It could well be the biggest economic reversal in Charleston since the Navy packed up and left a decade ago. Earlier this week, Maersk, Inc. announced it will leave the Ports of Charleston over the next two years, and it's anyone's guess how much it will affect the area.
Maersk spokesmen blame the International Longshoremen's Association (ILA) for its the decision. According to the Post and Courier, the ILA "rejected the company's proposal to move the so-called common area of the port and allow State Ports Authority workers to perform jobs that would otherwise fall to union labor."
Although labor unions have become a convenient scapegoat (and one must admit, much of the heat is warranted), the real issue is what will happen next.
Folks who visit Charleston may not realize how busy a shipping center it is, but it's huge. Three container terminals, plus plans to build a fourth on the old Navy base. A smaller breakbulk terminal downtown. A handful of smaller, vest-pocket shipping interests, and several oil docks. For years Charleston vied with Savannah for fourth place among the busiest shipping entities in the nation.
If shipping is the largest industry in the region, Maersk is clearly the largest customer. Now, the huge Danish company -- the world's largest shipping line -- accounts for 20 percent of the containers moving in and out of Charleston, and until recently its share was 30 percent. The Wando-Welch shipping terminal, on the Mount Pleasant side of the Cooper River, has room ("berths") for four container ships. Two of those berths are reserved for Maersk/SeaLand ships, and there have been times a Maersk ship has had to borrow one of the other berths. Using that as a yardstick, Maersk/SeaLand accounts for more than half of the business at the Wando docks. All the others -- MOL, Evergreen, Hanjin, MSC -- are bit players by comparison.
While it's possible the pullout is merely a bluff by Maersk to force a better deal -- such things are possible -- you may soon hear the sound of wagons circling in Charleston. Expect thousands of jobs to be affected in the area.
Although Maersk is closemouthed about where its ships will call, I'm betting on Savannah. Apparently the ILA is not as strong there, and there is already a network of warehouses and distribution centers in the area. Charleston does not have this; there are plans to build along the I-26 corridor (including about 12 million square feet of warehouse space in nearby Jedburg). However, already-existing distribution centers are a lot more useful for storing containers and shipped goods than something that merely exists on paper. And, with Maersk planning to pull out, this may well put most of these plans in doubt.
I deal with a lot of Maersk containers on my job, and one trucking firm -- Bridge Terminal Transport (BTT) hauls the bulk of those. Six months ago, BTT had the busiest bunch of trucks at the rail yard where I work. That has slacked off considerably, and now the drivers are wondering about their future.
"I'm real curious what we're going to get now," one BTT driver told me.
Other drivers, you can bet, are looking to jump ship. That is, if there's a place to jump to. While BTT's business has slacked off considerably at the rail yard, it's been that way with most of the truckers. It's just that the decline was most noticeable with BTT and Maersk containers. For most of the drivers I deal with, the local lobs from port to rail yard are their bread and butter.
Maersk won't just affect one trucking firm. The shipping company is big enough that all haulers will feel the bite, and this is not a good time for it. Business has been abominably slow in the past few months anyway, with many truckers (and as I mentioned in an earlier post, rail companies) cutting back.
Frank, a BTT driver, says he's not especially worried. His response surprised me; he's one of those guys who will complain about anything and everything. It's just part of his personality -- even when things are going great, he'll think of something. He's one of those guys who comes in just to give me a hard time, knowing I'll give it right back.
"Something else will come along," Frank says. "Ome door closes, another one opens."
I can't muster that same sense of optimism, though. The economy has been bumpy in the Lowcountry, and things just got more contentious.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Hard times: Silver lining is in the people
This is not a good time for the economy to tank, as if anyone can find a good time for this to happen.
The bad news surrounds us. Just look at the front page of any newspaper. If you can't find any bad financial news there, then check out the business section. It's enough to make a guy want to drop out and herd sheep or something.
My area is particularly getting nailed. Over the past week, Maersk/SeaLand announced it was pulling out of Charleston's port system. And Force Protection -- which makes military vehicles -- cut its work force again. It now employs slightly more than 1,000 people, about half of what the company employed in January.
You know things are bad when military suppliers such as Force Protection are cutting back. It just goes against all the rules of the game. Historically, when you're in a war the defense (and defense-related technology) industries are supposed to boom, and last I looked we're in two wars.
Meanwhile, foreclosures are up, and many residential builders say they've pretty much stopped work. And recently I checked out the job ads in the Monday "Business Review" section of the local newspaper. That section use half-sized pages, and the want ads usually fill at least two of those pages. But this time -- about a week ago -- those ads filled half a page, and many of those jobs were of the sketchy kind.
It's a little hard to find a silver lining in all this mess, especially with the Christmas holidays coming up. But from talking to people, I'm finding some unexpected glimpses.
"I'm just glad I have a job," one trucker told me. He's working for one of the area's busiest haulers, and his firm is cutting back to three- and four-day work weeks.
