Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Government Transparency???
While we fret over Socialism under Obama – which I guess means helping citizens rather than Corporations - the Federal Reserve is refusing to identify the recipients of almost $2 trillion of emergency loans from American taxpayers or the troubled assets they are accepting as collateral. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in September they would comply with congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system. Two months later, as the Federal Reserve is lending far more than that in separate rescue programs that don’t require congressional approval, Americans have no idea where their money is going or what securities the banks are pledging in return. We are suckers!
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Should we bail out the Big 3?
The Big Three US auto makers are trying to make the case that they are victims of the financial crisis, and therefore deserve a piece of the federal handout/ bailout. GM sales dropped 45 percent in October. Ford and GM lost nearly $15 billion in cash between July and September, and GM says it might not have enough cash to operate by early next year.
But the mess these automakers find themselves in has been coming for decades. Once a dominant market force, GM had 50 percent of the U.S. market in the 1960s. It is down to around 20 percent now. U.S. consumers have been saying no to these automakers with their pocket books for a long time. Now, in a true bit of irony, US taxpayers will be asked to put their tax dollars at risk to preserve the very companies from which they no longer wish to buy cars.
The United Auto Workers share much of the blame. The UAW has burdened the Big Three with unsustainable labor costs and obligations to retirees. While the Big Three have attempted to get out from under their grip, Ford still lost $1,467 per vehicle in 2007, while GM lost $729 and Chrysler lost $412. Toyota and others profitably manufacture almost 4 million cars in nonunionized states in the South.
The case for the bailout is that the job losses from a GM failure - 100,000 directly, and hundreds of thousands more in supplier factories - would be too much for the US economy to handle, and the government would have to back GM's pensions. Such rationale effectively defines GM as a job programs and welfare agency. A bailout of the automakers would signal a new era of government protection from corporate failures. What would stop every other troubled business from asking for federal cash?
Perhaps a deal can be worked out where government funds are only committed if the Big Three agree to file for bankruptcy. A bankruptcy court could then reduce the obligations to retirees, reduce dealerships, and cut back on wages and benefits, and replace senior managers who let this happen.
But the mess these automakers find themselves in has been coming for decades. Once a dominant market force, GM had 50 percent of the U.S. market in the 1960s. It is down to around 20 percent now. U.S. consumers have been saying no to these automakers with their pocket books for a long time. Now, in a true bit of irony, US taxpayers will be asked to put their tax dollars at risk to preserve the very companies from which they no longer wish to buy cars.
The United Auto Workers share much of the blame. The UAW has burdened the Big Three with unsustainable labor costs and obligations to retirees. While the Big Three have attempted to get out from under their grip, Ford still lost $1,467 per vehicle in 2007, while GM lost $729 and Chrysler lost $412. Toyota and others profitably manufacture almost 4 million cars in nonunionized states in the South.
The case for the bailout is that the job losses from a GM failure - 100,000 directly, and hundreds of thousands more in supplier factories - would be too much for the US economy to handle, and the government would have to back GM's pensions. Such rationale effectively defines GM as a job programs and welfare agency. A bailout of the automakers would signal a new era of government protection from corporate failures. What would stop every other troubled business from asking for federal cash?
Perhaps a deal can be worked out where government funds are only committed if the Big Three agree to file for bankruptcy. A bankruptcy court could then reduce the obligations to retirees, reduce dealerships, and cut back on wages and benefits, and replace senior managers who let this happen.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Scary prospects for November 4th
Socialist or National Socialist? Take Your Pick
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Americans will decide next week whether the next president will be a socialist or a national socialist. Lest you think I exaggerate, consider McCain’ campaign theme of "country first" before everything else – your private life, your job, your children, your education, your marriage, everything. Ask yourself how this differs from the philosophy of German fascism, which preached "the common good comes before the private good" (see Paul Lensch, Three Years of World Revolution).
Or consider the fact that McCain supported the Wall Street Plutocrat Bailout Bill. A defining characteristic of fascism was that all profits were private, but losses were socialized. And oh yes, military imperialism (a.k.a., "national greatness conservatism") and a dictatorial executive were also key features of European fascism. Recall that McCain promised that if elected (paraphrasing), "I will order the Secretary of the Treasury to buy up all of the foreclosed mortgages." Is that really a part of the delegated powers in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution?
