Noam Chomsky on Democracy Now!

Speaking of Bail-outs and Nautical Allusions...

A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 7 people steering and 2 people rowing.

Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 2 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 2 people rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rowers. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The pension program was trimmed to 'equal the competition' and some of the resultant savings were channeled into morale-boosting programs and teamwork posters.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off one rower, halted development of a new canoe, sold all the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses.

The next year, try as he might, the lone designated rower was unable to even finish the race (having no paddles,) so he was laid off for unacceptable performance, all canoe equipment was sold and the next year's racing team was out-sourced to India.

Sadly, the End.

Here's something else to think about: Ford has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US. The last quarter's results:

TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses.

Ford folks are still scratching their heads, and collecting bonuses...

IF THIS WEREN'T SO TRUE IT MIGHT BE FUNNY

Thanks to David Chard of www.deadhorses.org

Bail-outs and other nautical allusions

All this talk about 'bail-outs' is begging the real issue.
Bail-outs are a total waste of reserves if the hole in the boat is not being repaired. What is being done to right the ship of state and the correct the course of the economy?
The citizens of the US are simply expected to float billions in loans to the Big 3 and the Wall Street scoundrels - billions which are not in the Treasury - which are never meant to be paid back and for which no account will be demanded.
If hope for our economy is based on the magnanimity, honesty and fair-mindedness of corporate leaders, we are sunk. It would be better to scuttle this ship and let the rats drown.

Free Trade? Tell me another one...

It's not just an oxymoron and chimeric fiction; it's a criminal economic policy.

Ask the indigenous peoples of Colombia who, with sticks, stones and slingshots, are currently battling the military and para-military forces there in a valiant effort to wrest control of their lands from multi-national corporations. Ask the Bolivians who fought Bechtel and won the clear and simple human right to drink freely from their own water supply without paying an international conglomerate for it. Ask the millions of people who have been forced to work for pennies a day in the prison-like industrial compounds found in nearly every Third World country.

Now, the Free Trade pigeons have come home to roost in the USA with the continuing loss of jobs and the egregious 'bail-out' of the investment banking giants to the tune of whatever astronomic dollar amount Secretary Paulson can rattle off the top his head.

'Free Trade' is only free if you totally disregard what it costs those who are enslaved by it.

Chomsky Weighs in on Bail-out

Here's what I've been waiting to read:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20992.htm

Bush explains ‘Free Enterprise’

Bush bails out more of his buddies; McCain still thinks banking deregulation is just peachy and Paulson could give a good-god-damn about the US taxpayer.

Bush explains ‘Free Enterprise’

Simply put: it’s not ‘Free’ – not for the taxpayers, anyway.

President Bush: “Our system of free enterprise rests on the conviction that the federal government should interfere in the marketplace only when necessary. Given the precarious state of today’s financial markets and their vital importance to the daily lives of the American people, government intervention is not only warranted, it is essential.”

Essential to maintaining the position of the unscrupulous wastrels, socio-pathic mega-gamblers, and the morally bankrupt business elite, that is.

John McCain weighed in, as well. The Straight-talking Senator was asked by Scott Pelley of ‘60 Minutes’ if he still defended his support of deregulating the financial industry in light of the fiasco on Wall Street.

Scott Pelley: “In 1999, you were one of the senators who helped pass deregulation of Wall Street. Do you regret that now?”

Sen. McCain: “No. I think the deregulation was probably helpful to the growth of our economy.”

It should be remembered that McCain’s former advisor on economic affairs, Phil Gramm, was one of the principal conspirators in pushing through legislation de-regulating the banking industry.

Meanwhile, on the Hill, Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson feels that American taxpayers who are caught in the credit squeeze created by the mis-management of investment bankers are not entitled to bail-outs or assistance.

Henry Paulson: “The ultimate taxpayer protection will be the stability this troubled asset relief program provides to our financial system, even as it will involve a significant investment of taxpayer dollars. I am convinced that this bold approach will cost American families far less than the alternative—a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets unable to fund economic expansion.”

How Mr Paulson has been able to foretell the future with sufficient accuracy to determine ‘the alternative’ to the American people shelling out an estimated $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) to rescue failed businesses when he presumably could not foresee the current financial debacle remains unanswered. Mr Paulson did not elaborate upon whether or not other less extreme, less ‘bold approach(es)’ had been considered.

It is evident that President Bush and his administration are confident of the largesse of the American taxpayer to rescue even foreign banks from the financial calamity brought on by deregulation and the ‘Free Market’. Over the weekend, the size of the proposed bailout grew as the Bush administration said foreign banks, including Barclays and UBS, should be eligible for the bailout. The Financial Times reports some industry groups are lobbying for the fund to grow even larger by including a clause that would allow banks to account for any losses realized over a number of years.

Secretary Paulson is convinced that the American people will be less burdened by this $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) bail-out than by any attempt by the Fed or the Treasury to assist those millions of home-owners facing fore-closure, homelessness and destitution. Mr Paulson did not expound upon this irrationality.

His worry is ‘economic expansion’, and those folks in foreclosure as a result of predatory sub-prime loan programs simply cannot be expected to be a viable part of the anticipated ‘economic expansion’. Now, that’s what some wags might call ‘compassionate conservatism’.

900,000,000,000

Nine hundred billion

Nine-zero-zero, zero-zero-zero, zero-zero-zero, zero-zero-zero.

No, that number's not from the odometer on the Starship Enterprise nor the distance from here to the center of the galaxy.

That’s $900,000,000,000!

US dollars, that is.

First Bear-Sterns, then Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, now AIG; all are being bail-out by the US government!

That means the US taxpayers (not those who top the 5% stratum and have been getting all the breaks from Reagan-omics Mark II but all the rest of us) are now being forced by the administration to borrow more money to bail-out companies mismanaged by greedy, unscrupulous gamblers.

Meanwhile, some 4,000,000 home-owners who were at the mercy of predatory loan-sharking are forced from their homes for lack of government support. Not to mention our deteriorating infrastructure, under-financed education system, nearly-non-existent health care system, etc which could be - should be – at the front of the line for disbursements rather than these vipers in pin-stripe.

Add that astronomic number to the billions spent (and borrowed) every week to pay for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and anyone with more numeric savvy than a third-grade can see that the US economy is in deep doo-doo.

To hear Bush and McCain talk, you’d think otherwise.

“Sound Fundamentals”? Fundamentally F***ed, you mean, don’t you?