Champagne Business Start-Up Obama Style

Posted by Tina

When my husband and I started our business we did the bulk of the work involved in our own family room for the first few years. When we absolutely had to have a facility for production, funding came from an investment partner, a loan we paid back in full with a lot of interest at 12%. We also relied on our own personal credit card (we made the decision when the government allowed interest on credit as a deduction…the law was changed just in time for us to lose and at 18% it was a big discouraging loss).

We lived very frugally for five years in order to bring our product to market. We have continued to live frugally, save, and be careful about our business decisions over the past twenty-seven years and we, and our employees have done well overall as a result.

This is the way, or something quite similar, that most people start a new business. NO TAXPAYER WAS HARMED OR EVER PLACED AT RISK IN THE PROCESS.

President Obama apparently supports a very different business model where taxpayers are asked to take a tremendous financial risk. His idea of creating a viable business is to pick a few people with the right agenda driven product and award them large government loans at very low interest rates. He is willing to do this even when the companies he has chosen have been considered a poor risk Common sense, frugality, smart decisions and honesty about future prospects don’t enter the picture…just the fact that they will build a politically correct “right” product.


My dad used to joke about the folly of people having champagne tastes with beer budgets. Solyndra was just that sort of high brow company. Bloomberg reports:

“The new building is like the Taj Mahal,” John Pierce, 54, a San Jose resident who worked as a facilities manager at Solyndra, said in an interview.

The plant features 19 loading docks, four electric car charging stations in the parking lot and landscaping of wild grass and a rock garden. An automated rail system moved parts through the assembly process.

Robots that resembled “a big freezer with wheels” maneuvered around the factory transporting panels from one machine to another, said George Garma, 49, a former Solyndra equipment maintenance technician from Fremont. The Disney tunes alerted workers to the robots’ presence.

“It was first class,” David Chan, 51, who was an information-technology contractor for Solyndra, said in an interview. “I’ve been in the business for 25 years and have seen some elaborate buildings. I’ve never seen a facility like it.”

In addition to this wasteful extravagance they were also attempting to sell a product for three dollars that was costing them six to make.

I urge you to read the full article and keep up with the Obama plan to risk taxpayer money. The government is continuing to make such loans to force the green agenda. This is a ridiculous way to transition to alternative energy sources. If the risk was on the shoulders of individuals this building would never have been built unless and until the need for it emerged and the profit of the company justified the expenditure.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Champagne Business Start-Up Obama Style

  1. Post Scripts says:

    Yours is the great American story of how to do it right. Solyndra did just about everything they could wrong. They were over leveraged, and they put the cart before the horse more times than I could count. Way too much up front without a proven business plan. This tells me they were fools and perhaps criminals too. Their business model was so unworkable that no venture capitalist in their right minds would invest their money in such a group. However, government isn’t spending their money and they are stupid enough not to see the flaws, so it’s easy to take a risk, especially when its only your money.

    I hope a lot of young people venturing out into life for the first time read it and remember what you said.

  2. Tina says:

    Thank you Quentin for that blessing.

    I would like to point out that I have seen errors in your comments as well so you may be right about PS.

    Funding, by the way, has zero to do with the quality of education our kids are receiving. We could raise the amount or lower it and it wouldn’t make a bit of difference. Surprisingly the reasons are quite similar in the Solyndra failure.

    The “champaigne” error was not repeated in the piece:

    My dad used to joke about the folly of people having champagne

    I usually try to check my work for such errors and I apologize to our readers for any offense this error might have caused. (I will correct it)

    Now…what do you think about the Solyndra case?

  3. Tina says:

    Hmmm…I went to the editing page to correct my error and it turns out it had been corrected…I thought I had done that but I’m on pain meds so…

    When I came back to the PS page the misspelling was still there, until I hit refresh.

    Jack was it you or did I indeed change it yesterday?

  4. Nick F says:

    “Whenever someone tells me we should cut funding for education, I point them to Post_Scripts as the reason we shouldn’t!”

    Isn’t your salary largely attached to direct government spending on education…I cant imagine anyone paying for your tutelage. Something tells me that has more to do with your affinity for wasting tax dollars on…well…yourself.

    By the way, nice job on completely ignoring the central point of Tina’s post. Real life experience often causes academics to resort to scorn over debate. I cant tell if it’s an inferiority complex, or if you really are just that arrogant.

  5. Post Scripts says:

    Tina, it was me. I try to catch the typos whenever its obvious, but most of the time I am just chasing down my own cause I make way too many! lol

  6. Post Scripts says:

    Q, please try to be more civil, Tina is recovering from some major surgery and it hasn’t been all that easy. So please feel free to state your case, but avoid personal slights, okay?

