Disclaimer: Now if any of you have read or heard one of my rants before, its been awhile, but here goes another plus a little conspiracy theory of my own as well...
Now class, raise your hands. Does anyone know what country; that has a completely polar opposite socio-political ideology and views on freedom, class distinctions, freedom of speech and wealth distribution; owns the MOST of the United States' debt? BOTH Our GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE DEBT? HMMM HMMM?!
Well, if you guessed the Peoples Republic of China, RED CHINA to you old Cold War survivors, then you are right...
Now I ask you, I submit to your logic and common sense:
How smart is it for our government to have allowed a country that is ideologically on the moon compared to us, a country that has the most ACTIVE AND ROBUST espionage program against ALL SECTORS of our GOVERNMENT and INDUSTRY, has the worst CONTINUOUS record on human rights... How smart was it for our current administration to allow them to BUY such a large amount of our credit and bank AND FEDERAL DEBT!!??
Now, to have a country like this, Red China, with so much REAL pressure and influence to bear on OUR GOVERNMENT AND PRIVATE SECTOR's FINANCIAL DECISIONS, wouldn't you think, maybe, just maybe for an iota of a second that this MIGHT be a NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE? Am I the only one who thinks so?
Now here's where my conspiracy theory and active imagination kicks in... remember when I have kidded before about Obama being a real life "Manchurian Candidate"? Well more like an "Islamic/Manchurian Candidate"... well here is one of the reasons why I am not so sure I may have been subconsciously projecting... (If you haven't seen either version of the Manchurian Candidate get it at Blockbuster or NetFlix, do your homework viewing and get back to us)... Now trust me on this one, Obama will not address or push the Chinese on real issues like trade imbalance or human rights issues, or the many clashes that their military has with ours where we seem to let them do whatever to our troops or planes in the interest of diplomacy because the Chinese have all of this debt leverage over him/US/U.S.!
Conspiracy theory 2: Now, the Chinese are historically brilliant economists and mathematicians- I submit for your mental faculty buffet: HOW MUCH INFLUENCE did the Chinese have on the CREATION and then PURCHASE up of all these CREDIT SWAPS??! Hmmmhmmm?
I'll tell you why they have so much of our debt, because THEY BOUGHT A CRAPLOAD OF THEM, more than any other country or individual or private fund... SCAREY THOUGHT HUH? that MAYBE the country that President BarryO is parlaying with right now may have had more than an active role in the creation and fall of the economic disaster our country just recently felt and is still reeling from?
I sometimes think, when I revert to my most Pinochet of dark places in my head, that before it gets too carried away, in the interest of NATIONAL SECURITY we should have been nationalizing that debt... that Omni-Bus stimulis should have bought that debt back from China... I know, I know, there is much more to this than simply nationalizing and "taking back" our debt and declaring that China no longer owns anything in America because US business and our government have to still go out to other countries and foreign banks and BORROW and finangle to keep the lights on, but people, we need to be cogizant that this is a crisis. And being the capitalist that I am nationalizing is something that I abhor when it is done to American business and industry abroad- spell that Chavez...
No foreign government, especially one as diabolically obtuse to the American way and our values, err I mean the values of our parents, since Obama, Pelosi and Frank have made it clear that it is no longer the values of this administration and Congress; but especially not the Chinese, should not be questioning our government on how or what they choose to spend their money on... Look at it this way, theoretically, the Chinese could say, if you spend money on supporting or bolstering your troops in say, oh Afghanistan or the Gulf, or stop pressuring Chavez or we won't loan you anyore cash or we'll call in your notes asap...
Can you all see how this much influence from a member of the UN Security Council that ALMOST NEVER agrees with us (EXCEPTO against a nuclear North Korea cuz that is a direct regional threat to them, but obtusely they are soft on Iran's nukes)... can you see how this is a VERY BAD THING??!!
Now, if you see the national direction towards Socialism we are being herded to by the left, the re-distribution of wealth, the loss of individual liberties, the marking of veteran groups and vocal moms national threats by homeland security, the central party committee err I mean the central government taking powers normally reserved for the states, you can see that the Manchurian Candidate is taking us back en masse to his controllers... LOL, true some of this I exagerrated because it tied into my movie conspiracy and well, this is a bit entertaining as well as spiritual to me, but most of it is not exaggerated. We need to be afraid and question the direction this administration is taking our country.
