Bailing out the auto industry, without making significant changes to how they do business and what they produce, is not in the best long term interest of America or the environment. Bankruptcy may “not be an option” for automakers but it may very well be the best thing that could happen for consumers.
We are facing difficult economic times and America needs to change its attitude concerning what is really necessary to maintain healthy, satisfied lives. Our excesses have finally caught up with us and we must learn to now become more frugal. We have adopted a destructive throw-away mentality in this country that has to be reversed. The automotive industry is no exception.
There are far too many cars on the market. A Long Beach California port is warehousing thousands of new cars due to lack of buyers. Detroit has housed thousands of unwanted American-made cars over the last two years at Michigan’s state fairground and in lots at its airports. Car lots across the country remain crowded with unsold new cars. We need to make our cars last longer. We will survive without a new car every year or even every three years. Automakers do not need to make new model changes every year.
What is wrong with driving a used car a little longer? The Big 3 likes to tell us that the after-market parts industry will suffer without new cars every year, this is simply a scare tactic. As their cars age, car owners will need to replace parts and this will keep the after-market parts industry alive. Automakers need to concern themselves with making a product that produces less pollution, gets better fuel economy and lasts longer than just a couple of years. All of this can be done by combining current and developing technologies.
Wages in the auto industry are out of whack with the rest of the nations work force. They need to be brought in-line with everyone else.
Automaker CEO’s will actually survive without their exorbitant multi-million dollar a year salaries and private jets. My advice to them is to get your heads out of the clouds and live amongst the consumers you claim to care so much about. Take this time and the money already given to you to build the new breed of cars that the environment needs and Americans truly want.
Flying private jets to Washington to ask for financial help and then defending the practice as ‘standard procedure’ shows that their ‘standard procedure’ leans towards excess that a financially troubled corporation should not be indulging in. Are they more concerned with hanging on to their exalted perch so they can continue to loot their respective corporations than they are in keeping millions of Americans employed? Extremely high executive salaries and membership in exclusive country clubs, use of private jets, and various other miscellaneous fluff that typically goes with being the figurehead of a large American corporation does not help the average American auto worker put food on their table.
Auto executives say they are going to streamline business operations, keeping in mind that their idea of streamlined business operations in the past was to layoff thousands of workers and move their operations overseas, I can’t help but think they are a bit disingenuous in trying to convince us that asking for our help is going to benefit us.
This request for help, from an industry that affects so many aspects of American life, comes at a pivotal point in our economic and environmental health. The concerns of both must be taken into account, for they can both benefit if we proceed responsibly.
Should we bail them out of a situation of their own making? The painful lesson of British Leyland must be heeded in the limited effectiveness of bailouts. The government got in the business of trying to make a winner out of a structurally flawed company. Is the U.S. auto industry structurally flawed? They have already proven they are willing to deprive U.S. auto workers of jobs by sending those jobs outside the U.S. Flint Michigan, and ultimately the entire state, has been devastated due to auto executives decisions to hire cheaper labor in Mexico. And GM is currently building a $300 million facility to build cars in Russia.
And when Americans began turning away from American made cars in favor of foreign made cars that got better gas mileage, the U.S. auto makers, instead of listening to the trend and retooling their industry to make what Americans obviously wanted, their answer was to increase the production of gas guzzling behemoths to help keep the price of their product down. By ignoring consumers U.S. auto makers took a path that led to an oversaturated market of ever larger vehicles that increased our dependence on fossil fuel which in turn increased pollution. Environmentalist have been demanding for decades to have access to vehicles that addressed these two major concerns. Auto executives chose to ignore these demands and that decision put them in their current situation.
I don’t think they can be trusted to put America’s best interest first. Their current business model of bleeding the industry dry to pad their executives’ lifestyle and let their employees fend for themselves needs to end. They need to listen to their consumers to produce a safer and more fuel efficient product and prove they are willing to put America first by keeping jobs here in America.
Bailing them out is not going to force changes that need to take place. Perhaps the humbling experience of a bankruptcy is exactly what is called for.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Blackwater, Ted Stevens and the selling off of America
Juneau is hardly the top American target for terrorists, so what’s Blackwater doing in Alaska’s capital? Uniformed guards from the private security contractor have been reported guarding a radar station for tests of the National Missile Defense system now officially deployed in Alaska.
