Story Comments

Plug in cars would cost the equivalent of 60 cents per gallon to drive at the current average electric rates. The electricity to charge them could conceive ably come from solar or wind.This past year the high cost of gas seriously damaged our economy and society. While we are doing the Happy Dance around the lower pierces at the pump OPEC is planning straggly to raise the price per barrel back up to between 7-100. again. We really need to get on with alternative energy. Bail us out of our dependence on foreign oil and the control it has over our economy and society. There is a great new book out called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence NOW by Jeff Wilson. I highly recommend this book for anyone who is worried about our economy and would like to see our country become energy independent. www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com

To Mr. mccmarine,

You should read Keynes Theory, or maybe you just read but didn't quite understand it.
And wasn't this theory the 'bible' of countries completly sunken in the great depression?
Was a measure like New Deal done by privates? Or by the Government?
Countries like US, Germany, England took some of the measures proposed by Keynes in order to start their economies engine again and eventually worked.
Well sorry, I'm european speciflcy portuguese, and in 'american english' this means 'socialist', but maybe after the 'great depression' those Welfare State synptoms weren't that nocive to the US of A. Or were they?
Maybe you do need an interventive State.
Consumer confidence? Which consumers? The ones living in their cars? Are they your answer to the problem?
Maybe you don't quite get how far are still the USA from Sweden for example.
Nevertheless I'm not saying Europeans got it right, at all!
But what amazes me is americans saying th...(Read more of this comment)at deregulation is still the way to go and that Government should be a spectator in issues concerning economy.
These 'deregulation' and 'markets free from state intervention' supporters seem to me like the band playing in titanic and not caring at all if the water level is rising.
Its obvious that the market itself couldnt predict nor prevent this crisis, but if you still want to keep the government out of this equation, maybe its time to call Krypton to see if Superman is on the way.
Mr.Stewart's article isn't naive I think hes got it right, but thats my 'socialist' opinion.
Anyway good luck solving the crisis because the rest of the world depends on you.(Show less of this comment)

diddly, it is diddly squat

I implore Mr. Stewart to purchase a history book and learn 1) how our government works (the history of a president's affect on the economy) and, the history of what has happened when a president tried to directly affect the economy. How such a naive article can be printed is beyond me. Wait, I just figured it out! We live in a republic. Our founding fathers realized we knew to little to make our own decisions so we elect people to make them for us. The origins of Mr. Stewart's far fetched rambling can clearly be traced to the Kool-aid distributed to the American public by the Obama campaign and the media that uncaringly spread it faster and farther than Fed Ex ever could. This article is an embarrassment to this magazine and shed any reputability it might have had on the economy and politics.

Iran just asked OPEC to cut production by 1.5 more million barrels per day...here we go again...we have never been more ripe for a green revolution. Jeff Wilson's book is so right on the money The Manhattan Project of 2009 could not have been written at a better time in our history.

Is this guy for real? I can not believe that a column about bigger goverment and larger spending found its way to 'Smartmoney'. We are in a recession. History tells us that our government can not spend its way out of a recession. The only thing this accomplishes is a longer recession.

This recession needs to do what it is here to do: punish the fat cats and those who made stupid decisions. We should NOT bail them out nor encourage bigger government. There is no quick fix for a recession, because the core of a recession is overall consumer confidence. This confidence does not come from government spending.

DO NOT ALLOW OUR GOVERNMENT TO GET ANY BIGGER, it is big enough.

Bad mortgages go us into this crisis for two reasons. First, home owners were allowed to borrow more than home values. Second, these were teaser mortgage rates with low rates for a few years with a large rate increase as they became 'adjustable' mortgages. The latter being a major cause of high defaults.

Today I received an Email from ING urging me to take out a low teaser rate for 5 years mortgage which then became 'adjustable' at who know how high an interest rate? 8%, 10%? So nothing has really changed! I hope I'm wrong.

