Bailing out the car industry

Much has been made about the "Big 3" auto makers and how they may not be able to remain in business. What does that do to our country if they go down?

A friend of mine had an idea. (Thanks Steve T.) He thought that a bail-out of the car companies should progress as follows. Every family in the United States could be given $20,000 of credit to be used to purchase a new car. They could purchase the car from any company they wanted to. Money would flow through the economy, car companies could open production lines again which would be good for the employment numbers. It would become apparent which cars are most desired and emissions would be cleaner, which would be a move toward a "greener" America.

The market that would suffer under this plan may be the used car market, "why buy used when buying new will do"? 

One major difference between the auto manufacturers and the used car businesses is that if they were to go to Washington to ask for bail-out money themselves, they would not be flying in on their own corporate jets.

In debt

(This is a post that I wrote a month ago. I thought I posted it, but realized today that I hadn't. In reading through the verbiage, I think it still has relevance today.)

A student of mine had to leave school because their spouse was laid off and this person had to go and get a job. The student makes the sacrifice. Day after day that story is repeated with peoples' lives getting torn apart and people have to make sacrifices to survive. In the month of January 2009 news sources report that 552,000 jobs have been lost. How the little people suffer when at the top, greed is not restrained.

And then I read of companies carrying on like there is no pain in our country. Wells Fargo is the latest to pull back plans from a junket in Las Vegas because of media exposure. Not because they feel any responsibility for the billions the government has given them to bail their sorry butts off! Nope. They pull back because of the negative publicity it generated.

I am angry! How dare they? Our government is saddling us with mountains of debt with or without our permission,  to keep these banks solvent. And when money is thrown at the banks from the tax payers in peril of losing their own jobs, to mitigate the crisis, they act like complete ingrates. They may may be aware of their massive monetary debt, but appear to be completely ignoring a massive debt of gratitude.

Hope for the hopeless

It was announced that the California Prison system has to be reduced by 55,000 within three years. This means that some inmates will be released because the state can no longer afford to incarcerate some of the prison population. What a great time to be an inmate!

Of course it isn't all rosy. Getting out of jail means they will have to find a job. With jobs hard to find and a prison record on their application, that begins to look like a recipe for recidivism, but will the prison take them back? Maybe they will take them back and release the next in line and give them a shot at a work-free world. 

It gives a new meaning to the revolving door of prison. 

Business as usual

I am getting close to uttering the pronouncement "TELLWICHALLOFYA!" 

President Obama says in selling his stimulus package, "if we don't move swiftly to put this plan in motion, our economic crisis could become a national catastrophe!"

In response Michael Steele, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee says "Democrats have controlled both branches of government  for less than a month. And you have to wonder if all that power has gone to their heads. For the last two weeks, they have been trying to force a massive spending bill through Congress under the guise of economic relief."

These statements were taken from the internet source:  http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/02/pitched_partisa.html

Have we not learned anything from the last election? The country was voting for change. I don't see change here.  What I see is politicians betting on our memory being short. I was hoping things could turn around with President Obama. I was taking a chance. I realize that it is quite soon to be too judgmental on progress but the road signs for the future don't look hopeful. 

President Obama you say "catastrophic!" Is that your message of hope? (Thanks to Charles Krauthammer for this in "The Fierce Urgency of Pork", By Charles Krauthammer, Friday, February 6, 2009; A17 Washington Post) Is this how you  are changing the dialogue in Washington? It sounds like what we went through the last 8 years. In fact that was almost the SAME verbage President Bush uttered in selling us on TARP!

Michael Steele, is this how the RNC is going to deal with the present administration? Hurl insults into the Democratic camp and hope it sticks. You talk about irresponsible spending on the part of the Democrats. And yet it was your Republican president who threw almost a TRILLION dollars with very little oversight into TARP bank bail-out. We were told we had to do it or the consequences will be disastrous. Your accusations sound a bit hypocritical. 

I voted for President Obama. I do not regret my vote. I don't think Senator McCain, if elected, would have done anything substantially different. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are starting to look identical. I also fear that our politicians are as careless and clueless as the CEOs of the banks they bailed out.

Maybe the first order of business of our elected leaders should be to fan across the country interviewing the thousands that are out of work.  Maybe lessons could be taken back to Capitol Hill from the unemployed who have had to greatly scale back their lives to survive, and won't be bailed out.

