Obama: Towards Socialism Swiftly

I, and many others, have posited that Barack Obama's ultimate goal is to turn the United States into a socialist country.

A friend, and reader of this blog, scoffed that Obama was not "pushing for state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods." Therefore he is not a socialist.

Well, since that late February posting, we have seen Obama making major strides towards just that:

• The United States now owns nearly all of one of the largest insurance companies in the country, AIG.
• The US owns 40% of CitiCorp, one of the largest full service banks in the world.

Today, we hear of the next outrage from the Obama administration and another giant leap toward government ownership of a private company by practically ordering the firing of the CEO of General Motors, despite the fact that GM's board supported Rick Wagoner.

Time and time again, General Motors Corp.'s board of directors reaffirmed its support for Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner, even as the company piled up billions of dollars in losses and begged for government loans to stay alive.

Here, we have the case of the president of the United States telling a private corporation to fire its CEO. I don't care who the president is or what the purpose of the firing might be, IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE PRESIDENT TO FIRE A PRIVATE CITIZEN AT A PRIVATE COMPANY. EVER!

If the CEO is doing something illegal, and it comes to the prez' attention, he would call for the Attorney General to investigate and prosecute, if needed. Even then, the president would not fire the CEO.

Further, Obama required that GM further consolidate its brands in exchange for 60 days of working capital.

So now we have the president of the United States telling a private corporation how it should operate? Now Obama is an expert in auto manufacture and sales?

After all, Obama knows best.

Obama turned to Chrysler and demanded the company merge with another company.

The president's auto task force said Chrysler needs to partner with the Italian car company Fiat, which has "committed to building new fuel-efficient cars and engines right here in the United States," Obama said in a speech at the White House.

"Fiat is prepared to transfer its cutting-edge technology to Chrysler," Obama said.

Fiat? Will Chrysler's collaborating with Fiat drive you to purchase that PT Cruiser anytime soon?

32 Review Centre Fiat Brava 1.4SX Reviews

Good Points: When it works its nice and easy to drive.
Bad Points: had constant problem witn starting and idling many repairs done at different garages but problem always comes back. I'll never never buy a Fiat Bravo again.

Looks nice, spacious and comfortable but mechanics and clutch with gear box are very unreliable. Not reliable in terms of parts. Electric faults come up every week.

These are two cases where the federal government is using its powers to extort private companies to engage in business operations of which the government approves.

And this comes barely a week after Obama made moves to control salaries of private citizens in private companies:

From the outset of the Obama administration, officials and European leaders have disagreed over how much to limit pay. And Mr. Geithner has discouraged the administration from imposing across-the-board limits on compensation of all employees at troubled companies receiving federal assistance and more burdensome pay restrictions at healthy institutions that the administration is trying to encourage to take government money so they can increase lending.

Obama wanted to have the power to set salaries for ALL employees at companies he decides are "troubled."

If these aren't giant leaps towards European-style socialism, I don't know what is.

Does the Automaker Bailout Actually Bailout the Unions

The major U.S. automakers have requested $50 billion in "loans" to keep the companies from going under.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats seem warm to the idea of fronting cash to Ford, GM, and Chrysler. She believes that the failure of one or more of the major American automobile manufacturers would have a devastating impact on our economy.

Why are the automakers in such desperate straits?

The companies blame a drop in sales due to the high costs of gasoline over the summer.

But, one reporter from NPR cites poor planning as part of the cause:

Many people, however, blame the auto companies for their own problems. U.S. automakers built high-profit sport utility vehicles, but the market for SUVs declined when gas prices spiked.

The editors at National Review Online agree, and further the complaints about the automakers:

(T)hey invested too heavily in the manufacture of sport-utility vehicles as rising oil prices spurred a demand for more fuel-efficient cars that they were unprepared to meet. (And) Uncompetitive labor contracts coupled with the rising cost of health care have left the big three with unmanageable liabilities.

Whatever the cause, why not allow the companies to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, as Circuit City did recently?

Could it be that union lobbyists are pressuring Washington to keep the Big 3 out of bankruptcy court? In a bankruptcy filing could lead to a judge voiding these "uncompetitive" union contracts.

According to Wikipedia:

Some contracts, known as executory contracts, may be rejected if canceling them would be financially favorable to the company and its creditors. Such contracts include labor union contracts...

If the Big 3 automakers are in trouble because of declining sales and mis-management, let them file for bankruptcy like any other business.

After bailing out the mortgage companies, banks, insurance companies, and now the automakers, who is next, credit card companies?