The system, thus far, has not proven itself capable of shooting down any missile even when the target missiles’ exact take-off time and trajectory are known. The system is designed to shield the U.S. against incoming Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM’s). this is the same controversial system that Russia is up in arms about being contracted to be installed in Poland.
Blackwater International, a private militia, better known for their mercenary firepower, recruits elite soldiers trained by the U.S. military and rents them back to the U.S. at a premium. They provide corporate security and training for law-enforcement officers. They hire mercenaries and trainers out to foreign governments and to corporations. While the US Marines used to guard our embassies around the world, Blackwater guards are now manning many of those posts. Recently, Blackwater has recruited highly placed ex-government officials, such as former CIA Director of Counterterrorism Cofer Black, to head up a private intelligence agency. Blackwater, like others of its ilk, is penetrating every aspect of our military and intelligence services.
Our federal government is pouring billions of dollars into the pockets of defense contractors at an alarming rate. This wildly expensive high-tech version of France’s Maginot Line that can be so easily and cheaply defeated by decoys, or overwhelmed by a real-time mass attack, will never be a practical defense. Security functions that used to be performed by U.S. armed forces are now being paid for at a much higher premium. In Iraq, services that used to be provided by military departments such as food services, housing, clothing, security, etc are now being provided by contractors at far higher cost to taxpayers.
All of this amounts to a colossal rip off of American tax dollars and it is creating a very dangerous threat to America’s independence and security.
The Blackwater guards in Alaska are hired by Chenega, an Alaska Native corporation associated with the Alaskan coastal village of Chenega Bay, population 86. Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, architect of the “Bridge to Nowhere” and recently convicted of a seven-felony string of corruption charges, is one of the principal proponents of the anti-missile system and was also instrumental in writing laws which help secure government contracts for Alaska Native Corporations. Senator Stevens didn’t invent these affirmative-action type laws that many people have grumbled about since the Sixties but he has helped refine and corporatize them: Chenega gets contracts through the Small Business Administration, rakes off a percentage, then lets giant Blackwater provide the actual services. Since 2000 Chenega has received over $1.1 billion in sole-source or non-compete bids from the Army, Air Force and Department of Homeland Security. Now that is what I call ‘using the system to your advantage’. It is what politicians who want to survive learn very quickly. It is one of the downsides of Capitalism.
And the Bush administration has tweaked our government by turning over functions that have traditionally fallen under purview of the military and intelligence services to private industry leaving the taxpayer to pay higher prices for those services.
Once these services are no longer a government function, they can be sold to the highest bidder. If these company CEO’s are bought by a foreign country or private bidder, then we have the situation where the U.S. can no longer defend itself. History has taught us that loyalty goes to where the next paycheck comes from. Under these conditions, does national allegiance mean anything?
The system, thus far, has not proven itself capable of shooting down any missile even when the target missiles’ exact take-off time and trajectory are known. The system is designed to shield the U.S. against incoming Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM’s). this is the same controversial system that Russia is up in arms about being contracted to be installed in Poland.
Blackwater International, a private militia, better known for their mercenary firepower, recruits elite soldiers trained by the U.S. military and rents them back to the U.S. at a premium. They provide corporate security and training for law-enforcement officers. They hire mercenaries and trainers out to foreign governments and to corporations. While the US Marines used to guard our embassies around the world, Blackwater guards are now manning many of those posts. Recently, Blackwater has recruited highly placed ex-government officials, such as former CIA Director of Counterterrorism Cofer Black, to head up a private intelligence agency. Blackwater, like others of its ilk, is penetrating every aspect of our military and intelligence services.
Our federal government is pouring billions of dollars into the pockets of defense contractors at an alarming rate. This wildly expensive high-tech version of France’s Maginot Line that can be so easily and cheaply defeated by decoys, or overwhelmed by a real-time mass attack, will never be a practical defense. Security functions that used to be performed by U.S. armed forces are now being paid for at a much higher premium. In Iraq, services that used to be provided by military departments such as food services, housing, clothing, security, etc are now being provided by contractors at far higher cost to taxpayers.
All of this amounts to a colossal rip off of American tax dollars and it is creating a very dangerous threat to America’s independence and security.
