Broken Promises

I fully realize that I too often cite the New York Times as my source of information. I really need to change that, but until that happens, there is an excellent article on the state of pensions in the US.

The article talks extensively about the "moral hazard" that has resulted from the government's pension insurance program (PBGC). Because the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation exists, individual firms have been playing fast and loose with the funding of their pension plans. Currently, it is believed that the unfunded gap in corporate pension plans is $450 billion dollars. That is over two times GM's annual revenue (note GM is a potential major pension defaulter).

There are many reasons why this has occurred.

1. Corporations face to real penalty for failing to meet their pension obligations. Look at companies that have default recently like United and US Airways. They continue to operate, free of their pension plans, much more comfortably than their competitors. They have no obligation to turn over their profits to fund the gaps that existed in their benefits plan when it was turned over to the government. Instead United CEO took home over $1million in salary plus bonus.


2. Executives who either make the decision to increase pension benefits or default face no scrutiny. Take Robert Miller, the current CEO of Delphi, who is navigating his company through bankruptcy filings, chance are high Delphi's employee pension plan will have to be taken over by PBGC. However, this isn't the first time a company under Miller's helm has done been unable to fulfill their obligations. The same thing happened at Bethlehem Steel. Yet here he is CEO of yet another company -- a cat with nine lives.


3. Sure GM and Ford may have been pressured by the UAW into providing pensions despite their serious misgivings. However, companies are now effectively using pensions to increase their bargaining power with employees.
• Companies increase pension benefits, yet do not fund them. To retain employees and extract concessions from Unions, firms promise to increase benefits. This is a tactic used by capital-poor companies who cannot afford to increase wages or need to cut employees. Pensions do not come due until far into the future, so the companies either assume that they will recover and be able to fill the gap or that the government will pick up the slack.
• Just days before asking for emergency funding from Congress, United Airlines increased pension benefits for a subset of its employees by 40%. Soon after they filed for bankruptcy and their pension plan was turned over the the PBGC.
  

The PBGC is already underwater, and there are additional defaults expected to come with Delphi, Northwest Airlines, and Delta Airlines which have all declared bankruptcy. And with pension liabilities an increasingly large burden on employer balance sheets we cannot expect the trend to change. In fact, to stay competitive, other companies will also feel compelled to turn the administration of their pension plans to the federal government.

For once, and I want to bold this, I agree with the Bush administration. Something needs to be done to address the rampant abuse that is going on in major organizations. Like Bush, I believe that companies with junk bond status should not be able to promise increased benefits for any reason if they are no fully funded. Similarly, these companies should cap the years of service employees can accrue to limit their overall liability. This changes are necessary to prevent the burden of Union and Management mistakes from falling on the shoulders of the American tax payer.

One key area where I disagree from the administration is on the idea of private investment accounts as a replacement for corporate pension plans. Corporate pension funds are designed such that each month pensioners receive a check for the duration of their life. However, if private accounts were used instead, how would people know where to invest the money? How would they spread the money over the remaining years of their lives? Pensions as they stand are sophisticated financial devices with short and long-term horizons. Within companies and externally at financial institutions trained professionals are daily making informed investment decisions. Will the general public be able to do the same?

I am not sure what the solution to this problem is. But it is clearly begging for one.

Football Frenzy

It is always surprising how Saturday afternoons in the fall can turn into hours of frenzy and fanaticism. I myself am guilty of falling into such a trap. Cursing at my TV, praying that my team will win and the other team will lose, and dare I say it, actually placing bets (I started young -- a gambler at the tender age of seven). Every once in awhile when reason prevails, I am struck by the fact that I way too emotionally invested in games that I have no part in. Imagine the guys on the field, barely out of high school, playing on national TV and knowing that when the cameras stop rolling they will either be their town's sweethearts or completely reviled. College sports are indeed a strange phenomenon.

