Thursday, January 11, 2018

If North Carolina wants to invest $1 billion plus, why not design and build cars in the Piedmont Triad?

North Carolina could create more than 10,000 jobs by designing and manufacturing a high quality, simply designed, inexpensive, fuel efficient, modifiable category killer automobile with easily interchangeable parts between different model years, like Jeep CJ’s, vintage VW Beetles, Toyota Camry's or Kia Souls, turning the global auto manufacturing industry business model upside-down and changing the future of our communities.

The current auto industry's business model, infrastructure and baked in legacy costs could not adapt or compete with an end user oriented, relatively lower cost model, located within easy reach of the rest of the world.

If North Carolina wants an new auto plant even as car sales decline, why not also have a new corporate headquarters as well offering thousands more jobs than a plant owned by an out of state entity?  As economic times get tough and manufacturers with headquarters elsewhere are more likely to idle or shut down plants farther from home, the best way to preserve locally created jobs is to have more company headquarters located in North Carolina, especially if the state wants to invest hundreds of millions in automotive manufacturing.  Why not make sure the corporate headquarters of the company is also located here as an insurance policy on the likelihood of the best paying jobs staying here over the long term?

If taxpayer monies are involved, why not limit executive pay to not exceed 10-20 times the average hourly wage, creating consumer goodwill by maximizing employee income as much as possible to create higher rates of state wide economic growth and employment.  With a business model that would overtly fight income and wealth inequality, brand loyalty, which should be easily generated among the consuming public, could sell more cars than any start up in history.

Employee pay based on performance, productivity, quality and profitability could make North Carolina the center of the next era of the auto industry, by simply paying employees as much as possible within the metrics of a profitable company, and less if profit falls, while eliminating top heavy executive compensation.

A high quality, easily maintained vehicle should cost at least half as much over the auto's life compared to what's currently offered by manufacturers who rely on planned obsolescence and monopolistic business practices.  Essentially the entire global auto industry's profit margins are dependent on a non-consumer friendly business model that can be attacked by an upcoming competitor from a non-union oriented state which prioritizes the best interests of its workforce.

If the global auto industry's revenues are dependent on relatively protective business practices that can be negatively compared to an upcoming lower cost, higher quality American competitor from North Carolina with pre-owned equipment purchased at discounts as auto manufacturing contracts in the near future, we can create high paying employment within an industry hamstrung by unsustainable legacy costs and bloated balance sheets. 

As we enter what very much looks like a global economic downturn after ten years of global central bank intervention, auto manufacturing equipment should be relatively inexpensively acquired in the near term future, as some auto makers succumb to the actual realities of our current unstable, artificially sustained global economy dependent on central bank intervention.

If North Carolinian taxpayers invest, they should own shares along with the public.  If any taxpayer monies are utilized to create jobs via a automobile company, then individual taxpayers should literally own shares of the company.  Citizens who've never owned equity in an entrepreneurial enterprise would have a better understanding of how to create wealth in our community, thereby teaching as many in our area how to "fish".  Millions in financial backing from municipalities and the state can be leveraged into billions in equity offerings to exponentially generate debt free capital funding opportunities and interested, willing and qualified consumers, easily repaying taxpayer funded capital investment as soon as practicable.

A category killer like Apple's smartphone, Google's search engine or Amazon's business model could dramatically increase North Carolina's standard of living if workers, taxpayers, those involved or with a stake can own shares of a company who's value could exponentially increase in the near to long term.

If Tesla Motors launched its initial public offering and raised $226 million, we can raise exponential multiples as much for an automotive company that could sell 100 times more in quantity, which would employ thousands with less automation involved, specifically to increase incomes, brand recognition, loyalty, employment and economic growth in our state by changing the future of the global auto manufacturing industry.  North Carolina can create somewhere between $5 and $15 billion of direct investment into our state with this strategy, while not increasing outstanding debt.

The current auto industry's infrastructure and baked in union related legacy pension costs etc..., could not adapt and compete with an end user and employee focused start up producing lower cost, higher quality products.

An easily repairable/modifiable automobile produced by employees who have a stake in a high quality product should create an active aftermarket for enthusiasts, sparking small businesses to create alternative parts for trending modifications.

