Bail Out? – Bankruptcy? – Belly Up? – Or Brainstorming? – Let’s Help Create a Blueprint for the Return of Successful American Automakers

We must first find out what caused the problem before we can fix it. There is plenty of blame to go around. Many people are blaming the unions for the failure. I agree that part of the problem belongs to the unions. When our unions were first organized they worked hard to assure workers received fair wages for doing a decent job, better working conditions, shorter days, medical and retirement benefits, etc. Workers throughout America benefited from the unions’ efforts.

Please forgive me while I step on my soapbox for awhile to complain about what I think is the biggest problem with the unions today. Somewhere along the way unions quit fighting for the diligent workers and started fighting harder for the deadbeats that don’t actually earn what they receive. You know those that don’t carry their share of the work load – those with high absenteeism and tardiness, those that show up under the influence of drugs or alcohol, those that make excuses for why they can’t do a harder job, those constantly out on medical leave, etc. Yet, the union does their best to keep those deadbeats from getting fired. When asked “Why?” – Union representatives answered, “If we can protect their job; we’ll have no problem protecting yours.” Forcing employers to keep slackers on the payroll hurts everybody and possibly could be part of what’s risking everyone else’s jobs now.

I watched the news yesterday and heard that the CEOs flew into Washington DC on private jets. If taxpayers are forced to bailout those managing the big 3 – there had better be lots of rules. From what I’ve heard; management positions are not union members – if that is true; then the unions aren’t totally to blame.

Get back to the basics. These questions should be answered:
• Is the ratio of management costs to labor costs close to the same as they were when the big 3 first started being profitable? If not, which cost more now than it did then and what caused the change?
• How much of the problem is really linked to the unions abandoning the principles they were founded on?
• How much of the problem is high union wages?
• How much of the problem is linked to the corporate greed giving high salaries and fringe benefits to the white collar workers?
• How much of the problem is improper designing of vehicles that will sell?
• Were promised retirement programs properly funded?
• How much of the problem is linked to the rising cost of health care?
• How much of the problem is linked to the disadvantage of high corporate taxes that get passed on to consumers? (Those embedded taxes that hurt America’s competitiveness that Gov. Huckabee spoke about throughout his campaign – especially when promoting the FairTax)
• How much of the problem is linked to the current economic meltdown?
• Was there anything in the blueprint of the original Chrysler bailout that could help make things work now?

If the automakers fail; it will affect part suppliers and many others around the communities. Can we help avoid ending up with manufacturing “ghost towns” across the country? Please join the brainstorming with answers to my questions or asking more of your own.

Published in: on NovemberUTCbThu, 20 Nov 2008 15:31:20 +0000000000pmThu, 20 Nov 2008 15:31:20 +000008 4, 2008 at 3:31 pm Comments (4)

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”

The Democrats are working hard for an Obama presidency with a filibuster-proof Congress. According to an article I read recently; the last time there was a president serving with a filibuster-proof Congressional majority was in 1977. [The Carter Administration]

Although I don’t usually use Wikipedia for reference; since this quote goes along with what I remember – I will use it.

During Carter’s administration, the economy suffered double-digit inflation, coupled with very high interest rates, oil shortages, high unemployment and slow economic growth. Productivity growth in the United States had declined to an average annual rate of 1 percent, compared to 3.2 percent of the 1960s.

In my opinion the scariest similarities between Carter and Obama is this quote (also from the Wikipedia article)

The media discovered and promoted Carter. As Lawrence Shoup noted in his 1980 book The Carter Presidency and Beyond:

“What Carter had that his opponents did not was the acceptance and support of elite sectors of the mass communications media. It was their favorable coverage of Carter and his campaign that gave him an edge, propelling him rocket-like to the top of the opinion polls. This helped Carter win key primary election victories, enabling him to rise from an obscure public figure to President-elect in the short space of 9 months.”

The question is – Have we “learn[ed] from history” or “are [we] doomed to repeat it”?

Published in: on OctoberUTCbMon, 27 Oct 2008 11:52:56 +0000000000amMon, 27 Oct 2008 11:52:56 +000008 4, 2008 at 11:52 am Comments (5)

Actions speak louder than words

Edit: I’m adding 2 additions to this post. Note: The 2nd addition is at the end.

First addition:
I’m editing this post because I forgot to mention something which is very relevant to the theme of this article. This is the introduction of the original news article I mentioned that caused me to write this in the first place:

While Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign has produced a television ad criticizing Sen. John McCain’s position on equal pay for women and pointing out that women in America are paid only 77 cents on the dollar compared to men, Obama pays his own female Senate staffers, on average, only 78 percent of what he pays male staffers.