Anyway, what gets me down every year is that fact that my team, Michigan St, is so darn inconsistent. Over the past 20-odd years, they have given innumerable near heart attacks. (Perhaps that's my own fault for taking these games too seriously.) But why does everyone have to hate on Michigan St. football? Sure we have a tendency to start out strong and fall apart like a perennial house of cards *every* year, but we are the underdogs, show us a little love. This year (although I say it every year) was supposed to be different. We have a quarterback with game (currently rated top 5 in the nation). But alas, it looks like I'll have to wait until next year.

More Than Lip Service

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to hear Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) speak at the Kennedy school. To be honest, the only draw was that she has represented my district since before I can remember, first at the State and then National level.

In my opinion, the fundamental problem facing Michigan is how to combat the decline in the manufacturing industry. The loss of jobs and the reduces wages/benefits, have led to a downward spiral. To see this, all you have to do is visit old factory towns on the east side of Michigan. Local governments are in shambles, schools are subpar, and without any new investment coming in, there is little hope for change. This is not a problem Michigan faces alone, although it is unique in the way its fortunes follow that of the auto industry (both now in decline).

Stabenow acknowledged the fact that this was a critical issue facing Michigan and the rest of the country, but she gave no new ideas. It was the same tired story that Kerry used in his failed election bid and full of quantified. For example, we cannot afford a "race to the bottom", we need "a race up". Everyone knows we need "a race up", but how can we do that?

The US cannot compete with Canada's high skilled labor and nationalized heathcare that lowers employer burdens. Nor can we compete with the cheap labor and lax regulations on Mexico. Yes, NAFTA and CAFTA have hurt those employed in the manufacturing sector (as Gov. Granholm said, "NAFTA and CAFTA have given Michigan the shafta"), but we cannot continue to play the blame game. Let's hear and evaluate real ideas. Both Kerry's taxation solution (roll-back tax breaks for US companies that move jobs/factories off shore) and Stabenow's "trade prosecutor" solution (the trade prosecutor would monitor the behavior of other countries for violations -- e.g., copyright issues with China) are starts in the right direction. However, they are band-aids. They would treat the symptoms and top some of the bleeding. For America to become truly competitive, we need to restructure healthcare and continue to focus on innovation.

According to Stabenow, there are over 45million people in the US without health insurance. Yet per capital spending on healthcare if ~%5,600, twice that of other countries in our peer group. Companies ranging from Wal-mart and GM are actively trying to reduce healthcare costs, which either can or do overwhelm their balance sheets. Even the US government is trying to scale back costs associated with administering Veteran's healthcare. How would Congress would feel if their benefits were taken away! In an era when pharmaceutical companies are accountable to no one and CEOs take home record paychecks, why can't we adopt a system like that in Europe with strict controls on pricing? Our citizens should not be subsidizing cheap drugs elsewhere. Today healthcare costs and premiums have the potential to drive working families into bankruptcy. The rest of the Western world has adopted nationalized healthcare, in this area it might not hurt to look to our peers for advice. Or at the very list bring down healthcare costs across the board from medicine to doctor/hospital fees. Does it make sense to have "free markets" decide how much a life is worth?

In order to stay competitive, it is key that the US remain at the forefront of innovation. Our current edge is being threatened. South Korea has become a pioneer in genetic engineering just as school boards across America are mandating creationism be taught alongside evolution in science classes. The "brain drain" that the US so profited from is drying up. More and more companies are setting up centers in India and China, getting the advantage for well trained professionals and the lower cost of labor. At first lower skilled jobs were threatened (e.g., call centers, factory positions), but now high skilled jobs are at stake (e.g., software, backoffice functions). What will come next? are we prepared?

I had not meant to have this turn into the rant it did. The speech I attended yesterday was frustrating in that it answered few questions and made me ask more. The most trying part was when a student began her question with, "It's so refreshing to hear a politician talk about real issues instead of just paying them lip service...". I almost laughed.

It's Lonely at the Top

Have you ever wondering if as a woman to "succeed" in politics you need to be "alone"? This is still an incomplete idea but it randomly came to mind, and I really want to get it down.

The winners...

