« April 2009 | Main | June 2009 »
Barack Obama, new Chairman of the Board, (GM) Government Motors
by
Chet Greenwood
We the people now own 72 ½ % of General Motors. The price of this stock was a paltry $20 Billion. Would you have purchased stock in a bankrupt GM with your hard earned money?
You didn’t have to; our President did it for you.
The new world of cars:
P.J. on how we got here.
and
Some thoughts on how Government Motors will be managed.
Still ... it is Sunday. Last day in May. Why not put the top down and go for a drive.
In case you haven't filled up your gas tank recently, the price of a gallon of gas is now about $2.45, up 40% from January. Senator Sanders knows the reason:
Which sounds suspiciously like Senator Sanders' argument of a year ago (or see here) when gasoline was over $4 a gallon.
If speculators were responsible for the spike in crude oil prices last summer, and are again screwing the American people, then why did they let oil and gas prices fall so much last fall and winter? Are those Wall Street fat cat speculators stupid, or just lazy, or perhaps incompetent?
Just wondering.
Legislative leaders, Shap Smith and Peter Shumlin, held a press conference yesterday to announce the drafting of a "companion" bill that makes improvements in the budget which has passed both houses and will be vetoed by Governor Douglas.
Inquiring minds inevitably wonder, "Could this new legislation be designed to attract the votes that Smith needs in the House to override the veto?"
Why heaven forfend.
"This isn't about shoring up votes or anything like that," Smith said.
It is, he added, a reflection of
"... our willingness to listen to some of the concerns that have been raised."
Why is it that politicians feel compelled to deny they are committing politics when it is obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain that this is precisely what they are doing? This is one of those questions that can be pondered unto eternity.
For the moment, however, two more prosaic and urgent questions come to mind: First, will the ploy work and, if so, will the modifications contained in the buddy bill make for a better budget?
A couple of years ago, the salvation of Vermont's agricultural sector, and to some a lynchpin of the state's economic development efforts, was the organic food sector.
The New York Times reports, with a focus on Vermont, that, like so many other luxury goods, organic milk sales have plummeted in the recession, and farmers who made the switch have been hit hard.
Sales of organic milk have fallen, credit for farmers has dried up, and farmers are facing huge debt burdens:
Like any other business venture, there's lots of risk involved in a new product. Those farmers who took that risk are bearing the painful consequences. Government can't pick winning products. No government employee has the knowledge or information to do what entrepreneurs do. That's true whether we're talking about organic milk, wind or solar energy, or any other product or service.
It's one thing for private entrepreneurs to guess wrong and suffer the financial consequences. It's quite another for public policymakers to do it with someone else's nickel--that would be yours and mine.
Stumbling Toward A (Status Quo) Budget
by
P.G. Behr
Here we are in May, and it’s “Douglas vs. the Legislature” – again. The Governor has rejected the budget concocted by our lawmakers, demanding that they sharpen their pencils and cut costs, instead of raising taxes.
Our own Alison Clarkson pleads for the Democrats’ budget, saying that it protects “essential services” from our state government. The trouble with Alison’s thinking, and that of her henchmen, is that they claim everything the state government does is essential! As anyone with a modicum of business experience knows, there is always room for improvement. The whole idea of free enterprise is doing things better, faster, cheaper. If Alison used this model, our state government could perform truly “essential services” with a lot less taxpayer money.
Recent Comments