Well said, Kari. I know this might not be a popular post, I think you are so brave to put this out there. I still believe in an America where skilled labor makes a living wage, and has a seat at a bargaining table. Maybe that is a throwback, but I think the future is what we make it. And I do encourage people to check out the Chevy Malibu at your nearest showroom. That car is perfect Americana at its finest.

The only similarity is overpaid management.

The main difference is that Citibank does not employ unskilled labor that makes around $70k a year with great benefits, that are difficult to fire [see if the UAW would allow 50,000 people to lost their jobs for the good of the company!] and in an enviornment where seniority means more than performance. If we had national healthcare that would help with costs but still the non-union shops like Honda and Nissan are still able to make a cheaper and arguably better product. Unions are only a part of the problem, but a Big Part.

Blue Collar is great, but the majority of these jobs are not that specialized and when we employed summer help they were generally picks up what to do within a month.

FormerUAW- What are you talking about? Do you have any idea how many have been laid off? More than 100,000 in Michigan alone. What skills do you think it takes to be a "financial advisor" for Citibank? And the autoworker making 70k is largely a myth. Starting salary now in a union factory is 15.00/hr in the last contract- in which the union made HUGE concessions.

"They're trying to tell $10/hr, $15/hr, and $20/hr workers that those lowly bolt-turners who build cars don't "deserve" $30/hr, $40/hr, $50/hr. And that's gross. Why shouldn't a 20-year veteran automotive technician be making a solid middle-class wage and supporting his (or her) family?"

If you're going to pay the lowly bolt turner $40/hr, and your competition only pays $20/hr - you're going to have to make up the difference in some way. Which ultimately leads to a car that has less overall value than the competitors. The labor unions might be good for a few in the short run, but over the long term - as we can see - it's not sustainable.

Before "the wartime president", before 9/11, before Cheney met with energy execs, Bush began his first term calling himself "the CEO President". I still say it was his most authentic moment and we should take the statement very literally. The Iraq-style "have to keep on keeping on" stems from the fact that his style of managing the crisis largely mirrors the management style at Citigroup that caused their probs, I do believe.

Two points:

1. There are lots of automobile manufacturing jobs in the U.S. that will remain even if one or more of the Big Three go under. They just happen to be working for foreign car companies. Sure, they're not making as much as the UAW unionized workers, but they're making living wages.

2. The Obama administration needs to craft a health care plan that completely removes employers from the health care business. It will mean higher general taxes for us all, but removing the burden of providing health care coverage from employers, big and small, will take a growing millstone off of their backs that reduces their ability to hire new employees.

Regarding my second point - if the Big Three are relieved of providing health care insurance to their current and past employees it will be the equivalent of a multi-billion dollar bailout.

Drive down health care costs and we'll fix a lot of problems right there. Detroit needs to start putting out fuel efficient cars...like yesterday.

This is also an important issue to our national defense. Those manufacturing jobs are skilled workers who will build our war machines if for some reason we get in another shooting war. I'd rather build our own tanks than rely on Mexico to provide them.

If the big three and their suppliers go under, it is unclear if the foreign car makers will be able to continue to manufacture cars here at all, no matter what they pay their workers. For example, Delphi would likely liquidate if GM goes bankrupt. They are the only US supplier of the cockpit module for the Mercedes plant in Alabama. Also, the foreign cars have a huge build up of supply right now, too. This is a global crisis.

"The menial labor jobs have all been replaced by automation. What's left are highly-trained and specialized technicians and engineers. "

Source Kari?

Not my experience. Just because you have to monior a computer on the line does not make you a skilled technician. And last time I checked engineers are not blue collar workers. Some that are: Part pickers/stockers, Forklift and Pallet Mover Drivers, Shipping and Receiving, plant janitors, interdepot truck drivers all draw union salaries and benefits.

Remember the news stories a few years back about some cracker town in Texas that passed a law requiring everyone to own a gun? The only way the feds can save Detroit would be to pass a law that requires everyone to purchase a Chevy Suburban (or Ford or Dodge equivalent).

