Toxic Executives
It’s good to see that our government is making progress in isolating the toxic loans that have been the root of our current unprecedented economic downturn.
In conjunction with this effort I suggest the U.S. undertake a TERP program to supplement the TARP program.
The Toxic Executive Removal Program would target the criminals who conspired to bring our economic system to its knees. Those found to have knowingly taken part in the destruction of the world economy by rigging the financial system for their personal gain need to be removed from their positions immediately and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
The attempts by the government to undo the damage caused by these greedy and corrupt charlatans have been minimal as opposed to attention paid to the systemic cure for this whole mess.
Thousands and thousands of innocent, honest employees have lost their jobs because of the actions of these “captains” of the financial industry. A fair share of the job losses have occurred within the companies these executives were running.
Thousands of homes belonging to people who have made their house payments for years and years are being foreclosed due to the greed and dishonesty of these overpaid crooks.
Too many of the executives making the decisions that have caused this economic catastrophe continue to enjoy their high salaries, bountiful perks and private jets.
It’s just as important to remove the toxic executives as it is to wall off the toxic assets.
I suggest the Obama administration and Congress get to work on this.
R. Stephen Thomson
Coto de Caza
Helping Small Business
I have an idea on how the federal government can help the economy at very little expense to both the government and the companies involved.
The government should sponsor a Web site that displays products for sale by “small business” with some qualifier such as that they do $12 million per year or less in revenue. This qualifier should not be the current government “small business” definition, as that is way too big of a business to qualify for this program.
The site should rank products by one primary scale, the percentage amount of the product that is produced in the U.S. Service companies would qualify if they use U.S. manufactured products to perform whatever their basic service might be, with the same percentage classification.
If a product is 100% U.S. made, there should be no cost to list the product.
If it is 95% U.S. made, it should cost $25 to list.
The cost should rise as the percentage of the product made in the U.S. declines, but the top price should only be about $250. Small businesses that import specific products should not be shut out of the process,they should just pay more and be classified by the percentage of U.S. content contained.
There should be no qualifiers on what constitutes U.S. made. If the basic substance is mined or grown here, if the formation of the product is done here, if any enhancements to it are equally done here, if the assembly is done here, then it is 100% U.S. made. Any variation from that is some percentage less than 100%.
This would focus buyers on a way to help U.S. manufactured products but would also give small businesses a way to feature their products, even if they are not completely made here.
This could help the U.S. economy and small businesses, which is where most jobs come from. This is not a partisan issue. It is a “help the U.S. economy” issue.
Ed St. Amour
Mesa Verde