Then there is Comrade Obama, who has announced that he wants to "change the world" by "spreading the wealth." Didn’t Marx and Engels say the same thing in 1848? As is well known, Obama has long had a close association with ACORN, the far-left political organization that employed him as its legal counsel in Chicago. It is ACORN-style "community organizing" that Obama claims is his political forte and qualification for running for president. He boasts of having worked with ACORN to register tens of thousands of new voters and has defended the organization against all critics. It is safe to assume that there must be a congruence of interests between Obama and ACORN.
So the question becomes, what does ACORN (and by implication, Obama) stand for politically and philosophically? It so happens that I researched and wrote about ACORN over twenty years ago when I co-authored a book and numerous articles on the subject of "tax-funded politics," i.e., the (illegal) granting of tax dollars to "nonprofit" organizations to fund political activities. ACORN was receiving single grants from the federal government in the half million dollar range as far back as the 1970s.
And what was ACORN doing with your hard-earned tax dollars? According to the 1983 ACORN Members Handbook, "We will continue our fight until the American way is just one way, until we have shared the wealth . . . our freedom shall be based on the equality of the many . . ." Socialism, in other words.
The Handbook published a very communistic-sounding "Peoples’ Platform." With regard to the energy industry, nationalization was recommended in order to "put people before profits," one of the oldest of Marxist slogans. The Marxists never understood that in the free market the only way a business could earn profits was to serve its customers.
All of the public utilities should also be nationalized according to ACORN, so that the prices of electricity, natural gas, etc. could be determined politically according to "social considerations." Nor would there be any discontinuation of service for nonpayment, said the ACORN Handbook, which begs the question, "why would anyone pay their bills under such a standard?"
Price controls would be the order of the day for industries that were not nationalized, and the "health care plank" of the "People’s Platform" called for socialized health care. All hospitals would be managed by "democratically elected community-based committees." "Throw doctors and hospital administrators off the boards of directors, and replace them with a low and moderate income majority," demands the People’s Platform. Can you think of a better way to totally destroy health care in America?
The housing industry would also be subjected to the ruinous policies of price controls and prohibitions of evictions of tenants who failed to pay their rent. Welfare indexed for inflation would be part of "the rights of workers" when out of work, as would a "guaranteed minimum family income." Corporations would be required to have low-income rabble on their boards of directors to give "the people" a "voice."
In short, ACORN has always advocated nothing short of the destruction of American capitalism and its replacement by the dumbest and most destructive forms of socialism. For years, it made millions for itself by "challenging" bank mergers and branch expansions, as allowed for by the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act. In return for millions in donations and promises to make millions more in sub-prime loans to unqualified borrowers (i.e., "the people" referred to in "The Peoples’ Platform"), ACORN would withdraw its protests (usually administered by the Fed) and the banks would be permitted by the Fed to carry out their plans. ACORN worked diligently for three decades to force mortgage lenders, though this policy of legalized extortion, to make bad loans to unqualified borrowers. And their defenders, like Obama, claim that the Community Reinvestment Act and all of the "community organizations" that it empowered had nothing to do with the sub-prime crisis. It was all caused by "greed," they tell us. Have we really become a nation of morons?
So here’s your choice on election day: McMussolini (as Ilana Mercer calls him) or ObaMarx. Take your pick. Or do the patriotic thing and stay home. Don’t vote. It only gives them a reason to claim that "the people have spoken" and that they have a "mandate" to ruin our country.
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Americans will decide next week whether the next president will be a socialist or a national socialist. Lest you think I exaggerate, consider McCain’ campaign theme of "country first" before everything else – your private life, your job, your children, your education, your marriage, everything. Ask yourself how this differs from the philosophy of German fascism, which preached "the common good comes before the private good" (see Paul Lensch, Three Years of World Revolution).