The UAW members and retirees deserve a fair deal and that may require short term aid to the manufacturing companies. However, the Big 3 have buried themselves with bad management decisions going back 30 or more years, and I don't think any form of government intervention (other than the mandatory Chevy Suburban law suggested above) can save them from drastic reorganization. They sell products that are generally inferior to their foreign competitors. They have legacy costs that are obscene. And they have a bizarre system of dealerships which results in too many dealers trying to cut the throats of their competition while at the same time squeezing every last dime out of the consumer.

Chapter 11 - or perhaps some equivalent new legislation adopted specially for the automobile industry - will allow the manufacturers to eliminate about half their local dealership network without complying with expensive state "automobile franchise mandatory buyback" laws, and will allow the manufacturers to offload their legacy costs to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation and/or the federal government.

UAW current contracts - which are considerably less lucrative than the old days - are not the problem and should not need significant restructuring.

Kari,

It has been leaked (whether true or not is a separate discussion) that Obama favors a pre-packaged Chapter 11 filing for GM. This is smart and is real change.

GM could come through this without laying off the union workers and would be a more nimble player, better able to compete with Honda and Toyota. Honda and Toyota manufacture a tremendous quantity of cars here on US soil and do so profitably. They are the model to copy.

What's wrong with a pre-packaged Chapter 11 filing. The only major losers are the stockholders.

I'm willing to bet that a major reason why Citigroup was bailed out is that Saudi Arabia holds a large, if not controlling, stake in it.

I'm willing to bet that a major reason why Citigroup was bailed out is that Saudi Arabia holds a large, if not controlling, stake in it.

I'm willing to bet that a major reason why Citigroup was bailed out is that Saudi Arabia holds a large, if not controlling, stake in it.

What would be better is to have congress do what they did during WWII - take over the industry alltogether and tell them what they are going to produce. Instead of tanks and such like they did during WWII, they now can force the industry to produce the hybrid cars and the like that we really need.

Forcing the issue like this on the auto makers is the only item the big 3 understand.

As defined by the current United Auto Worker contract negotiated with the "Big Five" (GM, Ford, Chrysler, and top parts makers Delphi and Visteon), an auto "production worker" is a job description that covers anything from mowing grass to cleaning the toilets. In the real world, these jobs would be outsourced to $8 an hour, no-benefit wage earners, but on Planet Big Five, these jobs get the same wages as any auto line-worker: an average $26 an hour ($60,000 a year) plus benefits that bring the company's total cost per worker to a staggering $65 an hour. But at least the grass cutters are working for their pay. The UAW contract also guarantees that 12,000 autoworkers get full wage for doing nothing. On the heels of Miller's straight-talk, the Detroit News reported that "12,000 American autoworkers, instead of bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank." These aren't jobs. And they certainly aren't being "lost" to China.

"We just go in (to Ford's Michigan Truck Plant) and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," The News quoted one UAW worker as saying. "Otherwise, I've just sat." The coming months will be painful for many American autoworkers. Accustomed to a certain lifestyle, they will see their wages cut in half, jeopardizing second homes, college tuitions, and car payments. One blue-collar Delphi worker interviewed by the Detroit News makes $103,000 a year operating a forklift and fears the consequences if his pay is drastically reduced. But many Americans will ask how a forklift operator felt entitled to a six-figure income in the first place (according to Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average forklift operator wage in the U.S. is $26,000).

There's some serious class warfare going on here; and as usual, it's a war of the rich on the working class. Sure, every member of Congress knows a bank president, a stock broker, a hedge fund manager - and very few know the engineers, technicians, mechanics, and sales people that populate the auto industry.

"... every member of Congress..." Does that refer to all Democratic members, Republican members, or both?

Kari

What a great post and what good comments after - mostly. Former UAW...it is good that you are a "former" if you don't respect your co-workers and the work they do any more than it appears.

I think everyone above the factory floor in the big three should be fired immediately. Bring is some fresh new ideas in the corporate towers and design some cars that are on the cutting edge instead of the same ole same ole. Then let the factory floor folks build them.

I am a buy Union and buy American kinda girl - but it is nearly impossible anymore. I stil drive an american car but will have to let it go soon in favor of someting that gets better milage. It has well over 200 K on it and I have had no big problems with it.

