Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Websites and blogs I recommend
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(353)
-
▼
April
(37)
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 30, 2010
- The Barkerburger...
- The Rise of China... The Decline of America
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, April 29, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 28, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, April 27, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, April 26, 2010
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., April 24 & 25, 2010
- Well... Well... Well... Looky What I Just Found!
- The Truth Concerning the Dodd Bill
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 23, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, April 22, 2010
- GM and the Bush/Obama "New" Economy
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 21, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, April 20, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, April 19, 2010
- What Is This Man's Malfunction...???
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., April 17 & 18
- Rob's Thread
- Friday Newsbites: April 16, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, April 15, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 14, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, April 13, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, April 12, 2010
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., April 10 & 11
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 9, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, April 8, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, April 7, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, April 6, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, April 5, 2010
- The Oil Bubble Had Better Pop Soon Or...
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun. April 3 & 4, 2010
- Happy Easter!
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 2, 2010
- There's a Reason I Read Buchanan... And You Should...
- Happy Two Month Anniversary!
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, April 1, 2010
-
▼
April
(37)
About Me
- William R. Barker
- Pearl River, NY High School Class of '81; Northeastern University, Boston, MA Class of '87.
15 comments:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/business/07cars.html
The pension plans at General Motors and Chrysler are underfunded by a total of $17 billion and could fail if the automakers do not return to profitability, according to a government report released Tuesday.
* SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT... "RETURNING TO PROFITABILITY" IS MAINLY SEEN BY THE GOVERNMENT AS A MEANS FOR PAYING PENSIONS, NOT REWARDING INVESTORS... (THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE!)
Both companies need to make large payments into the plans within the next five years - $12.3 billion by GM and $2.6 billion by Chrysler - to reach minimum funding levels, according to the report, prepared by the Government Accountability Office.
* STILL NOTHING ABOUT THE STOCKHOLDERS - LET ALONE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT!
Whether the companies will be able to make the payments is uncertain, the report concluded, though Treasury officials expect the automakers will become profitable enough to do so.
(*SNORT*) YEP... GIVES YOU REAL CONFIDENCE, HUH... (*HEADACHE*)
If either company’s plan must be terminated, the government would become liable for paying benefits to hundreds of thousands of retirees.
* ME. YOU. OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS. ANYONE RECALL SIGNING UP FOR THIS...??? ANYONE RECALL "CO-SIGNING...???"
The effect on the government’s pension insurer, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, would be “unprecedented,” the report said. The agency manages plans with assets totaling $68.7 billion, less than the $84.5 billion in GM’s plan alone.
* IS 10:10 A.M. TOO EARLY FOR THE FIRST DRINK OF THE DAY...??? (*SMIRK*)
GM’s plan was overfunded by $18.8 billion in 2008, and was then underfunded by $13.6 billion last year, the report said. Chrysler’s plan was overfunded by $2.9 billion in 2008 but underfunded by $3.4 billion last year.
* AND YET... NO ONE IS GOING TO JAIL. (*BLOOD PRESSURE RISING*)
The Treasury Department owns 61 percent of GM and 10 percent of Chrysler as a result of the emergency loans the carmakers received last year. The government spent $81 billion bailing out the companies and others in the auto industry.
(*BLOOD PRESSURE STILL RISING*)
* AHH... "CAPITALISM" IN THE AGE OF OBAMA...
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-06/arctic-sea-ice-melting-season-posts-latest-start-on-record.html
The extent of sea ice over the Arctic Ocean grew until the last day of March, the latest the annual melting season has begun in 31 years of satellite records, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.
Cold weather and winds from the north over the Bering Sea and Barents Sea meant that the area of ocean covered by ice expanded through last month, the Boulder, Colorado-based center said today in a statement on its Web site. That’s two days later than in 1999, the previous latest start to a melting season since satellite monitoring began in 1979.
Scientists have highlighted declining Arctic sea ice as an indicator of global warming. In September, the researchers said Arctic sea ice shrank in 2009 to its third-lowest summer minimum on record, remaining “well outside the range of natural variability.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.27d504fa90c41ebd1553e2277f52b361.8a1&show_article=1
* AND NO, FOLKS... THE FOLLOWING ISN'T A SATIRE FROM THE ONION.
NASA announced Tuesday that it signed a contract with the Russian space agency to shuttle US astronauts to the orbiting International Space Station.