The last 168 BILLION DOLLAR round of stimulus checks did NADA for our economy. We must not as a nation forget the role the high cost of our dependence on foreign fuel played in the demise of businesses from the largest to the smallest. The exorbitant cost of gas the past year has done serious damage to our economy and society. Jobs and homes have been lost at a record rate. The increased cost of production and shipping of every consumer good imaginable have been passed on to the consumer.What OPEC has in store for our future is not pretty. We need to take lessons from our mistakes.WE also need to get out from under the grip our dependence on fore gin oil has on us. Why not take some of these billions and invest in America becoming energy independent. Driving an electric car would cost the equivalent of 60 cents a gallon. The electricity could be generated by solar or wind power. Green technology would create millions of badly needed new jobs. What America needs is a green revolution. I...(Read more of this comment)t is time for us to move forward with alternative energy. I just read Jeff Wilson's new book The Manhattan Project of 2009. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is concerned about the downward spiral of our economy and it's effect on our society and would like to see our country become energy independent! www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com

(Show less of this comment)

Mr. Stewart might want to check out a quote in yesterdays WSJ Letters to the Editor, by Henry Morgenthau(FDR's Treasury Secretary). In Congressional hearings in 1939 he said, 'We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work.'
' I say, after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started...and an enormous debt to boot!'
Does this sound prophetic of the direction we are heading? The comment, in another post, about reigning in the Unions is also right on the mark. Without that GM will never survive.

Mr. Stewart's Nov. 12 WSJ Common Sense column 'How Obama Can Fix the Economy' was excellent but failed to address the over arching climate crisis. Because our energy system is 'patently unsustainable' one can not address economic issues without also addressing energy insecurity and the climate crisis. With the advent of the microprocessor and other technologies of mass production one individual can make more cars, hamburgers, houses than he alone can drive, eat or live in. Thus, there is no way we can keep people gainfully employed unless they keep producing disposable junk that needs to be produced and consumed over and over again. And that leads us to the predicament we are in today; an economic, environmental and energy crisis. What we need is to keep people gainfully employed in a way that permanently addresses those issues. A way for people to be employed that also allows capitalism to thrive and flourish and does not contribute to the degradation of our environment...(Read more of this comment) or further exacerbate the energy crisis. The only solution I see is to pay people to go to school.

Education is a product for which there is an endless supply and demand. Education is something we can consume an endless amount of with out destroying our environment in the process. Education is the pillar of advanced societies. We would become an intellectually affluent society. We would have real qualitative development. We would replace welfare with educationfare, maximizing the potential of all people. All people going to school would get paid the minimum wage. As a society we could vote on the percent of the population we want in the system thus providing a steady state economy.

Adam Smith acknowledged specialization makes workers more efficient but also 'as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become.' Only government has the means to prevent such torpor, chiefly by diverting resources to education. But access to education would not just be for the uneducated poor and jobless workers whose work skills may have become obsolete or whose job has moved overseas. Education could be for an entry level trade worker or a graduate student studying fuel-cell technology. It could even be for a stroke victim to relearn daily activities such as how to button his shirt. And with more people maximizing their intellectual capacity we could solve some of our most pressing problems- energy insecurity and global warming- in years instead of decades. And, people will not be inclined to stay in the system forever making just minimum wage. They will readily see they can make more money as an educated, valued and well paid employee or as an entrepreneur. In the end, government spending on education may be the most constructive and virtuous use of public outlays.

(Show less of this comment)

Dear Mr. Stewart

Your common sense article on How Obama Can Fix the Economy makes a lot of sense. It has a lot of ideas that I completely agree with, but I think that you missed one or two key components

Even if the government appointed a czar to run GM, GM is still going to fail. As long as the government gives the Unions monopoly power to coerce unreasonable work practices and excessive compensation, it is highly unlikely that GM could ever earn a profit. They are paying on average around $78 per hour versus Toyota's $48 per hour. Also the non-union manufacturing companies do not have archaic work rules that increase labor costs.

Also the government imposed fuel economy rules prevent the auto makers from producing an optimal mix of cars but rather force GM to build unprofitable small cars in order to keep several auto plants operating in order to preserve Union jobs. I understand that Ford is profitably producing a fuel efficient car out side the U...(Read more of this comment)S but can not produce and sell it inside of the US because of government rules.

Thus the Congress ought to review the impact of the Wagner Act as well as the CAFÉ standards laws if they really want to save American jobs.

The politicians are always talking about fairness. How fair is it for the Congress to bail out their union friends in Detroit and not bail out construction companies and retailers who are in financial trouble? How fair is it to take tax money from Joe the plumber or Joe the mechanic and send it to their union friends who are making more money than Joe?

A quick analysis of recent industries with major problems - airlines, railroads, steel, all involved industries characterized by unions contracts where the employees were overpaid and archaic work rules existed. In a world economy, one country cannot have rigid rules that prevent companies from restructuring and adjusting to new technology and competition.


