Pay Raise for Government hidden in Auto Bailout Legislation; Democrats drop the ball!

I'm a person who calls things as I see them regardless of who my beliefs or alliances support. An apple is an apple and a square is a square. A Kennedy is a liberal extremist and a Bush is simply an idiot. I do not turn a blind eye when those I support do something foolish or that I disagree with on some issue (unless you're Lanie).

In that case, Democrats really dropped the ball on the auto bailout bill. Not the part that concerns the bailout either, in fact, that's what they got right. They reduced the amount asked for by auto companies, specifically because the auto companies can't give a timetable for when they will run out of money or how they are changing their operations to save capital.

Tucked away in the bill is a measure to increase judges' pay due to cost of living by about $5,000. That's right, in one of worst economic hardships our country has known in quite some time, Congress voted to increase pay for a sector of government jobs.

I find this appalling on a number of levels. First off, Democrats are supposed to support the working class. If they are doing this to fall in favor with federal judges then I suppose it is a strategy that might work (I would think judges would be smarter than that but money will influence anyone). Republicans voted against a pay raise for them that last six years, what some narrow minded conservatives would say is part of the Republican party's fiscally responsible behavior. If Republicans are so fiscally responsible, how did we end up in this economic mess and especially trillions of dollars of debt under a Republican President?

This is NOT the time to be handing out pay raises. If Democrats think this should go through because the Republican party has enough assholes to oversee pay raises for the very rich instead of voting for a raise for one of the most important positions in government, then I understand their position. But they still dropped the ball. Everyone needs to conserve every dollar they can facing financial turmoil, especially the federal government!

Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi lost some of my support when they both advocated for this. Pelosi could have stepped up to the plate and said "no fucking way, not now" and her approval numbers probably would've gone up. Instead, the rich get richer again. While it's true that a lot of attorneys make more than judges, $169,000 is a pretty nice salary. I guess $169k doesn't buy what it used to.

The second, and most appalling part of this issue...government officials are eligible for a Cost of Living pay raise every year and the rest of Americans aren't eligible?

Excuse me, but what the FUCK is going on here. This is exactly why a lot of Americans are in the positions they are in financially. Salaries that don't increase with the cost of living is one of the causes of our economic peril. Credit card companies and banks with high interest rates are in league with issues like this and with businesses nationwide to put us in this situation.

If we're supposed to feed our families, keep a roof over our heads, make sure we have electricity and water, how the hell are we supposed to enjoy some free time? I guess this is what TV was intended for all along...a one time expense that could provide endless entertainment while not draining all your money (although that changed with the invention of cable and satellite).

Yet, all the shows on TV have actors wearing fancy, expensive clothing, driving luxury vehicles, and enjoying fine dining and vacations at premier locations. Our stadiums and sports teams overcharge us to see some play LIVE instead of watching it on TV (where the seats are better and the picture is clearer). Commercials advertise the latest rounds of shit you don't need but they're convincing you to buy their new, cool products (everyone around you that has them will be quick to remind you and your family/children that you all are poor and all poor people are losers).

Did you know America is the only wealthy industrialized nation not to legislate any paid time off and holidays for its workforce? Britain offers four weeks, Denmark gives 30 work days, and even Japan mandates 10 days. The United States guarantees nothing, with low-wage and part-time workers suffering the most (source: Rebecca Ray and John Schmitt, "No-Vacation Nation," Center for Economic and Policy Research).

This all ties in together and this downward spiral sinks deeper everyday. To think that I actually thought Democrats would be any different than Republicans in Congress.

Want to hear a really great idea to solve this economic crisis? My dad suggested this to me the other day and I thought it was pure genius (of course, rich people will never allow this to happen). This $700 billion financial bailout...instead of giving it to these institutions, write an $86,000 check to every single U.S. citizen who made less than $250,000 last year.