And many of the folks I talk to say they're not going to do their annual budget busting for Christmas. There's no way. Places like Best Buy may have to suffer, and things may get a little slower at the malls. Though WalMart captures the discount-shopping crowd and may find things a little busier because there are more budget-conscious shoppers, any business increases may be negated by those who are cutting back beyond even that level.
Maybe folks are reexamining the holidays. And, like what happened right after 9/11, people are taking a closer look at what's important and what's not.
I asked one guy to define what would make a good Christmas for him.
"As long as I have a full belly," he says. "And time with my family."
Maybe we're getting back to the basics. Maybe. Like, for example, what Christmas is really about. And that's a good thing.
The bad news surrounds us. Just look at the front page of any newspaper. If you can't find any bad financial news there, then check out the business section. It's enough to make a guy want to drop out and herd sheep or something.
My area is particularly getting nailed. Over the past week, Maersk/SeaLand announced it was pulling out of Charleston's port system. And Force Protection -- which makes military vehicles -- cut its work force again. It now employs slightly more than 1,000 people, about half of what the company employed in January.
You know things are bad when military suppliers such as Force Protection are cutting back. It just goes against all the rules of the game. Historically, when you're in a war the defense (and defense-related technology) industries are supposed to boom, and last I looked we're in two wars.
Meanwhile, foreclosures are up, and many residential builders say they've pretty much stopped work. And recently I checked out the job ads in the Monday "Business Review" section of the local newspaper. That section use half-sized pages, and the want ads usually fill at least two of those pages. But this time -- about a week ago -- those ads filled half a page, and many of those jobs were of the sketchy kind.
It's a little hard to find a silver lining in all this mess, especially with the Christmas holidays coming up. But from talking to people, I'm finding some unexpected glimpses.
"I'm just glad I have a job," one trucker told me. He's working for one of the area's busiest haulers, and his firm is cutting back to three- and four-day work weeks.
And many of the folks I talk to say they're not going to do their annual budget busting for Christmas. There's no way. Places like Best Buy may have to suffer, and things may get a little slower at the malls. Though WalMart captures the discount-shopping crowd and may find things a little busier because there are more budget-conscious shoppers, any business increases may be negated by those who are cutting back beyond even that level.
Maybe folks are reexamining the holidays. And, like what happened right after 9/11, people are taking a closer look at what's important and what's not.
I asked one guy to define what would make a good Christmas for him.
"As long as I have a full belly," he says. "And time with my family."
Maybe we're getting back to the basics. Maybe. Like, for example, what Christmas is really about. And that's a good thing.
North Chuck gets national notice, sorta
While Charleston is a favorite destination for travel writers, its neighbor to the north doesn't get the same reviews.
In fact, Peter Greenberg has his won caveat about North Charleston -- don't go there.
It's the crime, Greenberg says, which puts North Chuck in the same breath as Detroit, East St. Louis, and Birmingham -- good places to avoid.
Of North Charleston, Greenberg wrote, "(its) identity includes a lot of drug-related crimes: homicides, shootings, stabbings, robberies."
Greenberg, who is a fixture on The Today Show, outlines his misgivings in his book, "Don't Go There: The Travel Detective's Essential Guide to the Must-Miss Places of the World."
Greenberg has a reputation as one of the more straight-ahead travel writers around; while many will gladly become shills or bend the truth for a price, the word on Greenberg is that he doesn't go that route.
North Charleston's Mayor Keith Summey's response was to call for a boycott of The Today Show and its advertisers.
"That jerk has never even been to our city, and he can keep his butt where he is," Summey says. "We don't want him here."
I always did like Summey. He's not one to keep his opinions to himself or his mouth shut.
North Chuck does have an image problem, and an identy problem. It's a separate city with its own government, and despite some gains here and there it's still considered the armpit of the Lowcountry. It's like every metropolitan area has a dumping ground, a place to put the paper mills, heavy industries, and people gentrified out of existence, and North Chareston it the place here. It's true there's no such place as "away," and in this case, "away" is North Chuck.
I mentioned some gains here. A year ago, North Charleston was ranked seventh most dangerous place to live. This year it ranks 10th in that dubious department. North Charleston is also the leader in retail revenue in South Carolina, and the area is looking much better than it did years ago. In this space I've mentioned new development in the Park Circle area and, most notably, the new construction going on at the old Navy Base.
OK, these are gains, but be honest. It takes a few years to graduate from armpit status to whatever the next step is. It's nice to know, though, that the arrow is pointing in the right direction.
The truth is, the traveler doesn't realize it's nearly impossible to bypass North Charleston to get to the good stuff on the peninsula. The airport is located in North Charleston, as is the Amtrak station. Interstate 26 cuts right through it. And, unless you can afford lodging rates downtown (and most can bankrupt a small country), you'll probably be staying in North Charleston.
The city is a little hard to avoid. For the time being, you might want to lock your doors.
