Killing the Goose?

There is an old story about killing the "Goose that laid the Golden Egg". The particular goose that concerns us is small business. Back in the UK we learned that RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland), now a partly government-owned bank, has been criticized for reducing its lending to small businesses, despite promises given to the government when it was partly taken over.

This apparent lack of interest in small business has forced many companies to explore other options. John Wright, national chairman of the (UK) Federation of Small Businesses, said: "Figures from the British Bankers Association indicate that more firms are dipping into their savings, which shows that many small businesses might be put off from going through a torturous application procedure for a loan or overdraft extension, which ultimately might not be successful."

This situation cannot last forever. Capital is the lifeblood of small business, and just as in the US, small business is the lifeblood of the economy. In fact, doesn't this story sound familiar? Americans have heard similar stories, and the result will be the same. With all the banks that have been given subsidies or even taken over, some safeguards must be put in place (in both countries!) to assure a fair share of capital is made available to small business on an equitable basis.

Healthcare Reform Meetings

While the Administration continues to carp about how bad a situation they were handed and how they want to save money, they are pushing for $2T in new spending between healthcare and reform and energy policies. But perhaps the most worrisome trend in all this is their insistence that all dissent is by special interest and radical groups.

Mr. Obama would have us believe that no one who opposes him is an ordinary citizen. Instead they are classified as disruptive. There are some indications that names are being taken and even reports of threats from as early as the campaign trail. I am not here to say that this has or has not taken place, but there are reports, and I urge everyone to do their own research on this to see for themselves.

But it is clear that the Administration is at the very least attempting to downplay the dissenting comments being received at some of their town hall meetings. Will they continue to bury their heads in the sand and try to ignore those of us who are saying "no"? Or will they see that these people, who now some might even call brave people, who are willing to show up at these meetings to voice their own views are just like you and me?

I don't know about you, but no one tells us what to support or even to do this blog. We write about what we feel is important and state what we believe. If you agree, maybe you will let folks know. If not, that's fine, too. But no one - no one - should be made to feel afraid to speak out, because the last time I checked, we still are supposed to have the right to free speech.

Open Letter to the AARP

I have just seen a report on Fox News about last night's "town hall" meeting held by an AARP representative to discuss the current healthcare proposals. I found the entire incident so appaling that I just sent them the letter below, which I share here in hopes that anyone else who is a member and feels strongly about this might also comment:

Your website states, "...AARP's policies are determined not by the staff in Washington, D.C., but by AARP members. We gather members' ideas from town meetings, phone calls, letters, emails, surveys and polls...." Yet, the nasty display that I saw aired this morning of an AARP update session conducted by a rude lady hardly underlines this point. Adding more fuel to the fire, your PR representative who was just on Fox News failed to acknowledge any of these principles and dismissed the whole incident without apology.

I am ashamed to be represented by AARP if this is the way you will do so. Could it be that you are allowing your insurance business to dictate your policy rather than the wishes of your members? Let's be clear: my wife and I are just two ordinary members of your organization, and we DO NOT SUPPORT the new healthcare proposal.

We have no general axes to grind, and no one tells us what to say or do. This is us saying that the healthcare proposal is flawed. We'd rather have the current system than anything approaching this bill.

So do not think that you are representing us when you support this bill. And I hope that instead of maintaining this arrogant stance, you will re-evaluate your position and support the wishes of your membership, as you say you do.

I doubt I will get a reply, but if you agree, please pass this around.