* YEP... YOU'VE READ THAT RIGHT...
The $335 million contract extension is for the "transportation, rescue and related services" of US crew bound for the ISS in 2013, NASA said in a statement.
The contract "covers comprehensive Soyuz support, including all necessary training and preparation for launch, crew rescue, and landing of a long-duration mission for six individual station crew members."
US astronauts bound for the ISS will depart aboard four Soyuz missions in 2013, and will return to Earth aboard two Soyuz missions scheduled for 2013 and two in 2014.
The United States is due to retire its aging shuttle fleet this year, and from then on will depend on Russian Soyuz flights to transport its astronauts to the ISS until the Ares 1 rocket and its Orion capsule are operational in 2015.
* AND, OH... BY THE WAY... (READ ON)
The International Space Station, a $100 billion project begun in 1998 with the participation of 16 countries, is financed mainly by the United States.
http://cbs2chicago.com/investigations/crash.tax.fire.2.1615889.html
If you get into a car accident and 911 is called, you may get billed for the emergency response. Cash-strapped communities are sending out bills to cover the costs of fire trucks responding to crashes.
* ABSURD.
[O]ften times it does not matter whether you caused the accident or are the victim.
* ADDING INSULT TO INJURY.
Aside from the cost, there is concern that people will be afraid to call 911. That's what happened last month in South Carolina. A couple tried using a hose to put out their house fire in order to avoid being billed by the fire department.
Once you're billed...there is no process to fight it. There is no court date. You just have to pay the fee, or the consequences.
* FOR THOSE UNAWARE, THIS IS NOT A NEW PHENOMENON. IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR AWHILE WITH AMBULANCE CALLS, BUT AT LEAST IN MY COMMUNITY THE DEAL WAS THAT A BILL WAS ISSUED, BUT IF INSURANCE WOULDN'T PAY IT THE INDIVIDUAL WAS "FORGIVEN" THE BILL. (IN OTHER WORDS, AN ATTEMPT TO PICK "DEEP POCKETS.")
* OH... AND OF COURSE THERE'S THE PRACTICE OF COURT FEES AND SURCHARGES ADDED ON TO TRAFFIC TICKETS AND SUCH; THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR SOME TIME. THIS TOO IS WRONG. THESE ARE SERVICES OUR TAXES ALREADY PAY FOR.
* FOLKS... WE'RE LOSING OUR COUNTRY. IT'S A SLOW BUT SURE PROCESS - INSIDIOUS REALLY. IT'S A MISUSE OF THE POLICE POWERS OF THE STATE.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0&.v=1
Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem.
About 47% will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That's according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.
* I KNOW... I KNOW... I POINT THIS OUT FREQUENTLY. STILL... IT'S WORTH REPEATING... AND REPEATING... AND REPEATING...
In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.
* F--KING RIDICULOUS... F--KING INSANE...! THIS IS NOT HOW YOU BUILD A RESPONSIBLE CITIZENRY. I DON'T WANT TO DICTATE TO PEOPLE HOW HARD THEY WORK OR HOW MANY CHILDREN THEY HAVE, BUT NOR DO I THINK IT FAIR THAT I HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE PEOPLE LIKE THIS. WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO "PAYING YOUR FAIR SHARE...???" HOW CAN "ZERO" BE A FAIR SHARE...???
[T]he top 10% of earners - households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 - paid about 73% of the income taxes collected by the federal government.
* AND THAT'S PLAIN WRONG. "PROGRESSIVISM" HAS BECOME THEFT CLOAKED IN THE EUPHEMISM OF "INCOME REDISTRIBUTION."
The bottom 40%, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.
* "...THE GOVERNMENT...???" MY ASS! THAT'S MY MONEY, YOUR MONEY, AND MONEY THE POLITICIANS BORROW USING OUR "NATIONAL CREDIT CARD" - PAYABLE BY THE U.S. TAXPAYER. (OR AT LEAST SOME U.S. TAXPAYERS...)
In 2008, President George W. Bush signed a law providing most families with rebate checks of $300 to $1,200.
* AND HE WAS WRONG TO DO SO AND I WAS QUITE VOCAL IN SAYING SO AT THE TIME. (BTW... THIS WAS A LAW PASSED BY A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS.)
Obama's Making Work Pay credit provides as much as $800 to couples and $400 to individuals. The expanded child tax credit provides $1,000 for each child under 17. The Earned Income Tax Credit provides up to $5,657 to low-income families with at least three children.