---------------------
Other tidbits from Greenberg's book:
Worst airports: O'Hare, Miami, Cincinnati, Atlanta, LaGuardia. I can personally vouch for one of those there, having spent 10 hours at O'Hare while my connecting flight was being delayed. And I was lucky. My brother and his family ended up staying there overnight, and he wondered if he needed to file state taxes in Illinois.
Worst pollution: Vermont (really?) gets abysmal scores here, with 126 polluted rivers and lakes. "If you jump into Lake Champlain, you might want to read the book first," Greenberg says.
In fact, Peter Greenberg has his won caveat about North Charleston -- don't go there.
It's the crime, Greenberg says, which puts North Chuck in the same breath as Detroit, East St. Louis, and Birmingham -- good places to avoid.
Of North Charleston, Greenberg wrote, "(its) identity includes a lot of drug-related crimes: homicides, shootings, stabbings, robberies."
Greenberg, who is a fixture on The Today Show, outlines his misgivings in his book, "Don't Go There: The Travel Detective's Essential Guide to the Must-Miss Places of the World."
Greenberg has a reputation as one of the more straight-ahead travel writers around; while many will gladly become shills or bend the truth for a price, the word on Greenberg is that he doesn't go that route.
North Charleston's Mayor Keith Summey's response was to call for a boycott of The Today Show and its advertisers.
"That jerk has never even been to our city, and he can keep his butt where he is," Summey says. "We don't want him here."
I always did like Summey. He's not one to keep his opinions to himself or his mouth shut.
North Chuck does have an image problem, and an identy problem. It's a separate city with its own government, and despite some gains here and there it's still considered the armpit of the Lowcountry. It's like every metropolitan area has a dumping ground, a place to put the paper mills, heavy industries, and people gentrified out of existence, and North Chareston it the place here. It's true there's no such place as "away," and in this case, "away" is North Chuck.
I mentioned some gains here. A year ago, North Charleston was ranked seventh most dangerous place to live. This year it ranks 10th in that dubious department. North Charleston is also the leader in retail revenue in South Carolina, and the area is looking much better than it did years ago. In this space I've mentioned new development in the Park Circle area and, most notably, the new construction going on at the old Navy Base.
OK, these are gains, but be honest. It takes a few years to graduate from armpit status to whatever the next step is. It's nice to know, though, that the arrow is pointing in the right direction.
The truth is, the traveler doesn't realize it's nearly impossible to bypass North Charleston to get to the good stuff on the peninsula. The airport is located in North Charleston, as is the Amtrak station. Interstate 26 cuts right through it. And, unless you can afford lodging rates downtown (and most can bankrupt a small country), you'll probably be staying in North Charleston.
The city is a little hard to avoid. For the time being, you might want to lock your doors.
---------------------
Other tidbits from Greenberg's book:
Worst airports: O'Hare, Miami, Cincinnati, Atlanta, LaGuardia. I can personally vouch for one of those there, having spent 10 hours at O'Hare while my connecting flight was being delayed. And I was lucky. My brother and his family ended up staying there overnight, and he wondered if he needed to file state taxes in Illinois.
Worst pollution: Vermont (really?) gets abysmal scores here, with 126 polluted rivers and lakes. "If you jump into Lake Champlain, you might want to read the book first," Greenberg says.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Bad news this Christmas ...
As if there's not enough bad news around here ...
(Thanks, Elaine, for sending this! -- Eric)
Ax swings close to home
I can't remember how the old quote goes -- something about if your neighbor gets laid off it's a recession, but if you get laid off it's a depression.
This week, my own place of business felt the nip of the executioner's ax, and for me it means I have to make some adjustments.
I got the word Thursday that our two newest employees will see their hours trimmed from 40 to 30 per week, as things have been beyond slow. A straight seniority thing, and what bites is that I'm the newest one there. Performance has nothing to do with it, the boss said (and I know he can't fault my performance, broken ankle or not, and he let me know he wants me to stick around). While the work I do says otherwise, in reality I'm low man on the totem pole.
It's not as bad as it sounds. At work, 30 hours is the magic number that keeps the benefits cooking, and that's the real incentive for working there. The pay, in truth, isn't that good, but the health insurance they have is all-league.
Anyway, there's no real news in all this because these cutbacks are happening all over. Business is dropping everywhere. Companies large and small are circling the wagons. South Carolina is particularly getting nailed -- projections have the unemployment rate doubling to about 14 percent by summer. And this is South Carolina, where the unions are not as strong and there's a cheap labor pool. Every time you open the newspaper there's more bad news -- another company folding or downsizing, more people out of work.
Right now, if a person has a job, even a piece of a job, he'd be well advised to keep it. This is not a real good time for upward mobility. Or any mobility. Changing jobs would be a mistake at this point. Even if it's for a better offer, positioning is everything now. Why ditch a so-so job where your position is established for a better one that puts you on the bottom of that totem pole? Seniority may be the new coin of the realm. Go for a second job if it's needed, but don't lose that position.
