Sunday, January 22, 2012
They let the banks fail and started anew. We bailed folks out at a cost of way more than buying every bad and questionable mortgage out there and giving the homes to the residents. And then the bankers took bonuses for saving their failed investments.
Which makes more sense? Keep in mind the bank bail out costs do not take into account the indirect costs of social services and unemployment and emergency room costs for the displaced. Those we bore as taxpayers.
Hindsight is great, but I do know that if I were in the position of handing out bailouts, there would have been strings attached, such as no bonuses, no golden parachutes and criminal fraud charges for those who bundled good and bad mortgages and then bet against them making it. Also, I would have made sure by passing laws this could not have happened again.
1) Asia now has a better infrastructure than the US. Not nimble enough.
2) the nation has stopped training (educating) people so that they can fill mid-level positions.
3) Government subsidies do create jobs.
4) Labor is super cheap and there are no such things as 8-hour days or weekends.
5) the difference in the cost of a complete computer made in the US was $22 dollars, as opposed to $4.85 cents.
So let me get this straight. I know that many Regressives did not want the US government to bail out the car industry because government can't help create jobs. Yet, it has been shown overseas that this is patently the case. Education sucks in this country partially because property values have fallen. This was caused by derivative trading failures and banks betting on failures and companies like Standard and Poor's giving great credit ratings to mortgages that cannot be paid. The second aspect to this is that governments have lowered financial support to education. and one other item I want to speak to--With union workers, in the US with complete benefits the difference for a complete computer is $18. that's right, $18. What were Macs selling for around that time? $1500. Compute the profit margin, folks.
How much profit does a company need to take to a Board? It is the fiduciary responsibility of officers of a company to make money for the investors. That is capitalism. The cancerous part of capitalism is "How Much?"
and how many lives are affected.
When I was taking business courses for my MBA, only one professor asked that.rojo
Granted, not many folks died as a direct result of bank crashes, but many people's homes were taken, there have been suicides and some have died as a result of losing jobs and not having health insurance.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Friday, January 20, 2012
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Sunday, January 08, 2012
I seldom comment about football on the blog. Two things after the Bowl season (still not complete) and the first round of the playoffs.
The Chargers have taken a lot of heat for not playing well lately. There have been many calls for the coaches head. I do not like the Chargers or Norv Turner, but they are short on talent. Just three eyars ago they had Ladanian Thomas at running back, with Michael Turner (now of the Falcons) as Backup and Sproles of New Orleans as his backup. The defense had the two Shawns at Defensive end/LB rushing the quarterback, Olivsky at nose tackle. They are just depleted.
College football is fun. However, the money is ridiculous. Texas has a revenue of $70+ MILLION dollars for college football. Coaches make a whole bunch more money than tenured specialists. It is ridiculous. One of the better conferences, Mountain West, has lost Utah, Brigham Young, Boise State and TCU to defections. Mountain West was never guaranteed a spot in the BCS Bowl series, which means at least $6M more than they are making now. Keep in mind Boise State and TCU two years ago combined for one loss. They can’t afford not to take the guaranteed money. Too bad and even worse the Big East was guaranteed a BCS Bowl team while Mountain West was not. It is said to see money have that much control over college.