* AGAIN... THOSE WHO PAY THE TAXES PROVIDE FOR THE "CREDIT." (JUST AS WE PAY THE INTEREST ON THE DEBTS ASSUMED IN ORDER TO COME UP WITH THESE "CREDITS" WHEN THE GOVERNMENT OPERATES AT A DEFICIT!
There are also tax credits for college expenses, buying a new home and upgrading an existing home with energy-efficient doors, windows, furnaces and other appliances. Many of the credits are refundable, meaning if the credits exceed the amount of income taxes owed, the taxpayer gets a payment from the government for the difference.
* WHAT IS THIS "PAYMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT" CRAP...?!?! WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! WE'RE PROVIDING THE DAMNED WELFARE... er... CREDITS - ULTIMATELY AT THE BARREL OF A GUN SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE.
http://blog.getliberty.org/default.asp?Display=2178
When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were nationalized in 2008, why were their debts never put on the federal government’s ledger?
That’s what Congressman Scott Garrett wanted to know.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed under conservatorship by Congress in 2008 under the administration of the newly-created Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). According to the agency’s website, “As of June 2008, the combined debt and obligations of these GSEs totaled $6.6 trillion.”
But that was never added to the national debt, which now totals $12.6 trillion. Why?
[According to Secretary of the Treasury] Geithner...the “corporate debt of the GSEs is not the same as U.S. Treasuries, nor should it be considered sovereign debt.”
[In a] letter [to Garrett, Geithner] continued, “By statute, all obligations and securities issued by the GSEs must include a statement that makes clear that such obligations and securities are not guaranteed by the United States and do not constitute a debt or obligation of the United States.”
In the same letter, Geithner wrote, the “Treasury is committed to supporting the GSEs while in conservatorship and to ensuring that the GSEs have sufficient capital to meet their debt obligations and honor their guarantees.”
Huh?
Read that again.
The Treasury is “committed” to providing the bankrupt Fannie and Freddie with “sufficient capital to meet their debt obligations and honor their guarantees” but those obligations “should not be considered sovereign debt”?
In short, Fannie and Freddie debt is backed by the United States, but not the full faith and credit of the United States. Make sense?
In other words, Geithner’s answer to Garrett’s question, “Which way did Fannie and Freddie’s debt go?” was the classic loony line: “Thataway!”
* FOLKS... I KNOW YOUR TIME IS LIMITED, BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ARTICLES WHICH REALLY SHOULD BE LABELED "MUST READING." AUTHOR ROBERT ROMANO, WRITING FOR GETLIBERTY.ORG, HAS DONE A SPLENDID JOB WITH THE ARTICLE AND THE LINKS HE PROVIDES DESERVE ATTENTION IN AND OF THEMSELVES.
http://blog.getliberty.org/default.asp?Display=2177
The Central Valley of California was once known as the breadbasket of the world - supplying about one-third of the nation’s food. But today, the Westside of the Central Valley is home to hundreds of thousands of acres of dry and desolate land.
Water is now scarcer than ever in this agriculturally rich land. To make matters worse, [an estimated 35,000-plus] jobs have been lost as a result, leaving families nowhere to go but to the local food banks.
* WE'VE ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE BEFORE HERE ON BARKER'S NEWSBITES. THIS ISN'T HAPPENING IN SOMEONE ELSE'S COUNTRY, FOLKS, THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT HERE IN AMERICA. THIS IS REAL FOLKS. THIS IS REALITY - AMERICA 2010 IN THE AGE OF OBAMA.
The Delta smelt, a three-inch bait fish, seems to have won the battle for water - the same water that is necessary for food growth and jobs in the highest-producing valley in the nation.
On August 31, 2007, California Federal Judge Oliver Wanger of Federal District Court protected the declining fish by severely curtailing human use water deliveries at San Joaquin-Sacramento River delta from December to June. These are the pumps at the Banks Pumping Plant that send water to Central and Southern California for agricultural and residential use. According to a May 2009 study conducted by the University of California, Davis, 35,285 jobs and $1.6 billion in economic revenue have been lost as a result of this environmental ploy in the Central Valley.
Giving farmers some reprieve was an announcement by Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, stating Westside farmers would receive 25% of their water allocation versus the 5% they were projected to receive.