Sincerely

Thomas Barton
(Show less of this comment)

The Auto Business just gave what the People wanted... Big cars, Big Enignes..!

While us 'little' people just wanted a Mid size car with either a V6 or even a V4 in and We don't want heated seats, 17' Wheels and Tires costing Twice as much as 15' and A GPS to help us Find our way to the Grocery store or to Commute to work! They conned us and Forced Us to take those 'Former Options' by making them 'Standard' and thus drove the price up...

$30,000 for a Chevy? $35,000 for a Buick? R U Kidding Me? Used to be if you wanted alot of Luxuary Options, you bought either a Cad or a Lincoln...and not be forced to have all those expensive Options on your CHevy and never use or need them...

let alone have to pay Twice as much to Pay for the Maintenance on them now with all those options... so they can increase their Repair Shop profits....

Typical Used car salesmen attitudes...
It's back to the future time..until the next Generation gets Conned to do it all...(Read more of this comment) over again..

;0>(

(Show less of this comment)

DITTO > InformedObserver
Being Self Employed most of my life, I found some 9 out of 10 who try, Fail and that's just the way it is..

competions is Good, but not to the Extremes, like selling a franchise store business to some unsuspecting person/group to open one in a too Small A Town to support it or in one that has 10 other same kind of Businesses...

Reminds me of the 60-70's when we had 4 Gas stations on every Intersection.. Those were Franchises... and the old Pryamid Days of the 70's wer another con game of over selling and saturation vs the Population to support it..

It seems only firms like McDonalds Keeps the Lid on this and all the others like it Don't ...
And why would Home Depot And A Lowes Open up a Store in our Little 7,500 Pop. Town and the other Towns are ave of 15 mil away and are all small towns as well? They have been Museums ever since opening 5 yrs ago..

Glad out Town Council requires a Bond to pay for a Businesess...(Read more of this comment) Buildings to be Torn down after they leave...2 Dealerships and 4 others have gone and are now torn down ..

And how can a Movie theatre with 4 Screens expect to stay in business in a Small Pop. Town and try to charge $12 per Person? Who are they kidding?

Ever been to Gurnee Mills in N. Illinois? It's now franchise City with Fast food Chains and they are ALL Dying.. and have been for Yrs...talk about over saturation...

City and Town Councils have to take control of things and slow down all this Saturation going on... and not look for the short run of Getting RE taxes and Low paying jobs, but for the Long Term Growth and Stability of their Community..

Our Town has adopted a '0' growth policy for past 3 yrs now.. and if our Little 7,500 pop can;t support a New Business that wants to come in? It don't get in..

We send them to neighboring towns to destroy them instead and they have..

(Show less of this comment)

Much of this 'common sense' is misguided. It's true that we have to shore up the financial system, since it underpins the entire economy. And we do need a president who is willing and able to communicate with the Nation about which policies are needed, why they are needed, and what the long term implications are of short-term fixes.

That's good for starters, but the US auto industry can't be fixed by a government bailout. The industy's cars are uncompetitive and costs are so high that they can't make any money selling the small cars that the world wants now. The only way to fix this is...lower costs. This means renegotiating union contracts (unlikely in a Democratic adminsitration) and jettisoning the overhanging burden of retiree benefits. The latter option means, in turn, that the rest of us--who have no pensions or retirement healthcare benefits--will end up subsidizing through taxes those who have these benefits. Watch this Congress and see if the bailout doesn't trans...(Read more of this comment)fer these labor costs to taxpayers instead of forcing the industry and its employees into a financial structure that is competitive.

'The 'everyone knows' lesson from the Depression is simply wrong, historically. The Depression was caused by government policy that we are getting ready to repeat, and all the Keynesian spending did nothing to reduce free-market unemployment. Only the war ended the Depression, and that is because hundreds of thousands of potential employees were given a different job (fight and die) and the economy was ramped up to support that effort. At the end of the war, we were the only remaining viable economy in the Western world. That helped our economy a lot more than FDR's alphabet agencies. Further, governement spending on the arts and public transporation will not restart America's engines. I like good theatre as much as anyone, but the arts don't create wealth in the economy; successful businesses that create jobs do that. And public transportation is a fine idea except that 95% of the country doesn't live in areas with enough population density to make it viable. Where we have such density--surprise--we have public transporation systems.

