« "Tea Party" Protest Same People Still Bitter About Election | Kris Broughton's Blog | What Happens When You Step On A Worm »
Mr. President: Treat Bailout Companies Like You Treat Your Kids
Mr. President, you're a pretty good parent. Although it's pretty
obvious that your wife and mother-in-law have pulled double duty the
last few years, you seem to pitch in readily when you are home. You've
raised your children to look out for each other. You've constantly
reminded them that "they are all in this together." You've showed them
how their interests, as separate as they may seem to them as
individuals, are all intertwined. You've punished them when they are
selfish and refuse to share with each other. You've trained the older,
stronger, wiser child to care for the younger, weaker one. You've
taught them, when there is a family crisis, to rely on one another's
strengths and battle their weaknesses as a unit. This is not just an
American phenomenon, it is a human one, practiced all around the globe.
So here we are, with a banking industry so far underwater you could call the mortgage derivatives they wish they'd never seen ".357 magnum liabilities", because the hole these debts would make in their balance sheets upon exit would be much, much larger than the holes they made going in - this is the very same banking industry who is now ready to turn around while we are still giving them their own bailout money and become "holier than thou" about the few billion dollars worth of their corporate brethren Chrysler's debt they control.
You couldn't do a more thorough job of destroying money than our bankers on Wall Street if you backed hundreds of dump trucks piled full of cash up to industrial furnaces and dumped their payloads straight into the red hot kilns. The convenient fiction these bankers want us to believe is that they did not do this intentionally, nevertheless, turning junk bonds into triple A rated securities was a whole lot like playing with matches. Keep it up long enough, and you are sure to get burned.
But the field of high finance has almost as many euphemisms for playing with matches and starting a fire as the military does when they kill people during peacekeeping missions. If you use this kind of lingo long enough, phrases like "mortgage backed securities" start to sound like they are describing sleek, elegant bundles of gilt edged securities instead of what they really were - unstable rocket fuel whose combination with the hot sparks of poor risk management decisions have exploded, creating a blaze that is curling billions of dollars worth of greenbacks into ashes right in front our eyes, the same way the phrase "collateral damage" has a smug knowingness about it that almost completely divorces the loss of human life from the act of firing deadly weapons.
Chrysler is in the same boat. They and GM use the phrase "we need to restructure our legacy costs" with so much vigor and flag waving, you are almost convinced that these companies could have really achieved all their success with a few hundred key people pushing the right buttons on their computers, as if the parts would formulate themselves and assemble into cars without any human intervention, the way things happen in a Disney movie.
If you're a parent, you know what to do when you have a child who is delusional, and given to believing in imaginary characters. It takes awhile with a kid like this, because he's got a really active mind that will concoct new fictional friends as fast as you neutralize the old ones. But eventually, between your perseverance and the passage of time, your kid will grow out of this as you teach him the difference between the things that actually exist and the things he wants to believe are true. Which means, Mr. President, that you are going to have to let the remaining execs in the auto industry know that there is no Tooth Fairy, and Santa Claus doesn't really live in the North Pole. You are going to have to insist that the only reason that these companies got as large as they did was because of the people they employed who actually did the work, people who have earned their retirements.
You know instinctively as a parent, Mr. President, that if you've got two children who both keep throwing rocks at your neighbor's window until it one of them breaks it, you have to punish them both the same way. Right now, the nation's masses are your metaphorical middle child, the kid who can recall with annoying certainty exactly how much the oldest received for their allowance when they were twelve. They are the kid who can regurgitate at a moments notice what kind of punishment you meted out to their siblings, broken down by type of offense, method of reprimand, and duration of punishment. They are the kid who has memorized in chronological order, down to the day, date, time of day, and location, each and every instance in which their youngest sibling received an extra helping of dessert.
We've seen what New Age parenting has done to our nation's children. In its quest to promote self awareness and high self-esteem, these kinds of parenting techniques have devalued the importance of authority, reduced the significance of achievement, and disavowed the notion that struggle and sacrifice are an integral part of success. I guess you and Mrs. Obama understand this yourselves, because you two seem to have gone back to the basics in raising your own children. Which means, Mr. President, you need to discipline the banking industry and the auto industry the way you appear to discipline your own daughters - sternly, fairly, and without showing favoritism to one over another.
So here we are, with a banking industry so far underwater you could call the mortgage derivatives they wish they'd never seen ".357 magnum liabilities", because the hole these debts would make in their balance sheets upon exit would be much, much larger than the holes they made going in - this is the very same banking industry who is now ready to turn around while we are still giving them their own bailout money and become "holier than thou" about the few billion dollars worth of their corporate brethren Chrysler's debt they control.
You couldn't do a more thorough job of destroying money than our bankers on Wall Street if you backed hundreds of dump trucks piled full of cash up to industrial furnaces and dumped their payloads straight into the red hot kilns. The convenient fiction these bankers want us to believe is that they did not do this intentionally, nevertheless, turning junk bonds into triple A rated securities was a whole lot like playing with matches. Keep it up long enough, and you are sure to get burned.
But the field of high finance has almost as many euphemisms for playing with matches and starting a fire as the military does when they kill people during peacekeeping missions. If you use this kind of lingo long enough, phrases like "mortgage backed securities" start to sound like they are describing sleek, elegant bundles of gilt edged securities instead of what they really were - unstable rocket fuel whose combination with the hot sparks of poor risk management decisions have exploded, creating a blaze that is curling billions of dollars worth of greenbacks into ashes right in front our eyes, the same way the phrase "collateral damage" has a smug knowingness about it that almost completely divorces the loss of human life from the act of firing deadly weapons.