Getting back to the personal angle here. Of course I'm not happy at losing 10 hours a week. That represents money that used to me mine. Of course I'm ticked off at Bush -- he's the man in front, but I'm particularly ticked at all those baboons in Congress who set the policy that triggered this financial flameout. Bush, well, he was there, like the figurehead of a ship, and was every bit as effective.
On Friday, the mood at work was pretty somber. Most of us saw this coming, but ... well ... this is hard to swallow when it strikes so close to home.
We have a good crew at work, and each of us has a role in the chemistry. Mine, as I see it, is that I ignite things and keep the folks loose. I'm blessed with a high energy level even with my breaking-down body. Working on crutches like i have been is setting something of an example, too.
But on Friday I had a few things to say to the crew:
- "These are tough times, but it could be a whole lot worse. Some of y'all might be looking for second jobs, but you're not going to find this kind of health insurance anywhere else.
- "If one person leaves, that will probably solve the problems of reduced hours. I know it'll be tempting to make this into a reality TV show, but this isn't going to happen. Not around here. No one's voting anyone else off this island.
- "This is a good crew, and I want to see it stay together."
Pretty harmless stuff. Did I speak out of turn? Probably. I know the other crew member who saw her hours trimmed is particularly upset. She's looking for a second job. The rest of us are concerned she may leave and we're doing what we can to keep her around. As I wrote this, one of the other crew members was trying to reach her by phone. But on Monday, everyone was back on the job, and she's decided not to ditch this job.
We're not being altruistic here. Although we do come to work for the money and benefits (duh!), that's not the whole of it. Although I don't think any of us see this job as the be-all end-all what-I wanna-be-when-I-grow-up job, it's not half bad. We have this crazy idea that working in a place you enjoy, with people you like, and with bosses that are good people, is worth a lot. Especially now.
I mentioned some of our folks may look for second jobs. I'm looking at a few personal adjustments myself. I spent part of Thursday evening mapping out my personal strategy. This is from my notes:
Making up the shortfall (in order of appearance)
- Through budget cuts (stopgap)
- Through any extra hours I can get (stopgap)
- Through any freelance work (long-term)
- Sipping into savings (stopgap & limited)
- Second part-time gig (way down on the list)
I've already tinkered with my budget and squeezed most of the water out of it. Admittedly, it's easier for me because I'm single and my dog is happy with Kibbles & Bits. Someone with a family might have to use a pocketknife to cut the budget; I can use a machete. I do have savings enough to cover any shortfalls for quite a while if needed, but I'd rather not go that direction.
Freelance work looks like it'll be a key step for me, and it was part of my long-term strategy anyway. Maybe these tough economic times will give me some incentive to act here; I do have a problem in paying attention and staying focused sometimes. A second job is an option, but if I go there it means everything else is in the toilet, swirling clockwise.
Oh, did I mention I have a little time on my hands?
This week, my own place of business felt the nip of the executioner's ax, and for me it means I have to make some adjustments.
I got the word Thursday that our two newest employees will see their hours trimmed from 40 to 30 per week, as things have been beyond slow. A straight seniority thing, and what bites is that I'm the newest one there. Performance has nothing to do with it, the boss said (and I know he can't fault my performance, broken ankle or not, and he let me know he wants me to stick around). While the work I do says otherwise, in reality I'm low man on the totem pole.
It's not as bad as it sounds. At work, 30 hours is the magic number that keeps the benefits cooking, and that's the real incentive for working there. The pay, in truth, isn't that good, but the health insurance they have is all-league.
Anyway, there's no real news in all this because these cutbacks are happening all over. Business is dropping everywhere. Companies large and small are circling the wagons. South Carolina is particularly getting nailed -- projections have the unemployment rate doubling to about 14 percent by summer. And this is South Carolina, where the unions are not as strong and there's a cheap labor pool. Every time you open the newspaper there's more bad news -- another company folding or downsizing, more people out of work.
Right now, if a person has a job, even a piece of a job, he'd be well advised to keep it. This is not a real good time for upward mobility. Or any mobility. Changing jobs would be a mistake at this point. Even if it's for a better offer, positioning is everything now. Why ditch a so-so job where your position is established for a better one that puts you on the bottom of that totem pole? Seniority may be the new coin of the realm. Go for a second job if it's needed, but don't lose that position.
Getting back to the personal angle here. Of course I'm not happy at losing 10 hours a week. That represents money that used to me mine. Of course I'm ticked off at Bush -- he's the man in front, but I'm particularly ticked at all those baboons in Congress who set the policy that triggered this financial flameout. Bush, well, he was there, like the figurehead of a ship, and was every bit as effective.
On Friday, the mood at work was pretty somber. Most of us saw this coming, but ... well ... this is hard to swallow when it strikes so close to home.
We have a good crew at work, and each of us has a role in the chemistry. Mine, as I see it, is that I ignite things and keep the folks loose. I'm blessed with a high energy level even with my breaking-down body. Working on crutches like i have been is setting something of an example, too.
But on Friday I had a few things to say to the crew:
- "These are tough times, but it could be a whole lot worse. Some of y'all might be looking for second jobs, but you're not going to find this kind of health insurance anywhere else.
