Letters 10-24-2016

It’s Obama’s 1984 Several editions ago I concluded a short letter to the editor with an ominous rhetorical flourish: “Welcome to George Orwell’s 1984 and the grand opening of the Federal Department of Truth!” At the time I am sure most of the readers laughed off my comments as right-wing hyperbole. Shame on you for doubting me...

Gun Bans Don’t Work It is said that mass violence only happens in the USA. A lone gunman in a rubber boat, drifted ashore at a popular resort in Tunisia and randomly shot and killed 38 mostly British and Irish tourists. Tunisian gun laws, which are among the most restrictive in the world, didn’t stop this mass slaughter. And in January 2015, two armed men killed 11 and wounded 11 others in an attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. French gun laws didn’t stop these assassins...

Scripps’ Good Deed No good deed shall go unpunished! When Dan Scripps was the 101st District State Representative, he introduced legislation to prevent corporations from contaminating (e.g. fracking) or depleting (e.g. Nestle) Michigan’s water table for corporate profit. There are no property lines in the water table, and many of us depend on private wells for abundant, safe, clean water. In the subsequent election, Dan’s opponents ran a negative campaign almost solely on the misrepresentation that Dan’s good deed was a government takeover of your private water well...

Political Definitions As the time to vote draws near it’s a good time to check into what you stand for. According to Dictionary.com the meanings for liberal and conservative are as follows:

Liberal: Favorable to progress or reform as in political or religious affairs.

Conservative: Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditions and limit change...

Voting Takes A Month? Hurricane Matthew hit the Florida coast Oct. 6, over three weeks before Election Day. Bob Ross (Oct. 17th issue) posits that perhaps evacuation orders from Governor Scott may have had political motivations to diminish turnout and seems to praise Hillary Clinton’s call for Gov. Scott to extend Florida’s voter registration deadline due to evacuations...

Clinton Foundation Facts Does the Clinton Foundation really spend a mere 10 percent (per Mike Pence) or 20 percent (per Reince Priebus) of its money on charity? Not true. Charity Watch gives it an A rating (the same as it gives the NRA Foundation) and says it spends 88 percent on charitable causes, and 12 percent on overhead. Here is the source of the misunderstanding: The Foundation does give only a small percentage of its money to charitable organizations, but it spends far more money directly running a number of programs...

America Needs Change Trump supports our constitution, will appoint judges that will keep our freedoms safe. He supports the partial-birth ban; Hillary voted against it. Regardless of how you feel about Trump, critical issues are at stake. Trump will increase national security, monitor refugee admissions, endorse our vital military forces while fighting ISIS. Vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence will be an intelligent asset for the country. Hillary wants open borders, increased government regulation, and more demilitarization at a time when we need strong military defenses...

My Process For No I will be voting “no” on Prop 3 because I am supportive of the process that is in place to review and approve developments. I was on the Traverse City Planning Commission in the 1990s and gained an appreciation for all of the work that goes into a review. The staff reviews the project and makes a recommendation. The developer then makes a presentation, and fellow commissioners and the public can ask questions and make comments. By the end of the process, I knew how to vote for a project, up or down. This process then repeats itself at the City Commission...

Regarding Your Postcard If you received a “Vote No” postcard from StandUp TC, don’t believe their lies. Prop 3 is not illegal. It won’t cost city taxpayers thousands of dollars in legal bills or special elections. Prop 3 is about protecting our downtown -- not Munson, NMC or the Commons -- from a future of ugly skyscrapers that will diminish the very character of our downtown...

Vote Yes It has been suggested that a recall or re-election of current city staff and Traverse City Commission would work better than Prop 3. I disagree. A recall campaign is the most divisive, costly type of election possible. Prop 3, when passed, will allow all city residents an opportunity to vote on any proposed development over 60 feet tall at no cost to the taxpayer...

Yes Vote Explained A “yes” vote on Prop 3 will give Traverse City the right to vote on developments over 60 feet high. It doesn’t require votes on every future building, as incorrectly stated by a previous letter writer. If referendums are held during general elections, taxpayers pay nothing...

Beware Trump When the country you love have have served for 33 years is threatened, you have an obligation and a duty to speak out. Now is the time for all Americans to speak out against a possible Donald Trump presidency. During the past year Trump has been exposed as a pathological liar, a demagogue and a person who is totally unfit to assume the presidency of our already great country...

Picture Worth 1,000 Words Nobody disagrees with the need for affordable housing or that a certain level of density is dollar smart for TC. The issue is the proposed solution. If you haven’t already seen the architect’s rendition for the site, please Google “Pine Street Development Traverse City”...

Living Wage, Not Tall Buildings Our community deserves better than the StandUp TC “vote no” arguments. They are not truthful. Their yard signs say: “More Housing. Less Red Tape. Vote like you want your kids to live here.” The truth: More housing, but for whom? At what price..

Home · Articles · News · Random Thoughts · The bright side of...
. . . .