It would appear that The Flags of Our Fathers no longer fly over this great country... A new wind is blowing into Washington and our government and the winds are blowing from the Far East- I don't advocate xenophobia or paranoia, I advocate knowledge and the right to question and protest that which is not ideologically in line with the Constitution of the United States of America... Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for ALL AMERICANS and the ability for them not to be taxed without representation or voice...
Wil-crest OUT!
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Post PresO address on Afghnaistan thoughts....
Originally written Tuesday, December 1, 2009 at 10:37pm - posted late - sorry folks.
Well, here goes... let me say though, that so far, out of all the addresses he has made as President, he sounded most authoritative and Presidential in this speech. He finally figured out that he isn't campaigning anymore and that he is actually supposed to be guiding national policy now and not wishing on a Nobel Peace Star that things will get done somehow...
He was most authoritative in his definitive 30K more troops being deployed to Afghanistan by "early 2010..." but what he didn't say was that if that was a CAP to total troops or if he would send more if needed. He also failed to tell us where the money was going to come from, and by all accounts on the Hill, the Democrats want to tack on a special surcharge tax to pay for it... how about balancing your spending, that would help pay for it and fixing your broken beaurocracies that are too top heavy and s a result provide fewer services than they would if they actually had more people in the service jobs. I digress...
He also spelled out the mission which in a nutshell was: Provide security for the Afghans so that we can train them up to take over so our troops can come home.
He also spelled it out that he was going to START pulling troops out "July 2011..." what he didn't say was when we would be totally outta there - which I for once agree with him on... but usually in a situation like this 18 months is usually when we are at peak effectiveness, to start pulling out at that point? .. but spelling out an complete end date would be a bad signal and only aid to the enemy- hide until such and such a date then come out, come out wherever you are! BUT what it also does is what it did in Iraq, it forces the Afghans to step up and take part in their infrastruscture and defense and security, it also tells them we are supporting their ability to become a free and democratic state.
As LBJ said about Viet Nam and I paraphrase: "to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves..."
In segue, some folks are going to scream and shout about this being another Viet Nam, just ask them crazy Code Pink idiots, they are already making that analogy at their protests. Well there are quite a few differences that don't really agree with that statement:
1. We were never attacked by Viet Nam, we WERE ATTACKED by groups that planned those missions in Afghanistan.
2. PresO pointed out that in Viet Nam we were not part of a true "coalition" of world neighbors, which TECHNICALLY is true, though I'd surely like to know then,what do we call the troops that were from Republic of Viet Nam, Australia, South Korea, Philippines, France and New Zealand that were there fighting with us? I digress...
3. Viet Nam's insurgency was backed by a rival SUPERPOWER, the Taliban just have, get this, Saudi Royal family money propping them up... Hmmm, Wasn't that the family headed by the guy that PresO bowed to when he was on the World Apology Tour 2008: I'm Sorry USA did...(you fill in the blank)? Nevertheless, Communist Super Power nations (spelled China and the Soviet Union) supported, armed and trained the NVA regulars and Viet Cong- they even went as far as taking part in direct actual combat in the air and ground against us while in their trainer capacities... Afghanistan is home grown Islamic extremism, trained there and without alot of true 1-on 1 tactical ability to meet our troops, their well will run dry, we just need the boots on the ground to "drain it"
PresO also noted that it won't work to try to get by with existing troop levels. As noted, the existing troop levels are not halting the Taliban's advance enough. And without more troops, we cannot hope to create the improved security conditions that Afghans need in order to join and later OWN the fight.
Finally, PresO in his speech insinuated that we leave "gate open" for members of the Taliban to be brought back into the existing infrastructure provided they "renounce violence and agree to certain human rights conditions." In other words, what his strategy does is he wants to drive a wedge between moderates and extremists within the Taliban. The best way to do that is by convincing them that they cannot win, of course existing troop levels aren't sending a very convincing message. What he didn't tell say was that his administration has started PAYING Al Quaida/Taliban leaders to defect... SOOO, basically he is just renting them until we leave...
Those were my thoughts and observations folks, what were yours if you watched it? Also, I wrote this quickly while it was still fresh in my head if I forgot anything please add the comment. Thanks!
Well, here goes... let me say though, that so far, out of all the addresses he has made as President, he sounded most authoritative and Presidential in this speech. He finally figured out that he isn't campaigning anymore and that he is actually supposed to be guiding national policy now and not wishing on a Nobel Peace Star that things will get done somehow...
