Skip to content

The How-to-Destroy-Jobs Summit: Starring Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm

December 4, 2009

As if the winter of 2008-09 wasn’t harsh enough (despite all that global warming we were promised when Bush was elected) an additional chill ran through the state of Michigan when we saw our Governor, Jennifer Granholm, in the background of nearly every camera shot as .  Barack Obama assembled his economic team.

It’s not news, that in the liberal mindset, failure gets you attention, and being the biggest failure makes you an expert, as long as you are doctrinaire.  This merits fawing statements from MSM reporters like, “Nobody knows better than you…” blah blah blah.

Case in point, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, a train-wreck of an administrator whose main talent is emoting on camera.

No state in the nation has lost jobs at the rate Michigan has, and only California edges us out as a state government fiscal disaster.  But state government keeps growing in Michigan, creating jobs for government unions.

And therein lies Obama’s fascination with Granholm.   Jenny is at the “Jobs Summit,” SEIU is there, the Chamber and the NFIB are not.  Barack Obama has something he desperately wants to learn from Jennifer Granholm:

How do you raise taxes in a recession, add government union jobs while destroying the private sector economy—and still win elections for your Party?

And Andrea Mitchell of NBC News is a more than willing accomplice; asking not one tough or pointed question of the governor of the state with the nation’s worst-performing economy.   You’d never know Granholm is at the end of a disastrous 8 year two term tenure.  Mitchell gives not one indication that Granholm has ANYTHING to do with Michigan’s problems.

Mitchell Indentifies Michigan as “Ground Zero in the unemployment crisis” as Granholm’s qualification for appearing at the Summit and on her show.

At probably the puff-piece interview’s low moment, Granholm identifies tax incentives for business as something that should come out of the summit.

Tax incentives for investment?  This is the woman who not only insisted– at the threat of closing down the government– that Michigan’s unique tax on business be resurrected just as it was about to be phased out, she slapped a 22% “temporary premium” on that job killing tax to boot.

Then after putting the accelerator to the floor and setting the cruise control in driving jobs to neighboring states, she made the grand statement that Michigan was now “open for business.”

Michigan now has 20% more government employees than manufacturing jobs—approximately 500,000 vs. 600,000.    Government is far bigger than when Granholm took office, and every “cut” has been in the increase in school funding, or state jobs.

Ground Zero in the unemployment crisis, indeed.  But if you’re going to use this analogy, then Jennifer Granholm is not one of the firefighters…

Granholm emphasizes to an empathetic Mitchell that under her watch, “Michigan has lost ONE MILLION JOBS,” as though she’s reporting bad weather beyond her control.  No, wait, she thinks she can control the weather, too.  Michigan is going to lead the way in combating global warming—no matter how much we could use some.

Granholm’s regulatory agencies have delayed high tech mining efforts in the Upper Peninsula.  In one case the nickel mining company (a necessary ingredient for the battery operated cars she supposedly wants) opened with 100 jobs instead of the original plan of 400, and the thousands of spin-off jobs that could have been created during the 3 years of delay are now still in the theoretical future.

Two clean coal plants that would have generated $1 BILLION each in private sector construction and 250 very good paying permanent jobs each, have been regulated out of existence because a few over the hill hippies showed up with protest signs.  The company just announced they aren’t going to fight the Granholm Administration anymore and have given up their efforts here.

So, if manufacturing DID come back to Michigan, very soon we won’t have the energy requirements in a state where a warm summer is already leading to rolling brownouts in some areas when air conditioning use is at its peak.

In other venues, Granholm brags that the new “green economy” she is pushing for Michigan will produce 50,000 jobs over the next 10 years.  10 YEARS?  Under the liberal policies of Jennifer Granholm, Michigan has lost 50,000 jobs every 5 months!

In a world where Jennifer Granholm has a voice at a “Jobs Summit,” I suppose Matt Millen should cover the NFL draft for ESPN, Tiger Woods can start a marriage counseling show, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd can be put in charge of financial regulation, Tim Geitner in charge of collecting taxes—oh wait…

  1. December 4, 2009 5:20 pm

    Considering your party took an economy with budget surpluses and turned it into massive budget deficits that resulted in the doubling of the federal debt, had four years with negative job growth, and who’s policies resulted in the worst recession since the Great Depression, I’d say you haven’t got a clue what the hell you’re talking about. You’re just complaining because your party is out of power. Well, actually, people like you complained non-stop even when your party had control of all branches of the federal government. You just like to complain because you have no ideas.

