What should have happened

I read in The New York Times today that now, even "good guys" (their term) like the AARP are ending contributions to their 401(k)'s, in an effort to cut costs.

This drives me crazy.

Years ago, there used to be pensions because, as we all know, people age and need something to retire on in their later, aged years.

Pretty complicated huh? (read sarcasm)

It was only fair and intelligent, for pity's sake.

We work at jobs for decades and, in return, it just made sense that responsible companies would put a bit of money aside--yes, from profits--for each employee so two things would develop.

First, the good employee would be rewarded for good work and encouraged to stay with the company. (We used to reward lonevity at firms).

Secondly, at the end of those decades of work, the associate would have money to take care of themselves in their old age.

But that was thousands of years ago, it seems.

Companies decided long ago that those pesky, "expensive" pensions were costs that had to be cut so they were, bit by bit, done away with.

That was bad enough.

At the time, the Federal Government should have stepped in, I believe, and required companies to maintain the pensions. It was good, too, for the country, so people had these saved nest eggs and could live on them in later life.

But naturally not.

Fortunately, someone came up with a 2nd-best idea and that was to start these 401(k)'s. The companies would get a tax deduction and the employee could contribute to them and voila'! While not as good for the employee as the pension, since half of it was usually paid for by the employee, at least there would be, again, something for that same employee to retire on.

But again, the ugly, voracious, self-eating "free markets" and capitalism come along, seeing a pot of money, one that it also views as an "unnecessary cost" and does away with it.

So now, in 2009 America, the worker--the old "salt of the Earth" we used to celebrate--is totally and completely, with the exception of the pittance of Social Security, alone and on his/her own. And that's assuming Social Security will survive, which most people assume it won't.

If you are one of the lucky few who have been able to keep a job, through good times and bad, and also been prescient and disciplined enough and able to save all your working career, you're okay.

Maybe.

Probably.

Possibly

If you stay lucky.

If, on the other hand, you've ever been let go from a job or had some expensive health care or other problem or just plainly weren't lucky and thrifty and extremely disciplined, all--you're screwed.

Too many Americans, frankly, down through the decades, have fallen into this last group, especially given the current financial crisis striking the US.

And that's why the US Federal Government should have held up expectations of its corporations, so we could further strengthened the entire society and for the long term.

Instead, all that corporate money just fattens the wallets of a select few lucky, conniving, shrewd, manipulative corporate titans who end up with hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars. All the while the middle class shrinks and people start doing without important basics like health care, insurance, food, in some cases, and more.

I'm sure some free market capitalist, Republican, conservative, right-winger would defend this barbaric, unbalanced, unfair, inadequate and, really, broken system.

I sure can't.

Link to story: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/your-money/401ks-and-similar-plans/27money.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Et+tu%2C+AARP%3F&st=nyt

McCain: sayin' the right thing

Okay, first things first.

Let me make it very clear that I am not a "McCain man". I am absolutely not, in any way for John McCain or for him for the Presidency of the United States in the year 2008. I never voted for him and never will. I did wish it were him instead of the current knucklehead we ended up with, precisely because I didn't think he'd be as bad for us as I thought W would be--and, apparently, I was more than just a little correct in that. I don't think he would have attacked another, foreign sovereign nation, which is so clearly, unalterably against international law. Also, he probably wouldn't have screwed us all up the way this, again, knucklehead has.

All that said, I will say that John McCain said the absolute right thing this week when he said he would not bail out any banks, construction firms or home buyers with government money. He said they made their mistakes and they'd have to live with them.

And you know? He's right.

The banks made lousy--possibly illegal--loans to home buyers and a whole bunch of greedy nincompoops signed off on what were just incredibly stupid home loans because they either believed they could afford them or they were told they could afford them, or both.

We shouldn't now bail them out and we shouldn't have to.

Senator McCain probably only said this to pander to the Conservatives in the party, I'm thinking, and he's only trying to simply prove how Conservative he REALLY is but, hey, he said it and, let me say it again, he was right.

Now, two things have or will have come out of this. First, because everyone's jumping all over him--mostly Democrats--he'll never say it again, which is too bad because--let me repeat--HE WAS RIGHT. Second, the Democrats have jumped all over this saying he's "Mr. Do-nothing" when it comes to the economy, which is nonsense and very close to a lie.

It's wrong and wrong-headed.

Look around. We have a pile of debt as a nation, and it's just getting bigger. Millions, billions and trillions larger. We can't afford to keep bailing out people who do the wrong thing anyway, in business. We just can't. We don't have the money anymore. We don't have that capability. And if we did, we still shouldn't. If your brother always got drunk and blew his paycheck and didn't take care of his family but gambled his money away, instead, would you forever throw money at his problems? No, you wouldn't. And you shouldn't, even if you could and the same applies here.

Now, connected to this bigger picture is the likelihood of a coming recession. Yes, I said the word: recession. (At the beginning of these things--which always come around, folks, I have news for you--people always freak out and only refer to it as "the 'R' word", like a) we've never done this before and b) it's the end of the world.)

I have news for you--we've lived through recessions before and we will again. And again. And again.

And we have to. It's called the business cycle, ladies and gentlemen, and they are a fact of life. They are a fact of the business world. If you don't have busts, you can't have booms. If you get very descriptive of them, you start sounding like Peter Sellers playing Chauncey in the movie "Being There", where you say things about there being a Winter, and then Spring comes along, with new growth.

BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS. And it's what needs to happen.

So when everyone starts talking about pumping money into the economy because, God forbid, we can't have a recession, I want to scream.

Let me say it again: WE NEED RECESSIONS. We need downturns so we clear out the crap. We need downturns so we later have upturns.

And for Hillary and Barack and any politician to say we have to pump money into the economy, I say bunk. More crap. We do not. We decidedly do not.

WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY. We don't have the funds to keep pumping in. IT ISN'T THERE.

And secondly, WE NEED DOWNTURNS. Throwing money at this recession is a mistake.

I'm not saying "tough" when someone loses their job, no. Actually, what I'm saying is that people inevitably lose their jobs. They'll need to go out with their skills and get a new job, yes, either with what skill set they have or they'll have to get some more training. (News flash: we need LOTS more computer people! And nurses! and teachers! Maybe train there).

So, when I hear politicians pandering that there needs to be more money sent out or given to some group, I just want to say "No! Enough!". And someone needs to. Senator McCain did and he's being vilified for it and it's wrong. He's right.

I hope he has the conservative guts to stick with what he said.

I bet he doesn't.