- "If one person leaves, that will probably solve the problems of reduced hours. I know it'll be tempting to make this into a reality TV show, but this isn't going to happen. Not around here. No one's voting anyone else off this island.
- "This is a good crew, and I want to see it stay together."
Pretty harmless stuff. Did I speak out of turn? Probably. I know the other crew member who saw her hours trimmed is particularly upset. She's looking for a second job. The rest of us are concerned she may leave and we're doing what we can to keep her around. As I wrote this, one of the other crew members was trying to reach her by phone. But on Monday, everyone was back on the job, and she's decided not to ditch this job.
We're not being altruistic here. Although we do come to work for the money and benefits (duh!), that's not the whole of it. Although I don't think any of us see this job as the be-all end-all what-I wanna-be-when-I-grow-up job, it's not half bad. We have this crazy idea that working in a place you enjoy, with people you like, and with bosses that are good people, is worth a lot. Especially now.
I mentioned some of our folks may look for second jobs. I'm looking at a few personal adjustments myself. I spent part of Thursday evening mapping out my personal strategy. This is from my notes:
Making up the shortfall (in order of appearance)
- Through budget cuts (stopgap)
- Through any extra hours I can get (stopgap)
- Through any freelance work (long-term)
- Sipping into savings (stopgap & limited)
- Second part-time gig (way down on the list)
I've already tinkered with my budget and squeezed most of the water out of it. Admittedly, it's easier for me because I'm single and my dog is happy with Kibbles & Bits. Someone with a family might have to use a pocketknife to cut the budget; I can use a machete. I do have savings enough to cover any shortfalls for quite a while if needed, but I'd rather not go that direction.
Freelance work looks like it'll be a key step for me, and it was part of my long-term strategy anyway. Maybe these tough economic times will give me some incentive to act here; I do have a problem in paying attention and staying focused sometimes. A second job is an option, but if I go there it means everything else is in the toilet, swirling clockwise.
Oh, did I mention I have a little time on my hands?
Mistakes a common thread in 1920s, now
Does history repeat itself?
While reading something else, I came across this quote on the Great Depression. And being a student of history -- especially as it relates to the here and now -- I had to trot it out.
"The Great Depression sprang from three fatal mistakes," William H. Peterson of the Heritage Foundation wrote in the Nov. 1, 1999 issue of Investor's Business Daily.
According to Peterson, these three mistakes were:
1) "The fed's jacking up of money-supply growth in the 1920s, which fueled the stock market boom."
2) The Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, "... hiking import duties to their highest level in U.S. history and inviting deadly foreign retaliation against U.S. exports," and ...
3) Cranking up the top income tax rate, "from 24 percent to 63 percent."
OK, Peterson's article ("Leviathan's Brood: Moral Hazards:) was written a few years ago, but it gets really interesting when we dust it off. The first point really caught my attention. If it doesn't sound like the easy-financing, "$500 down, $500 per month for 500 years" direction the mortgage industry went during the past decade, where just about anyone could get a home loan, then I'm missing something.
Regarding the second and third mistakes: Maybe there once was a situation where government intervention and/or increased taxes actually solved something. I'm taking that on faith, as I've never seen that happen.
See the common thread between the 1920s and now? I sure do, and it's not pretty.
Anyway, fasten your seat belts. Keep your hands and arms inside the vehicle, shut up, and hang on. This is going to be one bumpy ride.
(Disclaimer: I wrote this Wednesday, before the ax swung a little too close for my own comfort. But that doesn't change anything. Principles are still principles, and history does not revise itself for anyone's convenience.)
While reading something else, I came across this quote on the Great Depression. And being a student of history -- especially as it relates to the here and now -- I had to trot it out.
"The Great Depression sprang from three fatal mistakes," William H. Peterson of the Heritage Foundation wrote in the Nov. 1, 1999 issue of Investor's Business Daily.
According to Peterson, these three mistakes were:
1) "The fed's jacking up of money-supply growth in the 1920s, which fueled the stock market boom."
2) The Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, "... hiking import duties to their highest level in U.S. history and inviting deadly foreign retaliation against U.S. exports," and ...
3) Cranking up the top income tax rate, "from 24 percent to 63 percent."
OK, Peterson's article ("Leviathan's Brood: Moral Hazards:) was written a few years ago, but it gets really interesting when we dust it off. The first point really caught my attention. If it doesn't sound like the easy-financing, "$500 down, $500 per month for 500 years" direction the mortgage industry went during the past decade, where just about anyone could get a home loan, then I'm missing something.
Regarding the second and third mistakes: Maybe there once was a situation where government intervention and/or increased taxes actually solved something. I'm taking that on faith, as I've never seen that happen.
See the common thread between the 1920s and now? I sure do, and it's not pretty.
Anyway, fasten your seat belts. Keep your hands and arms inside the vehicle, shut up, and hang on. This is going to be one bumpy ride.