    • David Forsmark permalink
      December 4, 2009 5:48 pm

      that should be “whose policies”

      • December 4, 2009 6:05 pm

        Unless we’re talking about the band. Then it’s The Who’s policies. 🙂

        • Carterthewriter permalink
          December 4, 2009 6:18 pm

          The Dems controlled the Congress the last 4 years of Bush’s presidency. Wasn’t Barney the watchdog for fiscal responcibility. Your contradicting what went on. Ben. Both parties share in the blame. Collect your check for disrupting, sir.

        • Cas Balicki permalink
          December 4, 2009 6:23 pm

          ‘Who’s” is a contraction of “who is” as in who’s in charge? “Whose” is the possessive of who as in whose hat is this? Speaking of hats, Ben, you’ve been talking through yours long enough and you really should learn to quit while ahead.

          As for your analysis of the economic meltdown, the term that best describes it is blatant economic illiteracy. But then you’re a lefty and will probably take economic illiteracy as a compliment. Then again, at the risk of getting to subtle for you, economic illiteracy to a lefty might just be a complement.

    • JE Tabler permalink
      December 4, 2009 6:26 pm

      I’d say the Clinton administration was an anomaly. He’s the only peacetime Democrat in recent history under whom the economy grew, let alone who had surpluses. I think most of us would vote for a Democrat who would do that again, provided they not steal parts of sovereign countries and hand them to terrorist groups.

      Remember that the tea party movement began under Bush due to outrage at his obscene spending.

      We do have ideas: Reagan’s. They worked. He cut taxes, didn’t outspend the benefits of doing so like Bush did, and the economy recovered.

      I think most Americans are more pragmatic than partisan and would welcome change we could actually believe in because it’s tried and tested.

      • David Forsmark permalink
        December 4, 2009 6:45 pm

        A good share of Clinton’s economy was due to a stock bubble in which Goldman Sachs got its first few billion in bailouts over risky investments in Mexico, Russia and South Korea. He also had the benefit of being President when HUGE strides were made in productivity thanks to major advancement in computer and communications technologies. That bubble burst after Rubin was no longer inflating it, in the early days of GWB. Remember the NASDAQ bubble bursting? It was also under Clinton that the banking risky loans went from billions to trillions, but the effects weren’t felt for nearly a decade.

        • December 4, 2009 7:21 pm

          True that Goldman Sachs was largely responsible for the stock market bubble, but the booming economy was mainly due to the technology boom: regulation and standards to make scattered networks work as one Internet (thanks Al Gore), the advent of the Web in 1989-90, the decrease in PC prices, faster PCs, and a host of other technological advances.

          Bill Clinton was indeed responsible for signing the deregulation that led to the reckless high-stakes gambling by banks which ultimately led to the collapse of our economy. That deregulation was in the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which repealed Glass-Steagall — a safeguard put in place during the Great Depression.

          • David Forsmark permalink
            December 6, 2009 6:30 am

            Depression-era regulations on finance DID need to be reformed. However, by 1999, Wall Street gamblers had been bailed out 3 times for foreign market speculation, which combined for a hugely dangerous combination. The fuse was lit on a ticking time bomb. Had Bush’s reforms happened, the crisis would not have been avoided, too many bad loans had already been made,. It just would have been sooner, quicker and some degree less disastrous.

        • JE Tabler permalink
          December 5, 2009 11:11 am

          You’re right, but he did balance the budget, which had not been accomplished in quite some time. He was basically fiscally responsible, even compared to the two Republicans before him. I think Clinton deserves credit for that.

          • David Forsmark permalink
            December 5, 2009 11:45 am

            He wasn’t all that responsible before 94…

          • Radegunda permalink
            December 5, 2009 6:16 pm

            Clinton had to be dragged kicking and screaming into balancing the budget.

            And remember when the government was shut down after Clinton vetoed the budget that was passed by Congress, because it didn’t spend as much as Clinton wanted to spend? The MSM put all the blame on Gingrich, claiming that he had somehow forced Clinton to veto it.

            Remember that magazine cover: “The Gingrich Who Stole Christmas”? You see, Newt was branded greedy because he wasn’t spending ENOUGH of the taxpayers’ money to please the lib/left.