I'm fearing that I've been had. I have a sinking feeling that what we are looking at is business as usual... again. 

Looking for quease

p

I have been sent some material about the candidates that have been disconcerting at best. After spending some difficult thought provoking weeks and watching the second presidential debate I have finally narrowed down what I believe the election is about.

We have two senators running for president. One hasn't been in the senate for very long, and the other perhaps has been there too long. While both understand politics and law crafting, neither has had much experience with holding and attracting businesses.

If my main focus is on the economy, then Senator McCain is the way I go. He is more cautious when it comes to economy and raising taxes. As a bonus, in the economic arena Governor Palin could be an asset with her experience as a mayor and governor, who’s job it was to attract businesses into her city and her state. I get nervous when I hear politicians, like Senator Obama, talk about making corporations pay their fair share. There is nothing like businesses seeking to improve their bottom line, moving out of cities or country to depress an economy. Moreover, when corporations get taxed, I believe they just pass those increases on to consumers. 

Blame for the bank failures is being flung around Washington like poo from a monkey cage. To me, bank failures are not only the fault of one political party. While people love riding gravy trains, greedy excesses have a tendency to catch up with its commuters, and in this case, those of us who watched the train go by. As a nation, we will probably destroy ourselves because we don't know how to rein in maximal WIIFM (what's in it for me), human nature being what it is.

If my main focus is on foreign policy then I think I have to go for Senator Obama.  He is cautious on controversial issues and he is much more likely to show restraint in the global arena. Looking at President Clinton and President George Bush, President Clinton was far more likely to fire a couple missiles at a factory of an offending nation than commit our troops to additional ongoing battlefields. And up until the last couple weeks when banks were going belly up at a record rate, our political focus was on nations we are at war with or could be at war with. I'm not convinced that Senator McCain wouldn't be "Maverick" from the movie "Top Gun", itching for a fight.

It has been reported in the last few days about how the global markets are working together during this financial meltdown to keep bankruptcies and bailouts from destroying all markets. This has demonstrated for me the necessity to be able to navigate in the global arena. It is my belief that President George Bush, while a decent man, has decimated our standing in the global community. His reckless bullying actions in the world, his black/white thinking, and his cronyism has squandered the goodwill we enjoyed from the global community after 9/11. 

At this point, a month away from the election I am planning to vote for Senator Obama because I think global issues trump economic issues. If we have the resolve, we will work to climb out of this economic crisis we are in. There will be pain and inconvenience and possibly some dramatic changes in the way we live and do business. Maybe we will learn from this. Maybe we won’t. However if we make ourselves unpopular in the world we could be doing battle with a lot of other countries. It is hard to live in a global system with an ever shrinking set of allies. 

I don't believe that Senator McCain and Governor Palin are not the mavericky pair that will ride in and change the way Washington works. I don't believe that Senator Obama is going to save us. I’m not sure that either will be able to continue for a second term. I don’t believe that Senator Obama is the "Manchurian candidate" or that Senator McCain is as out of touch as his detractors contend. Either has the potential to astound or disappoint us. Elections are simply about damage control. 

The good news for me is that in these past weeks I have rediscovered my political equilibrium. I have long stated that if I don’t feel queasy coming out of the voting booth, I haven’t done my job.

Thank God, I now feel queasy.

Just a joke?

I read this joke on a widget I have on my computer. I found myself laughing, quite amused by the joke, delivered by Jay Leno.

Beijing skies are so polluted that Chinese authorities are planning emergency measures for the Olympics. For example, protesters will now only be run over with hybrid tanks.

I was going to print it up and put it on my door to share with others at work. I was going to put a picture of one of the dissidents standing in front of a row of tanks he was staring down along with the joke. As I was finding the picture of that in Google, other pictures of the dead bodies of dissidents who had paid for their protest with their life emerged as well. 

As I saw those pictures, the joke stopped being funny. I was sick to my stomach at the cruelty of a government that would run over demonstrators who were protesting the lack of freedom that others in other countries have. It felt like it cheapened the lives of those students.

There is nothing funny about repressive governments. I think Jay Leno was attempting to show that not much has changed in the Chinese government other than public relations. I think we do a disservice to the dissidents when we reduce the cost of their lives to a punch line.

When we make a joke of of this are we helping call attention to the plight of many in the world? Or are we creating humor out of horror, so we don't have to be so appalled by it?

