As with our soldiers; these are OUR BOYS!!!
Download The Full Audio MP3 below: Right click then Save Target As
Our Boys.mp3
Above all else, let us be clear; your view of government will dictate how you view federal intervention into our economy. Your view of government will also dictate what you understand to be the role it should play in such an intervention. Our economy has become the modern day version of the SS Titanic. When the titanic was sinking back then, it was easy for the ship’s engineer to realize that the ship had hit an iceberg which caused a gigantic hole in the ship’s hull. Using our analogy, the iceberg in our economic situation today has been hopelessly elusive. So then with limited funds who gets help?
Your answer may depend on your view of government. My own outlook is conservative in nature, so I tend to want limited government. I also see the government’s money as our money; the tax payer’s money. If you are more liberal in your outlook then you tend to see the government as playing a very important role in your own life. They are the rightful arbiters of what is just and the necessary benefactor of we the people. So when I hear democrats and liberals use the term bailout, of course I’m not surprised. When I hear democrats and liberals (one in the same) talk negatively about giving money and tax breaks to the oil companies and the corporations, again I’m not surprised. I would like to know how is it you can take money from someone then use that same money to “bail them out;” that logic seems somewhat convoluted. Sometimes however, when I hear my fellow conservatives talk negatively about bailouts and letting the big three fail, I get a little concerned as well. It is to this point that I would like to now turn my attention.
If you are a true conservative you are probably asking yourself, where is he going with this? Is Danian advocating socialism and is Danian recanting his stand on personal responsibility? Well of course the answer is no on both counts yet I believe it is logically consistent to be a conservative and to want the government to GIVE BACK money to the big three. Let me state my position by asking a series of rhetorical questions, so here goes:
1. When our troops weren’t doing so well in Iraq and needed more money, above and beyond their regular budget, should we have “bailed them out” or should we have allowed them to fail?
2. Without a tax base, where is national defense?
3. Do Ford, GM and Chrysler contribute in anyway to the federal budget?
4. Given that one in ten Americans are connected to the big three automakers, are the taxes generated by the American car makers a big part of the federal budget or is it a small part?
5. If it is noble to give one’s life in the service of country, does it not imply that those of us who facilitate this service partake in this noble venture? Do Ford, GM and Chrysler facilitate this service by the taxes they generate?
6. Since Ford, GM and Chrysler (along with the one in every ten Americans) started paying taxes, have they paid more than $25 billion (the sum total of the amount they are seeking)?
7. Finally, can they (the big three) not say with the rest of us, “Our taxes?”
The answer to these questions should be rather obvious and the answers should inexorably lead you to the conclusion that indeed Ford, GM and Chrysler should be able to get $25 billion of their hard earned money back from the government. These are our boys as much as the soldiers fighting on foreign soil are our boys, and we should never leave our fellow Americans behind for dead. Our boys make as good a car as any foreign company; in fact they make a better product. This is not my opinion this is a matter of record. And how any self respecting, patriotic American can buy a foreign car in these or any times is beyond me. I would make one exception and that is; if your job is tied to a foreign auto maker, then you should patronize that particular foreign car maker. How dare our government (especially my fellow republicans) after robbing our boys for so long, with their high taxes, without so much as lifting a finger for that tax money, now tell Ford, GM and Chrysler to shut-up and get out. No, we must fund our troops and we must fund our boys.
Danian Michael
Political Agenda
Our Boys.mp3
Above all else, let us be clear; your view of government will dictate how you view federal intervention into our economy. Your view of government will also dictate what you understand to be the role it should play in such an intervention. Our economy has become the modern day version of the SS Titanic. When the titanic was sinking back then, it was easy for the ship’s engineer to realize that the ship had hit an iceberg which caused a gigantic hole in the ship’s hull. Using our analogy, the iceberg in our economic situation today has been hopelessly elusive. So then with limited funds who gets help? Your answer may depend on your view of government. My own outlook is conservative in nature, so I tend to want limited government. I also see the government’s money as our money; the tax payer’s money. If you are more liberal in your outlook then you tend to see the government as playing a very important role in your own life. They are the rightful arbiters of what is just and the necessary benefactor of we the people. So when I hear democrats and liberals use the term bailout, of course I’m not surprised. When I hear democrats and liberals (one in the same) talk negatively about giving money and tax breaks to the oil companies and the corporations, again I’m not surprised. I would like to know how is it you can take money from someone then use that same money to “bail them out;” that logic seems somewhat convoluted. Sometimes however, when I hear my fellow conservatives talk negatively about bailouts and letting the big three fail, I get a little concerned as well. It is to this point that I would like to now turn my attention.