I think bailing out the industry (Ford and GM) must be done but only with very short and very strong strings (ropes) attached. Chrystler I am not so sure of - we did that once and they did not seem to learn their lessons.

For the big three to fly in private corporate jets to beg for my taxes is insulting and beacuse of that I think all their personal assistants should be canned as well. Starting with who ever called the airport and told them to get the plane ready...stupid, stupid, stupid.

We also need to go to the Wallstreet boys who bankrupt their companies and say --- "Remember the money you took with you, well we want it back. Now!" attche their bank accounts and all their property till they give us our money back.

Treat them like we would a common robber, make them pay their victims. I'd like to see a little community service in their furture - maybe cleaning up the highways and serving the homeless would humble them just a little. Heaven knows they could all use some humbeling.

Save the workers. Don't save the industry.

What America needs is a crash program to rebuild our rail transit systems, both city-level and cross-country, which the auto industry consciously and intentionally destroyed.

Those workers would be just as happy to build something America desperately needs as something that America most definitely does not need, which is more cars and trucks.

I agree with Jack, congress and Obama are asking for automakers to come up with a decent plan for the funds. The fact that they aren't asking banks to do the same doesn't mean they should give automakers a blank check. Automakers have done some pretty crappy things like oppose CAFE increases and killing the electric car (GM-EV1). Congress is right in asking for prudence. The fact that they aren't being prudent with banks doesn't mean prudence with automakers is a bad idea.

"That's what both political parties in Washington are looking for. I'm not just talking about labor costs; they have already made significant moves in that direction. They need to look at both the quality of their cars and the current market (including, but not limited to, gas mileage)."

Thank you, Jack.

Some of your fellow Republicans have not yet figured out that it wasn't unions which decided to pay Big 3 executives more than 15 times what the head of Toyota makes.

Rail is not a total answer, esp. to those in rural areas or for jobs like outside sales.

As Wes Clark wrote in a recent op-ed (New York Times, I think) there is a need for the auto industry for more than just personal automobiles. Do we want foreigners making Humvees and those MRAP anti-IED vehicles for the military?

Those demanding "pain" for labor and dealerships but not for executives (like that character who left as a Dow Jones executive and was talking about his book on Meet the Press) seem to forget that part of the Chrysler bailout was Iacocca being a dollar a year man and nominating Doug Fraser, head of UAW, for the Chrysler board. What business model is Toyota using? Why does VW have so few problems with credit?

THOSE are the questions that need to be asked, not just who should suffer "pain" so that the auto industry survives.

The auto firms should -- and will -- receive federal aid. It will come with strings, but it will come soon. Moving toward national health care, and lifting the burden of the legacy medical care costs off the backs of this industry will help immensely. That's why Obama should use this opportunity to push for national health care as part of his overall stimulus strategy.

Claiming that auto workers make "$75 an hour" by attributing the pension and health care costs of retirees is dishonest and spiteful. The retirees have completed their service to their employers under contracts in effect at the time they worked. They traded current for future compensation at the time, which many conservative probably considered foolish. There is no justification for cutting their benefits now. Pay levels for UAW workers, including all elements of compensation, averages somewhere around $40-$45 an hour for current employees. That's higher than average manufacturing industry pay, but it helps stabilize the middle class. We should be trying to find ways to bring others UP to this level, not bring auto workers' pay down.

I'm amused by the pundit class making an issue of auto workers' pay, but not saying anything about the 25-year-old hotshots on Wall Street making $500,000 a year in pay and bonuses for punching computer keys that move money back and forth. I'm still waiting for the first talking head to advocate for drastic reductions in pay for everyone from the mail room attendants to the CEOs in the financial community. There are plenty of people out there who can (and would!) do these jobs for a lot less than the gag-inducing compensation too many of these folks get.

All that said, it's interesting to see the indignation of so many BO folks about the effects of auto industry declines. First, Portland-area Dems have been working for years to make cars persona (automotia?) non grata in the state by creating artificial shortages of road capacity and promoting higher costs for everything from car titles to gas.

I guess it's also easier to be outraged about an industry in another part of the country. Many of the same people wringing their hands over those middle class jobs in the rust belt (and their worry is well placed), cheered as middle class jobs and families were demolished by politically-caused decimation in the timber and fishing industries right here in the Northwest. Didn't see much outrage from Portland Metro and Willamette Valley folks when that happened.