The Blackwater guards in Alaska are hired by Chenega, an Alaska Native corporation associated with the Alaskan coastal village of Chenega Bay, population 86. Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, architect of the “Bridge to Nowhere” and recently convicted of a seven-felony string of corruption charges, is one of the principal proponents of the anti-missile system and was also instrumental in writing laws which help secure government contracts for Alaska Native Corporations. Senator Stevens didn’t invent these affirmative-action type laws that many people have grumbled about since the Sixties but he has helped refine and corporatize them: Chenega gets contracts through the Small Business Administration, rakes off a percentage, then lets giant Blackwater provide the actual services. Since 2000 Chenega has received over $1.1 billion in sole-source or non-compete bids from the Army, Air Force and Department of Homeland Security. Now that is what I call ‘using the system to your advantage’. It is what politicians who want to survive learn very quickly. It is one of the downsides of Capitalism.
And the Bush administration has tweaked our government by turning over functions that have traditionally fallen under purview of the military and intelligence services to private industry leaving the taxpayer to pay higher prices for those services.
Once these services are no longer a government function, they can be sold to the highest bidder. If these company CEO’s are bought by a foreign country or private bidder, then we have the situation where the U.S. can no longer defend itself. History has taught us that loyalty goes to where the next paycheck comes from. Under these conditions, does national allegiance mean anything?
Burma sentenced blogger to 20 years
Nay Phone Latt, a Burmese blogger, was sentenced by Burma’s tyrannical Military Junta that will not tolerate any semblance of critical opinion being voiced over the World Wide Web.
Judge Daw Soe recently sentenced Nay Phone Latt to a total of twenty years and six months for possession of a banned video and having a blog to express his concerns about the increasingly difficulty of Burmese people to voice their opinions since the protests last year.
Nay was first arrested in January but was released, along with a handful of National League for Democracy (NLD) politicians, a few hours later but was arrested again a few days later. Since then he has been held at Insein Prison (pronounced ‘insane’), infamous for grotesque treatment of its political prisoners.
The blog Freedom For Burma written on February 2, 2008 describes Nay’s fate as well as others.
Bloggers the world over are being asked to post his photo on their blog and to write to Burmese embassies worldwide to request his release.
I have a lot of admiration for someone who can stand up to their oppressors knowing they will be thrown into a notorious prison likes of Insein just for doing so. I don't know if I could personally gather the courage to do it myself. I pray that I will never be tested.
But, there is something we can do. We in America and the world over can exercise the right that people like Nay Phone Latt is fighting for and express our disgust at how Burmese citizens are being treated simply for expressing their views.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Bailout? What Bailout?
Does acting quickly have the desired effect of appearing to know what you are doing? In the case of the $700B Wall Street bailout, the answer is apparently, No.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson panicked and cajoled Congress into passing a bailout that was identified as needed immediately in order to avert a looming economic crash that would have rivaled the stock market crash of 1929. In hindsight, his plan failed to have any effect and the stock market is still fluctuating wildly. Now, after being given complete control over how that money is to be used, he has changed course. This action has angered many who voted for the measure and has raised the question of his credibility and competence.
The plan was to buy troubled assets. Then the money was used to buy shares in banks. Now it’s going to be used to support financial institutions offering consumer credit. Democrats in Congress want some of the money to go to the auto industry.
The money was to be used to “stabilize” the economy. It didn’t stabilize anything.
The money was supposed to buy “troubled assets”, but it will not buy troubled assets.
The money was supposed to “rescue” Wall Street, but has only rescued some big banks and corporations. (The conspiracy theorist in me wants to think that those who were rescued had some ties to the Bush administration. Another theory has the federal government socializing the banking system. But these are fodder for other posts at another time).
The fact is Henry Paulson doesn’t have a clue how to best use this money and the program that was originally passed has changed. (Sounds an awful lot like a scam, doesn’t it).
The majority of House Republicans didn’t want any part of the original plan without more details and therefore did not vote for it. The plan was voted for by House GOP Leadership defying the wishes of the majority of members of their own House caucus. Now, some members of Congress, republicans and democrats alike, are supporting Bloomberg News in its legal demand that the Federal Reserve provide details of the bailout process.
It is down right scary to know that Congress will vote for a plan without details of that plan and place unprecedented power in the hands of a man who has now clearly shown does not know what to do with the money.
So, what we have is an extremely large pool of money (many say is not large enough), a man in charge of that fund who admittedly does not know what to do with it, and a faltering economy that desperately needs to be stabilized. Would demanding Paulson’s resignation improve things? I doubt it.
People are still loosing their homes and jobs, and our faith in our future is being badly shaken. CEO’s and big oil are walking away with record profits. Politicians grasp at any glimmer of hope to keep things working and no one is truly in control of anything.