He was most authoritative in his definitive 30K more troops being deployed to Afghanistan by "early 2010..." but what he didn't say was that if that was a CAP to total troops or if he would send more if needed. He also failed to tell us where the money was going to come from, and by all accounts on the Hill, the Democrats want to tack on a special surcharge tax to pay for it... how about balancing your spending, that would help pay for it and fixing your broken beaurocracies that are too top heavy and s a result provide fewer services than they would if they actually had more people in the service jobs. I digress...
He also spelled out the mission which in a nutshell was: Provide security for the Afghans so that we can train them up to take over so our troops can come home.
He also spelled it out that he was going to START pulling troops out "July 2011..." what he didn't say was when we would be totally outta there - which I for once agree with him on... but usually in a situation like this 18 months is usually when we are at peak effectiveness, to start pulling out at that point? .. but spelling out an complete end date would be a bad signal and only aid to the enemy- hide until such and such a date then come out, come out wherever you are! BUT what it also does is what it did in Iraq, it forces the Afghans to step up and take part in their infrastruscture and defense and security, it also tells them we are supporting their ability to become a free and democratic state.
As LBJ said about Viet Nam and I paraphrase: "to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves..."
In segue, some folks are going to scream and shout about this being another Viet Nam, just ask them crazy Code Pink idiots, they are already making that analogy at their protests. Well there are quite a few differences that don't really agree with that statement:
1. We were never attacked by Viet Nam, we WERE ATTACKED by groups that planned those missions in Afghanistan.
2. PresO pointed out that in Viet Nam we were not part of a true "coalition" of world neighbors, which TECHNICALLY is true, though I'd surely like to know then,what do we call the troops that were from Republic of Viet Nam, Australia, South Korea, Philippines, France and New Zealand that were there fighting with us? I digress...
3. Viet Nam's insurgency was backed by a rival SUPERPOWER, the Taliban just have, get this, Saudi Royal family money propping them up... Hmmm, Wasn't that the family headed by the guy that PresO bowed to when he was on the World Apology Tour 2008: I'm Sorry USA did...(you fill in the blank)? Nevertheless, Communist Super Power nations (spelled China and the Soviet Union) supported, armed and trained the NVA regulars and Viet Cong- they even went as far as taking part in direct actual combat in the air and ground against us while in their trainer capacities... Afghanistan is home grown Islamic extremism, trained there and without alot of true 1-on 1 tactical ability to meet our troops, their well will run dry, we just need the boots on the ground to "drain it"
PresO also noted that it won't work to try to get by with existing troop levels. As noted, the existing troop levels are not halting the Taliban's advance enough. And without more troops, we cannot hope to create the improved security conditions that Afghans need in order to join and later OWN the fight.
Finally, PresO in his speech insinuated that we leave "gate open" for members of the Taliban to be brought back into the existing infrastructure provided they "renounce violence and agree to certain human rights conditions." In other words, what his strategy does is he wants to drive a wedge between moderates and extremists within the Taliban. The best way to do that is by convincing them that they cannot win, of course existing troop levels aren't sending a very convincing message. What he didn't tell say was that his administration has started PAYING Al Quaida/Taliban leaders to defect... SOOO, basically he is just renting them until we leave...
Those were my thoughts and observations folks, what were yours if you watched it? Also, I wrote this quickly while it was still fresh in my head if I forgot anything please add the comment. Thanks!
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Abortion debate
If any of you that follow my blog are interested in a lively, yet civil, debate on abortion. My friend Andy and I are conducting it on his blog:
See you all there and feel free to toss in your questions or comments to the debate.
See you all there and feel free to toss in your questions or comments to the debate.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Comparing: F. D. Roosevelt, "Joe" Stalin, Hitler and maybe "O"?
What were the similarities between
Hitler, Stalin and Franklin Delano Roosevelt?
Some quick but limited research and this is what I came up with:
-They took control of newspapers and newsreels to advertise themselves.
-They promised "change" and "new ways to better the economy" through nationalized socialist means and huge government intervention and bureacracy
-They were very charismatic and motivational speakers
-They sought to cure a depression.
Who else can be added that is similar to these comparisons? History has a nasty habit of repeating itself- especially when we choose to forget its lessons in the light of the greater good.