Am I my brother's keeper? The unions took that question seriously and have achieved amazing salaries for people throughout the auto industry. What I hear mostly here are people wanting to bash the unions for a job well done. Legacy costs were prevalent throughout industry until about 10-20 years ago when those funds were raided and depleted in non-organized companies. Only organized labor has managed to retain these benefits and people want it taken away and to perpetuate those crimes. This is the folly of imbeciles.

IMHO, if the economy was in great shape, people would still be turning away from the SUVs because of the sudden and drastic change in oil prices. When the cost of a tank of gas more then doubled, that was when people were no longer interested in their SUVs. That was when prices in every market rose. That was when the summer vacations evaporated. That was when the pain of the home-losts spread to those more fortunate.

Our present financial crisis is related to oil more then anything else. We simply cannot quickly recover from the blow the oi companies inflicted. The recent lowering of prices was the result of the decrease in demand. It feels good to watch the oil companies rush to drop the price when demand slowed. Frankly, I look forward to their collapse as a green economy emerges and they are left wondering what to do with all the infrastructure we don't need anymore and all that oil. I can dream anyway. We took a step toward independence when we stopped driving so much and it hurt them. That was a pleasant moment.

I don't see why the auto companies can't file for bankruptcy. Plenty of big companies (including United airlines, Delta airlines, Texaco, and PG&E) have filed for bankruptcy and survived. If the auto companies file for bankruptcy the assembly lines will keep moving. Bankruptcy is a reorganization, not a shut-down.

The unions took that question seriously and have achieved amazing salaries for people throughout the auto industry.

Yeah, and that's part of the problem. In a competitive environment, if you're paying people 'amazing salaries' you better have an amazing product to back it up. With out that, all you will be doing is begging taxpayers for bailouts - because it's not a business model that lasts.

I think we need a few more politics-of-resentment posts. "Those damn UAW members have better health coverage than I do, so obviously we need to tear them down to my level, and while we're at it, we can give top management some more goodies and throw shit at feminists, gays, Jews in Hollywood, and whoever else Rush and Sean hate today."

there are a whole lot of people guessing at what domestic UAW auto workers do and what they make. I have two brother-in-laws recently retired from Ford in Louisville, KY and a nephew who works the swing shift there. Ford and the UAW have a long history of animis, but over the past 15 years in Kentucky have really been working together. UAW workers with 5 or more years seniority pull down about $60/yr before shift differential and OT. Newer hires are on a lower or two-tiered pay plan which was narrowed in the last round of contract negotiations. There are PLENTY of jobs in domestic auto manafuacturing plants that still work impact wrenches, rivit guns and small hand tools. Each plant has a whole army of material handlers who get parts from various spots to the line in a timely and efficient manner.

The problem with the Big 3 is entirely of their own doing. To blame it on the UAW, or call it blue collar warfare is just simplistic. Management has made some astoundingly poor decisions over the past 25 years. They have also fought reasonable CAFE standards increases since 1988. concessions won during negotiations have gone into purchasing other companies like Hertz, Volvo, Rover, etc rather than a wholescale upgrade of older facilites. That is not to clear the UAW however. There are still stranded legacy costs for retiree healthcare and pensions that are underfunded and many UAW diehards who refuse to bargain away such interesting perks as 2 years of sub pay in the event of a lay-off.

I too wonder why we can socialize the risk of AIG and Citigroup 9among others) yet kick the Big 3 to the curb.

"The problem with the Big 3 is entirely of their own doing."

Which is why we need the new administration to can the execs, take the industry over, and tell them what to make and how to make it. They have shown they can't be trusted any longer to continue by themselves. They have blown their chances and they will have to be led by the hand of the adult (the new administration)like a child would be led when the child is in need of suprevisory guidance.

"The problem with the Big 3 is entirely of their own doing."

This is nothing new. David Halberstam described problems with the American auto industry in his 1986 book The Reckoning. In this book, Halberstam told of how W. Edwards Deming tried to persuade the Big Three to change their management systems to the one he proposed that came to be known as Total Quality Management. The Big Three turned Deming down. He went to Japan where his ideas were readily accepted and the rest is history.