* A DECISION THAT AT THE TIME IT WAS ANNOUNCED APPEARED TO BE PART OF THE ONGOING BRIB... er... "PATRONAGE" TRAIN EXTENDING FROM THE OBAMA WHITE HOUSE TO DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF CONGRESS REQUIRING FURTHER... er... INDUCEMENT... TO VOTE "YEA" ON OBAMACARE. (I COVERED THAT HERE ON NEWSBITES...)
But this is still not enough. What it comes down to is this: a democratic-run Congress and Administration sees fit to let [35,000-plus] people lose their jobs and watch the most fertile ground in the nation go dry, simply to protect a bait fish.
* READ THE FULL ARTICLE, FOLKS; INDEPENDENTLY RESEARCH THE ISSUE IF YOU DOUBT THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/04/025973.php
The Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) has not had an adminstrator since President Obama took office, and apparently it will not have one for a while longer. Obama's first nominee, Erroll Southers, had to withdraw after it was revealed that he engaged in severe misconduct as an FBI agent and did not testify accurately about that misconduct during his confirmation hearings.
Now a second nominee, retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Harding, has withdrawn.
Harding's problems stemmed from a contract the company he ran after retiring from the Army had with the government to provide interrogators in Iraq. After the government ended the contract, the company, Harding Security Associates, claimed more money from termination of the contract than the Defense Department's inspector general said it was entitled to receive. The firm refunded approximately $2 million of that money in a 2008 settlement with the Defense Intelligence Agency.
In addition, at least according to this account, the company was awarded a $100 million contract with the US Army under a program that gives preference to contractors headed by disabled veterans. Harding listed his disability as sleep apnea.
* HEY... THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS... (*SNORT*)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2010/55_say_media_bias_bigger_problem_in_politics_than_big_contributions
Voters agree that big money talks in politics but apparently not as loudly as big media.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of U.S. voters continue to think that media bias is a bigger problem in politics today than big campaign contributions...
Thirty-two percent (32%) say big contributions are the bigger problem, but that’s down four points from the previous survey. Thirteen percent (13%) more are not sure.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Republicans and 62% of unaffiliated voters say media bias is the bigger problem in politics, a view shared by just 37% of Democrats. The plurality (46%) of Democrats says campaign contributions are a bigger problem.
Sixty-five percent (65%) of Mainstream voters and 54% of the Political Class agree that the bigger problem facing politics is media bias.
Just before the November 2008 presidential election, 68% of voters said most reporters try to help the candidate they want to win, and 51% believed they were trying to help Democrat Barack Obama. Just seven percent (7%) thought they were trying to help his Republican opponent, John McCain.
Fifty-one percent (51%) of voters say the average reporter is more liberal than they are. Eighteen percent (18%) say that reporter is more conservative, and 20% think their views are about the same ideologically as the average reporter’s.
As far as voters are concerned, liberal is the most unpopular of five common political labels.
Sixty-two percent (62%) believe that what the media thinks is more important to the average member of Congress than what voters think. Sixty-seven percent (67%) say the news media have too much power and influence over government decisions.
Sixty-eight percent (68%) believe that requiring the disclosure of all campaign contributions is more important that limiting those contributions.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-la-budget7-2010apr07,0,5313167,full.story
* A GLIMPSE OF THE FUTURE, KIDS...
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called for shutting down non-essential agencies two days a week Tuesday... The latest escalation of the financial crisis began Monday when the Department of Water and Power took steps to withhold a promised $73.5-million payment to the city's depleted treasury.
Villaraigosa blamed the action on the [city] council's rejection of an electricity rate increase, which DWP officials said was necessary to cover the DWP's fluctuating fossil fuel costs and the mayor's renewable energy agenda.
* AHH... THE MAYOR'S RENEWABLE ENERGY AGENDA! SO YOU THINK ALL THESE "GREEN INITIATIVES" WON'T COST YOU? THINK AGAIN!
City Controller Wendy Greuel has warned that, without the DWP payment, Los Angeles could run out of money to pay its bills and employees within weeks.
The mayor directed acting City Administrative Officer Ray Ciranna to prepare to shut down parks, libraries and other general fund services starting Monday. Public safety, trash collection and revenue-generating agencies would be exempt.
* "REVENUE GENERATING..." I'LL BET. (*SMIRK*)
"We take this absolutely seriously," said Julie Butcher, regional director for Service Employees International Union Local 721, which represents more than 10,000 city employees. "The mayor's endangering services and people's lives."