(Disclaimer: I wrote this Wednesday, before the ax swung a little too close for my own comfort. But that doesn't change anything. Principles are still principles, and history does not revise itself for anyone's convenience.)
Stepping outside to puff -- at the Oval Office
Barack Obama sucks a butt. Will this create security problems in his new job?(Photo from some site called angrywhiteboy.org.)
------------------
Barack Obama may have a problem in his new job, though it'll something personal. He might have a terrible time finding a place to light up.
To my understanding, Obama's a cigarette smoker who's been less successful at quitting than he has been at winning elections or even dodging some of his questionable friends from the past. So far, he's been pretty circumspect about smoking. Yeah, we do like our presidents somewhat free of the vices, though I do remember a TV campaign ad showing Gerald Ford puffing on a pipe, and Bill Clinton popularized intern-flavored cigars. But give Obama credit. Even though the media-happy life in high politics means the public will know if the president belches or scratches, you have to really hunt the Internet to find pictures of him puffing away.
One of my coworkers brought Obama's habit to my attention, and it's probably no accident that this is the coworker who goes through about a pack of cigs per work shift. She feels Obama's pain, in other words.
I can understand this myself. I like to smoke, though I'll ration myself to two cigars a day. One is for work (which is outdoors, in that Great Big Smoking Area), and the other is for unwinding at home. But I'm used to stepping outside for this. The idea of running into the bathroom and announcing I'm going to powder my lungs went out a decade ago.
Obama says he won't smoke in the Oval Office. I know he won't be able to smoke in the more "public" rooms of the White House. It's murky whether he'll be able to light up in the residential part of the White House. And stepping outside is going to create a major logistical headache, what with his Secret Service protection.
I know something about how the Secret Service handles smokers. Firsthand. True story: Around 1990, wen sitting vice president Dan Quayle was making a speech in Riverside, CA., I was writing for the Fontana Herald-News. This was fairly high-security stuff; I had to go through a few hoops to get my press credentials. Several forms of ID. Maybe a mini-background check. A whole bunch of security things before I was allowed to enter the auditorium at Raincross Square that day. Before Quayle came on, we media types were herded into a conference room for sandwiches. After eating my lunch, I felt like having a smoke -- cigarettes back then.
Since the only place to smoke was outdoors, and to go outside would create a security problem, I was escorted by a Secret Service man. Now, I know I wasn't the only local reporter who smoked, but I'll bet most of them did the smart thing and lit up in the boys' room. By the time Quayle gave his speech, I was already feeling fairly conspicuous and ... well, was it my imagination that the Service guys were keeping a real close eye on me after that?
I'm not near the major security priority that Obama is now. Then, it took one Secret Service agent to escort me (and he wasn't much for conversation). With Obama, it would probably take at least a couple of Secret Service teams to pull this off. Gotta sweep the area first to make sure it's safe, establish radio contact, and perhaps have a volunteer agent take a couple of test puffs on the cigarette to make sure it's not one of those exploding kinds. Hey, it might be easier to give Obama some of that nicotine gum.
The economy is not going to be Obama's most pressing order of business. It won't be our energy policy. It won't be the War on Terror. His biggest priority will be in finding a place to light up.
OK. So what?
"Obama's going to get really cranky," my coworker suggested.
Cranky enough to make weird decisions in the midst of a nicotine fit? Make manic calls on the red phone? Cuss out a few heads of state? Maybe bomb the wrong guys? Already, it sounds like the makings of a bad novel. Whatever the scenario, I'm not really sure I want to see it played out.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Think this business will make it?
(Photo furnished by my brother. He's a sick puppy.)
I can't remember the numbers, but a lot of businesses don't make it through the first two years. Or even the first, for that matter.
Now, this one is doomed to failure from the jump. You know it, too. Wherever this place is, you'll need to go there fast, before they nail the plywood and for-lease signs up again.
Automakers should show they deserve, not need, bailout
Buying gas is a lot easier these days (now about $1.60 per gallon in my neighborhood), but the hard part may be in getting a car to hold all that cheap gas.
From the way things look in the car world, nobody's buying. All of the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler) report jumbo losses over the past 12 months, and the smaller manufacturers are likewise hurting. But with the three big companies, there's talk of bankruptcy if the government doesn't hurry up and scrape up more than a few billion dollars to bail them out.
Blame the gas prices, which topped $4 over the summer. Blame tight money; what with the current fiscal crisis, it's not being lent out with the same blind trust as it had over the past decade or so. Blame the CEO's, the Arabs, the autoworkers' union, the Demopublicans. Blame anyone you please.
But much of the blame should go to the culture of the auto industry, which holds that what worked in the past will always work, that progress is only allowed in baby steps if at all. The culture that profits from the status quo.
Right now it's nearly impossible to separate the oil from the auto; they're like evil twins. When gas was on its record-breaking run, truckers -- especially owner-operators -- were wondering if they could make enough to fill up. But at least in the trucking industry a fuel-cost surcharge is tacked onto shipping bills. That surcharge was as high as 34 percent; now it's around 15 percent. (This surcharge, by the way, is eventually picked up by the consumer at the end of the line, which is part of why you were paying more for a box of Kraft Macaroni & Cheese.)