Misinformation about autoworkers' hourly compensation resurfaces on Hardball

I think there's another key difference: credit markets are a pseudo-public resource. Everyone, from large companies to working family households, benefit from access to credit. Whether it be consumer debt, student loans, car loans, or mortgages, everyone would suffer if all of their debts were called in tomorrow because banks are short on cash.

The "change" that everyone wants in Detroit will come much more quickly in Chapter 11. Most foreign automakers operate many manufacturing plants here. We aren't talking about preserving the American "auto industry"; Honda, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes all have manufacturing plants here in the states, and each is doing well relative to the Big Three. They are managing to survive this crisis "not of their own making" without government assistance, like most other private sector employers. We are talking about preserving the Detroit-based management of the auto industry. They desperately need the management shakeup that will come with a Chapter 11 reorganization.

Taxpayer dollars are well spent preserving resources from which everyone benefits; it's a perversion of public policy to use the "crisis" as excuse to shower benefits on politically influential corporations.

The problem with the financial industry is of its own doing as well. Yet the problem is so broad and deep, to not bail them out (we're told) would send the entire country into a long and protracted financial meltdown.

I fear the auto industry isn't much different.

Per MSNBC:

The federal government stepped in Monday and guaranteed $300 billion of Citigroup's assets... That brought the total of promised government outlays and guarantees to a staggering $7.7 trillion ...

It represents $24,000 for every American man, woman and child and is nine times what Washington has spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I cannot get my mind around any of this. Is there any hope of funding universal health care or stabilizing Social Security or Medicare after these expenditures?

OK, let's say for whatever reasons we need to bail out the Big 3. Here are some theoretical conditions that would make such a bailout palatable.

(1) We retain an equity stake and consumer and union places on the board of directors.

(1) As many have noted, nothing will happen as long as present management (or their philosophical clones) remain in place. So: Let's say that we designate a committee that starts with (metaphorically speaking) Ralph Nader, Michael Moore, and the head of the auto testing division of Consumers Union. Whoever the actual people on this committee are, these are the outlooks that we want reflected at the top. The present top layers of management are fired (let's see if they can get financing elsewhere to make their Humvees now) and this new committee starts to select a group of people to replace the top layers of management with socially responsible individuals.

(2)These corporations become a model of green citizenship. Fill in the blanks. What we can do, we do. The big three don't fight higher cafe standards . . . they voraciously go after efficiency the way that Intel goes after processor speed.

(3) The ratio between the lowest paid employee of the corporation and the highest paid employee of the corporation is never more than 15:1. (That is still about twice as much disparity as I think there ought to be, but it would be a dramatic departure from the 400:1 or 600:1 that we see now. _

(4) The era of planned obsolescence is over. Cars are built to last and minimize costly maintenance. Efficiency and durability and safety are the values of the new Big 3.

(5) Single payer medical care for all (the Canadian model) levels the playing field. We don't make corporations pay for medical care, nor do we hold workers responsible for negotiating which workers will get dental and which workers work with toothaches. Side benefit: everyone in the parasitic medical insurance field has to get a real job.

Change is coming to America, the man said.

Jack Roberts and the more conservative commentators,

Thanks for the laugh when you bring up "class warfare."

I am sure that you and others have no problem with CEOs negotiating a minimum salary of $1 million+ with millions in bonuses when the company due to those "union" workers and R&D produces a product that sells better than expected.

I find it absolutely funny that you start throwing up this "class warfare" rhetoric (implying that those who disagree are liberal closet communists)whenever the average working man negotiates for a fair wage, health care benefits and a pension to take care of them in their older years.

I will never understand people like you who apologize for a system that pays the CEO thousands and in many cases tens of thousands more than the average worker in their company, but when that average worker wants to negotiate for a better salary, benefits, and a pension, you and others shit a brick.

If you value the CEO more than maker of the product, then that shows clearly where you values are and it ain't with the "common" man who is just looking for a fair wage and some protection from the vicissitudes of the market.