  7. Tina says:

    Q: “Reading an article with the correct spelling in it and then cutting & pasting it to your blog as some sort of original thinking, only to misspell it when you put the title on is not a typo.”

    Not that I need to explain myself but boy are you wrong!

    The portion of my post that was taken from an article is clearly indicated as a block quote with a link provided. I do this deliberately so our readers can distinguish the words excerpted from an article I’ve read from my own words. I do it rather than rewriting what another has written, pretending it is my own work. I believe strongly in acknowledging the work of others. I excerpt from articles because I have found the content of an article worthy of discussion and think our readers might enjoy reading the full article and I have something besides what was revieled in the article to say. I DO NO TRY TO PASS OFF THE WORK OF OTHERS AS MY OWN ORIGINAL WORK.

    Our readers will not find the word “champagne” in the article from which I excerpted examples of the extravagance of Solyndra execs.

    One more thing…most of the time I sign my posts, “Posted by Tina”. Only when the bulk of the article is my own thoughts and words to I sign as “Tina Grazier”. This one was a toss-up but because I had used a long excerpt, I used the “posted by” signature.

    The title I originally selected for this post, which included my own story and my own words, was “Business Start-Up Obama Style”. When I reread what I had written I decided to include the word champagne based on my father’s favorite expressions which I had shared and which describes perfectly the approach this company had. I made the change at the last minute because I had to get on to something else and failed to notice my spelling error.

    As for the “education level of TEA(snip)” your arrogance is once more revealed. All levels of education are represented in the TP movement.

  8. Tina says:

    Jack thanks for the help in correcting the title. I’m thinking pain killers are also brain killers…champagne…campaign…what’s the difference…lol.

  9. Tina says:

    Nick: “By the way, nice job on completely ignoring the central point of Tina’s post.”

    It’s his favorite game. That way he gets to be the center of attention…like a small child tugging at your hand while you are engaged in conversation with other adults…lol.

    I do my best to use his comments to clarify issues whatever they may be.

  10. Nick F says:

    I enjoy that Quentin sets himself up as the example of the educated adult in the room.

    If this is the case then a sampling of Quentin’s writing would suggest that the statements of an “educated person” are little more than a set of logical fallacies holding hands, liberally soaked in poorly constructed ad hominem, laced with contradiction and a poor understanding of history.

    Tina you now have a better understanding for why you confuse and frustrate Quentin. Your over reliance on reason, facts, combined with real life experience and over all logical consistency might as well be Sanskrit to Quentin.

    Hope you feel better Tina!

  11. Toby says:

    When it comes to fighting in the arena of ideas, liberals go to war unarmed. All they have is mud slinging and name calling. Hey Q, how many readers does your blog have?

  12. Nick F says:

    “Hey Q, how many readers does your blog have?”

    Lets just say the only way Quentin’s blog could generate readership is if the government mandated it…and even then I think most people would choose to pay the fines.

  13. Tina says:

    Nick thanks for the well wishes.

    I know I’ll feel a lot better and also walk with greater ease once I get past the rehab, the pain (which is a challenge to manage) and the incredible amount of time involved in the whole six week long operation.

    It’s so good to have you once again chiming in as you can.

  14. Harriet says:

    Tina what is your business?

    You sound very much like the owner of a small business I trade with, I know not the same but curious what your business is.

  15. Libby says:

    Now … you don’t want to invite comparisons. I wandered over to Gate’s site … so sad.

  16. Tina says:

    Harriet we sell a product that is purchased exclusively by state and local governments both in and out of the US or through others who sell to these agencies. The product is computer related. It’s not a retail product.

    My husband really likes his privacy, so I’d rather not say more.

  17. Libby says:

    “Harriet we sell a product that is purchased exclusively by state and local governments ….”

    All right. That’s it.

    I mean, that’s REALLY IT.

    The hypocite of the year award goes to ….

    I, I, I have to go lie down now.

  18. Tina says:

    Libby: “All right. That’s it.

    I mean, that’s REALLY IT.”

    Good grief…get a grip!

    “The hypocite of the year award goes to ….”

    Please, once you have recovered from that extremely girly swoon, explain why selling a product to state and local governments makes me an hypocrite?

  19. Libby says:

    You’ll have to tell me Tina, is there a private market for your product? Cause if there isn’t, you and your husband have developed some means of extracting a livelihood from our tax dollars, which does not put you in a very good position to decry those “parasitic public employees” who also make their living off our tax dollars.