Forsaking our freedoms and civil liberties and letting the government start making our moral and capital choices for us is a step in a direction that has failed miserably in many national and regional experiments of socialism and utopianism. Many times I have iterated that the last person that should be trusted with a check book and monetary policy is an elected official.
The Soviet Socialist experiment failed miserably because the government tried to artificially control the economy and people's fiscal and retail choices. Those of us that grew up in what was once West Germany, and actually made the trip to East Berlin, can attest to the lines and shortages and the "fake" currency printed and minted to bolster the puppet economy there. We are on a crash course minting and printing our puppet money and socializing health and other industries...
Just a caveat, don't comment here blasting me saying that I said "anyone specifically in current public office" is like Hitler... I illustrated public solical policies of those predessor and historical public and national leaders that were in effect failures.
The social system and huge public spending that FDR incorporated failed to get us out of a depression and left us with the Social Security and Welfare entitlement system that is so broken today and unable to sustain itself beyond the next couple of decades. FDR did electrify the southern states with power though...
It was a WAR, World War 2 saved all of these men's bacon and economies, though not for a lengthy term for 2 of them and our own US post WW2 laurels are just now crashing down around us in our auto giants and banks failing through bad management and greed... we don't need more laws and more government- we need ENFORCEMENT of EXISTING LAWS...
Wake up sleeping American giant, arouse from your opiated stupor of uber-Change and get it right- for our children and grandchildren's sakes!
Oh and a shout out for one of my favorite radio personalities who just died this past weekend:
Paul Harvey Sr., "page 2, stand by for news!" was 90 years old.
Thanks for telling it like it was Paul Harvey- you are the last of an era and you will be missed greatly sir.
Hitler, Stalin and Franklin Delano Roosevelt?
Some quick but limited research and this is what I came up with:
-They took control of newspapers and newsreels to advertise themselves.
-They promised "change" and "new ways to better the economy" through nationalized socialist means and huge government intervention and bureacracy
-They were very charismatic and motivational speakers
-They sought to cure a depression.
Who else can be added that is similar to these comparisons? History has a nasty habit of repeating itself- especially when we choose to forget its lessons in the light of the greater good.
Forsaking our freedoms and civil liberties and letting the government start making our moral and capital choices for us is a step in a direction that has failed miserably in many national and regional experiments of socialism and utopianism. Many times I have iterated that the last person that should be trusted with a check book and monetary policy is an elected official.
The Soviet Socialist experiment failed miserably because the government tried to artificially control the economy and people's fiscal and retail choices. Those of us that grew up in what was once West Germany, and actually made the trip to East Berlin, can attest to the lines and shortages and the "fake" currency printed and minted to bolster the puppet economy there. We are on a crash course minting and printing our puppet money and socializing health and other industries...
Just a caveat, don't comment here blasting me saying that I said "anyone specifically in current public office" is like Hitler... I illustrated public solical policies of those predessor and historical public and national leaders that were in effect failures.
The social system and huge public spending that FDR incorporated failed to get us out of a depression and left us with the Social Security and Welfare entitlement system that is so broken today and unable to sustain itself beyond the next couple of decades. FDR did electrify the southern states with power though...
It was a WAR, World War 2 saved all of these men's bacon and economies, though not for a lengthy term for 2 of them and our own US post WW2 laurels are just now crashing down around us in our auto giants and banks failing through bad management and greed... we don't need more laws and more government- we need ENFORCEMENT of EXISTING LAWS...
Wake up sleeping American giant, arouse from your opiated stupor of uber-Change and get it right- for our children and grandchildren's sakes!
Oh and a shout out for one of my favorite radio personalities who just died this past weekend:
Paul Harvey Sr., "page 2, stand by for news!" was 90 years old.
Thanks for telling it like it was Paul Harvey- you are the last of an era and you will be missed greatly sir.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
When did U.S. sovereignty and property owners' rights dissolve - I missed that one...
Recently in the Washington Times a piece was printed about 16 illegal aliens suing an Arizona Rancher for "violating their civil rights" because in protecting his property- which is in the United States southern border frontier that is sparsely protected and patrolled- he stopped them at gunpoint from using his property as an illegal entry point.
16 illegals sue Arizona rancher
I am still at a loss as to when the illegal behaviour of others as well as aliens' rights merited equal civil court time against law abiding US citizens acting within their rights and well inside of their own property and border- to protect their property and detain persons conducting illegal acts...
