The Conservative Edge

President Obama recently hammered the executives of the largest banks/financial institutions, calling them “fat cats” who should stop taking advantage of the American people. It wasn’t enough that Obama appointed a “pay czar” that gets to decide how much corporate executives can earn. Now Obama is calling them names, just to rub some salt into the wounds.

In truth, there are a lot of people who despise the rich bank executives. And it is equally true that many banks have oppressive fees and other regulations. Some mistrust of banking operations is to be expected. However, the American people should be just as upset with the growing size of the federal government and the earnings of government workers.

The USA Today just released its study of federal government pay data. The results show that, during the first year and a half of the economic downturn, six-figure salaries jumped from 14% of all civil servants to 19%. Additionally, in the same time frame, the Transportation Department went from having one employee making at least $170,000 to having 1,690 people earning that amount. This means that those 1,690 people in that department earn at least 287 million dollars. God only knows what the payout is for all of the people employed at the Transportation Department.

The liberals supposedly have such care and compassion for the Average Joe. But it is hypocritical for the Obama administration, and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, to publicly skewer private sector executives for their pay scales, while government workers get larger salaries. This kind of growth in government is the last thing we need in recessionary times.

I wonder how many bankers it would take to earn $287,000,000?

President Obama has made it clear that Americans should embark on a new era of community service, neighborhood assistance and charitable works. There is nothing wrong with helping your fellow man. Even the Good Book says that if we see someone in need, and have the means to help, we are obligated to do so. However, there might be a hidden message in Obama’s call to service.

The first thing to consider is that this Great Commission sounds like we should duplicate, on a community level, what the federal government wants to do on a national scale. The Democrats, and the Obama administration, want to enact their wish list of government services and subsidies. Many of these services are eventually going to enlarge the number of people who become entirely dependent on government assistance. Welfare, health services, food stamps, unemployment benefits and other subsidies are being expanded by Congress and approved by Obama. Some may feel that this is the compassionate thing for government to do, but there is always a method to the madness. The ultimate goal for the Democrats is to keep as many people as possible hooked on government, thereby securing a voting base.

The next thing to remember is that the government, in its call for service, gets us to work for free. While the feds hand out just enough money and health services for people to live on, we are compelled to make up for any other needs through our community service. In other words, we become some sort of great commune, where everyone shares everything with everyone else, and nobody gets ahead. This is the socialist idea that drives the Democratic Party, even though some of them, like John Kerry, remain filthy rich while they strangle the rest of us. There are two things that Democrats and liberals fear: constituents who are affluent, and constituents who have means of defense. When you watch the Democrats in action, you will see them direct their aggressions against personal and corporate wealth, and against our right to self defense as expressed by the Second Amendment. They truly want us poor and defenseless, because we then become easier to control.

Finally, consider that all who embark on a crusade of volunteerism become potential workers in Obama’s proposed idea of “community organization”. This will likely be unveiled after the upcoming 2010 Census. No wonder that the stimulus package contained $1 billion to be used by the Census; no wonder why Obama intends to illegally supervise the Census operation, even though Federal law states that the Commerce Department is to direct the Census. If the White House is the overseer, what would prevent Obama from making adjustments to the results, affecting the distribution of perhaps $300 million in federal funding to state and community agencies? By redefining social and economic districts, metropolitan areas could have numerous government programs handing out federal money through the hands of a new class of volunteers. The rest of us (those who still value personal freedom) would essentially be forgotten.

The message is being received. For example, here is a news item from USA Today: “United Autoworkers Local 2250, the GM plant and the United Way of Greater St. Louis organized an on-site volunteer fair on Thursday to encourage about 2,000 employees to consider volunteering during their time away from work.
Benefits representative Mike Bridgins came up with the idea when he heard President Barack Obama speak of the importance of Americans helping one another in difficult times.”

Obama learned a lot from ACORN and Chicago politics, didn’t he?

I watched quite a bit of the congressional interrogation of the Big 3 auto makers’ CEOs this evening (November 18). One thing that became clear was that the senators making up the questioning panel actually raised some very good points. I was also a bit surprised that the mostly Democratic panel was able to be clear, firm, and succinct in its questioning.

The final point made by Senator Dodd was perhaps more personally directed to the CEOs, instead of the companies. His point was this: the overwhelming issue that American taxpayers have with this bailout is the fear that the money will wind up in the pockets of CEOs and executives who are already making outrageously high salaries. Senator Dodd reminded Bob Nardelli about the severance package of $200 million he received from Home Depot, which many people have neither forgotten, nor forgiven.

This reminds me of a company I recently worked for. In June of this year (2008), Delphi Corporation closed the plant where I was employed as a tool-and-die-maker. Delphi is a major parts supplier to GM; our factory made brake parts and assemblies, and a few other chassis details. The workers were part of the United Auto Workers union.

In 2007, we voted for a contract that we hoped would keep the plant open until 2011. The contract called for drastic wage cuts for most of the workers. People earning anywhere from 20 to about 26-28 dollars an hour took a cut down to the 14 to 18 dollar an hour range. Some benefits were reduced as well. Some cash payments were to be included to help offset the cuts, but the fact remains that wages were lowered quite drastically, and accepted by the union workers.

However, we also found out that Delphi executives were to share over $300 million in bonus money at (or sometime near) the end of the 2007 fiscal year. For mismanaging a company into bankruptcy? It seems insane that this much money would be available for these people. And, we also wondered why and how the company could even be IN bankruptcy if it was generating that kind of cash. We all felt that we were being asked to sacrifice, so the top dogs could keep their money and lifestyles.

Remember the American Axle strike a few months ago? American Axle, a manufacturer of axles and driveshaft assemblies was also a parts supplier to GM. Some time after the workers went on strike, it was revealed that the CEO of American Axle earned $10 million a year. Yet, he and his company wanted labor to take up to 50 percent wage cuts. Is that really fair?

Many people have a negative view of the UAW and other unions, placing the blame for the demise of the auto makers almost completely on the unions. My own experience leads me to feel somewhat differently. The unions were no doubt emboldened at the exorbitant CEO and executive compensation. After all, if there was so much money available for the big guys, why shouldn’t the workers have a slice of the pie? But, labor is always blamed for companies’ failures. Labor can’t always be held responsible—there is a lot of ineptness and shortsightedness at the top of many companies in America.

And remember, there are lots of individuals and organizations who specialize in squeezing every last dime out of a company before shutting it down, and then moving on to the next victim. I should know; I’ve been through 2 plant closures in the last 3-1/2 years. I’ve seen a lot of people who were crushed by the losses of jobs that were held for 5, 10, even 20 years. I am one of those who has to put his life back together. Through no fault of my own, I am out of a job because somebody decided I wasn’t needed any more. It’s a pretty helpless feeling!