Politics to Puke

I'm normally not one to get emotionally involved in politics, but the political events that have transpired in the recent months have moved to me to shear nausea! Okay, so maybe not that extreme, but I have found a lot of things upsetting regarding the new "change" being displayed on the political stage of this Nation. Because of such, I thought I'd share some of my own opinions of the larger issues portrayed by our government and media:

1. Government Bailouts: so in earlier blogs I've expressed my thoughts and views of bailouts. I opposed Bush in lending his $700 billion bailout package last year and I oppose the bailout efforts of the new Obama administration. Although no one really knows if over $1.8 trillion (this number deriving from last year's package and the recent package) will stimulate the economy as many people hope, that's not the arguement in my mind. The issue is that government bailouts in no way punishes bad behavior, nor does it stimulate good behavior. If anything, I would say it will reward mediocrity; it sends the message that's it's okay to be sloppy and to do just on okay job. Motivation for the best results possible is thrown out the window. Why? Because Uncle Sam will pay for our mistakes! Where is the Capitalism, upon which this country and economy were founded?! We have skewed our very own perception of the realities that face us in the near future, because we are forgetting too quickly the economic principles that gave us the comforts we have had up to this point.
2. AIG: This is more of a side note to the government bailouts. My question is: why doesn't the government first ask the companies they're "bailing out" for a specific budget of what these companies need and review it. Then, when the government forks out OUR tax dollars, they closely monitor that the money is being spent in the appropriate places. I'm against this whole practice to begin with and wish the whole thing wasn't happening; but if someone's going to use my tax money in a way I'm against, then at least show me the respect of taking note of how it's being used! Plus, I think it's kinda funny how people in Congress who voted for a bill which actually allowed the bonuses to take place, turned around and then said they were shocked to see the money being used for such uses.¹
   
3. Geithner & the Treasury: You guys said the issue about the AIG bonuses was put in because it might not otherwise be "strong enough to survive legal challenge."² Dude. I may not know a lot of legal goings on with all that's going on with AIG, but seriously. All I see are empty words from you guys, so you can avoid any kind of accountability. That's how it seemed with Chris Dodd regarding adding the bonus amendment.³ What kind of transparent government is that? Frustrating.
4. Another attack on marriage in CA⁴: The people have already spoken. Twice now (to my knowledge) California has voted marriage to be between a man and a woman. Okay, so I actually kind of already saw this happening (who didn't?). I don't think this issue will go away quietly. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it gets more attention than the first time. But here's my fear: when the marriage amendment is repealed (and I think it eventually will be; it's just a matter of time), I really think there won't be a major effort and movement to get it back on the ballot. I think either conservatives won't take an offensive stance, or the proposal will get shut down by the state (because I honestly believe the state supports gay marriage). I don't mean to be negative and I don't, by any means, intend to give the idea that it's a lost cause. I still think the battle should be fought, because it's probably one of the most noble battles to be fought right now. I just feel that more people need to be prepared and willing to take an offensive rather than a defensive stance when the time comes.

So what are your thoughts? Hopefully, I didn't show how ignorant I am of life, and I'm really not that cynical about things. I just get frustrated sometimes that people in our government often forget the simplicity of common sense in many issues. It's just that some of the things I read in the news makes me want to vomit! ;-)



Footnotes:

1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/19/lawrence-odonnell-reduces_n_176886.html
2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/19/geithner-treasury-pushed_n_177016.html
3. http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=dodd%20admits%20bonus&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#
4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/20/another-marriage-petition_n_177599.html

A Bailout for Santa?

Why not? It seems to the be the year of bailouts. We've begun the jolly trend of nationalizing everything, why not nationalize Christmas as well? Then next year, we can bail out 4th of July, Easter, and other holidays!