When did America become the place you maek a beeline to go to not only to commit illegal acts and then get reated with all the rights of a native born American citizen - and then as a result merit our taxpayers' dollars to protect your illegal law breaking ass??!!
It would seem America is no longer the home of the brave and the land of the free, America is now the location of graves of the brave and the land of the freeloader. In no other country in the world - IN NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD I say, I repeat again, can you walk across their borders, commit illegal acts and get on their gravy train, and not especially after you have committed those illegal acts - ESPECIALLY not in our immediate southern neighbor The Federal Republic of Mexico. A country I might add that once conspired with Germany to take land back from our southern states in the event we lost one of them World Wars of our past that set the tone of who we are (errr, I mean WERE in the World)...
16 illegals sue Arizona rancher
I am still at a loss as to when the illegal behaviour of others as well as aliens' rights merited equal civil court time against law abiding US citizens acting within their rights and well inside of their own property and border- to protect their property and detain persons conducting illegal acts...
When did America become the place you maek a beeline to go to not only to commit illegal acts and then get reated with all the rights of a native born American citizen - and then as a result merit our taxpayers' dollars to protect your illegal law breaking ass??!!
It would seem America is no longer the home of the brave and the land of the free, America is now the location of graves of the brave and the land of the freeloader. In no other country in the world - IN NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD I say, I repeat again, can you walk across their borders, commit illegal acts and get on their gravy train, and not especially after you have committed those illegal acts - ESPECIALLY not in our immediate southern neighbor The Federal Republic of Mexico. A country I might add that once conspired with Germany to take land back from our southern states in the event we lost one of them World Wars of our past that set the tone of who we are (errr, I mean WERE in the World)...
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Obama is Reagan-esque today...
Things that make you go hmmmmm...
President Obama said today: "...Business, not government, is the engine of economic growth in this country..."
I wonder why then, that Komrade Nancy Pelosi and Komrade Barney Frank, want to continue with this Socialist "redistribution of wealth" and social spending that IS NOT GOING TO STIMULATE the economy RIGHT NOW OR LATER... President Obama himself even acknowledges that his government can't help save jobs saying, "...It is true that we cannot depend on government to create jobs or long-term growth"
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the architect of the last century's American socialism, of whom which we still ride the coat-tails of, they being Social Security and the American Welfare system... FDR's own Secretary of the Treasury after World War 2 said that all the money they spent in infrastructure and social entitlement programs was not instrumental in America emerging from the Depression - what was instrumental was the growth of American industry to support the massive needs of the World War that employed Americans and fueled the prosperity America still seems to rest on...
BUT 20 days ago, President-elect, at the time, Obama was leading the government spending charge...
On Jan. 8th he said: "...only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe..."
President Obama said today: "...Business, not government, is the engine of economic growth in this country..."
I wonder why then, that Komrade Nancy Pelosi and Komrade Barney Frank, want to continue with this Socialist "redistribution of wealth" and social spending that IS NOT GOING TO STIMULATE the economy RIGHT NOW OR LATER... President Obama himself even acknowledges that his government can't help save jobs saying, "...It is true that we cannot depend on government
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the architect of the last century's American socialism, of whom which we still ride the coat-tails of, they being Social Security and the American Welfare system... FDR's own Secretary of the Treasury after World War 2 said that all the money they spent in infrastructure and social entitlement programs was not instrumental in America emerging from the Depression - what was instrumental was the growth of American industry to support the massive needs of the World War that employed Americans and fueled the prosperity America still seems to rest on...
BUT 20 days ago, President-elect, at the time, Obama was leading the government spending charge...
On Jan. 8th he said: "...only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe..."
Monday, January 5, 2009
A current topic of interest of mine is the bailout of the "Big 3" auto manufacturers.
Just before the eclipse of 2008, the Big 3 U.S. auto manufacturers came to Washington, hands out, to ask the federal government for BIG money to tithe them over while they were trying to figure out if they could make it through the next few years. They flew to Washington to ask for this money - because they ARE SOOOO CASH STRAPPED- in their own respective private jets.
Now we're just going to go on a mathematical tangent here for a couple'a minutes because I am distracted by the beggars arriving on their own respective private jets (owned by each respective auto manufacturer corporate).