(*SNORT*)
* FOLKS... IF YOU THINK SEIU OR ANY OTHER UNION GIVES A FLYING FIG ABOUT ECONOMIC REALITY OR WHAT'S BEST FOR TAXPAYERS YOU'RE SIMPLY DELUSIONAL.
[O]n Monday, one of the nation's top bond-rating agencies withdrew a AA rating on two DWP bonds worth $720 million, which could increase the agency's borrowing costs.
* IN THE REAL WORLD... IRRESPONSIBILITY HAS CONSEQUENCES. (UNFORTUNATELY, ULTIMATELY IT'S TAXPAYERS WHO BEAR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE IRRESPONSIBILITY OF OUR POLITICAL LEADERS.)
[DWP head S. David] Freeman said the utility's board "has a responsibility for DWP not to get in a situation where we can't borrow money and where our bond rating goes down, down, down." The agency is not collecting enough money to cover its costs, he said. "I don't see how you can expect the department to declare a surplus when we have a deficit on our hands," Freeman said.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/44956-1.html?type=aggregate_friendly
The Congressional Research Service confirmed in a memo Wednesday that rapists and sex offenders may get federally subsidized Viagra and other sexual performance enhancing drugs under the recently passed health care reform law...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575168492894541142.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion
Unemployment today doesn't look like any unemployment in the recent American experience. We have the astonishing and dispiriting new reality that the "long-term jobless" - people out of work more than six months (27 weeks) - was about 44% of all people unemployed in February. A year ago that number was 24.6%.
This is not "normal" joblessness.
The U.S. unemployment rate for workers under 25 years old is about 20%.
"Youth unemployment" isn't just a descriptor used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It's virtually an entire field of study in the economics profession. That's because in Europe, "youth unemployment" has become part of the permanent landscape, something that somehow never goes away.
Is the U.S. there yet?
Eight years ago, a bittersweet movie about this tragedy of fallen expectations for Europe's young, "L'Auberge Espagnole," ends with a bright young Frenchman getting a "job" at a public ministry, where on the first day his co-workers explain the path to retirement. He runs from the building.
In the final month of 2009, these were European unemployment rates for people under 25: Belgium, 22.6%; Spain, 44.5%; France, 25.2%; Italy, 26.2%; the U.K., 19%; Sweden, 26.9%; Finland, 23.5%. (Germany, at 10% uses an "apprentice" system to bring young people into the work force, though that system has come under stress for a most relevant reason: a shortage in Germany of private-sector jobs.)
In the U.S., we've always assumed that we're not them, that America has this terrific, unstoppable job-creation machine. And that during a "cyclical downturn," all the U.S. Congress or the states have to do is keep unemployment benefits flowing and retraining programs running until the American jobs machine kicks in and sops up the unemployed.
But what if this time the new-jobs machine doesn't start?
It was during the Reagan presidency's years of strong new-job growth, with an expansion that lasted 92 months between 1983 and 1990, that Europeans began to envy the employment prospects for American graduates. The envy continued through the dot.com boom of the Clinton years. Some of Europe's most ambitious young workers emigrated to the U.S.
Which brings us to the current American presidency. Last March, its admirers proclaimed that the Obama budget drove "a nail in the coffin of Reaganomics."
And replaced it with what?
Many upscale American parents somehow think jobs like their own are part of the nation's natural order. They are not. In Europe, they have already discovered that, and many there have accepted the new small-growth, small-jobs reality.
Will we?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303720604575169750237298946.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTWhatsNews
General Motors Co. on Wednesday reported a $4.3 billion loss for its first six months out of bankruptcy...
* JUST SAY THAT OUT LOUD - SLOWLY - REPEATING TWO OR THREE TIMES...
Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell said GM stands a good chance of making money this year if the car maker improves its sales performance and further reduces costs.
* THINK ABOUT THAT SENTENCE... (*SNORT*) JUST THINK ABOUT IT.
The $4.3 billion loss covers the period from July 10, 2009, when GM exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, until the end of the year.
The results reflect the first official post-bankruptcy accounting of GM's finances. The government-funded reorganization allowed GM to close factories, eliminate unprofitable brands and dealers and shed billions of dollars in obligations.
* "...AND SHED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN OBLIGATIONS..." MY, MY... THAT MUST BE NICE.