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson panicked and cajoled Congress into passing a bailout that was identified as needed immediately in order to avert a looming economic crash that would have rivaled the stock market crash of 1929. In hindsight, his plan failed to have any effect and the stock market is still fluctuating wildly. Now, after being given complete control over how that money is to be used, he has changed course. This action has angered many who voted for the measure and has raised the question of his credibility and competence.
The plan was to buy troubled assets. Then the money was used to buy shares in banks. Now it’s going to be used to support financial institutions offering consumer credit. Democrats in Congress want some of the money to go to the auto industry.
The money was to be used to “stabilize” the economy. It didn’t stabilize anything.
The money was supposed to buy “troubled assets”, but it will not buy troubled assets.
The money was supposed to “rescue” Wall Street, but has only rescued some big banks and corporations. (The conspiracy theorist in me wants to think that those who were rescued had some ties to the Bush administration. Another theory has the federal government socializing the banking system. But these are fodder for other posts at another time).
The fact is Henry Paulson doesn’t have a clue how to best use this money and the program that was originally passed has changed. (Sounds an awful lot like a scam, doesn’t it).
The majority of House Republicans didn’t want any part of the original plan without more details and therefore did not vote for it. The plan was voted for by House GOP Leadership defying the wishes of the majority of members of their own House caucus. Now, some members of Congress, republicans and democrats alike, are supporting Bloomberg News in its legal demand that the Federal Reserve provide details of the bailout process.
It is down right scary to know that Congress will vote for a plan without details of that plan and place unprecedented power in the hands of a man who has now clearly shown does not know what to do with the money.
So, what we have is an extremely large pool of money (many say is not large enough), a man in charge of that fund who admittedly does not know what to do with it, and a faltering economy that desperately needs to be stabilized. Would demanding Paulson’s resignation improve things? I doubt it.
People are still loosing their homes and jobs, and our faith in our future is being badly shaken. CEO’s and big oil are walking away with record profits. Politicians grasp at any glimmer of hope to keep things working and no one is truly in control of anything.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Sarah Palin: Political Farce
This shouldn’t be worthy of my time, but Sarah Palin had the unmitigated audacity to counter-attack McCain campaign aides’ remarks about her with such hypocrisy and irony that it screams to be addressed.
Claims were made that Palin did not know Africa was a continent instead of a country, or which countries are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement, despite touting her familiarity with neighboring Canada.
"Those were taken out of context and that's cruel," Palin said. "It's mean-spirited. It's immature. It's unprofessional and those guys are jerks if they came away with it, taking things out of context, and then tried to spread something on national news."
She makes this statement after she used the exact same tactics against Barack Obama during the campaign.
This all amounts to nothing more than the pitiful and childish finger-pointing that takes place by a losing team that does not have the class and foresight to learn from their mistakes and build on them in order to come back stronger in the next contest.
Anyone listening to Palin’s unscripted comments could see that she was in over her head. The voters saw through the façade the GOP was painting. You can dress her up in new clothes and prep her for debates but she still lacks any real substance.
The whole Sarah Palin show was window dressing and the GOP should be ashamed for their transparent attempt to pass her off as anything worthy of national attention. It amounted to nothing more than a farce on the level of a National Lampoon movie script about the presidential campaign process.
She says there was no tension among McCain staffers concerning her. Her denial is evident of her view of herself as “flawless” and worthy to be the center of attention, convinced that no one can possibly have any ill will towards her. She reminds me of that stereo-typical spoiled brat whose parents lavish praise on her, boosting her ego beyond her abilities, while everyone around her sees she is nothing special. It is really very pitiful.
This woman lacks the self-awareness needed to realistically view herself through other peoples eyes, which, as a politician, is extremely dangerous when trying to convince people to place their future in her hands.
The fact that she prepared a concession speech, and fully expected to give it before John McCain’s speech, coupled with the fact that vice-presidential nominees traditionally don’t give concession speeches on election night, bowing to the presidential candidate to give the speech, just proves how much more importance she placed in herself over John McCain.
As some McCain aides say, and many others saw, Palin had become more interested in her own future than in McCain's election. And, for future reference, this proves she places herself above this countries needs. She can deny it all she wants but her actions show it and her history bears it out to be true.
Her best option is to back away from the media and go about her role in Alaska for which she was elected. Put this business behind her and stay away from the national spotlight. We Americans have already witnessed her many failed attempts at trying to sound knowledgeable. We see these attempts for what they are, whitewash.