Okay here we go:
One jet - USED we're talking a minumum of $1,000,000 for a USED 4 passenger jet to $16,000,000 for something new and relatively nice but not too posh. A pilot runs around $100,000 a year, most jets have 2 of these. A hangar runs around $3-4K/month and maintenance teams can be up to $15K for every 40 hours of flight. Avgas is averaging around $3.50/gallon and these planes gotta have around 200-400 gallon tanks (if not bigger!) Just those simple figures mean that to maintain these jets that only the elite of their respective companies get to use the corporations are probably spending up to a million dollars to maintain the jets... Now if you were going to beg for a handout, wouldn't you go looking your raggediest or most thrifty to not look TOO RIDICULOUS?
So they went a begging and they got some interesting responses - one of which was that they had to give some plans and figures on how they were going to use the money loaned to them to become profitable again and how and what kind of timetable they were going to pay the loan back... Well this offended the auto executives!
C'mon people, when you go to the SBA (Small Business Administration) for a loan, they don't just cut you a check. Guess what- they want a business plan, they want to know how your business is going to work and succeed to pay the SBA loan back. Just because you think you can build flying saucers isn't exactly a guarantee of guvment checks to finance your personal pipe dream...
Sooo... if you go to Washington, on your private jet, and ask the government to bail your BIG business out- why be miffed that they send you home until you come back with a business plan that shows how/when you will pay back that investment. Private equity and investment houses would ask no less themselves, why is it different when that "investor" is the American people/Government.
Now, I DO AGREE that the most wasteful people with a checkbook are congressional politicians, and most especially Democrats as well.
Also, another pet peeve - the unions! When their constituents' jobs are all on the edge of the axe, that auto unions are unwilling to bend on the compensation, benefits and ridiculous retirement that are sucking the auto manufacturers dry. Just grandfather out the benies for the workers there for more than 15 or 20 years and move on. Make the workers partners and alienate the unions, give the workers bonuses on lowering costs to production and lowering rejection and assembly line mistakes that lead to costly recalls.
We already have more than half a million new unemployment claims last month, so what's a couple more thousand auto workers to add to that right?
Wrong, we really want to save the industry- we don't want to hand that huge sector over to foreign auto manufacturers without a fight BUT we need to do it intelligently with the American ingenuity that has sustained us for over 235 years.
Some of those auto manufacturers create the very strategic vehicles needed for our infrastructure, our security and military, so there is a national security aspect to it in that you don't want a foreign investment to buy into it either and have access to the patents and technology that makes us innovatively superior to other nations. It leaves us in a conundrum...
I guarantee that guys like my old Marine Corps buddies Arthur and Lewis who sell those cars aren't getting those union benefits and its ridiculous that non-college educated relatively low skilled jobs, that are predominantly supplemented by robotic labor on assembly lines, get paid that much and get those much benefits while the rest of non-union, blue and white collar, and working class America cannot relate to them and we pay our co-pays too! These people make more than 60% of our teachers and have better retirement than they who prepare our children for their futures!
Auto Unions can be a cancer on further expansion and advancement of the current American auto industry... Prove to me they aren't potentially a malignant cancer and that they have a use to us now in 2009. Do not give me 1892 Industrial Revolution health and welfare issues and examples... I challenge any of you to tell me why in 2009 with comprehensive labor reform and federal and state labor laws and protections for workers, that we need labor unions... Unions drive up the price of goods manufactured to pay for the ridiculous concessions that they require for their members. Are there some good unions, yes I grant that there are, but I am not addressing anything other than specifically auto industry unions in this essay. The bailout of these Big 3 and their re-structure for future growth and competitiveness has to address unions.
Another thing it has to address is timetables and development of new technology for fuel efficiency and fuel independence for vehicles and alternative fuel vehicles specifically that are AFFORDABLE to common Americans.
Now, Ford went home, they now say they don't need the money, they'll go it alone without it.
Congress also has to do its share. the time of the free meal ticket for foreign nations to import into the U.S. at will with little to no tariff and taxation is over. When our own auto manufacturers cannot be competitive abroad because their competitor markets ration the number and type of vehicles that they can export to competitor nations. You want free trade and you want a favored nation status for trading with America - open your markets and have parity with our industry...
This story isn't over- it's only just begun...
Just before the eclipse of 2008, the Big 3 U.S. auto manufacturers came to Washington, hands out, to ask the federal government for BIG money to tithe them over while they were trying to figure out if they could make it through the next few years. They flew to Washington to ask for this money - because they ARE SOOOO CASH STRAPPED- in their own respective private jets.
