vicarz | (no subject)

Wow, I just got a piece of job security - another person is leaving our staff, the recluse. Frankly, I'm glad to see him go. Like me, he's a giant nerd and socially awkward. Unlike me, he has no interest in people and often lashes out to try and attack those around him. He intentionally sits as far away from everyone as he can, and works hours off the clock - rarely interacting with anyone in the office. He always has a complaint ready to fire, and nothing is ever his fault. His work product is actually pretty good, but every type of interaction with him seems laborious and painful to both parties. He's going back to where he came from - civil rights, the land of chronic complainers and barely employable nut-jobs.

I told my boss this AM that I was applying for that PTO job. He doesn't blame me. There is a lot of unhappiness here, and about half or more of the people in our division are looking for work elsewhere. The funny thing is losing our recluse gives me that much more job security.

I hit L&T to see if there were any bargains to be had. Nope. Bankruptcy isn't what it used to be - they had everything marked either normal price or 25% higher. Mostly the prices were fair, but at only 20% off you're better off getting that coupon and going to BBB. Circuit City just declared bankruptcy - sounds like a buying opportunity, but I'm sure they'll also have a meaningless sale. I will probably do better online than looking to the clearance.

I'm looking for little things I can do around the house to make it nicer - having the tv running through the computer is so fun - I can't tell you how much I enjoy the media center. I should be ashamed as that is so very lame and hardly new technology, but last night after getting my application started and the gym gymified, it felt so very good to curl up under a blanket and watch an awful movie from tv with all the commercials skipped, the padding and chase scenes ffwd or skipped, and pause hit every time the phone rang.

OBAMA is talking about bailing out the auto industry. Uh, no. Fuck no. Not for the 2nd time, and NO. The right blew it on this one, with the industry leaders (self-regulated, you see) only going for the next big quarterly benchmark to nail their bonus. Freedom in the marketplace includes the freedom to FAIL, not to allow untaxed unlimited profit if you win, and taxpayer salvation if/when you lose. The left blew it as the unions and short-sighted yahoos who elected their leaders continued to have higher-than-college-educated salaries, no job loss, insane benefits, and an unsustainable retirement plan. They ignored all dire indication from the marketplace, only trying to win the next election and pacify their members' cries for keeping all the dollars they could even as the industry was sinking. The execs and the unions share the blame for the failure, and all deserve to fail utterly. I'll be furious if they saddle the taxpayer with the bill. I ran into a great idea on my mom's lefty blog - retrain our manufacturing workforce to do all that rehab that is needed on our dying infrastructure! If I'm going to have my tax dollars going into a blue collar worker's pocket anyway, why not give me water lines, sewer facilities, bridges, and roads I can drive on?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

ITA? Agree? Just the unions - what about the execs?

I totally agree.

I don't think execs should be taking home bonuses when their employees have raise freezes or paycuts, no. I haven't delved too deeply into Rick Wagoner's pay information, but I do know that he took something like a 50% paycut a few years back (not sure about what goes on with his stock options). For a CEO I don't think he's one of those exec's that takes advantage...but I'm not 100% sure.

That's very cool when execs agree to take the hits. However, my problem with the car manuf folks right now is that they were short-sighted in creating nothing but high markup monster trucks while the "foreign" companies blew us out of the water with economy cars. Do you see the execs as deserving a bail, or as less guilty than the unions? I'm not sure I understand.

I don't think I can give an objective opinion.

Part of me wants to teach them a lesson because I was surrounded by the entitlement union workers. One of them told me, laughing, that he is part of the "job pool" at GM. That means that he was paid to just be "available" in case someone called in sick. So he worked a second job on the side and was pulling in 6 figures. That's annoying.

I didn't rub elbows with too many execs. But I think Chuck Wagoner, himself, has tried his best over the past few years, but most definitely GM has made some major blunders. lol

Part of me is really nervous about the big three going under and not coming out. My stepfather's pension is on the line. My house in that city is on the line. My friend's jobs are on the line.

So unfortunately, I cannot give you an objective opinion.

Fair enough. My mother and I will suffer some if they go under, she more than me, but we think that in terms of what should be - they should.

I caution you away from taking your personal stake in something and letting that bleed over into your opinion of right and wrong. A lot of societal harm can come from things that help some people but harm more. It is important for each of us to be ready to make sacrifices for the greater good, or at least be ready to stay objective when deciding large issues.

I don't agree, however, that people should make decisions based on the greater good. I think people should make decisions based on what's best for them.

I see danger in that course, of course. If that is the case, there is no need for debate at all for all we are engaged in is a competition for resources - reasons be damned, the only reason is "i want." Society needs some concern for one another or we are just in anarchy or dictatorship. Even the most conservative mantra takes some expectation of decency to the fellow person as a necessary part of any proposed system. Poor Greenspan is learning his lesson on that front.

But you're entitled to you opinion. I just think that the result of that line of thinking is war and deep social stratification.

I kinda like Ayn Rand's line of thinking, honestly.

Her theories don't work when mixed with data, in addition, even she thought people would do the right thing for the greater good. The evil she seemed to perceive was people doing what was best for themselves no matter who got hurt - hence the evil slimy contractors using friendships and defenses to score money while superior workmanship and prices were passed by. What do you like about her line of thinking?

The evil that she referred to was the contractors appropriating resources from those who worked hard and were successful to make it "fair" for everyone. The greatest evil that she refers to is forcing someone to do something against their will. She believed that if everyone acts in inherent selfishness, it will result in the greater good. She also believed that self sacrifice is flawed.

Very few people would say, "Go ahead, take away my pension that I depend on because it will help capitalism."

Well on that point we agree - I'm a huge fan of effort and discipline equalling reward, and sloth suffering the consequences of its faliure. I do feel like an ant in a world of grasshoppers - and that mutha can freeze for all I care. However with that I do believe that we have a problem with selfish behavior, and that we should allocate regulation and resources to ensure that superior efforts can and do net results rather than just deals made on the golf course.

Well....I believe, personally, that the current system in place is very flawed and does not encourage hard work. It's hard to distinguish between someone who genuinely needs public assistance, access to resources, etc and someone who is doing it to abuse the system.

the problem is that the rest of us are living in a world where the concept of "pension" went extinct, oh, 20 or 30 years ago.

No one outside the auto industry and the government has the concept of a guaranteed job or retirement; why have we allowed such an anachronism persist?

Yes, millions of people have tied their futures to a ponzi scheme of ever-larger and complex and irrelevant vehicles being built and sold every year to... the rest of us. Guess what? We all bet on the wrong horse sometimes, and lose it all. Yes, it's lives and houses at stake. I've already watched my retirement go down the drain thanks to regulatory failures. And it's one thing to bail out the dollar. It's another to bail out companies that can't build a product that sells.

I say this knowing that a whole branch of my family lives in detroit and is dependent on the car industry. Nothing is guaranteed. Ever. You just have to start over again.

My stepfather can't start over though. He's 66 and has leukemia. He's dependent on those benefits. I totally understand phasing out pensions (they did around 2001 when my husband was hired at GM, therefore he has no pension) but completely negating the pensions of those who can't start overand get another job?

That's why I can't give an objective answer.