But now I have to laugh when I hear folks talk about how cheap gas is. Cheap compared to what? And how long will it stay at this level? Has the price bottomed out? Will the price go up to new levels if some head dude in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Venezuela, or Mexico breaks wind? And since we've already shattered the $4 barrier once, a hike to $5 or even $6 per gallon doesn't sound so outrageous. That price barrier does tend to warp public perception of how expensive gas could get.
Now hear this: Fossil fuel as energy should have been rendered obsolete at least a generation ago, and the internal-combustion engine should have been thrown onto the scrap heap with the 8-track players, dial telephones, and electric typewriters.
A little over a week ago, the Big Three tried to beg for some of that suddenly-available bailout money in Washington. In a rare act of common sense, the folks at Capitol Hill determined that without a real plan to get the industry's stuff together, there will be no bailout. Didn't help that the heads of the auto companies each went to D.C. in their own private corporate jets; it's a little hard to plead poverty unless the CEO's are taking the Greyhound to Washington. As I write thisthe CEO's are back at The Hill, hats in hand, perhaps taken down a peg, and trying to show how badly they need the money. Maybe they should try explaining how badly they deserve the money instead.
Gee, and why shouldn't the government bail out an obsolete industry, I ask with more than just a little sarcasm.
Better to let one of the companies go bankrupt. If nothing else, it'll send a message to the other automakers that they'd better get serious about the future. OK, you can blame the union wage rates -- and they are ridiculous -- but with the current product line an automaker would be hard pressed to make the right kind of money pushing the same old product line, even if they went completely to foreign help at a buck an hour.
Now, I'm kind of interested in GM's proposed Volt car (providing it stays alive long enough). Allegedly, it's a step up from the hybrid. Gee, I hope it's about four or five steps up from the hybrid. You compare miles-per-gallon numbers between a hybrid and the standard Detroit rolling iron, and the difference is not that great. Plus, I understand the hybrid's special battery is so expensive that it's not worth replacing. Kind of like swapping out batteries in a laptop computer -- you might as well just get yourself another computer. If the Volt is merely an incremental improvement over the old stuff, then the industry probably deserves to go into the tank.
Unfortunately, here's the usual script for a company teetering on the brink: Make cuts, by laying off whatever workers they can get away with, and cutting Research and Development right between the eyes. I can understand that logic -- better to show some short-term gains and keep the stockholders happy while anything long-term takes a hike. Good engineers cost a ton of money, they're highly impractical, a bunch of dreamers. The company line holds that they don't do any actual work (read: They don't generate anything that will help the short-term profits).
I see Ford's recovery plan involves investment toward the future, while GM and Chrysler are looking at the old menu of cutbacks. OK. One of the problems with deep R&D is that profits are not immediately apparent. Maybe use the money to build a loan program to help companies over the hump when developing products with a long lead time, for example.
If government money must be pitched to industries and companies, why not package it for companies that are growing, developing, researching ... showing a pulse ... instead of those that are at death's door?
This is a critical time on a number of fronts, and the company or organization that stays hidebound may -- and should -- fall by the wayside. Just like real life.
From the way things look in the car world, nobody's buying. All of the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler) report jumbo losses over the past 12 months, and the smaller manufacturers are likewise hurting. But with the three big companies, there's talk of bankruptcy if the government doesn't hurry up and scrape up more than a few billion dollars to bail them out.
Blame the gas prices, which topped $4 over the summer. Blame tight money; what with the current fiscal crisis, it's not being lent out with the same blind trust as it had over the past decade or so. Blame the CEO's, the Arabs, the autoworkers' union, the Demopublicans. Blame anyone you please.
But much of the blame should go to the culture of the auto industry, which holds that what worked in the past will always work, that progress is only allowed in baby steps if at all. The culture that profits from the status quo.
Right now it's nearly impossible to separate the oil from the auto; they're like evil twins. When gas was on its record-breaking run, truckers -- especially owner-operators -- were wondering if they could make enough to fill up. But at least in the trucking industry a fuel-cost surcharge is tacked onto shipping bills. That surcharge was as high as 34 percent; now it's around 15 percent. (This surcharge, by the way, is eventually picked up by the consumer at the end of the line, which is part of why you were paying more for a box of Kraft Macaroni & Cheese.)
But now I have to laugh when I hear folks talk about how cheap gas is. Cheap compared to what? And how long will it stay at this level? Has the price bottomed out? Will the price go up to new levels if some head dude in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Venezuela, or Mexico breaks wind? And since we've already shattered the $4 barrier once, a hike to $5 or even $6 per gallon doesn't sound so outrageous. That price barrier does tend to warp public perception of how expensive gas could get.
Now hear this: Fossil fuel as energy should have been rendered obsolete at least a generation ago, and the internal-combustion engine should have been thrown onto the scrap heap with the 8-track players, dial telephones, and electric typewriters.