In fact, it might just happen. The Wall Street Journal just did an article today (the 11th...I'm blogging this in the middle of the night, so it was technically yesterday) titled "U.S. Says It Will Bail Out Christmas". It explains how Santa and his gift-making operations are struggling due to recent "Christmas list swaps" that didn't quite go as planned. However, he is struggling to get aid from the government unless he "goes green." In all honesty, I'm not too worried. It looks like GM is getting their bailout. It's only a matter of days before Santa gets his.

Anyway, check out the article.

America, the Spoiled

With the continuance of the downward spiral of the U.S. economy (Congrats Wall Street! The Dow has officially dropped below 8,000!),we have seen several companies prostrate themselves before Capitol Hill in hopes to receive bailouts to survive this unstable economy. One of the latest topics in regards to this subject is that of the auto industry crisis. In a nutshell, the Detroit-based auto makers are losing money fast, and without immediate government aid, GM could face bankruptcy.

Although the auto industry has been pleading to Washington for a $25 billion aid package, warning that "the societal costs would be catastrophic"¹ if no aid is received, there is a current head-butt going on between President Bush and many Democrats in Congress, causing a "deadlock"² to prevent any aid coming to the auto industry any time soon.

Despite the dark and ominous clouds that are rapidly moving in and covering any optimism for the auto makers to receive any kind of aid and, thus, bypassing an otherwise highly-probable bankruptcy, former governor and Bain & Company (and Bain Capital) CEO Mitt Romney suggests that there is still hope for the crippled industry. In yesterday's New York Times he writes an article outlining a strategy that could get the American auto makers back on their feet and become more competitive with foreign auto makers, who are now leaving GM et al in the dust. Basically, he tells the auto industry not to take a bailout, to tough it up, and swallow its pride to ensure future success.

As tough as Romney appears on the auto industry, the solutions he offers are very practical and focuses on the reality that a bailout would only delay the problem instead of proactively solving it and moving on. The following are some "prescriptions" he gives to Detroit's auto makers:

1. There are costs that can be alleviated, such as new labor agreements and cutting back retiree benefits (which, according to Mitt, is a large reason why the costs per domestic auto is much more than those of foreign autos).
2. The current management needs to leave. There needs to be a fresh view on how things are run, and they need to cut back on some (if not many) of the luxurious costs of being an executive.
3. Stop looking for quick profits and focus on investing in the future.
4. Don't get rid of the sales people that can grow sales.

I couldn't agree more with Mitt Romney about not giving the auto industry a bailout. In fact, I'm really not an advocate of giving out bailouts anyway (at least, not freely like Washington has been doing). As is the case in human nature, once one company or industry gets a bailout from a liberal Uncle Sam, it's inevitable that other companies and industries will throw a fit like a spoiled child, crying for their necessity of a bailout as well. What good is that for our economy? More reliance and dependence on big government? Why has the American economy thrived for so many years, and even been able to pick itself up after sudden economic downturns? It's because of America's belief and focus on capitalism, on a free-market society. Now, with our spoiled-more-than-ever behavior, if things don't go our way, we turn to the government for aid. Why must our society shame ourselves and defame Capitalism by demanding governmental aid, instead of overcoming our own challenges? What happened to self-reliance? What happened to independence? Have we forgotten the American Dream? Have we forgotten the foundation upon which today's richly blessed America is built?

It seems that the call of a bailout is too much of a quick fix and is based off of selfishness and greed, two things that will NOT help this economy get out of its slump. In fact, it's because of selfishness and greed as underlying factors that put the U.S. in the mess we are in today with our financial/credit crisis. I say SUCK IT UP America; it's time for us to grow up and rebuild ourselves as a "city upon a hill"³, just as we were foreordained to be!

I'll get off of my soap box now. I have a lot more to say about the topic, but I think you get my drift. What are your thoughts???

Footnotes:

1. The MarketWatch website.
2. Bloomberg website.
3. John Winthrop's "A Model of Christian Charity" in 1630. This speech was given aboard the Arbella, traveling to the American continent from Europe.