Why don't we just send 1 of the big 3 down the crapper and take advantage of a serious opportunity that would present. We could then buy their facilities and retrofit them as needed to produce solar panels, wind turbines and whatever other green tech that is practical. You would have 1000's of skilled workers ready to step in to do the manufacturing. It would be a major win/win for America.

If we were really smart, we would flush a 2nd company and buy out the tech of Tesla Motors and start making our own plug-in electric cars instead of waiting for Nissan, Honda and the Chinese to supply them. THen we would really be on to something big.

Agreed, Kari. But then, I do have a lot of family in Michigan, many of whom have worked for GM or their parts suppliers.

Give the "class struggle" a rest. I can tell you firsthand that corporate America looks at every last person as fair game. If you're easy prey, you're easy prey. We don't care what class you come from. Our job is to make money; first, for ourselves, second for the stockholders, and third, just to beat the competition and hear the wailing of their widows!

The answer to the economy is simple. The mark is exhausted. Find a new mark. Vouchers? Yeah; send them straight to the venture capitalists. That is the only real work done in this country. You think the bolt turners work hard? We bust our butts to close a deal! That's the way it works. If you were a fly on the VP's wall, you would see that happening as we speak!

There seems to be an almost fractal quality about this crisis. At any scale, from the smallest household to the greatest nations, it seems to be the exact same pattern with a bit a random variation, but variation that knows where it has been!

China holds a lot of US and Brit debt. How long do you think they'll let us cut rates? If you're vesting in junk paper, you require a higher rate, not lower. They will have to come up. Brits seem to have gone belly up already with international effect.

India's territorial control over the northeast territories comes out of the Simla conference. Did anyone notice that after announcing their record spending, that the British ambassador to China announced that they no longer had a problem with the Chinese occupation of Tibet? That was 1914, right? So happens that India and China went to war over the border in 1962, and in 1987. That's when they started the 1 billion babies to fight China deal. Oh, right, the environment is actually the biggest threat. Civilisation as we know it seems to be going right down the krapper.

AJC is just baiting. Not even serious about the flippant crap he/she is saying. Just poking the bear for fun. AJC, tell us something you really believe.

"Some homeowners were dumb and overextended on home loans they couldn't afford. Some startups were dumb and overextended on business plans that didn't make sense. Some governments (ours) were dumb and overextended on debt-fueled policies that they couldn't afford. And that pattern is surely true for Wall Street - but I think they also engaged in shenanigans that went beyond just being huge and dumb"

Bottom line: They have no one to blame but themselves. They got what they deserved and should be left to suffer for their grand stupidity. Bailouts will only encourage another bout of this stupidity and will not teach anybody the lessons learned if we just let them rot from thier own stupidity like we should be doing.

Eric - you must be a protected person to say that. Any of us with no land, no stash, no relations to stand behind us if it falls to shite... we are aware that those high rises will fall squarely on US if we don't prop the bastards up. Many of us have NO protection from what comes next, as diagnosed and hoped for by those who apparently are provisioned well enough it will not hurt much. I sure wish more people would think outside their middle class boxes. The guy under the bridge CAN starve to death instead of just be freezing day in and out...

Joe Hill: Don't you know that sanity is a far-left attribute? Let's continue to reward the same people who caused our crises in the first place by giving them high-level positions in the Obama Administration. And don't criticize now, because there will be plenty of time for that later in the bread lines.

Anyone who argues that U.S. politicians and policymakers should act in accord with longstanding majority U.S. opinion - well to the left of both dominant political parties and the business class - by working for economic justice and rolling back American Empire is a dangerous and dysfunctional "ideologue."

Thanks for the shout out Court Jester. It's like tossing pebbles into the void here on Blue Oregon.

And Kevin, imagine the child living in a one parent/absentee parent household on less than 30K and scanty or no health benefits, instability driven by at-will employment and at-will rental market. Even more bleak than that of your daughter with two parents to care and collaborate, fund and protect.

It is considerable to drop big bucks for a slum dwelling IN the hip urban catchment, or commute over one hour not even big miles like forty... dreary.

That "jester" persona only popped up after I made a mention of such a character. It offends me to see what useless work his hands have done with it thus far.