If you are a true conservative you are probably asking yourself, where is he going with this? Is Danian advocating socialism and is Danian recanting his stand on personal responsibility? Well of course the answer is no on both counts yet I believe it is logically consistent to be a conservative and to want the government to GIVE BACK money to the big three. Let me state my position by asking a series of rhetorical questions, so here goes:
1. When our troops weren’t doing so well in Iraq and needed more money, above and beyond their regular budget, should we have “bailed them out” or should we have allowed them to fail?
2. Without a tax base, where is national defense?
3. Do Ford, GM and Chrysler contribute in anyway to the federal budget?
4. Given that one in ten Americans are connected to the big three automakers, are the taxes generated by the American car makers a big part of the federal budget or is it a small part?
5. If it is noble to give one’s life in the service of country, does it not imply that those of us who facilitate this service partake in this noble venture? Do Ford, GM and Chrysler facilitate this service by the taxes they generate?
6. Since Ford, GM and Chrysler (along with the one in every ten Americans) started paying taxes, have they paid more than $25 billion (the sum total of the amount they are seeking)?
7. Finally, can they (the big three) not say with the rest of us, “Our taxes?”
The answer to these questions should be rather obvious and the answers should inexorably lead you to the conclusion that indeed Ford, GM and Chrysler should be able to get $25 billion of their hard earned money back from the government. These are our boys as much as the soldiers fighting on foreign soil are our boys, and we should never leave our fellow Americans behind for dead. Our boys make as good a car as any foreign company; in fact they make a better product. This is not my opinion this is a matter of record. And how any self respecting, patriotic American can buy a foreign car in these or any times is beyond me. I would make one exception and that is; if your job is tied to a foreign auto maker, then you should patronize that particular foreign car maker. How dare our government (especially my fellow republicans) after robbing our boys for so long, with their high taxes, without so much as lifting a finger for that tax money, now tell Ford, GM and Chrysler to shut-up and get out. No, we must fund our troops and we must fund our boys.
Danian Michael
Political Agenda
posted by Danian Michael at
1:40 PM
12 Comments:
Wow, I am so glad you wrote this. The opinion all over the world seems to be "let them fall". Most people outside of Michigan don't seem to realize how crucial the big 3 are and the catastrophe that would happen if even 1 failed. It's true that the auto companies need to make some changes in management of resources and people so that this doesn't happen again. I believe they are willing to do what it takes. Another thing I don't understand is how Citibank was able to get billions of dollars seemingly overnight and without so much debate. I hope for the best.
Go Big three, we are behind you.
Danian, you show yourself to be a true patriot here and not just some no-brain conservative.
Good for you. You need to send this to Washington.
Kristin,
Thank you for taking the time to blog. I agree with you; people who say, well just let them fail, are probably not from Michigan and definitely don't know what they are talking about. If you listen to the audio version, I noted the Citi Group bail-out and how easily it happened.
I am just so angry right now, I can hardly think. Now they are fooling around with our livelihood and don't seem to care one way or another.
Anonymous,
Thanks for the compliment... I guess.
I have always maintained the fact that I am an American before I'm conservative. Although I don't believe there is any tension here between my conservative views and my wanting the government to free up some money for the big three.
Thank you so much for writing. And yes, GO BIG 3!!
Thanks for the support, Danian! I hope and pray that the U.S. public does not find out the hard way how critical the auto industry is to our country's economic strength and security.
In my humble opinion, there should not be anymore bailouts. There should have never been any bailouts. So far the Fed has pumped over $125 Billion into AIG alone!! We need to end the Federal reserve system, create stricter regulations on Wall Street and the banking industry in general, demand that our policy makers enforce FAIR trade, not free trade, and stop spending trillions of dollars destroying and then rebuilding nations.
