Soapbox

Raines : Country Boy Logic

A Liberal’s Viewpoint

by Mike Raines
one00100@mchsi.com

     I have a friend who loves to discuss things, especially politics. He and I are a lot like Bubba and LeRoy in the “Good Ol’ Boys Gone Bad” column of “The Independent” newspaper. I was going to title this “Redneck Logic”, but I only consider myself a borderline redneck, and he’s more like a “redneck country gentleman”. Rednecks generally don’t think much, and think even less “outside the box”. My friend, whom I’ll call “Bill” looks like a redneck, but enjoys and practices critical thinking and sometimes takes a contrarian viewpoint just for the sake of argument.

     Anyway, the other day we were discussing bailouts in general and the auto industry in particular. I admitted that I was not sure if an auto industry bailout would be better for the country than letting the big three automakers enter bankruptcy. I stated that the industry employs a lot of people nationwide, and it seems if they go under, those folks are going to lose their jobs, along with a lot of folks in the support industries like those that make tires, seats, brakes, etc. Even more folks who transport these goods, or feed these workers, will suffer as well. I also pointed out that the Bush Administration and most of congress seems to be saying the same thing.

     Well, Bill pointed out that GM, Ford, and Chrysler are going broke because they have excess inventory of cars, vans, SUVs, and trucks that no one wants to buy or can’t get credit to buy. Bailing out these three is supposed to allow them to continue to employ their workers. These are the same workers that are currently employed there – no one is talking about hiring more workers. These employees will make more vehicles that no one can afford to buy. After some time, the bailout money will be gone, and they’ll be back asking for more bailout money. Actually, the strings being attached to the money by Congress and the Bush Administration require the automakers to show that they are making changes so that they will become financially viable. These changes will surely include massive layoffs and salary reductions for hourly workers. This negates the argument that the bailout will save a significant number of jobs. Why waste $15 billion for such a paltry return?

     Once Bill and I got to talking, we explored the possibilities of letting the Big Three go bankrupt, and why Bush and Congress seem against it. Aside from the fact that Bush doesn’t seem to have a clue (and he’s not alone on that in this financial mess) and the fact that Democrats probably feel they owe the big unions a debt, we couldn’t come up with a lot of good reasons to support an auto industry bailout. The argument that some Republicans want bankruptcy for Detroit in order to destroy the unions probably has some merit, but bankruptcy doesn’t have to destroy the unions. They will need to make concessions to level the playing field in the automotive industry, sure, but this could be balanced by making it easier for workers at any company to organize if they want.

     Then Bill showed his contrarian side by proclaiming that he had a better idea for a bailout. Just as LeRoy cautiously takes the bait from Bubba, I said “Oh yeah?” Bill says we shouldn’t bail out any more companies or organizations. We should instead immediately send a refund to every person who paid federal taxes for 2007. The amount should be equal to what you paid in. No loopholes, no earned income credits, credits for dependents, etc. Simple, sweet, and quick. We could take that money and buy some of those cars, vans, SUVs, and trucks. Some of us might pay down our mortgages to what our properties are worth. The economy would start moving again. The automakers could try to restructure. If they make it, fine. If not, smaller, better car companies will rise from the ashes.

     Bill and I also worry that there has to be consequences for printing more money that is not based on something tangible. Some folks say that is where the bailout money is coming from, while others say we’re borrowing it from China. Bill also has an interesting theory that if we replaced our presidential elections with a national lottery every four years, overall, we would stand a better chance of getting an honest president. The lottery would be open to all American citizens who own property and pay taxes. The theory is that at least 50% of the time, you would end up with an honest president. You know, sometimes “Country Boy Logic” seems to make perfect sense.

     Mike Raines is a resident of Currituck, N. C. and is featured as a regular columnist, in the spirit of offering different viewpoints and opinions on issues of local, state and national levels. The writer can be contacted via email at:
one00100@mchsi.com

This post has been viewed 293 time(s)

© 2008 NE NC News.