It's obviously a slippery slope whenever you bail out someone that demonstrated poor judgment. Plus, there's the matter of sorting out the crooks and not penalizing those that didn't exercise poor judgment. Personally, I think this is why the power elite seem to have abandoned the Administration. That and not actually securing the oil. I think some cons are actually thinking about Americans' traditionally poor savings habits and how that was showing a real generational improvement with gen X. If you penalize those equally with taxes as those that decided to bank the mortgage on the advice of an ex sports figure, how much self-restraint will anyone show when the next scam comes along?

I think that when all is said and done and the gnashing of teeth has happened that we won't be able to move forward without getting over this obsession with guilt and innocence. It makes some sense that a highly classed society, suddenly much less so, would find a substitute. Particualarly when the majority were WASPs. "Signs of election" are easier to portray in a highly classed society. When a manual laborer can leave his family on a lark and find gold, come back home rich and all is forgiven, the just and the reprobate aren't so easy to tell apart. To be sure, the trend has a life of its own. Victorian England is what I'm comparing us too, yet they invented the concept of childhood innocence, from largely similar sentiments. Childhood innocence, whether you have suffered enough to deserve something, whether our society mirrors the mirror universe in heaven- these are the real underlying issues in most American policy debate. We use them to create classes from the great, broad, homogeneous landscape.

So, here's my point, finally. That attitude that says, "you should have known better, acted differently, put the emphasis on different factors, etc"- anyone can take that stance against anyone else. No one is perfect, obviously and no one is perfectly unworthy of consideration (the functional definition of "predator", BTW). I decided not to have kids when I was 18 because I didn't believe that the next generation could possibly have anything close to our quality of life (wonderful as that has been :-() if we all continued on with business as normal like our parents. I'm much older than that now and definitely don't regret it, but does that mean I'm justified in saying that I don't want one dime of my hard earned money going to parents that have 6 kids in 10 years because they obviously can't think it through like me? I work for a charity. I don't take any direct salary, only what I can make with third party deals. Surely, I deserve more take home than someone working at a job with a pure profit angle! Seriously, though, those six kids offend me and I consider their parents to be environmental terrorists, but, I don't get to judge. That's where the narcissistic rage comes in; it's the license to judge and engage in self-defensive behaviors!

Without going into that whole surplus pop. bit and the social consequences for people's personalities, it's pretty obvious that the last 30 years has been characterized by peoples' trying to create an identity by their membership in a self-defined, persecuted and/or suffering group. I've no doubt that as soon as Obama is sworn in and the latest episode of tinkle down economics is through, that most those homeowners with dodgey loans are going to become the latest victims, of Bush league economics. Ultimately, it doesn't matter. It's not so much about what you have done and why but what you will do and why not.

Converts are the most zealous members of any religion. In a sense we should be grateful for the last 30 years. It provides the perfect ground against which to paint the figure of social justice and responsibility. Perhaps the best example in history of Heidegger's dictum, "Das nicht nichtes", or "The nothing nothings". The ground is actually the positive force defining and forming the positive form that emerges. It's a call for conversion. Or therapy, whatever, but individuals have to get over what can only be called narcissistic rage, that all-pervasive anger that says, "how dare you do that to me." Or "___ doesn't deserve __". I know this society still harbors strong WASP values, but could we have some Scottish Pragmatism along with the Scottish Presbyterianism? Social policy has to become, purely what works. That, BTW, is the big L libertarian thesis, IMO.

And when people convert, they will recognize that the whole scene should never have been happening at the most basic levels. It is not an acceptable banking model to try to induce consumers into errors for your profit. Not just stupid refinancing, but simple things like trying to juggle the payment cut-off times/time zone/dates so that customers are late. I love the website that erases the cookie every time, then doesn't email you the password reset, but requires you to re-enter the card number and CSV if you don't remember the password. Anything to get you to put off a day and maybe be late. You go into a major bank to open a savings account and they keep pushing all kinds of commercial paper? These things used to be against the law and while we're trying to figure out how to make everyone able to resist every bad impulse, perhaps we could reduce a few of the ones that are only there for obviously fraudulent purposes!

It isn't class warfare so long as the rich are winning.

<h2>decent post, zara. and it's evocative to be reminded that we most closely resemble Victorian England in so many ways.</h2>