Or consider the fact that McCain supported the Wall Street Plutocrat Bailout Bill. A defining characteristic of fascism was that all profits were private, but losses were socialized. And oh yes, military imperialism (a.k.a., "national greatness conservatism") and a dictatorial executive were also key features of European fascism. Recall that McCain promised that if elected (paraphrasing), "I will order the Secretary of the Treasury to buy up all of the foreclosed mortgages." Is that really a part of the delegated powers in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution?
Then there is Comrade Obama, who has announced that he wants to "change the world" by "spreading the wealth." Didn’t Marx and Engels say the same thing in 1848? As is well known, Obama has long had a close association with ACORN, the far-left political organization that employed him as its legal counsel in Chicago. It is ACORN-style "community organizing" that Obama claims is his political forte and qualification for running for president. He boasts of having worked with ACORN to register tens of thousands of new voters and has defended the organization against all critics. It is safe to assume that there must be a congruence of interests between Obama and ACORN.
So the question becomes, what does ACORN (and by implication, Obama) stand for politically and philosophically? It so happens that I researched and wrote about ACORN over twenty years ago when I co-authored a book and numerous articles on the subject of "tax-funded politics," i.e., the (illegal) granting of tax dollars to "nonprofit" organizations to fund political activities. ACORN was receiving single grants from the federal government in the half million dollar range as far back as the 1970s.
And what was ACORN doing with your hard-earned tax dollars? According to the 1983 ACORN Members Handbook, "We will continue our fight until the American way is just one way, until we have shared the wealth . . . our freedom shall be based on the equality of the many . . ." Socialism, in other words.
The Handbook published a very communistic-sounding "Peoples’ Platform." With regard to the energy industry, nationalization was recommended in order to "put people before profits," one of the oldest of Marxist slogans. The Marxists never understood that in the free market the only way a business could earn profits was to serve its customers.
All of the public utilities should also be nationalized according to ACORN, so that the prices of electricity, natural gas, etc. could be determined politically according to "social considerations." Nor would there be any discontinuation of service for nonpayment, said the ACORN Handbook, which begs the question, "why would anyone pay their bills under such a standard?"
Price controls would be the order of the day for industries that were not nationalized, and the "health care plank" of the "People’s Platform" called for socialized health care. All hospitals would be managed by "democratically elected community-based committees." "Throw doctors and hospital administrators off the boards of directors, and replace them with a low and moderate income majority," demands the People’s Platform. Can you think of a better way to totally destroy health care in America?
The housing industry would also be subjected to the ruinous policies of price controls and prohibitions of evictions of tenants who failed to pay their rent. Welfare indexed for inflation would be part of "the rights of workers" when out of work, as would a "guaranteed minimum family income." Corporations would be required to have low-income rabble on their boards of directors to give "the people" a "voice."
In short, ACORN has always advocated nothing short of the destruction of American capitalism and its replacement by the dumbest and most destructive forms of socialism. For years, it made millions for itself by "challenging" bank mergers and branch expansions, as allowed for by the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act. In return for millions in donations and promises to make millions more in sub-prime loans to unqualified borrowers (i.e., "the people" referred to in "The Peoples’ Platform"), ACORN would withdraw its protests (usually administered by the Fed) and the banks would be permitted by the Fed to carry out their plans. ACORN worked diligently for three decades to force mortgage lenders, though this policy of legalized extortion, to make bad loans to unqualified borrowers. And their defenders, like Obama, claim that the Community Reinvestment Act and all of the "community organizations" that it empowered had nothing to do with the sub-prime crisis. It was all caused by "greed," they tell us. Have we really become a nation of morons?
So here’s your choice on election day: McMussolini (as Ilana Mercer calls him) or ObaMarx. Take your pick. Or do the patriotic thing and stay home. Don’t vote. It only gives them a reason to claim that "the people have spoken" and that they have a "mandate" to ruin our country.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Offshore Drilling - The Reality
Lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling would make little difference for consumers. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, production of the new supplies would not begin until 2017 and would have little effect on what Americans pay at the pump anyway — just a few cents a gallon by 2030 under the best-case scenario.
It's all politics!
It's all politics!