            Clinton realized that his political survival would be enhanced if he went roughly in the direction that the Republican Congress was pushing him to go. And then he took credit for it.

          • F. Swemson permalink
            December 5, 2009 9:02 pm

            The only thing Clinton was responsible for was strengthening the terms of the Community Reinvestment Act, and embarrassing the nation with his dishonest and sleaze ball behavior throughout his two terms.

    • Elaine B permalink
      December 5, 2009 8:30 pm

      Ben, can you spring for a new pair of glasses? They seem to be hiding your eyes which may be the problem.

  2. KYATL permalink
    December 4, 2009 5:37 pm

    Ben, the reason the Clinton administration even had a surplus was because of the tax cuts that Regan put into effect. The reason we had deficits during the Bush years is because of the hit our economy took from 9/11 and that we had to fight those terrorist. The Fanny May and Freddie Max debacle that the Clinton years put into effect with the help of Dem. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd is what has caused this recent housing debacle. Bush was the one who warned them that if changes weren’t made we would hit a disaster down the road to which Dem. Barney Frank said no, no, no…everything is fine. And it’s the Dem. Obama administration that has tripled our deficit with his stimulus bill and Omni bill spending. He took a bad situation and made it triple worse. Thanks to Obama .40 cents of every dollar America collects is now being paid to interest on debt that foreign countries such as Saudi Arabia and China own. What happens when our interest rates go up? Wake up and smell the roses and quit trying to blame all our woes on Bush. Obama, Polosie and Reed have lots to answer for.

    • December 4, 2009 6:07 pm

      Only in alternative universes.

      • Carterthewriter permalink
        December 4, 2009 6:19 pm

        Far out; pass the joint.

        • Brenda permalink
          December 4, 2009 8:53 pm


        • F. Swemson permalink
          December 5, 2009 9:13 pm

          Hey Ben;

          Here’s the truth. Look it up for yourself, assuming you can read of course:

          In January of 2005, McCain signed on as a cosponsor to a bill (Senate Bill S-190) aimed at reforming the government’s involvement in lending. McCain addressed the Senate on May 26th, 2006 in support of this bill. The exact text of his address follows:

          “Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

          The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

          The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

          For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

          I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

          I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.”

          Approximately one year later the bill died in Congress, when the Democratic Majority, led by Barney Frank, the new Chairman of the House Banking Committee, blocked it from ever coming up for a vote !!!



          Try reading some of the history of these matters yourself, and stop coming back at us with your pathetic talking points which you support or back up with any empirical evidence or documentation.

          As it is, you’re just a blowhard, who has no idea about what he’s talking about…

          Either say something real that you can prove, or go back to your bong, and lite her up !

          • December 5, 2009 10:04 pm

            [Approximately one year later the bill died in Congress, when the Democratic Majority, led by Barney Frank, the new Chairman of the House Banking Committee, blocked it from ever coming up for a vote !!!]

            No, what really happened is the bill died in a Republican controlled committee and never came to the floor of the Senate or back to the Senate Banking Committee for reconsideration.

            Maybe you should look to unbiased sources for your “facts.”

            • F. Swemson permalink
              December 6, 2009 11:39 am

              There you go again, with the traditional tactics of the left, accusing those on the right of doing exactly what you’re doing yourself. My sources were NOT biased, but your’s obviously were, & the link you referred to does NOT support your position at all.

              The bill did NOT die in a Republican controlled committee. In the 2005 congress, the democrats slowed it down, but never defeated it in committee.

              This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all proposed bills and resolutions that haven’t passed are cleared from the books. Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate under a new number in the next session.

              The bill was reintroduced the following, after the democrats too control of the house and the senate, after which the new chairman of the committee, Bawney Fwank, did indeed block it from ever coming to a vote.

              I think you’ve been taking too many bong hits since you started spewing the far left’s talking points here on NRB.

              • December 6, 2009 6:06 pm

                No, those are the right-wing talking points, but the reality was Bush threatened to veto the bill you’re talking about, so it never advanced.

                In 2007, Barney Frank introduced the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R. 3915) which would regulate predatory subprime mortgages. The bill passed in the House with all 227 Democrats voting for it.127 Republicans voted against it. The Senate never voted on it and it never became law.