1. Condoleeza Rice -- Unmarried. Incidentally she also has a strange gap in her front two teeth. Apparently, she accidentally referred to Bush as her husband in public once... very interesting. (Don't worry I am no conspiracy theorist. I am positive everything in that regard is on the up-and-up. Any pent up feelings she may have had were probably exhausted by shoe shopping trips, like the one to Ferragamo during Katrina. Personally, I am a Gucci girl myself.)

2. Janet Reno -- Unmarried. Again not terribly attractive. Will Ferrell played her in SNL skits. I don't think that was a compliment. But she was the Attorney General. She took down the Branch Dravidians. And told Rastafarians that bad hair wasn't an excuse to smoke marijuana. Hard core!

3. Hillary Clinton -- Married (with affection? questionable). Clearly a very influential woman. Perhaps she married for the influence? or maybe she stays married because of it.

4. Harriet Miers -- Unmarried. Another in the line of Bushie women who never got married. Sure she didn't make the Court, but she was senior White House counsel. She got to help define torture. Try telling Iraqis that's not power.

And the has beens...

1. Elizabeth Dole -- Remember her? If only she beat Bush. Those Viagra commercials her husband made probably didn't help much.

2. Geraldine Ferraro -- The first female VP who never was. Why? The Republicans smeared her because of her husband's business connections.

This is all I have at the moment. But there does seem to be a disturbing trend. I mean think about Oprah (she could go into politics and I am sure win by a landslide) and she's not married either. Does this mean successful women don't get married. Or if they do it's a marriage of convience?

Hallelujah

Is this the Republican meltdown I have been dreaming of for the past six years? Insurrection within his own ranks. Unthinkable! If the Christian conservatives leave Bush what does he have left? Certainly not us, liberal leftists.

Seriously though, this was a wise decision made by all parties. Harriet Miers was not qualified for the job. Though I had concerns about Roberts, he was an independant (albeit conservative) thinker who really understood the law. In Miers case, all we got from the White House was a wink and a grin and a "trust us". Mr. President, next time you make a nomination and cite the reason of her "extraordinarily legal experience" tell us what that experience is instead of hiding behind "executive priviledge". Or as I like to call it "executive abuse".

Hopefully, this has served as a wake up call to the Bush administration. The "trust us" line isn't going to work anymore. We trusted you in Iraq (show me the WMD!); we trusted you when you said Karl Rove wasn't involved in the leak (who's under investigation again?); we trusted you when you promised to take care of New Orleans (I don't even know where to begin here). Instead of asking people to operate on blind trust and loyalty, show us fact. Reason with us. Let's have transparency and a real dialogue in this country.

The Big Bad

I have never liked Wal-Mart. They always just struck me as too Southern, too Republican, and too Christian (basically the exact opposite of me).

Later I didn't like Wal-Mart because they "cheat". Sure they are a great company with an awesome supply chain, etc. etc. But are they good corporate citizens? Wal-Mart can run it's suppliers out of business if they don't give them the prices they want (there is precendent for this. Wal-Mart has done it before). They hire illegal workers to clean their floors. A disproportionately large number of their employees are on federally funded healthcare programs. Wal-mart likes to say that they provide goods that are affordable to everyone. But honestly the only reason we need Wal-Mart prices is because Wal-Mart pays their employees so little. They need someplace to shop. As far as I can tell Wal-Mart has done little accept hasten the downward economic spiral for America's lower class and working poor.

But now there is a New York Times article that says Wal-Mart with the assistance of McKinsey has come up with a new strategy to reduce healthcare benfits. I have a lot of respect for McKinsey and it really pains me to see that they are helping Wal-Mart scrap more money out of their already piteously low benefits package. Walmart no longer wants to hire older and "unhealthy" employees. (Is this discrimination?)Instead, they will focus on recruiting young, healthy employees. They are even changing job descriptions so that physical exertion is a must for all jobs (e.g., cashiers who are responsible for cart gathering). I hope people see this for what it is a shameless and pathetic attempt to further reduce compensation for employees. Walmart continues to "take" from society. Hopefully one day the Walton's will decide to give something back.

