Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Harry Mitchell this Election – #9

Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Harry Mitchell this Election

REASON #9 – When gas prices were skyrocketing, the talk in Washington was about real solutions now.  However, now that the price per barrel has dramatically decreased and the Democrats no longer believe that it is an election issue, where is the sense of urgency?

As a country we must decrease our dependence on foreign oil.  It is both an economic and national security issue.  I believe that we must invest in alternative energy supplies for our long term success, but the reality is WE MUST STOP OPEC’S STRANGLEHOLD ON OUR ECONOMY.  It is unconscionable that we continue to send billions of dollars each year to the very people who wish to do us harm.

We must invest the resources to stop this dependence with the urgency we as a nation showed when President Kennedy ramped up the space program.  I believe that we can take the next steps towards energy independence and improved environmental standards but only if we act towards our collective interests – not Pelosi’s special interests.

Read how David Schweikert and his opponent are vastly different on energy independence.


Comments

  1. Did I miss something? I did not see a reason number 10….

  2. Counterpoint:

    Where does David Schweikert stand on CAFE standards?

  3. Annie Hoyle says

    Rachael,
    You did miss it… scroll down 3 posts for #10.

  4. Klute, hopefully he is for rolling them back — it’s possible that without heavy-handed regulation the US based auto industry will survive.

  5. Thanks Annie! Not sure how I missed that…

  6. Walter,

    I find this hilarious. Everytime there’s an innovation, the knee-jerk response from Detroit is “Oh we can’t do it, it’s too expensive, it’ll kill the industry”. Japan says “Oh, well, we can do that – we’ll start on the top end and then make it profitable to put into the lower end, and by the time we’re done, America will have barely started”.

    Electric cars. Fuel efficient SUVs. Fuel efficient cars. Air Bags. Third eye brake lights. The list goes on.

    The technology is there – it exists, and Japan is exploiting it.

    Top selling cars in America:

    Honda Civic
    Honda Accord
    Toyota Camry
    Toyota Corolla

    Meanwhile, Detroit is still trying to figure out how to add an extra cupholder.

    Hope you enjoy your tax dollars going to bailout the inefficient US auto industry.

  7. Klute — EXACTLY — we are now subsidizing the increase in CAFE standards to companies that have already proven they are inept. Poor leadership, excessive Government regulation and unions that refuse to represent all of their members will do that.

  8. Walter,

    How are we subsidizing CAFE standards? It’s telling industry what American needs. Japan (and Korea and the Europeans) say “OK. We’ll get on that” and Detroit says “WAAAAH! We don’t wanna!”.

    And people wonder why imports sell as well as they do.

    When I bought a new car (wanted to sell my boat of a car), I went to Ford, Dodge, Honda, Kia, VW for a compact… The Japanese and Koreans (I wound up buying a Kia) offered the best car: safe, cheap, fuel efficient, 100,000 mile warranty… The American cars didn’t even come close to any of that.

  9. George of the Desert says

    Klute:

    Your indictment of American car makers has some merit. It artfully captures the impediments to moving forward with changes that might actually make the product better. But you and I would disagree on the source of the problem.

    You cite Japanese car makers nimbleness in responding to change. That is true. The reason is simple: the workers at these companies have been invested with a sense of pride of accomplishment. In fact, Japanese culture values hard work and pride of craftmanship – individual failure in those areas results in failure as a team or even a whole society. That’s true from the CEO down to the most humble line worker. Honda, Toyota, et al, have instilled that in their workers in Japan and the US.

    I have many family members who are Michigan-based auto workers. They are family and I love them but they are committed to their UAW contract far more than they are to the long-term health of their employer. I fully believe if GM, Ford and Chrysler were not burdened with unworkable union contracts, these companies would have a better chance of surviving. Companies cannot prosper when the workers have an adversarial relationship with management.

    Now as for CAFE standards. There is no question that government can take a pro-active role in mandating various safety and environmental regulations. But you argue that companies should simply accept every new government standard and then market a product successfully. That is not sound economics. There is a balance between reasonable and burdensome regulation. Continued efforts to raise CAFE standards based on a government-imposed number will eventually put American businesses at a competitive disadvantage.

    The marketplace itself works better. For proof, all you need to do is look at a car lot today. For $25,000 you can buy an SUV that listed a year ago at $40,000. $3 gasoline will do that. But just try to buy a Prius today (if you can get a loan, that is). The marketplace responded to a price spike and people suddenly decided having great mileage mattered more than having an SUV or truck.

    That’s the genius of capitalism. Yes, it needs reasonable governance, but asking business to instinctively react to each new government dictate as if government policy makers are infallible is as bad as Soviet central planning.

  10. George,

    Yours is a valid point – the Japanese worker does have a certain sense of loyalty to the company (sometimes too much – see: Karōshi). But part of that is because they know they’ll be taken care of and thus don’t have to fight with management to get benefits (Japan offers universal health care and pension guarantees). It’s like that line from “Office Space”:

    “…the fear of losing my job. But you know, Bob, that will only make someone work just hard enough not to get fired.”

