This has been around for awhile, but I’ve always thought it still very relevant. Perhaps the NEA could learn something from it rather than the PC crap they force down our kids throats.
Imagine for a moment that you were the CEO of a major, multi-national corporation. Then imagine that you were making a speech to your shareholders. Your message is this. It is my intention to harm this company, to decrease profits, to focus on providing a product our consumers don’t prefer to buy. All in the interest of political correctness and being “green”.
Do you think you would still have a job today? Would the board demand your resignation? Would the workers protest your stance? Not if you are the CEO of GM or Ford. This exercise in what if is in fact reality. Dan Ackerson, the CEO of GM, has made this statement publicly. Bill Ford Jr., the CEO of Ford, has also done the same.
They are both making the assertion that a forced gas tax hike shoved down the American consumers throats is a good thing. They think it’s a good idea to have government forcibly change your driving habits through financial terrorism, at least that’s what I consider it. Too much, you may say? Similar to Obamacare, enacting punitive legislation designed to change consumer buying habits through artificially imposed high prices goes against the foundation of a free country. It’s an attack on freedom and what else would terrorism be considered?
It’s an absolute outrage! Where the hell are the unions? The autoworkers? Your company heads are on record as supporting actions that will inevitably do harm to your companies. That will cut profits by forcing Americans to purchase smaller vehicles with a much smaller profit margin for your companies. The math isn’t hard here. Less profit per vehicle means fewer jobs. Less profit-sharing. Why would you support this?