Foley, FoxFaith, and Desperate Housewives

The Rep. Mark Foley scandal that is continuing to grow has the republicans shrugging it away as irrelevant, while at the same time attempting to be the party of moral values, as well as the party that ripped President Clinton a new one. Regardless of who knew what when, it seems is that this behavior has been tacitly tolerated. And I don’t see any evangelical leaders denouncing Foley too loudly. Come to think of it, I haven't heard a peep out of Falwell, which may be evidence of great restraint.

About a month ago, FoxFaith was promoted. This is entertainment’s attempt to encourage the faith of the faithful. This from the company that brought a lot of sleazy and irreverent programing to the airwaves. They have however, been successful in winning conservatives over with Fox News and allowing them to forget Fox's contribution to the moral landslide in this country.

A new video game based on the TV series “Desperate Housewives” is being released by Disney’s Beuna Vista Games company. The rationale for this move into predominantly male territory is that marketers were starting to realize that there were more women playing the CSI video game, and they realized there was a whole demographic that was emerging that they could profit from.

Our country has moved away from conviction and honor, and toward niche marketing and promotion. At least Desperate Housewives: The game, is able to admit their true intentions and no one gets offended. TV programmers call it family entertainment and politicians call it “playing to the base”.

Are we so far down river that we accept being played to, regardless of reality? FoxFaith isn’t about strengthening the faithful, it is going after the wallets of the faithful. Family values isn’t about strengthening the flagging morals of this country, it’s about getting the votes so they can hold on to power.

And we are the “sheep” that eat it up. The sad reality is that we are hungry, but we aren’t starving. Those who set the agenda will continue to feed us as much as we can ingest, as long as we have votes or money.

Sacrifice

One powerful action has marked the landscape in the Gulf States in recent weeks. Sacrifice. People have poored out their money prayers and time to help those who are in dire need. It is heartwarming to see the goodness of people pouring of their resources.

Washington has opened its heart as well. In the spirit of generosity that defines us as a nation they have stepped up to the plate as well. Many have decided to give up their special little projects to give that money to the needy as well. Bridges, highway projects, special land use, and the list goes on. The outpouring of their hearts are truly moving. Only one problem; IT'S NOT THEIR MONEY! I have heard it said that a liberal is a person who is willing to spend someone else's money. I think this moves across party lines. I think the staement should change. I think it should read, a politician is a person who is willing to spend someone else's money. And lets tack this on as well... and take the credit for it.

You have some spare money I could donate? I wouldn't mind looking generous as well.

Differences in crisis management

The world has dealt humanity another blow, to a far away region. The earth crust shifted and lives were ended. I found out about it on Google. There was no disruption in the force, as a thousand life forces were extinguished. No, it was just a double take at an Internet headline.

As I listened to the reports coming in from the other side of the world I am struck that there is no chanting from any convention center of “HELP! HELP! HELP!” I don't think there is FEMA reporting in. There are soldiers. There are pleas to the soldiers that go unheeded. The victims complain that the soldiers don’t listen, but it doesn’t sound like they are surprised that their pleas are ignored. Grief makes them pushy, but I don’t think there will be any federal investigation into the handling of this tragedy.

In Guatemala they are just proclaiming whole areas of mudslides as mass graves. In this country we were doing DNA tests on charred bits of flesh after the Twin Towers collaped.

We live in an imperfect country, but it does have its advantages. Like accountability. No matter how people dance, the truth will come out. And while the punishments may not be as harsh as we would like them to be, they do suffer some.

Harriet Miers

What a system of government we have here. Bush playing the consumate politician is betting he knows the game. Get someone who doesn't have a paper trail, and a woman to boot. It will be hard to "beat up" on a woman. And with what? At this time there seems to be little information. Bush played Roberts and won. Let's see how he does with Miers.

I have stopped looking at who has the moral high ground in politics. I believe that it is all about naked ambition. The Dems have been spoiling for a fight with the replacement of O'Connor. There is a saying, that someone has been "Borked" The dems in 1987 came out swinging with Robert Bork, a nominee by Reagan, armed with his paper trail and savaged him. I have no doubt that the republicans would do the same if the shoe was on the other foot.

Increasingly we are getting less paper trail, so there is less to hit someone with. Hence Harriet. Who is she? We don't know. My guess is that it is going to be difficult to beat her up because the dems are going to have to find the clubs first.