                • F. Swemson permalink
                  December 6, 2009 8:38 pm

                  I don’t know why I bother talking to idiots like you, and this is certainly the last time I respond to you.

                  What you just wrote is pure 100% bull$hit

                  If you believe it, you’re a brain dead zombie…

                  If you don’t then you’re just a LIAR…

                  Putz !

                  • December 6, 2009 9:10 pm

                    Ha! The truth hurts. By the way, those facts are easily verifiable. Just look them up.

      • Wayne Logue permalink
        December 4, 2009 9:44 pm

        In which you appear to be living.

    • Maggie permalink
      December 4, 2009 9:19 pm

      Goldman Saks was not responsible for the financial melt down. It is easy to blame them for our current debacle however, Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac together held about 5 trillion dollars in mortgages. Many of these loans defaulted. Many were made with no documentation and no down payment. This was done at the behest of those great financial geniuses Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Goldman packaged the loans & sold them to investors. That is what an investment house does. They had no control over the fact that Fannie & Freddie were generating crap under the guise of mortgages. It was Barney Frank’s position that every American deserves to own a house. Every American does not deserve to own a house. Where in the Constitution is that mentioned? Barney is at it again! He is insisting on NO DOWN PAYMENT loans once again. It worked so well before and once again all of the rest of us and our grandchildren will face trillions in debt and crippling taxes. My parting question is how does a congressman who doesn’t know he has a pot farm in his yard or a house of prostitution in his apartment weild so much power?Kindest Regards

      • David Forsmark permalink
        December 5, 2009 6:35 am

        You are right, Goldman are not primarily responsible. The real roots are groups like ACORN and Jesse J’s OperationPUSH, which assaulted banking standards for 30 years in the name of “equal housing.” Once the standards are lowered, giving dumb loans to people with good incomes looks safe by comparison, and the government, which started the bailout precedent (which the politically connected to BOTH parties Goldman benefited the most from) under Clinton backed trillions in dumb loans.

        Here’s a review of a superb and readable book that entertainingly tells how we got here:

        • December 5, 2009 7:51 am

          [The real roots are groups like ACORN and Jesse J’s OperationPUSH, which assaulted banking standards for 30 years in the name of “equal housing.”]

          What about Bush’s push for an “ownership society?” Although both parties are responsible, the beginning of the end started with late 90s deregulation.

          • David Forsmark permalink
            December 5, 2009 8:17 am

            read the review, I mentioned that Bush made a few efforts at reform, but fell back on bragging that more minorities owned houses under his Administration than any other. You can try to tag me with the “when your guys were in charge,” but it just shows limited knowledge. Not that anyone should have to study my writing that closely…

          • December 5, 2009 8:57 pm

            There’s plenty of blame to share by both parties. It shows a narrow vision if you think that Republicans caused all the problems or that Democrats were solely responsible. But one thing is clear: most politicians will go straight to Hell without pause. Unfortunately, here on earth we have to live with hell-bent politicians.

      • John Arens permalink
        December 5, 2009 8:10 pm

        The one thing that is always overlooked in this story of the Freddy/Fanny/Barney equation is the role that environmental statism played.

        The whole house of cards (-that is, the unsustainability of zero-down loans and other exotic mortgage products backed by government fiat) came crashing down only when gasoline retail prices zoomed over $3 a gallon in the early winter of 2008, and those folks who could afford an interest-only loan serviced each month from their paycheck-to-paycheck cash-flows, suddenly found their over-inflated lives unaffordable. It became an overall train-wreck when gasoline zoomed past $4 a gallon just before the election later that fall.

        If America had been diligent about providing its consumer market with affordable gasoline, rather than bending to the will of the environmental Marxists, we would have been developing every domestic petroleum resource available; — We would have been awash with cheap gasoline. America would have been the driver of the market, not the victim. There are plenty of domestic sources for oil here in America, and the broader western hemisphere; all we needed was the societal and political will to marginalize the environmental puritans, and go get it out of the ground.

        Over the last 40 years, we could have been building nuclear power plants, and building every possible efficiency into energy production. Instead, we crippled ourselves as penance to the Environmental lobby. When the economies of the developing nations ignited, refined petroleum was the fuel, and we were running on fumes. Gasoline became an unaffordable necessity, and people bought gas– but couldn’t pay their mortgage. Thus the dominoes started to topple.

