, businesses, think tanks, economic experts and others to raise awareness and inform discussions about the current and future policy challenges of new technology. We serve as a resource for lawmakers to help them develop modern policy solutions that benefit all Americans by expanding consumer freedom, allowing businesses to best serve their customers and preserving free market competition.

Now, I've never heard about it before, but let's start right there with the claim that it wishes to preserve "free market competition".  In order to preserve it, it'd be necessary to have it.  But because of the structure of  the American Capitalist economic system, we don't have one.  We have a mixed state supported one, as corporations are by their very nature corporate entities that have been created by state action.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for Socialism (not by a long shot), but I 'm advocating for truth and knowledge, and the often claimed American belief that we have a "free market system" isn't wholly correct but only partially so.  As corporations are natural creatures roaming the economic prairie in a state of nature, but a partnership converted into a "person" at law by operation of the state, they're a state supported entity.

Indeed, at least in law schools, or at least in the musty dawn of time when I went to law school, the creation of corporations was regarded as an act of legal genius by economies then converting from mercantilism to large scale global capitalism.  We like to think, of course, of the global economy coming into existence last Thursday or something, but that's very far from true.  Really old corporations, like The Hudson's Bay Company, came into existence long, long ago with gobal competition in mind. 

And incorporating your small business, or creating a limited liability company, is for most business entities a really, really good idea.  

But let's not be naive either.  The development of corporations has created a system in which corporations have the advantage over individuals (the real kind, i.e., people) and over partnerships, as they shield what would have been partners from individual liability, save for their own. That wouldn't have been the only way to go about that in terms of legal development (but it probably is the best way it could have developed for societal reasons), but its a fact.  And that aids economy of scale.  I.e., it promotes businesses getting big at the disadvantage of the small.

Again, I'm not saying which is good or bad, but what this does mean is that in some sectors of the economy, such as retail, large corporations have an enormous advantage over the small.  Call it the Walmart effect if you will, but this is why, over time, Big Box stores have eliminated lots of local business.  And most people feel that's bad.  As its done that, it's also converted the retail sector from one where individual shopkeepers could make middle class livings from their families into one in which those same families are likely struggling to stay afloat economically or have simply given up and been driven into other occupations.

It also means, as the proponents of this bill know, that these big corporations don't contribute as much economically, in some ways, to their local communities. And, moreover, as they're national, and not local, they've already featured the cost of taxation into the prices of what they offer on the shelf.  In other words, Walmart isn't going to retab anything anywhere if Wyoming starts taxing its income.  It's already built the cost of taxation into the shelf price.

Well, Rinzell warns otherwise, starting off his alarming piece with:

While Wyoming has a storied history as a leader in ranching and agriculture, it is now working to become a pioneer in robotics, artificial intelligence and machine learning that will propel the state’s economy into the 21st century and benefit consumers and businesses alike. But a bill rushed through the state House threatens to undermine the state’s status as an innovation hub and could rein in the next generation of Wyoming’s economic growth.

Hmmm, why would that be true, we might ask.  If a Wyoming corporation is going national, would it actually be the case that the small amount of whatever it sells in the least populous state in the union is going to impact its bottom line, if its taxed?  Particularly if its going to be taxed elsewhere?

We might take a page from the coal severance tax that funded Wyoming's education for decades.  This exact same argument was made about it.  Pass the tax, and the mines will not develop, and it'll be a disaster.

It wasn't.

House Bill 220 seeks to replace some of that severance money that the collapse of coal has brought about. The money would go to education.  The small amount of tax added isn't going to effect the bottom line of any corporation that pays it. They've already figured that into the bottom line.  Basically, Wyoming would just be giving money away by not passing the bill.

Which doesn't mean that drawing the opposition of this national group isn't remarkable.  It is.  But it's remarkable for that reason.  The bill, which won't impact any national corporation of the type its aimed at, is so adverse, apparently, to the goals of a group that bills itself as for a "modern economy" that it actually has addressed it in a local paper, and when doing so  it was clear that the author had done some research about the state he's not from and doesn't live in.