A little over a week ago, the Big Three tried to beg for some of that suddenly-available bailout money in Washington. In a rare act of common sense, the folks at Capitol Hill determined that without a real plan to get the industry's stuff together, there will be no bailout. Didn't help that the heads of the auto companies each went to D.C. in their own private corporate jets; it's a little hard to plead poverty unless the CEO's are taking the Greyhound to Washington. As I write thisthe CEO's are back at The Hill, hats in hand, perhaps taken down a peg, and trying to show how badly they need the money. Maybe they should try explaining how badly they deserve the money instead.
Gee, and why shouldn't the government bail out an obsolete industry, I ask with more than just a little sarcasm.
Better to let one of the companies go bankrupt. If nothing else, it'll send a message to the other automakers that they'd better get serious about the future. OK, you can blame the union wage rates -- and they are ridiculous -- but with the current product line an automaker would be hard pressed to make the right kind of money pushing the same old product line, even if they went completely to foreign help at a buck an hour.
Now, I'm kind of interested in GM's proposed Volt car (providing it stays alive long enough). Allegedly, it's a step up from the hybrid. Gee, I hope it's about four or five steps up from the hybrid. You compare miles-per-gallon numbers between a hybrid and the standard Detroit rolling iron, and the difference is not that great. Plus, I understand the hybrid's special battery is so expensive that it's not worth replacing. Kind of like swapping out batteries in a laptop computer -- you might as well just get yourself another computer. If the Volt is merely an incremental improvement over the old stuff, then the industry probably deserves to go into the tank.
Unfortunately, here's the usual script for a company teetering on the brink: Make cuts, by laying off whatever workers they can get away with, and cutting Research and Development right between the eyes. I can understand that logic -- better to show some short-term gains and keep the stockholders happy while anything long-term takes a hike. Good engineers cost a ton of money, they're highly impractical, a bunch of dreamers. The company line holds that they don't do any actual work (read: They don't generate anything that will help the short-term profits).
I see Ford's recovery plan involves investment toward the future, while GM and Chrysler are looking at the old menu of cutbacks. OK. One of the problems with deep R&D is that profits are not immediately apparent. Maybe use the money to build a loan program to help companies over the hump when developing products with a long lead time, for example.
If government money must be pitched to industries and companies, why not package it for companies that are growing, developing, researching ... showing a pulse ... instead of those that are at death's door?
This is a critical time on a number of fronts, and the company or organization that stays hidebound may -- and should -- fall by the wayside. Just like real life.
Injury little more than a pain in the ... ankle
(Photo courtesy of the folks at Roper Urgent Care, Mt. Pleasant, SC. They just don't know about this, heh-heh!)I'm fortunate. It's not often I have to go to a doctor; just for a patch-up job every so often.
I had one of those situations about a week ago. It's kinda hard to explain, unless you know me pretty well. But I'd come across a desk at the common dump at my mobile home park. I needed a desk, this one looked pretty solid, so I grabbed it. While carrying it, my left ankle went out from under me. I heard a loud grinding noise, the kind that tells me something is seriously wrong.
The next day, Monday, I was over at Roper Urgent Care, one of those oddball medical places. Not quite an emergency room, not quite a doctor's office. There's radiology equipment on site, run by some third party. Anyway, they shot pictures of the ankle and found out it was fractured.
Now I'm in what they call an "air cast," and supported by crutches. Kind of an interesting rig, this air cast. Hard plastic shell, sectioned bladder liner. The lower half of the liner -- around the ankle -- carries some goo that you can freeze. Kind of like those Blue Ice things you stick in your freezer overnight. The upper bladder of the air cast contains, well, air. It's a fairly compact thing; you can put a shoe on over it if you unlace it first and take pain meds about a half hour before forcing the shoe on.
The crutches, well, no new technology there. I've used them years ago, and no major design changes. Fortunately, getting around on crutches really is like riding a bicycle. After a fast shakedown run, it does come back to you. (And like on a bicycle, I am just a little reckless on the crutches. Already they're kind of scarred up, I've knocked a little paint of the walls, and my dog keeps her distance while I'm using them.)
One of the things I thought was so cool from my visit to Roper Urgent Care is how they package their X rays. They're on CD-ROM, and they come with some sort of viewing program. Of course, Windows-based, so when I got home I went straight to the .jpg files and saved them to my hard drive. I don't have the CD-ROM now; it's now in possession of the orthopedic clinic where I had my follow-up visit. What you're looking at is an intercepted .jpg file; I hope I don't get in trouble for showing it. Can I plead First Amendment for something like this?
In all, had two days off while seeing doctors. On Wednesday, I got my work boot on over the air cast (see procedure above), made it to work, and pulled a full shift without problems. My boss, bless his heart, asked if I "should be doing this." Thursday and Friday were paid holidays, and in fact my unused personal leave kicked in for the two days I missed. So I worked 40 hours, according to the paycheck.
Well, I'll be hobbling off now ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)