The Wizzle is back, just in time for the whole darn economy to fall apart

Hey there, it's me - the mostly absent, cautiously optimistic, baby-making, tree-hugging, flip-flopping resident bleeding heart! The newest, smallest member of my household is 8 weeks old and I'm starting to come up for air periodically, so I thought I'd write an actual post of my own - you know, instead of just lying in wait and then picking apart other people's deepest thoughts...

...although my own preference is to do less talking and more listening. It really has been enlightening and a pleasure to read everyone's perspectives on the issues we've discussed. I surely get tired sometimes of hearing my own voice talking itself in circles in my head!

I've been thinking a lot about the economy and all, as I try to calculate how many children we can reasonably stuff into our little house (since it appears that selling it for a profit is, shall we say, a pipe dream at best). While I'm calculating that, I'm studiously avoiding checking the value of our 401K and praying that BBD's job will continue to be secure. I'm sure we're all pretty much in the same boat there.

So my family's future isn't looking too bad at the moment - but I'm way out here in the Wild West. Many of the good people of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and the rest of the Midwest are waiting this week for the other shoe to drop. The very foundations of their livelihood, the Big 3 automakers, have come groveling to the government to save them from bankruptcy. People aren't buying their products, and they're bowed low with the weight of some of the most generous pension and health care plans in the known world. Millions of people depend on Chrysler, GM, and Ford for their jobs in one way or another, and the way I see it, those people will get screwed now or they will get screwed later. The question is, are the rest of us going to go down with them?

Mitt Romney wrote an editorial for the New York Times this week that really summed up the situation very well, in my opinion. Basically, if the Big 3 bailout is shot down, the companies will declare bankruptcy. They will be able to start over and restructure the areas that are most problematic: the management that has come up a day late and a dollar short in anticipating the changing needs and expectations of the American buying public, the adversarial relationship between the management and the workers' union, the gross excesses of executive compensations and benefits that are in no way tied to company performance or the compensations of the "regular" employees, and the total lack of investment in research and development - the pioneering spirit that this country - and the American auto industry - was built on! We pioneered high-quality/low-cost cars, for crying out loud, and now practically everyone in the world makes them better and more efficiently than we do.

Bankruptcy is going to hurt the employees of the Big 3, and all the employees of other businesses in their wake. And anyone who knows me, knows that my heart breaks for those people who have given their lives to these companies, trying to support their families and just keep their heads above water. It's an honest living. But I just don't see any way around the restructuring that needs to happen. For the Big 3 to regain their competitive footing, they're going to need to address these problems sooner or later. So people's pensions are going to be smaller, their pay will be cut, their benefits reduced, because that's the only way for American car companies to keep making cars. The difference is, it can happen in 5 or 10 years anyway and the rest of the taxpayers can foot the bill, or it can happen now and we can begin the extraordinarily painful rebuilding process sooner.

Now, as I've been typing this my mind has wandered, as it so often does, and I find myself thinking: building cars that all of us drive is an honest living. We manufacture so little in this country anymore, yet our know-how and infrastructure for automobile manufacturing is so good that even many "foreign" cars are now made right here in the USA. I think we should cling to that and do it the very best that we can.

BUT.

Henry Ford built his extremely successful operation on mass production of of inexpensive cars - coupled with high wages for his employees. It was one of the critical, fundamental tenets of his business model. We are now at the point where the Big 3 can no longer afford to offer that to their workers, because Honda, Toyota, and others pay their workers less and yet churn out better products. But why is that? People used to buy cars and houses and furniture and groceries from their local vendor or producer of said items. They used to go to their physiciand and pay in cash for their treatment. They weren't all wealthy, but they didn't have to buy everything at Wal-Mart just to have enough money left over to keep the lights on.

What has changed in the world? Is there just so much more information, so much "access", that we are aware of all the "stuff" out there in the market and we perceive it to be necessary for a middle-class life? Is it globalization? Is it overpopulation? Is it the ever-growing chasm between the Haves and Have Nots? Why do we run around like chickens with our heads cut off, working more hours, spending more money, getting more stuff, but not any happier? Why can we "not afford" to shop at ethical businesses, to buy high-quality products that don't fall apart after 5 uses and sit in a landfill, to pay our honest workers a living wage? Is our income relative to our needs so much less than it used to be? Or has our perception of what we need, or deserve, grown faster than we can support it?

These are not rhetorical questions, any of them. I really don't know, and I'd really like to. I wonder if there's any hope for a society where you can only live comfortably by entering a few select professions. Teachers, auto workers, construction workers and garbage collectors provide services we need, and I would venture that they provide a great deal more benefit to us than all these executive-investment-banker-speculator number crunchers who circle over us, betting on our misfortunes, shuffling imaginary money around and profiting from the people who actually get their hands dirty and WORK.

What does the future hold? Does GM restructure its benefits, cutting back so far in the name of competition that another blue collar career becomes one that cannot support a family? Or does the new management find a way to keep Henry Ford's dream alive in a new century, a new society, and a whole new world?