Ending compensation for management failure is a good notion, but it is a populist prescrIption that will contribute almost nothing to correcting the current economic collapse. And good luck trying to sell this Congress on the idea that it's OK for anyone to make a lot of money in return for hard work and success. The Congressional majority now starts with the notion that if you make a lot of money, their job is to take it from you and turn it over to those who are not as successful. They see the economy as a pie to be divided, so that one person's success reflects wealth stolen from others. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of a free economy, but one that appeals to our personal pride and envy to win votes.

Fianlly, of all the proposals mentioned, a reasonable role for government is best reflected in the supposed bridge to nowhere. This is just a cheap shot that reflects Mr. Stewart's unfamiliarity with the situation there. The famous bridge was intended to open for economic activity an area across the channel from Ketchikan. That densely settled city--the 4th largest in Alaska--is hemmed in by water, mountains, Federal lands, and Native Corporation lands. Changes in Federal environmental policies effectively shut down the logging and fishing industies that served as the economic base for this area, and the only developable property for alternatives is across the channel. So unlike a lot of government pork, the much-derided bridge would serve as partial compensation for the government policies that ruined the city's economy, and would also serve to open for free-market, tax-paying activity the only nearby land not in governemnt hands. (Show less of this comment)

The current Teen to 40 somethings need a Reality Check..They think their Tax $ should be given away to Some Poor Country and We don't need to Go to War ... We don't Need anymore defense, we have 'Star Wars'...LOL

Sure wish Our Gov't would Show were all Peoples Tax Money Really goes.. and not bury it in some 10,000 page report..made up by Spin Doctors to make it look good..and Hide 'Earmarks' and Pork..

You want to Go to College, work a Nice Cushy Job and live the Good life? Then Get out your Checkbook and Pay Others to Defend you.. at Twice as much as they are getting paid now and alot more Benefits, such as They won't have to pay Taxes on the first $50,000 during and After Serving...forever! You want others to do your fighting for you? Get out your Checkbook..

Just like they did in the Cival War...

DITTO> jepassos

and we best save Investors & Create Jobs! Otherwise where is all this $ going to come from to fund all this?
And Best ReInstate a Draft.. The Teens -30 somethings have lived a very easy and no responsiblity Life and have to be brought into Reality...Defense is Not a Video game....

using Nat'l Guard and Reserves is Not a Way to Defend a country..It doesn't work..

obama cant fix doodly squat..only hair brain nancy can do that,.. and she does not have enoygh smarts to come in outta da rain..it shows by her wanting to bail out the little 3

The real question is who are we going to bail out? Are we going to bail out the management, the investors, the employees, or the people that depend on a business to keep functioning. These are very different.

The management got fat and lazy, and rewarded them selves as if it was their inspired leadership that should get the credit for the good times. We should not bail them out at all, we should throw them out; after all risk management and long term value creation are the key executive responsibilities, and they failed.

The investors? Unfortunately, everything the management did they did for the investors and in their names, and if investors want to reap the reward they have to face the risk. The investment community was also asleep, thinking that this time it was different. I would dilute them by issuing new stock or preferred convertible stock, just as has been suggested, and just as has always been done.

Unfortunately we cannot bail out the em...(Read more of this comment)ployees too much, or we change the purpose of the company into a jobs program. Don't get me wrong, jobs programs can be good if they are temporary and educational. A company must exist to create value or it decreases society's wealth. Letting a non-competitive company exist any longer than necessary just increases the costs. We should cover some of these costs to ensure that employees are not just thrown out, but we cannot and should not make it as if nothing had ever happened.

Really a bail out must be for society as a whole, and not focus on these 3 'special interest' groups. Consider AIG (but there are plenty of other examples): so long as the insurance policies stay in force, so people get the coverage they paid for, and can continue to get coverage, then society as a whole is unharmed. This what is important, and in the big picture, that is all that is important. Or consider GM: so long as we can get parts for the life of the GM cars we already have, and assuming that the auto market is competitive enough that losing GM would not cause monopoly power, then why does it matter if GM never sells another car? Most cars sold are already made by some other company, why not all of them? It would matter a lot to the employees to be sure, and we should cover them to some extent, but does it matter to America? How badly was America hurt when RCA stopped making TV's?

The bottom line is that the only risks we should bail out are the risks to the country, not the risks to management or investors, and not all of the risks to the employees. If a company creates no value, then we don't need it. If it does create value, then it is worth something and perhaps we should invest in it. Under no circumstances should we just throw money at it to make life easier for anyone.(Show less of this comment)