    Remove a certain level of fear from the American worker, you’ll get better workers.

    “Now as for CAFE standards. There is no question that government can take a pro-active role in mandating various safety and environmental regulations.”

    Man, where were you conservatives for the last eight years?

    “But you argue that companies should simply accept every new government standard and then market a product successfully.”

    With CAFE standards, absolutely. It’s criminal that cars built in the 2000s have marginally better fuel economy than those built in the 1970s.

    “Continued efforts to raise CAFE standards based on a government-imposed number will eventually put American businesses at a competitive disadvantage.”

    Or make them more competitive and crush their European and Asian counterparts. Can you imagine if America was making cars that can get 60 mpg? SUVs and light trucks that can get 35? Who the hell would buy Japanese?

    “The marketplace itself works better. For proof, all you need to do is look at a car lot today. For $25,000 you can buy an SUV that listed a year ago at $40,000. $3 gasoline will do that.”

    I don’t follow your logic. Because American companies refused the common sense CAFE standard increases in the 90s, and plowed through building crap cars that no one wants, and now the government is going to have to pony up the dough to save these companies… That’s the genius of capitalism?

    I’m not trying to be totally glib, but… come on. Everyone’s for capitalism until the economy is collapsing, then everyone goes running to their rich Uncle Sam. Shouldn’t an economic collapse be just part of the great circle of capitalism life?

  11. George of the Desert says

    Klute:

    I never argued for government bailout of US car-makers. I think the recent bailout of Wall Street was a mistake; at least in the form it took. A bailout strategy is just not the point of view I hold, so please don’t ascribe it to me. We’re in this mess because too many people thought you could build a mountain of debt without there being consequences down the road. The solution is not more debt.

    I would also take issue with your assertion that US car companies built crap cars that no one wanted in the 90s. I think Ford and GM in particular would be surprised to hear that since they were selling vehicles quite well. True, many of them were not cars, but trucks and SUVs, but, people did seem to want them. Now people want smaller, fuel efficient cars. You can achieve that through the marketplace or through central planning. I prefer the marketplace.

  12. FearForMyCountry says

    Scary similarities! (From Wikipedia)

    National Socialist philosophy came together during a time of crisis in Germany; the nation had lost World War I in 1918, but had also been forced to sign the Treaty of Versailles, a devastating capitulation, and was in the midst of a period of great economic depression and instability. The Dolchstosslegende (or “stab in the back”),[20] described by the National Socialists, featured a claim that the war effort was sabotaged internally, in large part by Germany’s Jews. The National Socialists suggested that a lack of patriotism had led to Germany’s defeat (for one, the front line was not on German soil at the time of the armistice). In politics, criticism was directed at the Social Democrats and the Weimar government (Deutsches Reich 1919–1933), which the National Socialists accused of selling out the country. The concept of Dolchstosslegende led many to look at Jews and other so-called “non-Germans”[21] living in Germany as having extra-national loyalties, thereby raising antisemitic sentiments and the Judenfrage (German for “Jewish Question”),[22] at a time when the Völkisch movement and a desire to create a Greater Germany were strong.

    On January 5, 1919, the party that eventually became the Nazi Party was founded under the name German Workers’ Party (DAP) by Anton Drexler, along with six other members.[23][24] German intelligence authorities sent Hitler, a corporal at the time, to investigate the German Workers’ Party. As a result, party members invited him to join after he impressed them with the speaking ability he displayed while arguing with party members. Hitler joined the party in September 1919, and he became the propaganda boss.[24][25] The party was renamed the National Socialist German Workers’ Party on February 24, 1920,[24] against Hitler’s choice of Social Revolutionary Party.[26][27] Hitler ousted Drexler and became the party leader on July 29, 1921.[27][24]

    Although Adolf Hitler had joined the Nazi Party in September 1919, and published Mein Kampf (“My Struggle”) in 1925 and 1926, the seminal ideas of National Socialism had their roots in groups and individuals of decades past.[24] These include the Völkisch movement and its religious-occult counterpart, Ariosophy. Among the various Ariosophic lodge-like groups, only the Thule Society is related to the origins of the Nazi party.

    The term Nazism refers to the ideology of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party and its Weltanschauung, which permeated German society (and to some degree European and American society) during the party’s years as the German government (1933 to 1945). Free elections in 1932 under Germany’s Weimar Republic made the NSDAP the largest parliamentary faction; no similar party in any country at that time had achieved comparable electoral success. Hitler’s January 30, 1933 appointment as Chancellor of Germany and his subsequent consolidation of dictatorial power marked the beginning of Nazi Germany. During its first year in power, the NSDAP announced the Tausendjähriges Reich (“Thousand Years’ Empire”) or Drittes Reich (“Third Reich”), a putative successor to the Holy Roman Empire and the German Empire).

  13. a important site and amazing info.I am going to bookmark this website.

Leave a Reply