Keeping it in perspective

For those depressed about the corruption scandal in Illinois, where governor Rod Blagojevich was accused of trying to sell Obama's vacant senate seat, putting things in perspective may be helpful.

Blagojevich will be prosecuted and is likely to end up in jail, while the former governor is already doing time for unrelated corruption charges.

The U.S. is no Denmark or New Zealand, but its levels of corruption pale in comparison to neighbors Brazil and Argentina. In Brazil, the ruling party run a scheme paying most congressmen a $12,000 monthly stipend to ensure they voted with the government. No one was arrested and the president's popularity remained unchanged. The Argentinian president was mostly undisturbed by the fact a "businessman" was arrested in Miami carrying a suitcase with $800,000 in illegal donations from the government of Venezuela. The only conviction occurred in U.S. courts.

At least here the bad guys have to worry about going to jail.

Bailout suppliers, not the big three

Most people seem to agree that none of the U.S.-based automakers deserves to be saved. But many argue that letting them fail would deepen the recession and cause a chain reaction that would bankrupt their suppliers and the entire car-related industry. The bulk of the jobs estimated to be lost from the failure of the big three (up to three million) would come from these suppliers, who also happen to make parts for other carmakers with plants in the United States (Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, and many others).

So why not bailout just the suppliers? It would be cheaper, it would limit the fallout and the job losses and would not reward the lack of vision and poor management we have seen from GM, Ford and Chrysler. And I bet not all three would fail, leaving the remaining one or two in a stronger position.