Dear Sir,
I am a conservative. I will always vote for the candidate
that believes in the smallest government. I would like to share two stories of
what the policies of liberals have done in the life of a friend of mine and in
my own life. I will start with my friend. Names have been changed to protect
people’s privacy.
My friend Jim is a Korean vet who worked for a construction
union his entire adult life, except for his time in Korea . During his career, he worked
hard for the union as well as the contractors for which he worked. I would
describe him as a good union man. He fought for good benefits, both while
working and after retirement. He used to tell me proudly of the “cradle to
grave” care of the union. We often discussed politics, business, and unions. While
we had dramatically different views (He was a liberal Democrat), he taught me
so much over the years. I am proud to count him as a dear friend, and in many
ways a mentor.
When Jim retired at 67 after nearly 50 years of membership
in the same local, he discovered over time that the “cradle to grave” care
wasn’t what he had been promised by union leadership over the last 50 years. The
union had failed to set aside enough money to provide for their aging
membership. As a result, retirees were informed that they would have to pay “a
small percentage of the costs of their health care”. This percentage grew over
a few years to consume almost all of his pension.
The roots of the problem were two fold. First, the union
leaders assumed that there would always be a large number of union members to
fund the retirees benefits. When this began to change as more and more work
went to non-union contractors, they failed to plan for the future and set aside
more funds to take care of the faithful members, like Jim. Secondly, the union
leadership felt that they should have salaries commensurate with their status. Eventually,
they lost sight of the men they were elected to serve. They saw the accumulated
funds for member retirements as their personal slush fund. Money that
rightfully belonged to the members was used to buy influence and power for the
leaders.
In the end, Jim became bitter toward the people that lied to
him for many years while they feathered their own nests. He began to see the
union leadership as just as corrupt as he saw the corporations that he railed
against.
Fast forward to today. I am a small business man. I started
my own business servicing industrial machinery over 20 years ago when the
company I worked for went bankrupt. The failure of that company was an
engineered death designed to allow the owner to fill his pockets at the expense
of employees and vendors, much like Solyndra.
My business is founded on simple principles. First, I will
not enrich myself at the expense of my employees. I have never made more money
than my top mechanics, and often far less. Second, as long as my employees
abide by my three simple rules, I will do everything I can to educate them and
reward them. The rules: 1) Don’t lie to me. 2) Don’t steal from me or our customers.
3) Don’t show up for work stoned or drunk. Violate one of them and you are
fired.
A typical new hire is a person with little real experience
but has a desire to learn. Over time, they will have the opportunity to learn
to be a millwright with significant electrical controls experience or a master
electrician with significant mechanical knowledge. Starting rate is 150% of
minimum wage (or more depending on skills). Top rate is over double that. Plus,
we generally have between 10 and 15 hours a week of overtime. My top employees
typically earn high five figures. Over the years, I have had three employees
leave to start their own successful businesses using skills they learned
working for me. I don’t begrudge them their success, even though I have to
start over, investing in a new person.
Over the years, especially the last four, my expenses have
skyrocketed, largely due to government mandates and regulations. For the sake
of example, I am picking one: unemployment insurance. In 20 years, I have laid
off four people. One was someone that I should have fired, but laid him off so
that he could collect unemployment until he found another job. He collected for
5 weeks. The other three were laid of in 2009 after I lost a major account that
represented 70% of our revenues. Before they were laid off, I borrowed $150,000
to pay their salaries for six months while I sought new customers to replace
the revenues. Unfortunately, I failed to accomplish that and was forced to lay
them off. Yet, I still have to repay the money borrowed to support them for six
months.
Even though my company has never had a negative balance in
our unemployment insurance fund, our rate when from 0.6% of payroll to 7.0%. For
a new hire, this is a $2000 penalty for me. For a top employee, this is almost
$6000. This is a ten fold increase in just one expense. Why should I be
penalized for running a business that is successful, run for the long term, and
is not part of the problem? If my business closes, I am ineligible for
unemployment, in spite of paying into it for my entire working career, even
though I have never collected.
To encourage hiring, our government created tax breaks for
companies that hire people, do research, or buy equipment. Unfortunately, I
don’t qualify for any of them, in spite of investing $50,000 in training the
average employee in the first 3-5 years of employment. These expenses mean that
I will not seek to grow my business or hire new people until the regulatory
environment changes. If I am forced to close my business, because of my skills,
I will have little trouble finding a job. I will admittedly be taking a job
that someone less qualified needs to survive. I will go from providing for five
other families to providing just for my own.
I share these things because it is policies of both major
parties that have created the problem. Just like the leadership of the
operating engineers, politicians are more than willing to pad their own pockets
and to buy votes to maintain their power and prestige. I am vehemently against
cutting the lifeline of welfare, social security, or Medicare for those who
need it. However, I believe that there are ways to change the application of
the programs that would provide for the needs of the truly needy while reducing
the cost to the taxpayer and providing fiscal stability to each program. Unfortunately,
with few exceptions, neither side is willing to have an honest discussion of
fixing the problem.
For example, welfare reform is completely off the table. I
have a fairly equitable solution that encourages success and individual growth
without hurting those that truly need. Welfare benefits are currently worth X
dollars. What is so wrong with saying that if you get a job, your benefits
won’t be reduced until you earn 30% of X. For each dollar you earn over that
level, your benefits are reduced by $0.25/dollar earned. If you earn over 60%
of X, the reduction is $0.50/dollar earned. You wouldn’t lose your benefits
until you earn more than the benefits are worth. At no point would you have
less than if you only receive X dollars in benefits. This method provides an
incentive to work and to improve oneself. Yet, even this modest reform is
completely unacceptable to liberals, in particular.
Ultimately, power corrupts. I include myself as guilty. To
paraphrase Gandalf from Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” series when offered the
Ring of Power: I would start off benefiting Middle Earth. But eventually, I
would become evil. This tendency is part of the human condition. We can’t be
trusted with too much power. This is true of corporate presidents, union
leaders, bankers, Wall Streeters, politicians, and OWSers. It is true of all
people. As a result most politicians are more interested in their own short
term future than they are in fixing the problems. Power has corrupted them,
just like you and I.
Peace,
David R. Fry
Excellent! Thank you!
ReplyDeleteWell put, the writer makes his case well. He is right about the effect of power. As Churchill is credited with saying - all power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely. Something our politicians, with their 'careers' in parliament or congress, seem to have forgotten.
ReplyDelete