Is Cheney in Deep Poopoo?

So finally there is proof Cheney knew about Valerie "Flame" Plame before the leak even occurred. For details see this new article posted on the New York Times website.

Honestly, I don't know is anyone did anything wrong at this point. The whole story has been played out hundereds of different ways on FOX, CNN, and all the other major networks and newspapers. The players themselves seem to change their stories every other day (Judith Miller) or won't speak (Robert Novak, everyone in the White House). All I know if that if I step back and look at this, it seems like a classic case of bullying where the White House is the bully. Just because Joe Wilson wrote a memo and then an Op-ed stating that Iraq had no intention of acquiring uranium from Niger doesn't make it ok for the White House to out his wife. End of story. It's like someone trying to draft the Bush Twins into the army because they don't like Bush's view on abortion. Like that would ever happen.

Here's to hoping we get Karl, Dick, and Jane (actually it should be Scooter, but I like the way this sounds better)!

Kay, You Have It All Wrong

So I wasn't going to post again tonight. But then I read this statement by Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tx) in the New York Times, and it just burned me up. This woman, who is promoting Harriet Meyers as the be all and end all in constitutional law, also seems to believe that what Karl Rove and Scooter Libby did (to clarify "did" -- release potentially life threatening informaion about an undercover CIA agent) was no worse than what Martha Stewart did (insider trading). Yes, Kay, clearly playing games with peoples lives is the same as selling stock at an illegal gain. And if it the case, here's to hoping that Scooter and Karl enjoy a few monthes in prison just like Martha. If they are lucky, maybe one of their friendly inmates will knit them a poncho and the Donald will give them a TV show. Here's to hoping!

The Ten Things I Hate About TV

Ok. So I don't have ten things. I just have five things. Or rather just five things I can think of right now.

1. How do the characters on CSI have new clothes each week when they probably get paid like $30,000/year (city salaries aren't fabulous)? And for that matter how does Carrie Bradshaw buy so many Manolo's? either her credit cards are maxed out or she has a Sugar Daddy besides Mr. Big.

2. Why don't they show real news on the news? I am so bored of the human interest stories where a cat got chased up a tree and won't come back down. Come on. Give me some real hard-core, muckracking journalism.

3. Why is every show really a boiled down romance novel? Almost every one hour "dramedy" is a soap. Even shows like LOST (the Jack-Kate-Sawyer triangle and what was up with the weird Shannon-Boone sexual tension), Alias, ER, Grey's Anatomy, even the crime shows have succumbed. Does this mean men wish they could read a Harlequin romance novels too?

4. Sports commentators. I have no idea how much they get paid, but I can certainly do a better job. After a big loss, they always ask players/coaches, "How do you feel?". Seriously how the hell do you think they feel? And their commentary? Dumb. Just plain dumb. They make Dan Ratherisms sound normal. I have come to the conclusion that sports commentators were really bad football players who got tackled too hard too many times and hence can no longer speak coherently.

5. Why do the Fox News anchors look like they are wearing makeup? Obviously when you are under the lights you need to put some on. But put a wig on some of these men and you would have ugly women. (But hey, they are Republicans.)

A Funny Picture

This is a funny picture my sister made for me. I think it is supposed to be me. Well maybe me as a South Park character. I hope I don't actually look this cross-eyed. Umbrella drinks... yummy.

TV

You know, I really watch too much TV. I just can't seem to help myself. It's always there. Things are much better now (depending on how you view it) since I got rid of cable. Now I just have the basics.

Here are some thoughts on the shows I have been watching.

Desperate Housewives: I used to watch The Adventures of Lois & Clark way back when. Teri Hatcher was cool, except for the small problem of not being believable as a reporter. Now I am just kind of bored of her. Part of the problem is those stupid Radio Shack commericals she did while on "hiatus", whenever I see her I think of them and want to switch the channel. The other problem, is her character. Susan is just annoying. The show stuff her down your throat, making her out to seem like such a goodie-goodie, but she is definately not good people. She burned down a house, embarassed her daughter in public to make herself feel better, and paid her boyfriend's runaway teenage son to stay away. Seriously -- not normal!