Chrysler is in the same boat. They and GM use the phrase "we need to restructure our legacy costs" with so much vigor and flag waving, you are almost convinced that these companies could have really achieved all their success with a few hundred key people pushing the right buttons on their computers, as if the parts would formulate themselves and assemble into cars without any human intervention, the way things happen in a Disney movie.
If you're a parent, you know what to do when you have a child who is delusional, and given to believing in imaginary characters. It takes awhile with a kid like this, because he's got a really active mind that will concoct new fictional friends as fast as you neutralize the old ones. But eventually, between your perseverance and the passage of time, your kid will grow out of this as you teach him the difference between the things that actually exist and the things he wants to believe are true. Which means, Mr. President, that you are going to have to let the remaining execs in the auto industry know that there is no Tooth Fairy, and Santa Claus doesn't really live in the North Pole. You are going to have to insist that the only reason that these companies got as large as they did was because of the people they employed who actually did the work, people who have earned their retirements.
You know instinctively as a parent, Mr. President, that if you've got two children who both keep throwing rocks at your neighbor's window until it one of them breaks it, you have to punish them both the same way. Right now, the nation's masses are your metaphorical middle child, the kid who can recall with annoying certainty exactly how much the oldest received for their allowance when they were twelve. They are the kid who can regurgitate at a moments notice what kind of punishment you meted out to their siblings, broken down by type of offense, method of reprimand, and duration of punishment. They are the kid who has memorized in chronological order, down to the day, date, time of day, and location, each and every instance in which their youngest sibling received an extra helping of dessert.
We've seen what New Age parenting has done to our nation's children. In its quest to promote self awareness and high self-esteem, these kinds of parenting techniques have devalued the importance of authority, reduced the significance of achievement, and disavowed the notion that struggle and sacrifice are an integral part of success. I guess you and Mrs. Obama understand this yourselves, because you two seem to have gone back to the basics in raising your own children. Which means, Mr. President, you need to discipline the banking industry and the auto industry the way you appear to discipline your own daughters - sternly, fairly, and without showing favoritism to one over another.
Advertisement
















The corporate leaders who dream of busting the unions to lower wages and raise the profit margin on their product overlook their need to have consumers who can afford to buy that product. It seems more obvious in a time where consumer credit is being marketed at usurious rates.
Yes, I agree President Obama needs to give GM a time out until they learn to share. GM is going to be in bankruptcy for a long time. Solvent companies like Toyota will exploit that weakness by advising car buyers not to buy a Chevy because they might not be in business to honor the warranty soon.
Can GM pay that price and survive in a competitive world that won't wait for them to get their act together? From my limited knowledge of economics perspective it is doubtful.
April 13, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
tao wrote "The corporate leaders who dream of busting the unions to lower wages and raise the profit margin on their product overlook their need to have consumers who can afford to buy that product."
They’re not overlooking. Instead that is the target.
A Win/win for Corporations and a Government bought and paid for by the Corporations.
Corporations would rather do business in the US because of stability; but because, labor costs are too high they evaluate the risk.
But if the most powerful Corporations can force a severe economic downturn. They’ll get what they can only dream about. Driving labor costs down in the best Country with the best military and laws and infrastructure. Voila.
Does it really affect their margins when cars become cheaper because labor costs are cheaper?
Does it really matter to the Corporate Prostitutes, forcing submission from some Chinaman or American wage slaves? Voila!! It only took a few years to utterly destroy the opposition to their scheme.
A scheme supported and encouraged by our very own, Prostituted Representatives.
With the real wages of workers going down, commodity prices will eventually stabilize at lower levels, health care providers labor costs will be forced down. Since the cost of living will have been forced lower, because despite demand, who’ll, have the money to purchase.
How long before Social Security Cost of Living Allowances, (COLA’S) will be brought under control?
When Obama and the rest of our leaders talk about sacrifices being made. Did you not realize? YOU, You were the sacrifice. You were the one kicked under the bus?
Completely decimating the middle class, replacing them with desperate slaves.
Slaves to meet the new demands of Corporations who have wanted the security, provided by the US of A.
Who do you suppose will be crying? Which class?
April 13, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your points are well-taken and I do appreciate the comment.
We can expect our standard of living to decline along with the UAW members. We agree there. Corporations are sociopathic in nature, being there for the express purpose of making money. They cause U.S. Citizens to die at their whim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNuCfD5bICQ
But corporations and shareholders and banksters and stock brokers look at quartely reports as the big picture. And they have taken nice neat scholastic examples and tried to apply linear models to a web fabric of interconnected events that now forms the financial universe of the world. The world does not play in the U.S. sandbox. Less corrupt financial systems see the Dollar as completely replaceable, and we are in serious debt to China.
In my reality we do not have the best military in the world although it certainly is the most expensive, and that makes us militarily vulnerable to nations where war profiteers suffer even minimal standards of oversight. Our infrastructure of roads, bridges, dams, and railways sucks compared to most any of the developed countries in the world, which makes us less competitive. My progressive view is if we have a healthy educated populace, they will by nature be more productive as they strive to reach a satisfying life. And in doing so will have more money availble to pay taxes to subsidize the corporations and rich. If the masses are less productive because they have poor education and bad health, there will be less money available to the predatory elite to protect their wealth and privledges. In the long view the middle class is the producer that the predators are codependent on.
April 13, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which means, Mr. President, you need to discipline the banking industry and the auto industry the way you appear to discipline your own daughters - sternly, fairly, and without showing favoritism to one over another.
Also note that Pres. and Mrs. Obama have rules and regulations for the girls, oversight to see that they comply and if a time-out is called for, well, a temporary nationalization has never hurt anyone.
April 13, 2009 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink