The story about the beggar

This is an edited version of the story I heard. It's one of the supposedly boring stories that are supposed to teach you something, and yes, while many others also hear it, only a few knew what it really meant.

Once, there was a merchant (I prefer to think of a farmer) who made a good living. To and from his work, he always passed by a beggar every day. Taking pity on the beggar, every once a week, he would give the beggar enough money for food. Over the years, the charity became a routine.

Unfortunately, disaster (think a drought) struck and business was bad. The merchant barely made a living and decided to cut back on his charity, and being the nice man he always was, he decided to let the beggar know.

So he said "Business has been bad. I'm sorry but I have to give you less from now on."

The beggar reacted by grabbing the merchant's collar and yelling "What did you do to my money?"

Of course, this is a age old story, meant to advocate smart use of resources, even with maximum social benefit in mind. But, what GM, Ford and Chrysler are doing now are no different from the beggar. The fact that the cash burn started from poor management for a few decades now makes bailing out the "Wheeny" three even more futile and merely suicidal on the cash perspective. It's one thing to feel angry about being scammed, its another to be angry at others for your own doing. Oh, did I mention their arrogance years before to lobby against the US government?

I think emigrating the entire state of workers to start drilling in Texas would cost less. Also, the UAW has always been hardlined about their worker's welfare. They want the automakers to take care of everything, even when the workers are no longer with the company. Now, how is that money earning the company more money? Did the worker build something great? Are the workers in the company benefitting from their predecessors?

It's one thing to be responsible for your workers, but its another when the company cannot survive taking the stab to the gut. Ultimately, reward should only come after work is done, not before. I always believe people have to work for their food, where the poor and willing workers of many other countries do not have a chance to.

However, if one does and is unrewarded, then many others will be unrewarded too. Motivation will be lost and that will hence bring about the downfall of the empire by its rotten leadership. UAW has done a great job. Too good in fact. Policing rewards is a tricky job and in this case, UAW made it unsustainable for the automakers. Of course, they can always say the automakers are not competitive enough, but they are ultimately part of the team in the automaker.

I would feel the sincerity of the workers of the three companies if they asks their union to cut back on their welfare demands. Afterall the crew sink with the captain and the ship, as long as the captain is not Jack Sparrow, or Paulson. Anyway, even a cutback in benefit will need to be in black and white to protect the workers. We know unscrupulous capitalist industrialists and their sneaky lawyers will backstab the hardworking workers once the "war against depression" is over. Then again, you can believe I'm being optimistically utopian, but I do advise ward against harm. Better be safe than sorry. Hardworking people should always be rewarded, merely pen pushing lawyers shouldn't.

Still, like what I believe from the story above, bailing out the automakers will mean that the taxpayers' money is worthless. Even the workers at the automakers. How much will you pay for a worthless product? Now, imagine your money is taken to put into junk, how much will it be worth? I sincerely hope my argument is put in good perspective, and that the people of America where freedom is believed to be everywhere will stand up and oppose any more unnecessary bailouts, and Obama has not inspired confidence that he will do the right thing yet. Please don't waste my vote of trust, Obama.