I do like Bree's character. She has red hair. I always wanted to have red hair, though I doubt it would suit my complexion. Her family is also hysterically dysfunctional, despite her trying to be the perfect Stepford mother/wife. Her character is the only reason I watch the show.

Grey's Anatomy: My friend really likes this show. So I decided to watch an episode or two. This is essentially a "classy" soap. But then all doctor/hospital dramas are. They make hospitals seem like these giant mixers where doctors just hook-up, break-up, and then hook-up some more (either with the same people or some one new). I wonder if real doctor's are like that...

LOST: So I have no idea what is going on in this show. There are numbers, and "the others", and some monster in the jungle, and a hatch, and the list goes on and on. Given that I have no idea what is going on, I am not sure why I am still watching. But it is interesting. It reminds me a lot of Lord of the Flies. (That was a crazy book.) There are even wild pigs that they hunt.

My theory is that the plane was purposefully crashed into the island, so "someone" could run a social experiment. Kind of like the experiment they ran in the 60s/70s where people either acted as prison guards or prisoners. I don't think that ended well.

Smallville: I will be the first to admit that watching shows on the WB at my age is truly sad and pathetic. But I can't help it. I love Lex. He is awesome. The evil genius billionare, what's not to like. Personally, I think his character is far more interesting than superboy - Clark Kent.

In this week's episode, they introduced the character of Aquaman. Apparently he is from Southern California, and environmentalist cum surfer, who can swim like a fish. But that isn't why the show was interesting. It was interesting because for the first time they really showed Lex turning to the dark side. What's weird about watching "prequels" is you keep wanting to tell the soon-to-be villians to be good. It's like in the Star Wars prequels, Anakin seemed like such a nice kid, until he wasn't so nice. That was sad. Anyway, if you like bald, rich, evil geniuses, watch Smallville.

Four shows. I wonder if that is a lot. Maybe I am a couch potato.

Blame America?

I think Hugo Chavez must either be a little crazy or his people hate him so much that he is determined to find someone for them to hate even more. After Pat Robertson's statement, about how the US should assassinate him and get control over his oil, I understand that Chavez probably has an axe to grind. But seriously, an American attack on Venezuela? Sure we need oil. But one could argue we already have access to plenty in Iraq. Besides which, we don't even have the resources to wage war on his country now because our newly streamlined armed forces are already over strained with missions in Iraq and Afganistan.

Chavez needs to wake up and realize that blaming the US for all of his problems isn't the solution. If his socialist, essentially-undemocratic agenda isn't working, maybe he should try real democracy.

John Edwards (Bill Clinton Redux)

Today I had the chance to hear John Edwards live. He stopped in Boston as part of his tour to increase awareness/activism on poverty. Given that his talk started almost an hour late, I was not in a particularly charitable mood. But he was good. The wind blew away his speech almost as soon as he began, but he didn't miss a beat. I couldn't help but imaging what would have happened to Bush if his speech blew away. Would he have bent down to pick it up?

Edwards does remind me a lot of Bill Clinton, who I had the chance to hear/"meet" several years ago. But he's a little warmed over. He has the openness and ease that Bill Clinton does, but he doesn't inspire me like Clinton did or even hold my attention. Even those who disliked and hated Clinton could see his appeal when they actually heard him (or so some of my conservative friends tell me).

This speech was on poverty and was timely given the country's awakening post-Katrina. It was about the working poor and the cycle of poverty. I would like to share a few things from the talk with you...

• The net worth of the average African American family is $6000. The net worth of the average Latino family is something like $8000. The net worth of the average white family is $80,000. To me this is just incredible. ($6000!) He definately got my attention with this statistic.