15 comments:

Coy said...

I love what you said...
"we are aware of all the "stuff" out there in the market and we perceive it to be necessary for a middle-class life?"
Amen to that. I think we confuse "needs" and "wants" more and more each generation.

The Wizzle said...

Yeah, I was thinking that too. I mean, I've heard my grandmother (my only living grandparent) talk about raising 8 kids "back in the day". and she said it was no hardship on them to pay the doctor for all those deliveries, although they were by no means well off. But those docs didn't have malpractice, those 8 kids didn't all have karate and ballet and cars and prom limos etc, my grandma didnt have botox and designer jeans and $200 haircuts...

It's just a whole different mindset. There's nice stuff out there, sure, but I think we drive ourselves nuts trying to get it, and then we "can't" afford to pay each other a reasonable amount for reasonable services, so we have to work even harder and longer for the stuff we "need"...

Stephanie said...

Doesn't this remind you of Elder Perry's talk on simplifying life? I think that will bring us as individuals and families peace and happiness during these difficult times.

So many ideas in this post (several that I was going to write a post on - we seem to be thinking about the same things a lot of the time, Wizzle). Here are my thoughts on a few of them:

First, the reason the big 3 are struggling and that people aren't buying their products is that people are used to buying cars with loans. If the loans dry up, car purchases dry up, and it will take a long time for those purchases to be "made up" because people now need to change their buying habits and actually save to buy a car (imagine that!) In some ways, the car companies themselves created this problem with a strategy that included creative financing to get people to buy cars they couldn't afford. So, the number of cars being sold was artificially inflated to begin with - same as the number of homes and price of homes being purchased. Same as pretty much everything. The volume and price of purchases was inflated with easy credit. So, we are going to go through a rough period of adjustment as we get back to reality.

Second, how is it that congress can sign off on a Bailout for $700B to go to who knows, for who knows what, but can't sign off on $25B to help the automakers (and their employees). To be clear, I oppose ALL Bailouts. I was spitting mad after the first one. But, I see rank hypocrisy in passing the first one (which hasn't done anything to help the economy or credit markets, which is only half-used and Obama is going to get to decide how to spend the rest, and which is causing healthy banks to aqcuire unhealthy banks or change their structure to "get a piece" of the Bailout). I can only think of one word to describe all of this: corruption. And amidst all the corruption of bailing out banking executives, congress is going to let the Big 3 Automakers fail. Honestly, I want to puke on congress.

The difference is, it can happen in 5 or 10 years anyway and the rest of the taxpayers can foot the bill, or it can happen now and we can begin the extraordinarily painful rebuilding process sooner.

This pretty much sums up the entire situation of all the Bailouts. Let's bite the bullet now and clean up this mess - not artificially prop up failing businesses (for the "people", they say *wink* *wink* while executives still take their salaries and bonuses and "the people" start losing jobs).

Third, I agree with Romney that we need a restructuring. You know what needs to get "restructured" first? UNIONS. Let's stop shooting ourselves in the foot. I think the unions are a big reason why it is is so expensive for American car companies to produce cars.

Fourth, yes, we are a nation of "excess". Honestly, I am sometimes almost physically ill as I check-out at Walmart and see all the crap people buy. You asked what it is - I think it is GREED, covetousness, pride.

Fifth, Or does the new management find a way to keep Henry Ford's dream alive in a new century, a new society, and a whole new world?

Yes, I think it is possible. Government, GET OUT OF THE WAY.

Anonymous said...

I think we could learn a lesson from our illegal hermanos y hermanas, despite the fact that I really don't want them here:)
Most illegals pay cash for everything. This means they don't buy until they can afford, geesh...what a concept! They also don't give a whole lot of thought to how big or nice their home is. Yes it is harder to make a living much less a retirement as a blue collar worker, but this is the career these people chose. I am self employed and therefore pay for our families health care out of pocket. We also have no pension, 401k or any retirement other that what we have saved for it...which is ZERO! It's my choice and my fault. Going through the current economy has caused us to look closely at our finances. We don't "need" our newer cars or many other things that could have saved us a lot of money.

As long as cardinal games are sold out and midnight showings of "Twilight" are sold out, I really don't feel to bad for most people.
It really is a matter of priority.
I know many really are struggling and doing there best but still can't make end meet. This is where we as neigbors, friends and families need to help out.
The only education more valuable than schooling is financial education. Most people could live within their means if they really wanted to.

The Wizzle said...

Matt, that's a good point. I am really shocked that kids make it to adulthood without so much as a whisper regarding good financial management! Yes, it could (and should!) be taught in the home, but from the state of the economy and the national savings rate it is evident that most adults do not have the skills to teach the next generation what they need to know. It's a shame, since it's much harder to learn as an adult - and the stakes are much higher!

big.bald.dave said...

The more I think about this issue, the more I think these guys are right.