Now we're just going to go on a mathematical tangent here for a couple'a minutes because I am distracted by the beggars arriving on their own respective private jets (owned by each respective auto manufacturer corporate).
Okay here we go:
One jet - USED we're talking a minumum of $1,000,000 for a USED 4 passenger jet to $16,000,000 for something new and relatively nice but not too posh. A pilot runs around $100,000 a year, most jets have 2 of these. A hangar runs around $3-4K/month and maintenance teams can be up to $15K for every 40 hours of flight. Avgas is averaging around $3.50/gallon and these planes gotta have around 200-400 gallon tanks (if not bigger!) Just those simple figures mean that to maintain these jets that only the elite of their respective companies get to use the corporations are probably spending up to a million dollars to maintain the jets... Now if you were going to beg for a handout, wouldn't you go looking your raggediest or most thrifty to not look TOO RIDICULOUS?
So they went a begging and they got some interesting responses - one of which was that they had to give some plans and figures on how they were going to use the money loaned to them to become profitable again and how and what kind of timetable they were going to pay the loan back... Well this offended the auto executives!
C'mon people, when you go to the SBA (Small Business Administration) for a loan, they don't just cut you a check. Guess what- they want a business plan, they want to know how your business is going to work and succeed to pay the SBA loan back. Just because you think you can build flying saucers isn't exactly a guarantee of guvment checks to finance your personal pipe dream...
Sooo... if you go to Washington, on your private jet, and ask the government to bail your BIG business out- why be miffed that they send you home until you come back with a business plan that shows how/when you will pay back that investment. Private equity and investment houses would ask no less themselves, why is it different when that "investor" is the American people/Government.
Now, I DO AGREE that the most wasteful people with a checkbook are congressional politicians, and most especially Democrats as well.
Also, another pet peeve - the unions! When their constituents' jobs are all on the edge of the axe, that auto unions are unwilling to bend on the compensation, benefits and ridiculous retirement that are sucking the auto manufacturers dry. Just grandfather out the benies for the workers there for more than 15 or 20 years and move on. Make the workers partners and alienate the unions, give the workers bonuses on lowering costs to production and lowering rejection and assembly line mistakes that lead to costly recalls.
We already have more than half a million new unemployment claims last month, so what's a couple more thousand auto workers to add to that right?
Wrong, we really want to save the industry- we don't want to hand that huge sector over to foreign auto manufacturers without a fight BUT we need to do it intelligently with the American ingenuity that has sustained us for over 235 years.
Some of those auto manufacturers create the very strategic vehicles needed for our infrastructure, our security and military, so there is a national security aspect to it in that you don't want a foreign investment to buy into it either and have access to the patents and technology that makes us innovatively superior to other nations. It leaves us in a conundrum...
I guarantee that guys like my old Marine Corps buddies Arthur and Lewis who sell those cars aren't getting those union benefits and its ridiculous that non-college educated relatively low skilled jobs, that are predominantly supplemented by robotic labor on assembly lines, get paid that much and get those much benefits while the rest of non-union, blue and white collar, and working class America cannot relate to them and we pay our co-pays too! These people make more than 60% of our teachers and have better retirement than they who prepare our children for their futures!
Auto Unions can be a cancer on further expansion and advancement of the current American auto industry... Prove to me they aren't potentially a malignant cancer and that they have a use to us now in 2009. Do not give me 1892 Industrial Revolution health and welfare issues and examples... I challenge any of you to tell me why in 2009 with comprehensive labor reform and federal and state labor laws and protections for workers, that we need labor unions... Unions drive up the price of goods manufactured to pay for the ridiculous concessions that they require for their members. Are there some good unions, yes I grant that there are, but I am not addressing anything other than specifically auto industry unions in this essay. The bailout of these Big 3 and their re-structure for future growth and competitiveness has to address unions.
Another thing it has to address is timetables and development of new technology for fuel efficiency and fuel independence for vehicles and alternative fuel vehicles specifically that are AFFORDABLE to common Americans.
Now, Ford went home, they now say they don't need the money, they'll go it alone without it.
Congress also has to do its share. the time of the free meal ticket for foreign nations to import into the U.S. at will with little to no tariff and taxation is over. When our own auto manufacturers cannot be competitive abroad because their competitor markets ration the number and type of vehicles that they can export to competitor nations. You want free trade and you want a favored nation status for trading with America - open your markets and have parity with our industry...
This story isn't over- it's only just begun...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