I don’t see how tossing money at GM is going to save it. They are claiming they won’t make it through December without an infusion of cash. If the government really wants to help, why don’t they offer to pick up the tab on their retirees pensions. Or maybe provide health care to everyone. Perhaps the government could refuse to trade with China, until they improve their workers rights, or maybe they could demand that Exxon sell the patent that they are holding on the batteries from the EV-1, and we could get electric cars on the road, next year, not in 10 years. Or maybe provide a real living minimum wage, that could make it possible for more people to afford a $20,000 car.
If they do get the bail-out or loan or line of credit, and I assume they will, who’s to say they won’t be back next year, and the year after that. Where does it end? Who else is “too big to fail”? And BTW, I find it self-serving and a bit offensive to compare the armed forces to the Big 3. Come on. Talk about tapping into the lowest common denominator.
Peace in.
BiGhEaD
Wow, Mr. Bighead has kind of left of left agenda which is fine, but I don't think it has anything to do with "the price of tea in China" to use an old expression...just sounds like he's using the latest issue facing our country to advance his theories. He is entitled to that, of course. However, as far as the matter at hand...I do get that we need to give some of The Big Three's money back (yes, as you pointed out, they've paid billions in taxes--as have the 10% of Americans who's livelihoods are tied to them). America is making some great cars these days, but for whatever reason people are just not willing to believe it. It is true, foreign cars were better in the not-to-distant past...but that is no longer the case. I have been driving Chevy's for quite some time and they have been great...so has the service from my dealer, GMAC financing and every other aspect of my experience. I realize that this is antecdotal (as are so many things I hear against American cars, by the way). But I believe an honest analysis of quality will show many, many American models are excellent vehicles.
LOL. I know, I'm a lefty freakazoid. And most of my reply was pretty ideological, that's just how I roll...
But assuming quality of vehicles, service at the dealership, and overall car buying and owning experiences being even, these companies aren't setup to survive in the current global situation. The Big 3 can't make money on their cars, no matter how many of them they sell, just due to the high cost of labor and the overhead that these companies carry. Trust me on this... the business plan for the 2012 focus is, best case, to break even, worse case, don't lose more money per car than they do now... how's that for a business plan. If you want to throw our tax dollars at that, I've got some property for you :)
Bighead,
I must say that it never once entered my mine that you might be the sensitive type. Do you seriously find my analogy offensive? I mean, I can see how a black person might be offended by the N-word but to say that hard working Americans trying to better themselves in providing a service for other Americans is offensive; don't you think you are being a bit too sensitive? Do you know what an analogy is; it implies that somethings are alike and somethings are different. Anyway I still stand by my analogy. I do have one question for you however, should we continue to bail-out welfare recipients and if so, why?
It's not that I'm sensitive. It's that I am sick of the rhetoric that what we are doing in the Middle East is a good thing. I don't believe it is. I don't think we should be over there. I guess we can agree to disagree on that point, because I already know that you think invading and occupying Iraq was a great move on our part. But when you compare giving car companies loans or bail-outs or whatever, to increasing the number of troops in a war zone, it's almost comical. We don't have a say in how our government spends our money, this is obvious. Big business has the money, they have the real voices in DC, and they will always come before the needs of the American people. Yes, the big 3 employ a shit ton of people. but they are a publicly traded business, not a Army Brigade or Battleship somewhere in the Gulf. If one or more of them sink, we'll come back, most likely, stronger than ever.
I am going to look into my crystal ball, and see that this bridge loan to no-where is only going to delay the inevitable. The Biggest Car Company in the World is going to file for bankruptcy before the end of the next decade (maybe sooner), and there's not enough money in DC to stop that from happening.
And to answer your question about welfare; Yes. In the richest country in the world, if we can't feed clothe and shelter our poor, then what good are we?
Am I happy about the fact that there are millions of homeless, starving people in our country? no. Do i wish we didn't need welfare? yes.
But I don't think it's fair to compare providing someone the basic needs to sustain life to bailing out a car company.
WOW!! So this thing died in the Senate tonight!! Honestly I was hoping it would go through. It is scary to think what's going to happen next.
But I still stick by my guns, that it wouldn't have fixed the problems... just maybe held off a GM or Chrysler (or both) bankruptcy for a few more months; maybe when the economy is a little stronger... yikes.
~BiGhEaD
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home