Thursday, April 30, 2009

The Chrysler Deal

Well, well, the UAW now owns Chrysler. At least that's what the paperwork says. Ironic isn't it? The union that helped to kill the industry now owns part of it. According to media sources, when the dust settles from the Chrysler bankrupcy and Fiat deal, the UAW will own 55% of Chrysler, Fiat will own 20%, the US Government will own 8% and the Canadian Government will own 2%. Sounds just peachy, doesn't it? Everyone gets a piece of the Chrysler pie.

But something is rotten with this deal, somewhere. Even though the US Government only owns 8% of the company, it gets to name four of the nine members of the Board of Directors. Fiat names three, the UAW gets one, and Canada gets one.

Let's get this straight. The UAW owns the majority stake, but only gets one Board Member? The US Government owns 8%, but names four? I would have loved to see that worked out in the smoke-filled back room.

Perhaps it went a little something like this....(it's possible)

Administration: Hey guys. You know what we want.
UAW: Lemme guess.... Power! No--Control... No--Dictatorship!
(Laughs all around the table)
Admin: Seriously.... we don't care who gets the money. We just want to run things.
UAW: We'll take care of the money for you!
Fiat: Hey, weesa gonna getta our money, too!
Canada: (snore)
Admin: Hey UAW! How much did you contribute to the campaign last fall?
UAW: A lady never tells!
(Laughs all around again)
Admin: We remember. You guys, you get the company. How's 45% sound?
UAW: You know who you're talkin' to? We're the UAW. We own the Democrat Party. We'll do the percentages. Fifty-five or we'll break your kneecaps.
Fiat: Hey, whatta bouta our money?
Admin : (to Fiat) Shut up. (to UAW) OK, OK, 55%. But we get to call the shots in the office.
UAW: Hey, whadda we care how the company's run? We haven't yet, why start now?
Canada: (snore)
Fiat: HEY WHATTA--
Admin and UAW: SHUT UP!
UAW: Stinkin' weasels... let's give 'em... oh...say 30% and tell 'em to shove off!
Admin: We could... but somebody's got to actually run the company. Think they could do that?
UAW: Fiat? Do they even make cars?
Fiat: Our cars are da finest cars ina all of the entire--
Admin: Hey--for the last time, shut it. When we want you to talk, we'll tell you what to say.
UAW: Capiche?
Admin: (to Fiat) Fifteen percent and three seats. See if you can find someone in Tuscany or somewhere who can build cars, OK? Bring 'em on over, because they are going to actually run the place.
Fiat: Fiat no gonna be insulted like-a this!
UAW: Do it or we'll break your kneecaps.
Fiat: Fiat only take-a twenty percent, no less!
Admin: Fine, have it your way. Twenty percent and three seats. Done.
UAW: We get the money...
Admin: We get control...
Fiat: And we finally getta chance to build-a cars in America!
Canada: (snore)

I wonder who they'll get to run GM? I hear that Hyundai has a few extra chaps on its Board of Directors...

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

New Predictions about Obama Administration

Well, I've not blogged for a while now, but it seems like it's time to start up again.

And my the times are a' changin'! Last time I blogged, I predicted that Mr. Obama would be our next President. And, I'm very sad to say... I was right. It was a prediction I would have just as soon been wrong about.

Well.... let me make some more predictions.

After having seen the Obama Administration in action, I have formulated two basic rules of thumb about how Mr. Obama and his underlings will act.

First: The right things will be said, but they will not be done.
Mr. Obama has been profuse in his use of the spoken word. He is clearly a master communicator. His ability to connect with an audience is rapidly approaching that of Ronald Reagan. But Mr. Obama uses his words for a cloak to conceal his actions.
When major action is required, a speech will be given. It will ring with sincerity and fluency and be easily chewed up into sound bites for the media. It will also be only two-thirds true.
Obama largely does what he says - except when he doesn't want to.

Hence we have a major speech sounding ethics reform for lobbyists. And exemptions from that for those Mr. Obama wants to hire. Then we have the President firing a CEO, and laying down the law to the car companies - and saying he doesn't want to run privately held companies.

In short, take nothing the man or his administration says at face value. Simply watch what they do.

Second: The Competence Factor.
There will be three levels of competence in this government. In areas where the government can do legitimate good, there will be gross incompetence. In areas where the government can be dangerous, there will be absolute competence. In areas where the government can be changed from doing legitimate good to being dangerous, there will be attempts at competence.

For example: I look for the decline of these departments of government: Defense, Border Patrol, Drug Czar, Postal Service, Veteran's Affairs, Dep't. of Interior, FEMA, Attorney General and Transportation. These are areas where the government, through providing necessary services to our country, can have a positive impact on our nation. I look for them to decline in priority, efficiency, and power, due in no small part to the simple incompetence of Obama Appointees.

I look for an increase in the efficiency of the government in these areas: Dep't of State, Health and Human Services, and any Department that will increase the power of the Federal Government.

I look for a shift in the focus from good to dangerous in the following departments, and there will be varying levels of competency there. Homeland Security and Intelligence Agencies will no longer be efficient intelligence gatherers for real threats, but for political ones. Dep't of Energy will no longer be concerned about finding good sources of energy, but about being environmentally correct, and will fall into gross incompetency. Dept' of Education will be ruthlessly efficient in promoting extremism in schools, and funding it. The EPA will become a powerhouse of regulation.

However... there is one exception. Treasury. I look for Gietner et al. to be dangerous AND incompetent.