        The boom in the world economy could have continued ad infinitum if America’s relationship with its raw energy requirements had been driven by its need rather than its emotional perception. We farmed out our drilling and exploration needs to third world countries because, well, because its a dirty business. Let those kids with the flies on their cheeks deal with it. We’re too clean here in America to dirty our hands with Demon Oil.

        Sadly, we are still doing it. Once the world economy burps to life again in the next twelve to eighteen months, the price of oil will spike up and the retail price of gasoline will go up with it. There is no shortage of oil, and these spikes are the fault of American policy-makers listening to the environmental Marxists.

        Barney Frank is a malicious clown, and his party and world-view is completely responsible for the financial melt-down. But, remember the environmental straight-jacket is what systemically weakened (and continues to weaken) the American economy.

        And that’s what, ultimately, America’s New Fifth Column wants.

        • David Forsmark permalink
          December 6, 2009 6:33 am

          Thomas Sowell’s book Housing Boom and Bust also examines another related problem with environmental statism– that it’s practice in California drove up housing prices, and how that rippled across the country to some extent, further inflating the bubble. It’s a great look at how government action always has unintended consequences.

  3. Marylou permalink
    December 5, 2009 1:22 am

    I couldn’t agree more! This woman has a special talent for winning elections while totally messing things up. It’s a mystery to me.

  4. j c original permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:13 am

    Ben Hoffman,
    Based on your comments you know nothing about debt or deficits. Our deficit this year will be approx: 1.7 Trillion, which means BEN H that obama will have quadrupled the bush deficit for the last 4 years combined. Maybe, I’ll say it this way…Total up the deficits for Bush’s last four years, get that figure and compare it with Obama’s first year. It won’t add up to 1.7 Trillion (in concert with socialist democrat congress)

    Our national debt stands currently at over 12 Trillion dollars and take into account some 60 TRillion dollars in Unfunded Liabilities, wouldn’t one think the spending should not only stop but be severly cut.

    Remember, we have experienced a Democrat controlled congress since 2006 or 3 years and a willing President.

    • December 5, 2009 7:52 am

      Bush’s fiscal year ended two months ago. Bush quadrupled his own deficit. Obama was responsible for only about 20% of it.

      • David Forsmark permalink
        December 5, 2009 8:18 am

        okay, now you’re being deliberately obtuse.

  5. j c original permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:26 am

    The financial markets started heading south in March of 2000, eleven months before Bush was sworn in…Clinton had a republican congress and he cut the military budget. Trying to blow up the Towers was a civil event for him, he never took it seriously.. He figured some day lawyers will find OBL.

    There’s a tremendous amount of good people in Michigan and they are suffering because of a democrat controlled state.

  6. John Arens permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:35 am

    As a Michigander, I can give first-hand testimony about the free-fall this state has suffered.

    Sadly, it’s not ALL about what an incompetent ideological air-head technocrat Jennifer Granholm is (although she does make for good comedy: In a State-of-the-State address several years ago she said that by 2008 we would all be “blown away” by her brilliant leadership. Indeed. Blown away to Texas, North Carolina, etcetera).

    The death of Michigan, though, has many pallbearers: The public-sector unions, the crony capitalists seeking favor from an ever-larger state government, Owen Beiber, and the assault on private mercantile capitalism by Leftists and their facilitators in and out of state government.

    A friend of mine was a GM Fellow at MIT when GM accepted the contract in 1990 that instituted the “Jobs Bank” (which is a union instrument created at a time of near full-employment) that insured, somehow, “Job Security”. My friend said at that time, “GM will be out of business in twenty years. You can’t pay people to not work, even if you are the world’s biggest company”.

    He was precisely correct.

    But, GM upper-management was more responsive to the current share-price and not making the union mad than they were about the overall health of the company. They accepted the Leftist herring that making the UAW mad was bad public policy, when, even in Michigan, the UAW has been widely viewed as a group of knuckle-dragging thugs for two generations now. The nobility of the Flint Sit-Down strike, and the Battle of the Overpass were sixty or seventy years ago, and the UAW has morphed into a weird combination of Don Corleone’s protection racket and Mary Poppins nursery. And its all supported by the Leftist’s anti-capitalist world-view.

    This is the culprit of the Murder of Michigan.