Lowering carrying costs means lower consumer payments for insurance and maintenance.  With easily acquired and inexpensively obtainable replacement parts over the auto's longer lifespan, vehicle owners should fair well financially, increasing state wide discretionary income.  If parts were made to be easily replaced and widely available without prohibitively expensive specialized proprietary tools and diagnostic equipment, they should cost much less, which would dramatically lower warranty and long term carrying costs to consumers, building brand loyalty.

If a bumper gets scratched in an accident, a modern automobile's replacement is relatively very much more expensive than 30 years ago.  Modern replacement costs are most likely only available at a premium as consumers have become dependent on the industry's exclusivity of non-aftermarket parts and labor for profitability.

By designing and producing an easily up-gradable and/or modifiable automobile, which would create an active aftermarket for enthusiasts as imagination and enjoyment kick in on something that is relatively the same, but can be made different, catering to individual styles of diverse owners, we can create thousands of high paying domestic jobs.

Include a Smartphone/tablet instead of installed, overpriced in-dash components;

Cars with easily replaceable smartphones and tablets for on board computers instead of expensive to replace installed systems could revolutionize the auto manufacturing industry by clearly saving consumers money over time.

Owners can save big money with high level diagnostics at their fingertips,  Imagine the long term cost savings of engine lights not just alerting drivers of relatively unknown or unknowable issues, but an inexpensive app informing much more about what an actual problem may likely be earlier, with easily replaceable, lower cost ubiquitous parts.

Higher levels of reliability and economy should lead to lower insurance premiums and increased resell values relative to competitors.  A global economic downturn should provide a once in a generation opportunity to create a large market share quickly by producing relatively lower cost, reliable, longer lasting cars.

Monday, January 1, 2018

On the "financialization of the economy" and the betrayal by the elected

We had the perfect chance [to fix the financial industry control over the economy] in 2009, when Barack Obama came in, to disrupt that cycle and get back to being an economy that actually produces things rather than an economy that shuffles financial instruments back and forth. And we didn’t do it. We thought we did, we thought we were voting for that, but our leadership chose not to go in that direction.

The World's population was betrayed to keep those in power, in power, 
by a US President voted into office to go after the bad guys, who did the opposite

PAUL JAY: And I think an expression of the power of finance, they selected a guy who could feint left, and when he comes to power, appoint Wall Street as his financial team.

And then we did it again, only with a different set of the same kind of people

THOMAS FRANK: Yeah. Well, that was the big disappointment for me, is watching Barack Obama deal with the financial crisis, and basically right off the bat, it was apparent that he –I mean, not apparent to me, of course, I was very hopeful, as the phrase went at the time — that he was going to take the steps that needed to be taken. And by that, I mean that he was going to do what Franklin Roosevelt did to the banks back in the early 1930s.

PAUL JAY: And had control of Congress and could’ve done it.

THOMAS FRANK: And then he had the bailout mechanism. He had seats on their boards. He had everything at his disposal, including prosecuting these people for fraud. They were dealing in something called “liar’s loans.” They were packaging them up and selling them to retirees in Germany. This is so bad in so many ways. And as we all know, they were designing financial instruments to blow up in people’s faces, the people who bought it. They were doing all this deliberately. We know this is true. It would’ve been hard to prosecute them because they have good lawyers, but you still have to do it. You’re the president.

PAUL JAY: And not a single prosecution at a senior level.

THOMAS FRANK: Not a single one. That’s right. He didn’t even fire them. This is the other thing. Barack Obama had every authority over these guys. If you go back and look at what Roosevelt did in the ’30s, his bailout agency constantly was firing bankers from their positions because the government basically owned the banks because it had bailed them out. By virtue of bailing them out, they had power over them, and he could remove, and he did remove bankers from leadership positions all the time from management. Obama never even did that. Now, he did fire the CEO of General Motors, which they also bailed out. But no, he didn’t lift a finger with the banks.

PAUL JAY: But in terms of the banks and who gets bailed out and the inequality of it is why they lose control of Congress.

THOMAS FRANK: When Barack Obama was running for president, he said, and he actually did say this, this is not just hopeful thinking by a sappy liberal from Kansas, but he said that we were not just going to bail out Wall Street, we were going to do something for homeowners as well. They never did it. They just never did it. And they never even did anything for small banks. Small banks all over America went out of business in those days. There was this huge die-off of small banks.