Monday, September 1, 2008
Relay for Life
I was fortunate enough to be affiliated with an exceptional group of bright and energetic young women for this years local Relay for Life. Some of the team is pictured here and among those in the picture, four have lost Mothers to Breast Cancer, including my daughter. These are young women who have lost the loving and mentoring relationship that mothers and daughters share, and whose kids have lost a Grandmom. This was a first year team and they did extremely well raising in excess of $3,500 for the American Cancer Society. But almost as importantly, they are a close knit group of spiritual young women, who will likely live up to their team name, "Girlfriends For Life"....I sure hope so. My daughter was the team captain, and she knows how proud I am of her, but I do want to say how proud I am of all the "girls" and how well they did. They are already talking about next year's event, so I know we are in good hands.
If you've ever thought about participating in a Relay where you live, I would encourage you to get more information, and find out how. Let's hope that through such events, we will find a cure for this awful disease that takes so many women at such a young age, and that when this team's kids are their mothers age, all the Moms will be standing there with them.
A Lasting Legacy
When my wife passed away a little over 2 years ago, my daughter made a list of traits that exemplified her life, a life that was too short but left a lasting legacy. I think it is a fitting tribute that these traits be occasionally shared. Although our three youngest granddaughter’s will never know Grandmommy personally, they will know her from her positive influences on so many, and they will know that she loves them very much.
Follow Romans 12:9-10: “Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good. Love each other with genuine affection and take delight in honoring each other.”
Show others you care by writing and calling consistently.
Make family your #1 priority.
Go out of your way to offer encouraging words to those who are struggling.
Don’t complain, even when it’s cancer.
Put everyone else’s needs above your own.
Give everyone the benefit of the doubt even if they don’t deserve it.
Don’t hold grudges. Be the first to give in and say you’re sorry.
Sacrifice all of your time to help your loved ones, going above and beyond.
Be able to laugh at yourself when everyone else is laughing at you.
Be willing to give away anything you have to make someone else happy.
Try to see the good in people, even if everyone around you doesn’t.
Let your motive for helping others truly be for their happiness, not for your glorification.
Make things better for others, not caring whether or not they ever realize it.
Be the first one to get up from the table and start cleaning up and doing mounds of dishes (even at the Farmer’s Market). And be the last one to stop.
Put up with people’s nonsense because you love them so much.
Be the first one to help when someone is in need.
Be the glue that holds your family together.
Follow Romans 12:9-10: “Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good. Love each other with genuine affection and take delight in honoring each other.”
Show others you care by writing and calling consistently.
Make family your #1 priority.
Go out of your way to offer encouraging words to those who are struggling.
Don’t complain, even when it’s cancer.
Put everyone else’s needs above your own.
Give everyone the benefit of the doubt even if they don’t deserve it.
Don’t hold grudges. Be the first to give in and say you’re sorry.
Sacrifice all of your time to help your loved ones, going above and beyond.
Be able to laugh at yourself when everyone else is laughing at you.
Be willing to give away anything you have to make someone else happy.
Try to see the good in people, even if everyone around you doesn’t.
Let your motive for helping others truly be for their happiness, not for your glorification.
Make things better for others, not caring whether or not they ever realize it.
Be the first one to get up from the table and start cleaning up and doing mounds of dishes (even at the Farmer’s Market). And be the last one to stop.
Put up with people’s nonsense because you love them so much.
Be the first one to help when someone is in need.
Be the glue that holds your family together.
Friday, August 29, 2008
A Christmas Recession?
Another good news/bad news economic story. The New York Times reported on Friday that the US economy grew by 3.3% in the second quarter, beating previous estimates of 1.9 percent growth. Is this good news? Well according to Reuters, the economy is probably heading for a recession by year-end as the housing crisis worsens. On the positive side, it should be relatively short and mild, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce!
Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at the research firm MFR, notes that the boost in the economy came from tax rebate checks and a surge of foreigners buying America's dollar-depressed products. In other words, the “R” word is still coming. Merry Christmas!
Joshua Shapiro, chief U.S. economist at the research firm MFR, notes that the boost in the economy came from tax rebate checks and a surge of foreigners buying America's dollar-depressed products. In other words, the “R” word is still coming. Merry Christmas!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)