    It is guffaw-inducing that Obama has invited our disaster of a governor to his “Jobs Summit”. It is rather like inviting Julius Streiker to a Jewish Faith Outreach. She knows absolutely nothing about jobs, other than to snuff them out, or coerce them from extremely scarce Government resources. But, again, she is only the final nail in Michigan’s coffin. She was merely the end-note, prologued proudly for years (with a brief hiatus during the terms of John Engler) by the likes of RINO republicans like the odious William Milliken and Jim Brickley, and the overtly socialist axis of the public sector unions, the UAW, and pansy-ass upper management at the Big 3.

    Michigan will only heal from its self-induced coma when the Leftists at all levels of State, Local and Federal government are punished and defeated politically. It will take several generations, but the time is ripe to begin.

    Or, we will all be “Blown Away”.

    • Carterthewriter permalink
      December 5, 2009 8:04 am

      Let’s not forget the ripple effect created in Ohio by these ill-fated programs. While these Unions sought to insure their existence, even the Korean auto manufactorers gained prominance.

      GM sealed their own fate by partnering with the UAW, rather than combating their ill-conceived principles.

      • December 5, 2009 9:46 am

        [GM sealed their own fate by partnering with the UAW, rather than combating their ill-conceived principles.]

        GM’s problem was they made crap. People didn’t stop buying their vehicles because of unions. They stopped buying them because Japanese companies built better cars. GM is still clueless. They’re betting the farm on the Volt, but Toyota is coming out with something similar that will be better and on the market sooner.

        • Carterthewriter permalink
          December 5, 2009 10:16 am

          I did mention, “Ill conceieved principles” and wasn’t the union on the board of directors at GM, too.

        • David Forsmark permalink
          December 5, 2009 10:20 am

          The UAW contract is FOUR THOUSAND PAGES LONG. 4000 pages of things you can’t make a worker do. That means you need 3 people to fill one job because of the restrictions. Even worse, 30 and out retirement meant that eventually you were going to have 10 people you were supporting for every ONE that was producing. That’s worse than Social Security!

          Lots of GM management types have just been taking what they could get out of the company for about a generation, seeing this demographic disaster on the horizon.

    • David Forsmark permalink
      December 5, 2009 8:18 am

      You are exactly right.

      • December 5, 2009 9:47 am

        Thank you. 🙂

  7. clyde griffin permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:55 am

    While sitting in at a local spit-n-whittle gathering yesterday, a respected local official quipped, thanks to Obama there will be a jobs glut in the near future for grave diggers and ammo bearers.

    • December 5, 2009 9:47 am

      That’s because all the spit-n-whittle jobs have been outsourced to China.

      • Carterthewriter permalink
        December 5, 2009 10:18 am

        And who shall be blamed for that, sir?

      • David Forsmark permalink
        December 5, 2009 10:21 am

        And public schools have contempt for the trades and prepare kids for cubicle jobs– the most outsourceable jobs imaginable.

        • David Forsmark permalink
          December 5, 2009 10:22 am

          Jennifer LOVES cubicle jobs, hates those dirty blue collar jobs like power plants, mining, foundries, etc.

  8. Elaine Schiff permalink
    December 5, 2009 11:03 am

    No one is mentioning the name (shhh) George Sorus??-The evil one behind ACORN-SEIU- who made one and a half billion on the Fannie May-Freddie Mack-debacle-Also is making money on the dollar being devalued-(lets remeber what he did to the British Pound) is investing in offshore Brazilian oil-(Did not Obama give money to Brazil for that??)
    I am not praising GWB-he could have not signed what the Demo’s voted for-Old lefty’s never die-they just change their name to “progresives”

    • David Forsmark permalink
      December 5, 2009 12:19 pm

      This train got rolling down the track without Soros, though he does know how to profit and his minions are trying to keep it going, even AFTER the disaster!

  9. Elaine B permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:17 pm

    If I did not have a flaming ultra-leftwing liberal cousin in Michigan I would never understand how that mindset works (or should I say, fails to work.)

    She is, of course, a huge Granholm fan even though her own son has lost his prison guard job (closed the prison) and will soon lose his home.

    She calls me for a handout all of the time.

  10. Elaine B permalink
    December 5, 2009 7:21 pm

    I forgot to add this cousin married an alcoholic, has been on the government dole for 40 years and lives in the home her father built with his own hands and she owns free and clear and she has more money from us taxpayers to purchase food than I have.

Comments are closed.