And they never got crammed down … You remember this? This is one of the early fights. There were a whole series of things, of battles in the early Obama years where he was required to choose sides between Wall Street and Main Street, and he persistently chose to side with Wall Street on basically every issue that came up.

THOMAS FRANK: Obamacare. There was all of this debate at the time, whether it was right for president to stop focusing on the economy and start moving to healthcare. I didn’t really have a problem with that. Healthcare is the great sort of … You’re from Canada. You know this. This is the great unfinished sort of aspect of the American welfare state. We got Medicare but no more, and so many Democrats have tried to get some form of national health insurance, and they’ve always failed. Well, here comes Obama, and he’s going to try.

I was very happy with that. What made me unhappy was that the solution that they settled upon, Obamacare, this massively complicated thing, and the reason it’s massively complicated is because it’s all about making sure that private, for-profit health insurance companies stay viable and continue to make profits. They get written into it.

PAUL JAY: And don’t touch pharma.

THOMAS FRANK: You’re going to have a national system where these guys continue to make these exorbitant profits all the time. How is that going to work?

THOMAS FRANK: Trump is out there … By the way, to get back to Trump, every conversation leads to Trump these days, Trump actually was banging Hillary over the head with Goldman Sachs, was actually using that against her, and now look who’s the Secretary of the Treasury. It’s unbelievable that they’re able to get away with it, but they are. How do they do that? Now, that’s a really good question. How does a party like the Republicans come off pretending to be on the side of the ordinary people? Well, they do. They do it again and again and again. This is one of their themes, is populism. It’s fake populism, but they’re very good at it.

PAUL JAY: Now, you’ve been to these places recently.

THOMAS FRANK: I want to see economic protests in action like you had in the 1930s. We know it’s going to happen. I want to see it with my own eyes.

It’s like, look at this silly, made-up protest, the Tea Party movement. I’ll be damned, it caught on. It was a genius move in this sense, they made up a fake protest movement for hard times, and I mean they made it up. They said, “Well, hard times. You got to have a protest movement. Let’s get out there and make one. Let’s do it.” And they did, and they managed to change the subject from getting tough with Wall Street to deregulating Wall Street.

You go around to these towns that we’ve been describing, these Trump voting areas, and you talk to people, you talk to working-class people, and they are furious with what is happening to their lives. And maybe it’s happening to them personally or maybe it’s not. Maybe they got a pension, maybe they’re retired, maybe they’ve got a secure job, but they can see it coming for their kids, that there are no good jobs anymore. Everybody knows it, and everybody is so angry about it.

So look at the Democrats. Here’s the party that should traditionally be in touch with that anger and speaking … They used to be the party of organized labor. They should know about this. Instead, they’re out there campaigning and saying, remember what Hillary was saying, America is already great. This is poison, this is toxic to be putting out that message in a year like 2016.

PAUL JAY: I was saying to you earlier, the night before the election, everyone thought Hillary was going to win, so did I. But the night, they did a final rally in Philadelphia, and Barack Obama was on stage next to Hillary and spoke, and it was all about the great achievements of the administration.

THOMAS FRANK: Yeah. This is the dilemma. Because they loved that man. They love Barack Obama, and they can’t acknowledge that the economy got worse under his watch.

PAUL JAY: Not for everybody.

THOMAS FRANK: Yeah. There’s a famous quote from Hillary. Actually, it’s not famous because it’s in … Where is it? I think it’s in Donna Brazile’s book. It’s in one of the campaign books. Hillary says, “But how can I say those things without people thinking I’m criticizing Barack Obama?” She just couldn’t do it.

PAUL JAY: Even Bernie held back.

THOMAS FRANK: She couldn’t bring herself to do it. So I was at the Democratic Convention, and someone did give a very fiery speech, and it was Elizabeth Warren, and she did talk about, everything I’ve said, she talked about. The problem is she’s railing against these things, and here’s the President of the United States sitting up there in the box, the box seat up there. She never mentioned him of course. She can’t. She’s in the same party. So they have this terrible problem that they love Obama, but they’re very upset. They can see the pain out there in the country, but they can’t criticize it.

PAUL JAY: I think the last thing on earth Wall Street wants is a Sanders or a Sanders-esque and maybe Elizabeth Warren.


