Can someone tell me how the big auto makers, Chrysler and GM, are going to save money by dumping hundreds of associated dealers?

These dealer are all independent businessmen and women who only make money when they sell or service cars. So presumably the dealers selling cars are making money not only for themselves, but also for the manufacturers of the cars. And if a dealer is not selling any cars, or buying any parts to service cars, then that dealer will go out of business without any help from the manufacturer. How does the auto maker lose either way? I would say the more dealers the merrier, because the more people who are out there trying to sell your product, the better the chance that more will be sold.

The fly in the ointment, I suppose, is that these dealers carry a large inventory of cars and car parts, but they don’t pay for them until they sell them, so that they are undoubtedly being heavily financed by Chrysler or GM (actually the finance companies owned by Chrysler and GM, Chrysler Financial and GMAC). I don’t think, though, that just dumping profitable dealerships is going to save either Chrysler Financial or GMAC from any significant losses. Doesn’t this just make it more likely that the dealer will default on the borrowed money? Wouldn’t it make more sense to simply tighten up their credit standards? If a dealer ship is shaky, don’t extend it so much credit. This may result in that dealership going out of business, but doesn’t this make more sense than just dumping a bunch of dealers, many of whom, as I understand it, are profitable?
There you go again, wasting another few minutes perusing my drivel. See you next time.

Independence Day and the Declaration

We have always been told that Thomas Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence, but it turns out that we may be giving Jefferson a bit too much credit. According to ushistory.org the first draft of the document was done in the handwriting of John Adams. The committee appointed by the Continental Congress to prepare the declaration was made up of Jefferson, Adams and Benjamin Franklin. After the first draft had been written by Adams the committee turned it over to Jefferson to do the editing. On the ushistory.org website you can see Adams' draft and compare it to the next draft which was done by Jefferson. There was quite a bit of editing done, but most of the language and certainly the main points covered (mostly complaints about the conduct of King George III) were contained in the first draft by Adams. Even after the Jefferson version was adopted by the committee and presented to the Congress, a few more changes were made in the language of this historic document. So when we are told that Jefferson is the author of the Declaration of Independence, this is true---sort of.

Another interesting tidbit about Independence Day is that it was not until 1941 that the day became a paid holiday for federal employees. Happy 4th, everyone!

Murder She Wrote

I attended the Maine Bar Association summer meeting in Bar Harbor this weekend, and while there I attended a lecture by the noted trial lawyer, Dan Lilley. The subject was the trial of a case in defense of a person accused of murder. Dan had a number of suggestions which would be helpful to any attorney who tries cases to a jury. One of these is that a lawyer should stop reading books and instead spend his or her time watching popular TV shows, especially the crime shows such as CSI. This is what the members of the jury watch, and the lawyer needs to do this is order to have a feel for where the jury is coming from or how they will be approaching a legal case in their thinking. Something to think about, but if you are not a trial lawyer, you have just wasted another few minutes reading my scribblings. Don

I am pretty new to blogging, so I am not sure that just venting on a personal gripe is really the way to go, but this thing is just sticking in my craw, so maybe writing it down will help.

I pay most of my bills online by logging into my bank’s website, where I can view the balance, activity, etc. in my checking account, and I can direct the bank to pay whichever bills I indicate. In some cases, when the payment is going to a large established company, I believe that the funds are transferred electronically, but in many cases the bank simply creates a check and mails it to the creditor.

In early April I directed the bank to pay a premium on my, and my wife’s, long term care insurance in the amount of approximately $2,500. In late May I received a notice from the insurance company that my payment was overdue. I looked at the record of my account online and saw that the check had been paid, or at least the amount of the payment had been deducted from my account. I called my agent who then checked with the insurance company and found that it had no record of receiving the payment and would need a copy of the front and back of the check to show that the payment was made. When I asked the bank for copies of the check, they responded that the check had never cleared.

Now, it is not the fact that the insurance company lost the check which is irking me. What makes me ticked off is that the bank deducted this amount from my account without ever having made any payment, and furthermore, now insists that in order to get that money put back in my account, I will have to submit a ‘stop order’ request and pay $25. Go figure.

I have written a strongly worded letter to the bank and have threatened to take this up with our state banking officials if they won’t put the money back into my account without charging the $25 fee. It is unlikely that I’ll actually do this, but just making the threat and blowing off some steam seemed worth it.

The 1908 Woman: An Object of Public Interest

Here is an interesting item that I came across recently in a publication by the Supreme Court Historical Society.

In 1908 the Supreme Court decided a case that upheld an Oregon law which prohibited an employer from requiring a woman to work more than 10 hours in a day. The fact that the court would allow the government to interfere with a private employer and an employee was pretty radical for that time, but even more amazing was the reasoning which the court adopted.
The court found that, “women’s physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a disadvantage in the struggle for subsistence is obvious. This is especially true when the burdens of motherhood are upon her. Even when they are not, by abundant testimony of the medical fraternity, continued standing for a long time on her feet at work, repeating this from day to day, lends itself to injurious effects upon the body, and as healthy mothers are essential to vigorous offspring, the physical well-being of woman becomes an object of public interest and care in order to preserve the strength and vigor of the race.”

What a difference a century can make! Not withstanding that the ruling was in favor of women, the paternalistic approach which the court took at that time is just the opposite of the equality sought by women of today.

At the Height of Their Generation

Here we go a-blogging again. This time I’d like to mention a phenomenon that I have been noticing more and more lately. It seems to strike me particularly when I am traveling by air, but that is probably just because I don’t have occasion to meet up with many young men on a day-to-day basis. The observation that I am referring to is this: It appears to me that 90% of the men I see in airports under the age of 30 are at least six feet four inches tall. When did this happen that everybody got so big? And how? I was very near to six feet tall when I was a bit younger (I am sure that I have lost an inch or so in my “old age”), but I find myself looking up at almost every young man and teenaged boy that I meet. It used to be that anyone that big would be ticketed for a career in professional sports.

Fortunately for me no points are awarded in court for tallness, but for anyone interested in having Lowry & Associates handle a personal injury claim, you don’t have to worry, because my associate, James, is a young man who is fully up to the standards of his generation.

So there is something to think about, but mainly you have wasted another perfectly good few minutes reading my ramblings.

Swimming For Longevity

We all know that regular exercise is good for a healthy heart, but did you know that swimming is even better for you than walking or jogging?

Not much research has been done on the health benefits of swimming, but two recently published studies show that this form of exercise may be the best.

One study involving nearly 46,000 people measured blood pressure, cholesterol levels and energy output. Not surprisingly swimmers and runners had the best numbers for cardiovascular health.

The other study measured death rates among 40,547 men, ages 20 to 90 over a 13 year period. Only 2% of swimmers died, compared with 8% of runners, 9% of walkers and 11% of non-exercisers. Pretty impressive, wouldn’t you say?

It’s something to think about in case you are interested in a long, healthy life.