The bright side of bankruptcy

Robert Downes - April 6th, 2009
A friend compares the current economic crisis to the stomach flu. “I hate to throw up,” he says. “You resist and resist and keep feeling sicker until you can’t take it anymore. Then you’re glad you threw up and got it over with.”
It’s a good metaphor for what ails General Motors and the Big 3 automakers. Should taxpayers give GM a heave and get it over with, or should we keep resisting the company’s bankruptcy until we just can’t take it anymore?
Either way, like the consequences of stomach flu, it’s starting to seem inevitable.
Now, it looks as if the federal government is holding up the toilet seat and giving GM a comforting pat on the back to do the Thing That Must Be Done.
Last September, the feds gave the Big 3 automakers a $25 billion loan. In November the automakers were back, asking for $50 billion more. They were told to get their act together and come up with a plan for reviving the auto industry.
A week ago, the Obama administration decided that the carmakers’ plan was too little, too late, with rosy sales projections that weren’t likely to bear fruit. Basically, GM’s plan was “lend us more money.”
When GM Chairman Rick Wagoner resigned under pressure in the wake of a lackluster plan, President Obama hinted that a speedy “controlled” bankruptcy might be the best way to bring the company back to health, with the government guaranteeing auto warranties until GM is restructured. Within a day or so, new GM CEO Frederick A. Henderson was saying that bankruptcy was “probable” as a means of “recreating and reinventing General Motors as a competitive enterprise, one that wins in the marketplace.”
Bankruptcy would create more hardship for Michigan in the short term. There are an estimated 266,000 GM workers, many of them spread across five Midwestern states. By one estimate, seven times that number of workers in the auto parts industry will lose their jobs if GM goes out of business.
And those auto parts suppliers will perhaps receive only pennies on the dollar for what they’re owed by GM. Who will save them?
Then there are the 400,000 or so retirees whose “legacy” costs in the way of health benefits and pensions take $1,000 in profit off the top of every GM vehicle sold.
But bankruptcy doesn’t mean the end of the world. In 2001, Congress bailed out the U.S. airlines industry with a $15 billion package, similar to that provided to the auto companies. In 2005, Northwest Airlines (NWA) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection from its creditors. It was joined by Delta, United and US Airways -- four of the six largest airlines in the country, all declaring bankruptcy at the same time.
Yet the planes of those airlines kept on flying despite being in bankruptcy, and employees kept receiving paychecks. Northwest emerged from bankruptcy in 2007 and recently merged with Delta to create the world’s largest airline.
Then there’s Kmart, which declared bankruptcy in 2002. The company closed more than 300 stores and laid off 34,000 employees. It emerged from Chapter 11 a year later and went on to purchase Sears. Both chains are still around (although sometimes it seems barely).
Northwest Airlines and Kmart are cited, because like GM, they too were big players in Michigan. Kmart had its former headquarters in Troy, while NWA operates a major hub at Metro Airport in Detroit. And like GM, Northwest Airlines has also had legendary problems between labor and management.
So it is possible to find a bright side to bankruptcy, and the mood of the country seems to be going in that direction, rather than force-feeding GM more taxpayers’ cash in the hope that this dodo will someday fly.
Consider that GM’s big ‘innovation’ over the past decade was the Hummer, a vehicle that symbolizes all that’s bad about America with the hallmarks of military aggression, conspicious consumption, and a lack of concern for the environment or energy independence.
While Japanese carmakers were coming up with innovations that have captured the market, GM seemed more interested in lobbying against EPA standards to cut emissions and improve mileage. Instead of creating an alternative to the Toyota Prius or Honda Insight, GM carried on with a product line that was dependent on the SUV.
And like the management of GM, it often seems as if the UAW is suspended in another time -- the 1970s -- when much of their benefit and pension package was negotiated. The ground has shifted since then as a result of globalization and the UAW hasn’t sold taxpayers on the idea of paying them more than workers at Toyota or Hyundai plants in America, especially when many taxpayers aren’t making half of their $60,000-per-year average pay.
“Enough is enough!” notes a blogger on a site relating to GM’s troubles. “How long are we going to continue to prop up a failing company? Great pay, great benefits, great pensions, terrible products, no sales, no profits!”
It would be a mistake, however, to assume that bankruptcy will be a magic pill to cure GM. You can fire the company’s management, discontinue unpopular models, renegotiate pay, downsize employee health plans, and cut into pensions and legacy costs and still end up with a company that makes products that don’t sell.
But we can hope for the best, and wish GM well on its new ‘green’ direction with products such as the Chevy Volt electric car planned for 2010. This is a critical opportunity for GM, considering that the Chinese have announced that they are making it a top priority to capture the world‘s electric car market. Last week, China announced that it would increase its production of electric and hybrid cars to 500,000 by the end of 2011, up from just 2,100 last year.
Isn’t that a market that the Big 3 should be desperate to own? The odometer on my car just passed 100,000 miles, but I‘m holding onto it until someone comes out with a good, all-electric car. I hope it’s an American carmaker.
There’s a saying from the Vietnam War era: “Sometimes you have to destroy a village to save it.” Perhaps the same holds true with GM and bankruptcy.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5