Claims were made that Palin did not know Africa was a continent instead of a country, or which countries are part of the North American Free Trade Agreement, despite touting her familiarity with neighboring Canada.
"Those were taken out of context and that's cruel," Palin said. "It's mean-spirited. It's immature. It's unprofessional and those guys are jerks if they came away with it, taking things out of context, and then tried to spread something on national news."
She makes this statement after she used the exact same tactics against Barack Obama during the campaign.
This all amounts to nothing more than the pitiful and childish finger-pointing that takes place by a losing team that does not have the class and foresight to learn from their mistakes and build on them in order to come back stronger in the next contest.
Anyone listening to Palin’s unscripted comments could see that she was in over her head. The voters saw through the façade the GOP was painting. You can dress her up in new clothes and prep her for debates but she still lacks any real substance.
The whole Sarah Palin show was window dressing and the GOP should be ashamed for their transparent attempt to pass her off as anything worthy of national attention. It amounted to nothing more than a farce on the level of a National Lampoon movie script about the presidential campaign process.
She says there was no tension among McCain staffers concerning her. Her denial is evident of her view of herself as “flawless” and worthy to be the center of attention, convinced that no one can possibly have any ill will towards her. She reminds me of that stereo-typical spoiled brat whose parents lavish praise on her, boosting her ego beyond her abilities, while everyone around her sees she is nothing special. It is really very pitiful.
This woman lacks the self-awareness needed to realistically view herself through other peoples eyes, which, as a politician, is extremely dangerous when trying to convince people to place their future in her hands.
The fact that she prepared a concession speech, and fully expected to give it before John McCain’s speech, coupled with the fact that vice-presidential nominees traditionally don’t give concession speeches on election night, bowing to the presidential candidate to give the speech, just proves how much more importance she placed in herself over John McCain.
As some McCain aides say, and many others saw, Palin had become more interested in her own future than in McCain's election. And, for future reference, this proves she places herself above this countries needs. She can deny it all she wants but her actions show it and her history bears it out to be true.
Her best option is to back away from the media and go about her role in Alaska for which she was elected. Put this business behind her and stay away from the national spotlight. We Americans have already witnessed her many failed attempts at trying to sound knowledgeable. We see these attempts for what they are, whitewash.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Bailing out the auto industry
America’s automobile industry is suffering, along with the rest of our economy. Few of us are shedding tears over it. Those that are crying bailout depend on the auto industry for their livelihood.
Auto sales are at their lowest in 25 years. Chrysler sales are down 35%, General Motors sales are down 45%, Ford posted a loss of $3 billion in its latest report. They are all asking the federal government for a $25 billion bailout. This is in addition to the $25 billion already granted them just last quarter.
Let’s get past the question of whether or not the federal government should bail out all of the hard working middle class Americans who are suffering from the result of corporate greed and mismanagement and take a close look at what caused this problem and what we can do to turn it around.
The auto industry has a long history of sleeping with big oil and believe that since they are considered the manufacturing backbone of our economy that they should receive special benefit of a bailout anytime industry leaders decisions backfire on them.
In a free enterprise system, there are winners and there are losers. Winners keep themselves abreast of the latest technologies and consumer trends and adapt their products to keep up with the market. This is simple economic strategy and every successful business owner knows this rule inside and out. The American auto manufacturers have not followed this rule. They have repeatedly lost sales to far superior foreign products all the while knowing they had the ability to change their methodology to match or exceed their competitors products. They simply did not keep up with the competition. They lobbied the federal government to pass laws so that their products did not have to meet strict emissions standards even while foreign manufacturers were beating those standards. They did not take it upon themselves to make their product financially attractive enough to American consumers.
Why should they be bailed out when their own behavior has put them in this position? They ignored the writing on the wall when people began buying more fuel efficient foreign vehicles and instead of reinvesting in retooling to produce lighter-weight, more fuel-efficient vehicles continued to build the largest ‘land-yachts’ in the world.
Another major problem adding to the auto industry woes is the rising cost of doing business in America. Both the federal government and the union should share the blame for this. Runaway insurance costs, the increasing tax burden, wages and inflation have made it more attractive for many industries to move their operations overseas to healthier financial environments where they realized greater profits due to not having to pay such high overhead.
The American auto industry relied too heavily on the old sentimental loyalty of Americans to “buy American” and it backfired on them.