If one of the big three goes into bankruptcy, they are dead. Cars are durable goods with warranties, requiring very long-term commitments from both the consumer and the manufacturer. According to a recent poll, 80% of car buyers said they wouldn't even consider buying a car from a manufacturer in bankruptcy.

And thinking back to Economics class, one of the determinants of demand is ... expectations of buyers. If buyers don't expect a company to be around, they won't demand its products.

The government is going to have to get involved somehow here, likely by coordinating simultaneous bankruptcies of all three Detroit automakers, and guaranteeing financing.

I think that's a pretty good compromise between the benefits of a bankruptcy (restructuring, reducing legacy obligations) and the best interest of the taxpayer.

big.bald.dave said...

Check out this phenomenal article by Michael Lewis, author of Moneyball and Liar's Poker. Liar's Poker was written in 1989, when Lewis quit Wall Street after being disgusted by how the game works (it turns out he was working for the firm that first created credit derivatives from subprime mortgages). Back then, he predicted that the whole system would fail, and it turns out he was all too right.

Stephanie said...

Incredible article, BBD. My blood was boiling by the end. This is the first time that I can see the "evils" of capitalism liberals keep talking about - not that I think capitalism or a free market system is evil, but the corruption and dishonesty in our current Wall Street system takes my breath away. This sentence is understated:

What he underestimated was the total unabashed complicity of the upper class of American capitalism.

This article reaffirms even stronger to me what a bunch of crock this bail out is. Who are we bailing out? Crooked, unethical, dishonest, GREEDY businessmen at ALL levels. This is the worst of socialism. At least when some of you liberals argue for social democracy, the reason is to help the poor - not help people like these. My taxes are going to go up to bail out these guys?!?! My blood is ON FIRE. What is crashing here is a myth to begin with. Money, value, wealth was all created from nothing, and now we taxpayers are supposed to pay it back? To cover the losses?

He agreed that the main effect of turning a partnership into a corporation was to transfer the financial risk to the shareholders. “When things go wrong, it’s their problem,” he said—and obviously not theirs alone. When a Wall Street investment bank screwed up badly enough, its risks became the problem of the U.S. government. “It’s laissez-faire until you get in deep sh[*&]"

Greedy people used capitalism to take advantage and live on the backs of others. I think the same can be true for socialism. It would be easy for a few people with control to live on the backs of others. Greed, dishonesty is problem. I still believe in capitalism and free markets - just disgusted with wickedness.

I have been wanting to write a post related to all of this meltdown for a while, but I just can't bring myself to do it. So, here is an article I was going to use. It basically tells the same story as this article BBD posted, although without the insider knowledge.

The part of the article that really gets me is when the CEO of International Swaps and Derivatives Association (a trade association of "the very same companies that created the vast shadow market, lobbied to keep it unregulated, and are now drowning because of unanticipated risks") says:

"It is something that we all need to look at and learn lessons from. And we all need to work together to understand that and design a structure in the future that works more effectively,"

Watch him smirk in the video if you really want to get a sense for who he is and what he does.

It is true - capitalism on the way up, socialism on the way down - all meant to cover the butts of and to protect the wealth of a few greedy, dishonest people.

big.bald.dave said...

Stephanie wrote, Who are we bailing out? Crooked, unethical, dishonest, GREEDY businessmen at ALL levels. This is the worst of socialism. At least when some of you liberals argue for social democracy, the reason is to help the poor - not help people like these. My taxes are going to go up to bail out these guys?!?! My blood is ON FIRE. What is crashing here is a myth to begin with. Money, value, wealth was all created from nothing, and now we taxpayers are supposed to pay it back? To cover the losses?

While I certainly understand and agree with your thoughts here, the fact is that if these corporations aren't bailed out and the system fails, the average American is going to feel it way more than any of these scumbags ever will. I hate that we're doing it, but as long as the right regulations are put into place to make sure this never happens again, I can appreciate the necessity of the bailouts.

Stephanie said...

I don't know if I agree, BBD. Perhaps a few are necessary. But, look at what has happened so far. All that money poured into bailouts and nothing to show for it. The credit markets are frozen, jobs are being lost. Perhaps targeted, logical THINKING bailouts of a few key financial firms, but we are seeing idiotic craziness, IMO.

Stephanie said...

And Obama seems to be promising a whole lot more of what we've already seen. I am not sure if I would classify that as "change".

Stephanie said...

To be fair, though, jobs are going to be lost either way. There has to be a correction. People have been living on and spending phantom money, so cutbacks on spending are necessary, which will mean jobs are lost just for that reason alone.

big.bald.dave said...

I'm certainly no economist, but I think you are underestimating how devastating (to ordinary Americans) the collapse would be that certainly would have occurred if the government had not propped up the banking system. I'm as worried as anyone about the precedent these bailouts set, but I think 1929 is roughly the alternative, and I'm not sure that's in anybody's best interest.

Stephanie said...

I'm not sure that the government propping up the banking system is going to prevent a crisis like 1929.

Stephanie said...

Well, get ready, it looks like the fun is just beginning.