Comments

A link to the article would be helpful. I certainly can't find it be searching on the LA Times site.
Thanks.

Posted by Lance Knobel at February 27, 2009 7:02 PM

Yes Tom,
I can not find the article either. A direct link would be very helpful.

As always, thanks a million for everything,
Prab

Posted by Prab at February 27, 2009 7:50 PM

My fault! Here you go:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/politicalconnections.php

Posted by cathy mosca at February 27, 2009 8:17 PM

Great article. Amazing that ideology trumps poverty in South Carolina,Louisiana and Mississippi. Sheer idiocy!

www.danerwin.com

Posted by Dan Erwin at February 27, 2009 9:30 PM

As a Southerner, I was surprised that Brownstein played the race card to dismiss the southern governors' criticisms of the stimulus package. To acquaint today's South with the Dixiecrat South of 60 years ago is either ignorance or malice. It would have been a far better article if he had actually offered a real critique of their position instead of smearing them. I thought we were beyond using race for ideologically motivated purposes. I guess not.
It suggests to me that the argument for the stimulus package is weaker than I suspected. Does it mean that the cause of green energy is weaker, more ideologically driven than many of us have thought? Is this going to be a repeat of the tech bubble and the housing bubble? Are we going to see a green bubble because of this stimulus package?
I found it another example of how partisanship prevents real dialogue about the crucial issues we face. Thanks for posting it. I would not have read it otherwise.

Posted by Ed Brenegar at February 28, 2009 12:40 AM

Psychology always beats economic theory in my opinion. Optimism can overcome almost anything in life. ‘I think therefore I am’ still wins for me.

Meanwhile ….. Here in the UK we see businesses failing in record numbers; thousands of front line employees losing their jobs every week; home re-possessions running at an all-time high and people really scared about their future. At the same time we hear the story of Sir Fred Goodwin, former CEO of Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) who, at 50 years of age, has been ‘pensioned off’ after being in charge of RBS for a few years. Under Sir Fred’s ‘leadership’ RBS announced that its 2008 loss totalled £24.1bn ($34.2bn), the largest in UK corporate history.

But never mind … Sir Fred has probably not been left destitute as a result of his leadership because he has been awarded a pension of £13,000 ($18500) PER WEEK that's £693,000 ($990,000) PER YEAR for the rest of his life. At the same time millions of front line employees wonder if their house may be repossessed tomorrow.

I am not for one second suggesting Sir Fred should lose everything - but for him to say he is not prepared to give back a single penny feels obscene.

Regardless of what the law says we surely must ask about morality and ethics among our business leaders who are supposed to set the example.

Capitalism and 'light touch regulation' is a great concept while the sun shines it seems to me as a non economist. The older I get and the more I see of capitalism the more I love socialism.

“Dropping Almonds” the book written by Bach Anon captures perfectly the lack of integrity among leaders in business. Bach’s book is a must-read for anyone wanting to see what’s wrong with leadership in the business world.

Here’s the BBC News link about Sir Fred Goodwin - I wonder if he will be worrying - like millions of people on our ONE planet - whether he can afford to eat today http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7916215.stm

Posted by Trevor Gay at February 28, 2009 4:04 AM

I am troubled by this article in that it compares one uber succesful region of California with that of the traditionally poor states in the south.

If any of the states mentioned had a major industry that was going to benefit greatly from the stimulus plan, and it was clear path to prosperity, each would jump all over it and endorse it as the folks in the valley do. And even though each of the states mentioned has pockets of prosperity, these governors have to deal with their states in its entirety.

My state of birth and my home, South Carolina, has systemic problems going back to slavery and our idiotic resistance to desegregation. We are paying for the sins of our fathers.

For example, in the stimulus bill, there are some great ideas on increasing the funding to get more people into college. But in our state, even though we spend over $8,100 per year to educate our K-12 students (California spends slightly more at $8,400), we don't see the same benefit as other states as we have close to a 50% drop out rate. Yes, our poorly educated parents beget children that are also poorly educated. And the only jobs they are qualified for are low skilled and easily transported to low wage countries like China and Vietnam (textiles being a recent example).

So even though I applaud the Presidents push for higher education, this type of program is not going to do much for our folks that didn't even graduate high school. This, and much of the stimulus dollars frankly will not help folks in South Carolina, Mississippi and Alabama,

So why does our governor rail against the package like his predecessors did against the new deal? Because, if the new deal was really all that great for the folks in South Carolina, and other poor southern states, how come we are still poor?

Posted by Mark Richards at February 28, 2009 8:38 AM

This is another story that despite the odds, opportunities always exist. But more importantly, it illustrates that some economic clusters know how to best leverage them - private or government. Silicon Valley is simply at the top of this heap.

Posted by Rodney Johnson at February 28, 2009 1:26 PM

My intent was not to malign the South--though my "endorsement" of the article might imply that.

Sorry!!!!

My goal was to re-enforce a point from an earlier post that there's a lot right going on in the US of A. And it largely (totally, more or less) goes unreported.