Now the auto industry is using American jobs as the reason they should be bailed out. They are probably correct in assuming that if this industry goes under the loss of tax revenue generated from automobile sales, the loss of income tax generated by workers and the loss of payments into social security will cripple this economy even further. The America economy will suffer far greater damage than we can imagine.
Some people compare bailing this industry out with bailing out the bankers and Wall Street CEO’s and they don’t want to see it. This industry differs in that it directly affects hundreds of thousands of jobs, each contributing to a tax base that drives this economy.
What can be done to help the economy and the auto industry in the long run depends on the cooperation of the federal government and the auto industry.
Government should rewrite its laws to allow, and force, auto manufacturers to produce competitive products.
Any foreign country that sells a car here should be required to manufacture it here, this will create jobs here and will help keep some of the money here in this country instead of shipping it overseas.
Create an international standard for fuel efficiency, gas emissions, and alternative means of power to help us get away from fossil fuels and force the auto industry to adhere to these standards.
Any car manufacturer that wants to ship vehicles to the U.S. should pay higher tariffs making less attractive for them to do so.
In fact, raising tariffs on everything that comes into this country would help other American industries as well. America has become the dumping ground of cheap products made overseas and this needs to stop. Americans used to feel a certain pride in making quality American products. There is no pride in sending our money overseas for product that should be made here.
Ideally, these changes will entice all industry to bring their manufacturing back to America and re-employ Americans.
Let’s face it, Americans are not loyal to American products, we are loyal to getting the best product for our money. It will always be this way.
Auto sales are at their lowest in 25 years. Chrysler sales are down 35%, General Motors sales are down 45%, Ford posted a loss of $3 billion in its latest report. They are all asking the federal government for a $25 billion bailout. This is in addition to the $25 billion already granted them just last quarter.
Let’s get past the question of whether or not the federal government should bail out all of the hard working middle class Americans who are suffering from the result of corporate greed and mismanagement and take a close look at what caused this problem and what we can do to turn it around.
The auto industry has a long history of sleeping with big oil and believe that since they are considered the manufacturing backbone of our economy that they should receive special benefit of a bailout anytime industry leaders decisions backfire on them.
In a free enterprise system, there are winners and there are losers. Winners keep themselves abreast of the latest technologies and consumer trends and adapt their products to keep up with the market. This is simple economic strategy and every successful business owner knows this rule inside and out. The American auto manufacturers have not followed this rule. They have repeatedly lost sales to far superior foreign products all the while knowing they had the ability to change their methodology to match or exceed their competitors products. They simply did not keep up with the competition. They lobbied the federal government to pass laws so that their products did not have to meet strict emissions standards even while foreign manufacturers were beating those standards. They did not take it upon themselves to make their product financially attractive enough to American consumers.
Why should they be bailed out when their own behavior has put them in this position? They ignored the writing on the wall when people began buying more fuel efficient foreign vehicles and instead of reinvesting in retooling to produce lighter-weight, more fuel-efficient vehicles continued to build the largest ‘land-yachts’ in the world.
Another major problem adding to the auto industry woes is the rising cost of doing business in America. Both the federal government and the union should share the blame for this. Runaway insurance costs, the increasing tax burden, wages and inflation have made it more attractive for many industries to move their operations overseas to healthier financial environments where they realized greater profits due to not having to pay such high overhead.
The American auto industry relied too heavily on the old sentimental loyalty of Americans to “buy American” and it backfired on them.
Now the auto industry is using American jobs as the reason they should be bailed out. They are probably correct in assuming that if this industry goes under the loss of tax revenue generated from automobile sales, the loss of income tax generated by workers and the loss of payments into social security will cripple this economy even further. The America economy will suffer far greater damage than we can imagine.
Some people compare bailing this industry out with bailing out the bankers and Wall Street CEO’s and they don’t want to see it. This industry differs in that it directly affects hundreds of thousands of jobs, each contributing to a tax base that drives this economy.
What can be done to help the economy and the auto industry in the long run depends on the cooperation of the federal government and the auto industry.
Government should rewrite its laws to allow, and force, auto manufacturers to produce competitive products.
Any foreign country that sells a car here should be required to manufacture it here, this will create jobs here and will help keep some of the money here in this country instead of shipping it overseas.
Create an international standard for fuel efficiency, gas emissions, and alternative means of power to help us get away from fossil fuels and force the auto industry to adhere to these standards.
Any car manufacturer that wants to ship vehicles to the U.S. should pay higher tariffs making less attractive for them to do so.