(*SHOUTING TO MARY IN THE NEXT ROOM*) HEY, HONEY! CALL THE IRS, NYS, AND ALL OUR CREDITORS AND FOLKS WHO BILL US FOR SERVICES MONTHLY; TELL 'EM WE'RE... er... SHEDDING OUR OBLIGATIONS! (*SNORT*)
[T]he U.S. government invested about $50 billion in GM and now owns 60% of the company...
* "INVESTED," HUH...
Currently, GM is paying U.S. union workers who remain on the company's payroll though they have been idled by production cuts.
* GREAT! OUTSTANDING...! (*SMIRK*)
Shedding billions of dollars in debt and other obligations has significantly lowered GM's break-even point, Mr. Liddell said, without offering details.
* "SHEDDING..." I STILL GET SUCH A KICK OUT OF THAT... er... TERM.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604575167921009558824.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion
In Khartoum this past weekend, [President Obama's] U.S. Envoy to Sudan, Scott Gration, expressed his confidence that the April 11 elections in that country - the first since 1986 - will be as "free and fair as possible."
Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir should be plastering "We Love Gration" posters all over the capital. No one in Sudan believes the elections will be anything approaching free or fair.
Intimidation, vote rigging, manipulation of the census, and bribing of tribal leaders are rampant. Most of the 2.7 million displaced Darfuris are living in refugee camps. They are unable or unwilling to be counted at all. All of this, plus the ongoing violence in Darfur, have caused key opposition candidates including Yassir Arman of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement to withdraw from the election.
The Carter Center, the only international observer mission in Sudan, announced that the election process is "at risk on multiple fronts" and requested a modest delay of the election. Mr. Bashir threatened to oust the observers, saying on state TV last month: "if they interfere in our affairs, we will cut their fingers off, put them under our shoes and throw them out."
Hope is rare in Darfur, but when Barack Obama became president the refugees had reason to be hopeful. As a junior senator in 2006, Mr. Obama made his feelings about the evils in Darfur quite clear. "Today we know what is right, and today we know what is wrong. The slaughter of innocents is wrong. Two million people driven from their homes is wrong. Women gang raped while gathering firewood is wrong. And silence, acquiescence and paralysis in the face of genocide is wrong."
A year later, then-candidate Barack Obama said: "When you see a genocide, whether it's in Rwanda or Bosnia or in Darfur, that's a stain on all of us. That's a stain on our souls."
Darfuris were listening, and they hoped anew when President Obama said the Sudanese regime "offended the standards of our common humanity." They believed he would appoint an envoy who would take their plight seriously and serve as an honest broker between warring rebel groups and the Sudanese regime.
And how is his appointed envoy dealing with the perpetrators of those atrocities that have stained our souls? "We've got to think about giving out cookies," Mr. Gration told the Washington Post last fall. "Kids, countries—they react to gold stars, smiley faces . . ." Cookies for a regime that is as savvy as it is cruel? Smiley faces for a thug who seized power by coup in 1989 and has retained it only through iron-fisted brutality? Gold stars for an indicted war criminal responsible for the murder, rape and displacement of millions? This spectacularly naïve perspective - and accompanying policy of appeasement - has further terrified Darfur's refugees, who feel increasingly abandoned by the U.S. and marginalized within their country.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304017404575166201937283866.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion
Government employees on average have higher pay and bigger benefits than the private-sector employees who support them with taxes. This has become a well known fact.
When private firms run extended losses - spending more money than they take in - their employees must share in the necessary adjustments.
But how about when governments spend much more than they take in, running huge and extended deficits? What should happen then?
This is something Americans who work in private companies might consider while they file their tax returns over the next week. Ireland shows the way.
Having had a long run of high growth and success, Ireland has now had a severe bust, the deflation of a housing bubble, and a financial crisis. Plus, its government is running big deficits. Sound familiar? In response, the current Irish government budget takes these steps (translating from euros to dollars and rounding):
Government employees' salaries up to $40,000 will be reduced by 5%.
The next $54,000 of salary will be reduced by 7.5%.
The next $74,000 of salary will be reduced by 10%.
When these tranches are added together, this gets you up to salaries of $168,000. Government salaries over this amount may be subject to marginal reductions of as much as 15%.
This looks like a very sensible plan for nonmilitary government employees. Ireland has already worked out the plan. All the U.S. has to do is implement it.
Post a Comment