Wait, what...some of you still have your heads up your asses? How many people have debt more than this (not including mortgages)? It would solve the financial credit crisis that all these institutions are crying over. Most people would have lots of money left over and would probably buy a new car (the auto industry would be saved) or put it back into the economy in some fashion. No more recession, no more auto bailout, no more Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, no more foreclosures.

This country needs a serious overhaul in Washington. Rich people and lobbyists (pretty much the same thing) are controlling everything. The few controlling the many. The few enjoy the spoils and lecture the rest of us while they blow their mountains of money on anything they wish. Why are so many people in favor of capitalism again?

U.S. Automaker Crisis continued...

Following up on the post I made on Thursday, U.S. Automakers are appearing to continue a business as usual mode. This may or may not be a great example, but something that I found interesting and wanted to share with everyone.

I watched both the Colts-Bengals and Steelers-Cowboys games today and noticed a lot of the same commercials time and again. The ones that appeared the most was three separate Cadillac commercials advertising their CTS and Escalade models but all three advertised their "Red Tag" event and exclaimed how this was a first ever for Cadillacs. "The price you see on the Red Tag is the price you pay, not a cent more (taxes?). See your local Cadillac dealer today for great deals."

The most curious part of these great deals? The CTS had an all-new, low price of...over $43,000 dollars. The Escalades? Over $57,000. Remember, this is not including taxes.

Wasn't GM one of the automakers pleading and begging for money the past several weeks from our government? Yet, they still advertised overpriced, gas guzzling vehicles. The only brand General Motors has that is comparable or more expensive in price is their Corvette line.

The other commercials weren't much better. To GM's credit, they did advertise a 37 mpg Chevy Cobalt at the beginning of the Colts game but I don't recall seeing the commercial after that. The Cadillac commercials were approaching 12 advertising time slots when halftime approached the Steelers-Cowboys game. Cadillac also sponsored the Colts game.

Ford only advertised trucks (specifically their "new" F-150). The truck commercials proudly boasted having an astonishing 21 mpg while still increasing horsepower. Another truck commercial exclaimed about the new pull out step to reach your cargo hold, like having a boost is the rage for trucks all the sudden. I don't remember seeing any other car companies besides Ford and GM.

The point I'm trying to make is it looks like these companies are making no effort to save cash they so desperately need and are not changing the way they do business at all. I read an article just minutes before reading this about how backed up inventory for ALL automakers is here in America ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081207/us_nm/us_autos_ports). If your average American can't even afford a Corolla, Aveo, Cobalt, Civic, Fusion, or any other common Sedan, how the fuck are they going to be able to afford a Cadillac CTS or an ESCALADE? If someone doesn't have enough cash to drop on a new vehicle that costs less than $15,000 how will they have enough to buy one that costs $45,000 or MORE???

The best article I read by politicians is the one that Barack Obama and Chris Dodd (the guy I just got done blasting, I'll eat a plate of crow later if it proves I'm wrong about him) commented on the futures of executives of American automakers (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081207/ap_on_go_co/congress_autos).
Apparently there are plenty of people, even some who are rich and powerful, who think these people should lose their jobs and have little if any compensation if they lose them (why should someone be compensated for being fired anyway? When someone is fired at a restaurant, they don't compensate them a dime).

If these companies need cash so bad they would pull a lot of their advertising and save it there. I wouldn't give them any money at all if I were voting in Congress. Remember, Rick Wagoner and any of the other auto executives don't care if they go under. They already raped for their millions.

U.S. Automaker Crisis

One of the biggest concerns in Washington today and for the country nationwide is the purported collapse of the U.S. auto industry that is on the horizon. Reading some of the various press releases, there are some members of Congress who have the view on these companies absolutely correct. These industries haven't changed the way they do business so why should we help out companies that focus on horsepower and more ways to put emissions into the air instead of enviornmentally friendly and gas/money saving vehicles?

The answer is we shouldn't support these companies. Bankruptcy and new management would do wonders for U.S. automakers who have fallen behind the Japanese auto companies. Japanese companies focused on making fuel efficient vehicles that lasted while also offering the oversized, overpriced SUVs and trucks that Americans crave. Japanese companies were prepared to handle this kind of collapse. American automakers continued business as usual.