Original post plus 2nd addition at the end:
I’ve never been a member of NOW [National Organization for Women] even though I agree with SOME of their goals. I believe that chores should be shared around the home between all family members. That is ONE of the reasons I was impressed with Sen. McCain’s VP choice. The Palin family is an example of “What’s going to work – Team Work” in action; a true inspiration for families across America. But, many outspoken feminists across America don’t like Gov. Palin. Are they afraid she might actually let the world know it’s OK to be a pro-life, pro-traditional family, pro-gun rights, and religious conservative female? Were they shocked such creatures exist? Maybe they’ve never heard of Feminists for Life, Christian Womanhood, Joyful Woman, etc.?

I believe in equal pay for equal work; regardless of race or gender. I just read an article that really leaves me very confused since NOW recently endorsed Obama. Have you heard that “Obama Pays Women Only 78 Percent of What He Pays Men”?

… Obama pays his own female Senate staffers, on average, only 78 percent of what he pays male staffers.

Women on McCain’s staff, meanwhile, earn 24 percent more on average than women on Obama’s Senate staff. McCain also pays his female Senate staff members a higher average salary than his male Senate staff members…

In percentage terms, McCain paid female staffers 101 percent of what he paid men. Women outnumbered men on McCain’s staff, 26 to 16.

NOW President Kim Gandy did not view the pay disparity as a problem…

Thirteen of the 20 highest paid members of McCain’s Senate staff were women during the sixth-month reporting period. Eight of the 20 highest paid members of Obama’s Senate staff were women.

Read more here.

NOW had a choice between endorsing a candidate whose ACTIONS support fairness between genders or a candidate that SAYS they support fairness between genders; even though his actions PROVE otherwise. They chose the empty suit candidate full of empty words.

As an Illinois State Senator, Obama worked hard to raise tax payer dollars to support his favorite charities. As an US Senator, he was working hard to encourage Congress to fight global poverty. Read more here. That was probably part of the reason Oprah endorsed him. Fighting poverty is dear to Oprah’s heart and she has done a good job using her own money supporting that cause.

I’m a strong supporter of our 1st Amendment right and believe God gave each of us the choice as to which religion (if any at all) we want to practice. I personally believe it is Scriptural to give to charity and examine my own records to make sure I give a minimum of 10% [Tithe] of our family income to charity like the Bible teaches. Malachi 3:8 (KJV) “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.” I also believe it is up to the individual as to whether or not they obey God and give to charity. But, I’d like to point out some interesting information.

Until recently [2005 – around the time he began his presidential run] the Obama’s charitable contributions were at a lower percentage of their total income than the national average of 2% of gross income. Read more here. In 2007 the Biden’s gross income was $319,853 with less than ½ % [$995] going to charity. Read more here.

How do the presidential candidates compare in charitable contributions for 2007? The Obama’s 2007 income level was larger than that of most Americans, 4.2 million dollars gross income with approximately 6% [about 3 times the national average of 2%] going to charity. Although smaller than the Obama’s, the McCain’s 2007 income is also larger than most Americans, $794,000 with approximately 27% [almost 10 ¾ times larger than the national average] going to charity. Read more here.

Regardless of what happens with our taxes, I intend to continue fulfilling my promise to give at least 10% of our family income to charity. I have a problem with government deciding WHICH charities I should support with our tax dollars. Some of their choices are fine. Some of them go against everything I believe. I really have a problem with the Democrat ticket wanting to put OUR money where THEIR mouth is. Maybe they never learned that charity begins at home.

Obama says Congress should do something about the way mortgage companies do business. He blames the Bush administration and McCain for our “recent” economic crisis. Bush tried to do something about it in 2003. Read more here. McCain actually tried again by co-sponsoring a bill in 2005 to address the problem. But, once again the bill was squashed by the Democrats in bed with Freddie and Fannie. “…Obama in his three complete years in the Senate is the second largest recipient of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae campaign contributions…” Read more here.

Obama says he supports immediate troop withdrawal; but allegedly “OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL” Read it here.

Obama says he wants to reform government. “Obama sidesteps reform in Illinois.” Read it here.

Something to think about:
Hypocrite means “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” What does that say for Obama’s and NOW’s words vs. their actions? I wonder – What kind of picture would be next to the definition of the word hypocrite in a dictionary?

Edit: 2nd addition:

Something more to think about:
Didn’t Obama claim running his campaign is proof of him having executive experience? Upon examining that type of “resume” – which candidate could we really expect to make changes for equality among the sexes? Sen. McCain pays males and females of his staff virtually equally; although women are paid about 1% more than men among the top positions and chose a woman to be his VP. Obama pays women 22% lower than men and chose a man as his VP. Does Obama’s “resume” mean we should expect “more of the same” suppression of equality between sexes if he is elected the chief executive of America? Once again Obama talks “change” while McCain performs change.

Published in: on SeptemberUTCbFri, 19 Sep 2008 16:46:53 +0000000000pmFri, 19 Sep 2008 16:46:53 +000008 4, 2008 at 4:46 pm Comments (4)