In fact, raising tariffs on everything that comes into this country would help other American industries as well. America has become the dumping ground of cheap products made overseas and this needs to stop. Americans used to feel a certain pride in making quality American products. There is no pride in sending our money overseas for product that should be made here.
Ideally, these changes will entice all industry to bring their manufacturing back to America and re-employ Americans.
Let’s face it, Americans are not loyal to American products, we are loyal to getting the best product for our money. It will always be this way.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Fossil Fuel Profits vs Human Rights
On November 4, 2007, a Buddhist monk, writing under the name U Gambira, published an op-ed in The Washington Post advocating democracy for his Southeast Asian nation of Burma.
U Gambira wrote: "It matters little if my life or the lives of colleagues should be sacrificed on this journey. Others will fill our sandals, and more will join and follow."
As U Gambria wrote, the regime already had arrested his father and brother, holding them as hostages to flush him out. It found and arrested him on the same day that his article appeared.
Since then, U Gambira has been forcibly deprived of his monastic robes and tortured in Burma’s notorious Insein Prison. A half-dozen other members of his family have been arrested or forced into internal exile. At age 29, he has been charged with “crimes” that could bring years in prison.
What are those “crimes”? Leading a non-violent demonstration protesting the oppressive rule of Burma’s military leadership and asking for something we in America take for granted: Democracy and basic human rights.
On Tuesday Nov 4, we in America exercised one of our most cherished rights, to vote a change in leadership. The people of Burma don’t have this right. If they did General Than Shwe and his band of murderous, thieving, oppressors would be ousted and the Burmese people would once again enjoy the enlightened lifestyle of a free democratic society.
The brutal and oppressive military leadership of General Than Shwe and his policies have looted and destroyed sacred monasteries in his efforts to round up political and religious leaders. He has brought Burma’s economy to its knees. They have emptied what was once considered the breadbasket of Asia to the point that it cannot feed its own people. Burma, once known as a light for education and literacy now has closed its schools and universities.
Last September, the Burmese people spoke up against General Shwe’s rule and many were imprisoned, tortured and slaughtered for it. That bloodbath brought the world’s attention to Burmese plight but very little has changed. General Than Shwe has since sought to portray this uprising as a singular event, now over. A veneer of quiet has replaced the sounds of gunfire on city streets. Unfortunately, many in the international community buy in and actively support this propaganda.
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his special adviser, Ibrahim Gambari, have taken steps to open a dialogue with Burma's generals but little progress is being made.
China and Russia continue to block the UN Security Council from facilitating a dialogue between democratic forces and the regime.
Association of Southeast Asian Nations have condemned the regime's actions but have done little else.
The world's largest democracy, India, continues to provide military assistance and trade deals that help finance the regime's war on its people.
The U.S. claims to be a stalwart of human rights and yet allows human rights atrocities to continue in Burma, Zimbabwe, Tibet, etc. and even writes its laws to allow a U.S.-based corporation to profit from it.
Chevron, based in California, has been making huge profits in Burma as part owner of a natural gas project and is therefore complicit in the human rights abuses through its investment. U.S. sanctions prevent most U.S. companies from working in Burma, but Chevron's investment there existed before the sanctions were imposed and continues under a grandfather clause. The message being sent around the world is “Profit trumps human rights”.
Chevron’s answer to the many letters of protest they have received over their part in Burma is to remove all references to Burma from their webpage.
U Gambira, and many others like him, is willing to die to gain freedom for his fellow countrymen. Chevron and the U.S. is willing to let him die at the hands of a tortuous dictatorial regime in order to make a profit. Now jump to Iraq where Bush’s lies led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians to lose their lives in a scheme to enrich his buddies in the oil and gas industry. The main difference between Bush and Shwe is the U.S. Constitution.
Is profiting from fossil fuel worth more than human lives? Those of us who live under ethical and moral standards would say "of course not". But, ask Bush and the CEO of Chevron and we get a much different answer.
Bush feigned moral outrage over Saddam Hussein’s torture of his own people and so therefore felt a "moral obligation" to "save" Iraq from Saddam’s madness. Where is that outrage now against what the Burmese are suffering from? The only difference between Iraq and Burma is that Iraq has more oil reserves.
We owe it to our own conscience to stop supporting Chevron and any other company that makes a profit on the misery of any person.