(My friend Joel Kotkin wrote in Time or Newsweek this week that CA's great strength is not, in fact, NoCal's hightech hotshots, important as they are, but SoCal's immigrant entrepreneurial hotbed--most, obviously, Latinos. I agree with that as well, regardless of the fact that it contradicts the first point to some extent.)

As I also said earlier, it pisses me off that more or less 40 million Californians seem to be off-the-radar foe those who report on America's economic troubles.

Again, sorry for any offense--I grew up in what was then part of the South, Annapolis MD, and consider myself part-Southerener (my Mom was Old Virginia--Northern Neck) and I lived mostly in MD (1st 20 years)and CA (next 35 years).

Posted by tom peters at February 28, 2009 2:30 PM

Tom,

Just finished wrapping up a business meeting with a multicultural couple and we were discussing diversity and the progress of the States. I think the bigger issue of America's society is more aligned with Trevor's comments.

I've never seen so much reward (money) handed out for such poor results and leadership. Very counterculture to how I run my business, you run your business, and Trevor runs his. I'm not sure why the elitists of the United States and abroad continue to receive golden parachutes for running companies into the ground.

I also had a business meeting with another client yesterday. Husband and wife team that gave up a career in education to start their own business. Their business is successful and they are both wonderful people. What's their problem? They can't get money from the banks to fund payroll and finish current projects (they have contracts signed and ready to go). They are dead in the water until the banks begin to circulate some bridge loans for operating expenses and wrapping up current projects. Then the domino effect begins to occur for our economy...

During our lunch, we thought the scenario in the States was outlandish because the major auto companies were taking and asking and taking and asking for more and more money. The car companies had been failing before the "bailout period" and they were and are terribly managed and led. Yet, I'm sitting before a small business owner and his wife, college educated with a great business model, and they can't get a dime from the banks.

My questions for you, TP, is this: What happens when the government performs its "stress test" of the American banking industry and finds out, that even with trillions in prop up money, that the banks are essentially insolvent? Where will the stock market go then?

While auto makers continue to receive billions upon billions while showing their inability to manage, the client I'm dealing with, a small business owner, can't get a dime to fund day-to-day operations, money the owner will pay back to the banks as he draws income.

We, without a doubt, have not aligned our financial priorities with the hard working Americans that remains a silent majority that go out of business, get laid off, and now moves out of the country to get a fresh start (in some cases).

Posted by Scott Peters at February 28, 2009 3:09 PM

Luckily for you all - you know that me & mine have never been happier, healthier & wealthier with our Barack Silicon-energy-education-healthcare-banking mega riches.

That is my GIFT of peace & love to you this last day of February - that you know the wealth grows exponentially (for me anyway) - c'est la vie.

Love this great recession silver lining of the House of Lords being reduced to the lapdogs, minions, & vermin that they truly are.

Once we have Trevor Gay as a slum dog of bankruptcy - as the ultimate Simplicity - then & only then shall we be safe & free. Love & peace.

Posted by C Love at February 28, 2009 8:12 PM

PS - Memo to Sir Fred Goodwin from The Eagles wonderfully irreverent Don Henley:

"A man with a briefcase can steal millions more than any man with a gun."

PS - love to you too C Love :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 1, 2009 2:17 AM

Don't worry Trevor, Sir Fred will be the first with his back against the wall when the revolution comes!

Posted by PaulH at March 1, 2009 2:02 PM

Thanks PaulH - good to hear from a fellow member of The Tooting Popular Front. Our leader 'Citizen Smith' lives on brother :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at March 1, 2009 4:08 PM

New clients of mine Scott Peters, Richard Lipscombe & Trevor Gay have been classified as "toxic assets" under the USA TARP "troubled assets" program.

C Love Ltd. has secured $10M free and clear for EACH of them - given that ALL of their clients from 2005-2009 have gone bankrupt.

The magistrate had a special wicked googlie ruling for "digital warrior" Lipscombe in that he is re-branded to "digitalminion.org" or perhaps "digitalweasel.net" or maybe "digitalgiantego.com" - depending on the English to Australian translation.

Peace & love & bailouts for all.

Posted by C Love at March 1, 2009 6:03 PM

C Love,

I'm in good company with Richard and Trevor. No bailouts for me, I'm far too low on the totem pole.

Remember gasoline and the panic associated with per gallon gas prices? The same is true of our economy and capital will begin to flow at some point in the future. After all of the cobwebs are clean, there will be brighter days and C Love for all. When the economy turns, hold on, because commodity prices will soar (once again), the Stock Market will rebound (once again), and I will make some money during the turn.

Night is always darkest just before dawn...

canadian pharmacy for viagra

Peace and Love, Peace and Love!!

Hey C Love...you should navigate over to http://simplicityitk.blogspot.com

Trevor and I are in perfect harmony on his blogspot. Long live the King. Feel free to donate some of your bailout money to his charitable cause and Race for Carers. Very simple process!

