Topic: Politics
The Politics of the Auto Industry Bail Out
Bad things are usually done for reasons that seem good to those who promote them. What good reason does President Bush have for bailing out the auto industry? Politics, of course.
by Jahfre Fire Eater
(libertarian)
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Why is President Bush's bail out of the auto industry a bad idea? Because it tends to prolong the problem by delaying any and all possible solutions.
Any action that tends to keep mis-allocated resources, including labor, attached to jobs that should not exist in a less manipulated market prevents jobs from being created that could make better use of those resources; delaying indefinitely any potential recovery.
What President Bush seems to be doing is cultivating good will with the unions for his party. If the auto industry collapses, so will the auto workers unions. No prosperous industry could possibly arise from the ashes with an 800 pound monkey on its back. Unions are good for one thing, constantly throwing sand into the works of an economy. The poorer shape that economy is in, the more sand they throw into the works. So why would a President want to save the unions? They vote and contribute big bucks to the political process. Follow the money, follow the influence, follow the politics and do not believe that in any case the government is being altruistic.
The biggest mistake that socialists and liberals (including the GOP neo-cons) make is to anthropomorphize government. They ascribe their own feelings and attitudes to a non-thinking, non-feeling organizational construct then defend it, and sadly, trust it as if it were a blood-relative. All this while said relative proceeds to crush the very spark of liberty that allowed it to exist in the first place. Slowly, in a process consisting of a succession of safety nets and failures, the most possible damage is eventually done to the people. Only then will the people rise up to restore a culture of liberty. We are a long way from recovery because we're no where near the bottom of our slide into Socialism.
This reminds me of a spate of articles a few months ago in which authors mulled the question "Why aren't people marching in the street with torches and pitchforks?" One humorous blog in particular by
Thomas DiLorenzo over at LewRockwell.com provided the best backdrop for pointing out how now is
not the right time in the cycle of the collapse of civilization for the torch and pitchfork crowd. Mr. DiLorenzo wrote about stopping off at Home Depot to buy a pitchfork on the way to marching in the street. Oh my god that's funny! You see, the problem is that people do not get their ass out of a LazyBoy recliner to go buy implements of destruction to march INTO oppression. No, first they must trust the government and their favored party leaders until they find themselves holding pitchforks as a necessity of life. We have a long way to go before there will be torches and pitchforks but when the time comes, the people will already have them and they will not need to stop off at Home Depot.
The USA is first going to pay the price for 80+ years of unions pushing wages skyward relative to the global value of labor. This has continuously made the US less and less competitive in the world. The time has come for that to be rectified and the market will see to it. None of the bail out plans or loans or public emotional pleading by politicians or banksters will prevent the business cycle from consuming non-productive entities. These political bail out actions simply ensure that as many people suffer as is possible. Share the misery, that's the Socialist creed. Forced sharing of misery in the name of altruistic social engineering and central economic planning is what Obama will pursue, just like FDR did.
Every time the Fed, or US Treasury or the President present a new and improved safety net for our society, it lures more hapless fools into behaving as if things will be OK. When the downward economic trends rip through those safety nets without even slowing, those same hapless morons look to the leadership who made up the failed safety net for an explanation and hope for the next one to be THE ONE. In the long term, Bush's actions will provide a scapegoat for the circumstances Obama is unable to alleviate. In the short run, Bush's actions ensure more people share the misery for longer. Nice going George.
-Jahfre Fire Eater
©2008 Jahfre Fire Eater, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Saturday, December 20, 2008
Last modified: Saturday, December 20, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of Jahfre Fire Eater only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Jahfre Fire Eater is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Jahfre Fire Eater of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-12-20 17:00:24
A few more slips of paper given to the auto industry isnt going to do much more harm one way or the other. I am waiting for shadowstats to blow a fuse from the M3 drop and M1 rise.
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/money-supply
Report violation
Posted By: jeff
Date: 2008-12-21 15:32:57
Disagree. Bush didn't bail out the unions in an altruistic sense for the party or the unions. His only concern is his legacy and he knows that historians are typically liberal. Bush is weak. He lacks the integrity or leadership skills to stand up to the unions (or the Democrats). He'd rather betray the Republican Party and the conservatives who voted for him in the hope that the liberal historians will treat him well. What he doesn't yet understand is that history will judge him to be among the worst of our presidents, arguably even worse than Jimmy Carter.
Report violation
Posted By: Dale Husband
Date: 2008-12-29 11:01:12
Instead of bailing out the auto companies (or the banks) and allowing them to keep the same incompetent leadership, the government should have bought out those companies, restructure them to make them more profitable, and then resell them at auction to new private owners. The government would make a profit, the workers would continue to work and both make and spend their own money and pay taxes, and the executives who failed would still be properly punished by losing their properties. Oh, and limit the power of the labor unions!
Report violation