It is easy to simply buy Chevron gas with our credit card ignoring the fact that in doing so we are aiding Chevron in their complicity in the suffering that the Burmese people endure every day. It is more difficult to think about our actions, tear up that credit card, drive past every Chevron gas pump and not aid and abet in their profiting from human suffering. But really, how difficult is all of that when compared to U Gambira being tortured in a jail cell for standing up for his right to be free?
Further reading:
Words of Power
San Francisco Chronicle
U Gambira wrote: "It matters little if my life or the lives of colleagues should be sacrificed on this journey. Others will fill our sandals, and more will join and follow."
As U Gambria wrote, the regime already had arrested his father and brother, holding them as hostages to flush him out. It found and arrested him on the same day that his article appeared.
Since then, U Gambira has been forcibly deprived of his monastic robes and tortured in Burma’s notorious Insein Prison. A half-dozen other members of his family have been arrested or forced into internal exile. At age 29, he has been charged with “crimes” that could bring years in prison.
What are those “crimes”? Leading a non-violent demonstration protesting the oppressive rule of Burma’s military leadership and asking for something we in America take for granted: Democracy and basic human rights.
On Tuesday Nov 4, we in America exercised one of our most cherished rights, to vote a change in leadership. The people of Burma don’t have this right. If they did General Than Shwe and his band of murderous, thieving, oppressors would be ousted and the Burmese people would once again enjoy the enlightened lifestyle of a free democratic society.
The brutal and oppressive military leadership of General Than Shwe and his policies have looted and destroyed sacred monasteries in his efforts to round up political and religious leaders. He has brought Burma’s economy to its knees. They have emptied what was once considered the breadbasket of Asia to the point that it cannot feed its own people. Burma, once known as a light for education and literacy now has closed its schools and universities.
Last September, the Burmese people spoke up against General Shwe’s rule and many were imprisoned, tortured and slaughtered for it. That bloodbath brought the world’s attention to Burmese plight but very little has changed. General Than Shwe has since sought to portray this uprising as a singular event, now over. A veneer of quiet has replaced the sounds of gunfire on city streets. Unfortunately, many in the international community buy in and actively support this propaganda.
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and his special adviser, Ibrahim Gambari, have taken steps to open a dialogue with Burma's generals but little progress is being made.
China and Russia continue to block the UN Security Council from facilitating a dialogue between democratic forces and the regime.
Association of Southeast Asian Nations have condemned the regime's actions but have done little else.
The world's largest democracy, India, continues to provide military assistance and trade deals that help finance the regime's war on its people.
The U.S. claims to be a stalwart of human rights and yet allows human rights atrocities to continue in Burma, Zimbabwe, Tibet, etc. and even writes its laws to allow a U.S.-based corporation to profit from it.
Chevron, based in California, has been making huge profits in Burma as part owner of a natural gas project and is therefore complicit in the human rights abuses through its investment. U.S. sanctions prevent most U.S. companies from working in Burma, but Chevron's investment there existed before the sanctions were imposed and continues under a grandfather clause. The message being sent around the world is “Profit trumps human rights”.
Chevron’s answer to the many letters of protest they have received over their part in Burma is to remove all references to Burma from their webpage.
U Gambira, and many others like him, is willing to die to gain freedom for his fellow countrymen. Chevron and the U.S. is willing to let him die at the hands of a tortuous dictatorial regime in order to make a profit. Now jump to Iraq where Bush’s lies led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians to lose their lives in a scheme to enrich his buddies in the oil and gas industry. The main difference between Bush and Shwe is the U.S. Constitution.
Is profiting from fossil fuel worth more than human lives? Those of us who live under ethical and moral standards would say "of course not". But, ask Bush and the CEO of Chevron and we get a much different answer.
Bush feigned moral outrage over Saddam Hussein’s torture of his own people and so therefore felt a "moral obligation" to "save" Iraq from Saddam’s madness. Where is that outrage now against what the Burmese are suffering from? The only difference between Iraq and Burma is that Iraq has more oil reserves.
We owe it to our own conscience to stop supporting Chevron and any other company that makes a profit on the misery of any person.
It is easy to simply buy Chevron gas with our credit card ignoring the fact that in doing so we are aiding Chevron in their complicity in the suffering that the Burmese people endure every day. It is more difficult to think about our actions, tear up that credit card, drive past every Chevron gas pump and not aid and abet in their profiting from human suffering. But really, how difficult is all of that when compared to U Gambira being tortured in a jail cell for standing up for his right to be free?
Further reading:
Words of Power
San Francisco Chronicle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)