Which gets us back, I suppose, to the question that Wendell Berry asked so long ago.  "What are people for?"  There's pretty good evidence that the economy needs some tweaking for most people at this point of some sort.  Perhaps not radically so, but perhaps so.  Just barrelling along in the direction we're heading, modern or not, should at least cause some reflection.

Some Gave All: French War Memorial, Reconnaissante France.

Some Gave All: French War Memorial, Reconnaissante France.:

Saturday, January 26, 2019

French War Memorial, Reconnaissante France.

French war memorial in  Reconnaissante France.  Like many of these memorials, this one had the names of the World War Two war dead added following the Second World War.

MKTH photographs.

Mark ups at the State Liquor Warehouse.

Regulating booze profit mark up at the State Liquor Warehouse?

Why?

Has this been a problem?

If it is, it's likely due to the costs of operating Wyoming's very odd system of liquor regulation and it might just be a better idea to completely overhaul it.

2019

STATE OF WYOMING

19LSO-0440

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0162

Alcoholic liquors markup amount.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Connolly, Eyre, Furphy, Paxton and Zwonitzer and Senator(s) Rothfuss

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to alcoholic liquors; increasing the maximum profit to the state from alcoholic liquor sales from the Wyoming liquor division; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 12‑2‑303(a) is amended to read:

12‑2‑303.  Purchase and sale of alcoholic liquors; shortages.

(a)  The Wyoming liquor division shall purchase and sell alcoholic liquors to qualified licensees within the state including, at the discretion of the division, any retail distributors or permittees operating within any military post or national park located within the boundaries of the state of Wyoming.  Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, sales shall be made at prices sufficient to return the cost of merchandise and all expenses of operation together with a profit, not to exceed seventeen and six‑tenths percent (17.6%) twenty and six‑tenths percent (20.6%) above the cost of the merchandise.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2019.

(END)

1

HB0162

You're never as good as everyone tells you when you win, and you're never as bad as they say when you lose.

You're never as good as everyone tells you when you win, and you're never as bad as they say when you lose.

Lou Holtz, 1937-, American football coach

The Blessed Fruits of Secularism

Yep.

Homeless children in hospital emergency department up 29%

Wouldn't have happened in a poorer. . . and less secular Ireland.

The price we pay to be rich, modern, hip and cool.

Lex Anteinternet: The Year in Review | Catholic Answers (Mid Week At Work) And also the Orthodox Schism

Easter (Greek) Orthodox Church in Cheyenne, Wyoming.  This new Greek Orthodox Church's sign simply indicates its "Orthodox Christian", but now there's a schism in the Eastern Orthodox world.

I linked this in earlier here on this blog:

Lex Anteinternet: The Year in Review | Catholic Answers (Mid Week At...: The Year in Review | Catholic Answers Really fascinating economic discussion starting at 20:00. I've been posting some topics on Dis...

I did that due to the interesting discussion on Distributist economic principles, but there's a discussion starting at about 10:00 on the schism that's developed in Eastern Orthodox world this past year that's quite interesting.

Russian Orthodox Cathedral in Denver.

It's been hard to get news on that topic, and this approaches it in a fashion I had not heard before with information I had not previously heard.

Ukrainian Catholic (not Orthodox) Church in Belfield North Dakota.  This church wouldn't be par tof that schism, of course, but it does reflect the schism of 1054 when the Apostolic Churches experienced the Great Schism which remains yet to be fully healed.

Blog Mirror: With the British Army in Flanders: The Dead Donkeys; The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part One – 1914

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part Two – The Western Front 1915

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part Three – Gallipoli 1915 – Disaster in the Dardanelles

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part Four – 1916

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part Five – 1917

The Dead Donkeys: The Myth of the ‘Château Generals’ Part Six – 1918