• Edwards talked a lot about increasing the minimum wage and allowing labor to organize. While morally and intellectually, these ideas appeal to me. I wonder how practical they are. Organized labor has served a vital function in America. If you disagree, please please read the Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It convinced me. But now that there are certain government enforced standards, do we need the Unions? Have the Unions crippled Big Business and forced bankruptcies and off-shoring? I am of two minds on this. But it definately something worth thinking about.

• Other countries in the world are working to eradicate poverty (namely Britian which is hoping to eliminate it by 2020 and then there is Sachs millenium initiative), but the US has yet to make any real commitment to the effort. In Edwards opinion the world is watching and waiting for us to take moral leadership. I question whether or not this is actually true. After Iraq and after the "underbelly" of American society was exposed during the Hurricanes, does anyone really want our moral leadership?

As I said, John Edwards doesn't inspire me the same way Bill Clinton did. But he does recognize there is a need and desire for Americans to have a "national community" and referred to it multiple times in his speech. Erasing poverty is one way to build such a community. But how we do that is still a mystery to me.

Book Recommendation #1

It Can't Happen Here
by Sinclair Lewis

I found this book at a local used book store. As far as I can tell, it's currently out of print. But if you are at all interested in politics and have a strong dislike for our current administration, it is definately worth tracking down a copy. The book presents an extreme view, but there are clear paralells between this administration and the one described by Lewis.

The book begins with the shady election of Buzz Windrip, a folksy, dark horse candidate, as President, over FDR. He promises equality (read: equality for everyone but minorities and women) and humanism (read: compassionate coersion). Sound familiar? Remember Florida. Remember the president who promised compassionate conservatism and instead brought us a revival of the Christian right.

Buzz Windrip's rise to power and subsequent consolidation of power (via abolishment of Congress, as an example) was enabled by various religious figures and political cronies. Bishop Prang, modelled after Father Coughlin an anti-semetic, Christian leader with a large ministry and national radio show initally threw his full support behind Windrip. Much like James Dobson (Focus on Family) and Pat Roberts have done today. His administration was packed with friends and loyalists (Harriet Miers. Remeber the FEMA guy who used to judge horse shows). But ultimately the strong men behind him pulled the strings (Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld).

Lewis himself was an adamant liberal. It is not surprising then that It Can't Happen Here shows the violent effects of a Facist coup. The military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned off becomes reality. The breakdown of the political system does not occur overnight. It is the work of geniuses and media who shape and spin information and images, leaving behind an uninformed and powerless electorate. Although extreme in all senses of the word, It Can't Happen Here will leave you with plenty to think about long after you put it down. Give it a chance.

Links of interest:
Amazon's listing
Eisenhower's speech

Welcome

Jumpingpanda. That's the name of my site, and no, I have no idea what it means.

I really wanted to call my site 'Eeyore'. Why? Because I like Winnie the Pooh, but he is a glutton. Plus I don't like honey. Its sticky. And Eeyore is more morose. Kind of like me. He is a sad donkey. And I am a sad Democrat. (At least I think I am a Democrat, my sister seems skeptical.) It just seemed so fitting. But if you do want to visit the Eeyore site, you should, so here it is.

Then I thought, why not call my site 'Blind Assassin' because it sounds cool. And it is also the name of a Margret Atwood book. For some bizarre reason I even have two copies of it. But no. That too was taken.

Then I thought about 'sparkle', but my friend said it sounded like a pornstar site and my sister said it sounded like a 10-year old rich girl who wanted to be a princess. Well I just wanted to call it sparkle because I like shiny/sparkly things. Seriously, what girl doesn't.

Anyway, so after much trial and error and guessing at names, I ended up with jumpingpanda. It seems that no one else wanted the name. Surprise, surprise.

In spite of this somewhat inauspicious beginning, I hope this blog is fun and that someone besides me will read it. I like to talk about politics, school, business, movies, TV, books, anything pop culture related (for example, why does Katie Holmes look like she is 3mos pregnant when she supposedly only knew like yesterday).

More to come soon.