Granted, GM started offering the Chevy Cobalt and Aveo to take a stab a making fuel efficient vehicles but they were way behind. Has anyone ever taken a drive or ride in either of these vehicles? They sacrificed space, size, and efficiency for a rocky, cramped, and unpleasant experience. Chrysler offers the PT Cruiser but the vehicle's unique design and appeal from when it was first released has faded and the MPG could be better. Ford, surprisingly, has started offering Hybrids on a lot of its vehicles, most intriguingly, the Ford Escape. But the company forgot something that made it popular many years ago, a vehicle that was extremely fuel efficient and built to last...the Ford Escort. By the time the vehicle's production ceased, it wasn't nearly as popular. However, in the 80s and 90s, the vehicle was largely in demand in wake of all the truck and SUV commercials. Ford had the right idea and let it slip from their fingers. It wouldn't surprise me if Toyota and Honda noticed the popularity of these vehicles and capitalized.

I will give Ford credit where credit is due. They restructed their Volvo operation and sold off Jaguar and Land Rover brands for billions. This saved the company billions by restructuring and updating its cost efficiency. After all, how in demand are Land Rovers and Jaguars? GM could take notice and sell off its Hummer and Corvette divisions, saving them just as much money while restructuring to the demands of today's buyers.

Still, this all may be too little, too late. The heads of the Detroit Big 3 first arrived in Congress in private jets, costing the company hundreds of thousands had they simply been ridden coach or even a first class commercial flight. Today they arrived in vehicles. While the moves saved money, it proves they think they are still too good to associate with the common American. First class or coach? Who do you all think we are?

A couple of words come to mind. Ignorant, inefficient, slow, unadaptable, no accountability. What does the head of the company do that deserves millions in pay?

I know Democrats don't want an industry collapse to fall in their lap and possibly affect their political futures for decades. It's a precarious situation to be in for their party. They know the right thing to do is to let them go bankrupt and restructure accordingly. But they don't want millions and unemployed Americans to associate them with losing their jobs for the rest of their lives.

Of course, George Bush won't help the situation any either. Congress approved the $25 billion to come out of the $700 billion designated for the financial industry bailout but he won't approve those funds, designating them strictly for the financial industry. I'm not really sure what $700 billion buys that $675 billion won't but he must know something the rest of us don't (which is what his whole presidency is predicated on).

The worst thing about all of this is the auto industry pours millions into the pockets of both parties to get this kind of support. They help fund elections and consequently, it shouldn't be any surprise that the people in Washington who received a lot of those funds support this cause.

If anything, Chris Dodd should not be heading the committee to oversee these hearings. He's already decided he won't run for re-election in 2010 for the Senate (he's been there since 1980) so he'll pretty much do whatever he wants from here on out. However, this same guy thought Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were doing just fine before Congress bailed them out (guess who got the most funding from those two companies for re-elections and the like? Chris Dodd. He also got favorable mortgages from companies associated with these two also). Not exactly who needs to be judging whether or not someone is in trouble.

His own state (Connecticut) disapproves of his job performance more than they support it (48% disapprove-42% approve). He's been on the job a little too long.

The only viable solution is to let these companies face the music and deal with it themselves. It's a scary solution, mainly because the people in charge of these companies will be just fine if these companies collapse. If the government were to intervene it should only be to fire the board of the directors and CEOs of all these companies and replace them with people who give a shit. Business as usual has become too common of a term and problem for industries that are having financial trouble. The financial industry could be labeled the same way, I mean, really...how bad do you really have to be at your job to let your entire company collapse? Every company has losses at some point...but a complete collapse?

I wish there were a better solution and that giving these companies money would be the best solution. At some point you have to wonder if a move to socialism might be a real solution to these problems because, ultimately, all this corruption is killing the American economy and doesn't look like that will change anytime soon.