Saturday, December 30, 2017

Please provide documentation describing "Capitalized Interest on Limited Obligation Bonds" for the STPAC project

Downtown Greensboro Parking Deck Math = City Council lied to our community and may have broken a few laws

STPAC VIP Parking Control Fraud Math

On Margaret Moffett's "Downtown parking decks may be a thing of the past", Justin Outling, Tammi Thurm and our coming tax increase to pay for handouts to millionaires

Looks like The Steven Tanger Center for the Performing Arts is going to cost a lot more than the reported $89.7 million

Are the parking deck deals for Randall and Roy "Rackets"?

On Greensboro's News and Record's "Officials: Cone Denim's legal access increases with deck" by Margaret Moffett

Jeff Sykes carves up Nancy Vaughan, Roy Carroll, Randall Kaplan and the rest of the crooked crew in downtown Greensboro

A mix of Gary Kenton's letter to the editor and Hartzman's, "Voters should follow money connections", with some public records requests submitted to the City of Greensboro

Thursday, December 28, 2017

Please provide the City's estimation of STPAC patrons parking and staying at the Marriott, Roy Carroll and Randall Kaplan hotels




Please provide the City's estimation of Uber, taxi services to be utilized by STPAC patrons




Please provide documentation showing expected STPAC ticket fee revenue

Please provide and documentation and communications associated with ticket fee revenue for the STPAC from January 1, 2017.


STPAC VIP Parking Control Fraud Math

$10 million + $2.1 + $1.079 = $13.179 million in expected revenues for about 331 VIP parking spots over X amount of years during Y amount of shows at the STPAC

$13.179 million / 331 VIP parking spots = $39,816 in expected revenue for each space to pay for both interest and principal over an unknown number of years

At $20 per space, $39,816 / $20 = 1,991 sold spaces over an unknown number of events and years

At $15 per space, $39,816 / $15 = 2,654 sold spaces over an unknown number of events and years

If the City of Greensboro borrows the money over 30 years at 4.5%, the monthly payment would be $66,776;
The actual interest rate should probably be higher, as the property and the revenues are the only collateral backing up the debt, as opposed to a general obligation bond backed by tax revenues

$66,776 x 12 months = $801,312 per year needed to pay the bond off

$801,312 per year / $15 = 53,421 sold VIP parking spots per year to pay off the bond

$801,312 per year / $20 = 40,066 sold VIP parking spots per year to pay off the bond

The paid consultant said the center could host about 149 events per year after 3 years, some of which obviously couldn't get VIP parking money;

53,421 sold VIP parking spots per year at $15 = 161 performances at which all 331 VIP parking spaces are sold each and every performance, which would produce $801,312 per year to pay off the debt

CTG's Wizard of Oz etc... can't/won't sell VIP parking

The tax increases on downtown parking are to pay for Roy and Randall's $60 million worth of parking decks and the $10 million on the second line of the first graphic, all of which will reduce the demand for the VIP parking at the STPAC

The STPAC is not going to sell 331 VIP parking spots at every event

If the math doesn't work, we have been lied to

If the math doesn't work, Randall and Roy are taking millions from the public
Control fraud occurs when trusted officials in positions of responsibility subverts an organization and engages in extensive fraud for personal gain.

The Mayor, City Manager and top department heads of of the City of Greensboro, are uniquely placed to remove the checks and balances on fraud upon the public.

Accounting tactics can position these executives in a way that allows co-conspiritors to engage in accountancy fraud and embezzle money, hide shortfalls or otherwise defraud investors, or the public at large. A control fraud will often obtain "investments that have no readily ascertainable market value", and then shop for appraisers that will assign unrealistically high values and auditing firms that will bless the fraudulent accounting statements.

Some control frauds are reactive in the sense that they turn to fraud only after concluding that the business will fail.

Please provide documentation detailing how $13.179 million in revenues from



Please provide documentation itemizing "$41.826M PRIVATE FUNDING TOTAL" for the STPAC

Please provide any documents or communications detailing private donations for STPAC since January 1, 2017.

Please provide any documents or communications detailing delivery of private donations for STPAC since January 1, 2017.

Please provide any documents or communications detailing the current status of private donations for STPAC since January 1, 2017.

Please provide any documents or communications between anyone at the City and CFGG concerning private donations for STPAC since January 1, 2017.