Posted by Scott Peters at March 1, 2009 9:17 PM

Interesting comparing a small city to entire states just to try to make a point. Isn't California in bankruptcy and can’t even afford to pay the workers? Perhaps, the author should fix his own state before trying to tear down the other states.

Posted by Rob at March 2, 2009 10:07 AM

Recipients of bail-out booty should be optimistic!
Those who will foot the bill, less so.
Thus, the article was a statement of the obvious.

Peace

Posted by jimi at March 3, 2009 9:38 AM

Thank you, Tom, for raising the treacherous issue. After the disgrace of 9/11/2001, the U.S. of A. government in making it impossible for extreme talent to take their knowledge, dexterities, and clients from, say, the European Community and Japan. You go to Uncle Sam’s embassy and they get you in a black list to make it impossible to enter in the country, since you do not have the Robert Redford’s physiognomy (that is, the Scandinavian looks). Wait a minute! This guy even has a good behavior “score card” given by the Immigration Service. This fellow was schooled here in America and got graduated with (American) honors. “This guy” has not only legally and lawfully worked in the U.S. with great success. But he also was heavily trained by Americans, Britons, and Anglo-Canadians. He’s only error is that he is a Judeo-Christian (extremely respectful of all denominations, creeds, and races), namely a 150% Westerner (almost from the Bible Belt). And he wishes to take a worldwide contract out Toyota of Japan and Novartis of Switzerland into an American firm. What for? So that the American firm makes some huge money that otherwise would not cash in said American firm. Globally sophisticated talents with a high degree of sophistication and respect and already-Americanized (by act of own consciousness) for the “States” are tired of paying zillions to those immigration lawyers. It seems to me that Americans must not ever allow this and change this situation at any legal cost. Though, is there problem, not mine. It is not a job you are given a foreigner. It is an Americanized foreigner that can bring Japanese and Swiss investment to Uncle Sam’s heartland with lots of jobs and opportunities for actual Americans. To do what? To create jobs and pay taxes in that great heartland. Many colleagues of mines find it extremely fluid and comfortable in doing business with the British. You know well that out of London you can do so much without that stupid harassment by the Cambrian red-tapers. In effect, if the Obama administration does not change this IMMEDIATELY, the Japanese and Swiss investments, among others, will be a delight to the wise and sophisticated British. America has never ever needed more of these executive that she educated and shaped to the highest standards as per the American culture. In my case, if someone wishes to get me onboard on a lucrative project, he will have to grant me the citizenship. Otherwise, I am not interested as I reflect that the true “shinny city” of London, is so much to my gusto and peace of mind too. Tis, Tom, a huge problem, perhaps pseudo “epic,” not to international talents, but to Americans from all walks of life. In the mean time my sister and I are over-actively cooperating with the top military attaché of the U.S. Embassy (in a Latam country). Cooperating equates to look after the well-being of 20,000 U.S. citizens working as permanent residents in such a country and under the ‘pro bono’ mode. I have nothing against Hispanic. My family heritage, though, is all European, chiefly from England, Scotland, France, Spain, and Corsica. Tough European upbringing to my brothers and myself. What are the American people going to do as they have so many concerns? I am already learning—in this order—German, Japanese, and Russian to kill those stupid border limitations while I take my intellectual capital to the highest level. In the process, we will have the greatest respect, esteem, and admiration for Americans, but so too for British, Anglo-Canadians, and Australians. Even Oscar Wilde mentioned his upsetting going through immigration and customs. Hey, America is sovereign and to a great degree it will close all maritime, airborne, land borders WITHOUT A FAIL. Who is the persona non grata? That who engages the communists through the world against the best values of the U.S. Right? Our friends in the Military Attachés (top brass) are so embarrassed. We get invited to the ambassador’s official parties and those of the generals, BUT OUTSIDE THE STATES. They supervise who gets and who does not get even the sight-seeing visa, clearly under the express mandate of the Pentagon as of now. I speak to you Tom because you are a meritorious person. Perhaps, you can ventilate this problem with some senior political people. You know that this subject is all over online and otherwise publications of management, business and science. For those that we’ll complete our ultimate education and formation a second prior to the last exhale, we’ll make the BIG BUCKS anyway.

Posted by Andres Agostini (Andy) at March 4, 2009 3:26 AM

Interesting, Andy, and compounded by apparent confusion by officials over what the rules actually say. The new DHS travel authorisation process, which requires online registration before travel into the US, is a good example, where there seems to be uncertainty about very basic issues. The authorisation has a lifetime of two years, but does that cover multiple entries, where some of the details such as address in the US would change? The British Airways website says yes, the DHS recently told a UK friend of mine (who works for a US company, travels to the US probably 20 or more times a year, and this time needed at short notice to make a one-day business trip from the US to Canada and back) that it didn't. And whereas the DHS website says that 72 hours' advance notice is "recommended", the official she checked with said it was mandatory. As a result, the trip didn't happen and business was lost, to her US firm. It's all confusing, inefficient, off-putting and bad for business.

Posted by RobCH at March 4, 2009 6:24 AM