    It is the very last word in irrational to despair over government spending … when you make your living off government spending … and I can’t believe I just had to explain this.

    I don’t really like this; I know it’s not “nice”, but dang, it must be done. The blinders are a menace to our Republic; they’re coming off. This is it: you are perfectly happy to have the government spend money on you … it’s all those other people who are “spongers.” Tina, you must suck it up and seriously examine this position.

    (And don’t you ever let me find out that your “product” is some superfluous aid to pointless bureaucracy, because I will never, ever, ever let you live it down.)

    She is so mean.

  20. Post Scripts says:

    Libby: “is there a private market for your product?”

    The product could be adapted for use in the private sector.

    “Cause if there isn’t, you and your husband have developed some means of extracting a livelihood from our tax dollars, which does not put you in a very good position to decry those “parasitic public employees” who also make their living off our tax dollars.”

    Extracting a livlihood? Sounds like you are accusing me of doing something underhanded or illegal. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    “…you are perfectly happy to have the government spend money on you … it’s all those other people who are “spongers.”

    Excuse me Libs but the government agencies I sell to are not spending money on me. They are buying a product that benefits every citizen…and at low bid. I can honestly say that because of the way we structured our business (no frills, low overhead) we have saved the taxpayer a lot of money over the years.

    And by the way…when I described government work as parasitic it was in order to distinguish between them and those who actually create wealth. It was not meant to be a desparaging remark but instead a descriptive way to explain that we all depend on wealth builders, that wealth builders make it all possible.

    “(And don’t you ever let me find out that your “product” is some superfluous aid to pointless bureaucracy, because I will never, ever, ever let you live it down.)”

    It’s a safety product…sorry to disappoint.

    “She is so mean.”

    And you, sweety, are the goddess of nice.

    Most often it is children that make this accusation of “mean”. They do it when their mothers are askinjg them toi be responsible…it may be a badge of honor to be so designated.

  21. Libby says:

    “She is so mean.”

    You’re right. I should have quotated it. I did mean me.

    “It’s a safety product…sorry to disappoint.”

    Well, that’s something anyway. But if you were really, really living up to your principles, you would be selling your safety product in the private sector only … only the private sector does not spend its money on safety products (unless the government makes them) … so of course, the only market for your product is the government, and, oh, yes … that was one seriously strategic blunder, Tina. I am still quite feeling quite gleefully mean.

  22. Pie Guevara says:

    When Libby does go on at length what are we treated to? A mean (and by mean I mean small minded) personal attack on Tina’s integrity, a feeble attempt to smear Tina as a hypocrite, and a manufactured, silly, left wing canard that “only the private sector does not spend its money on safety products (unless the government makes them).”

    And this woman has the gall to attempt to chastise me with bald faced lies and misrepresentation? You truly are a piece of work, Miss Snooty!

    So much for “cogent exposition”!

    Libby, you have one humongous blind spot there. Seriously, do you ever, and I mean ever, listen to yourself?

    Who was it who said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates I think.

  23. Tina says:

    Libby: ” But if you were really, really living up to your principles, you would be selling your safety product in the private sector only…”

    Sorry Libs, I’m not about to let you get away with this bologna.

    I demand to know what exactly about selling a product to state and city agencies that they need is in any way against my principles? I want a substantive answer lady not your usual smarmy slaps in the face.

    I sell a much needed quality product at a reasobnable price in a competitive bid process. Government puts out the bid and solicits my response…I don’t twist anyone’s arm nor do I line anyone’s pockets to win the contract. We also do repairs at reasonable price and my husband has offered trouble shooting assistance at no charge.

    So what’s the beef? What principle do you think I have breached?

    “Tina. I am still quite feeling quite gleefully mean.”

    I’m not at all surprised; you do go to the extreme.

  24. Libby says:

    “I demand to know what exactly about selling a product to state and city agencies that they need is in any way against my principles?”

    What? Has the earth shifted? Have you not spent the last umpteen years despairing over “excess” government spending? Apparently, it is only “excess” when the check ain’t written to you. One more time: why are you entitled to payment for your services, but other public employees (for that is what your are) not? Do I really have to dredge up your previous comments on the subject?

    Is it that, for all your industriousness, you are not a PERS employee? Well, that is something you will have to address in your next contract … but don’t go defaming the other PERS employees for your lapse, inadequacy, spinelessness.

  25. Tina says:

    Libby: “Have you not spent the last umpteen years despairing over “excess” government spending? Apparently, it is only “excess” when the check ain’t written to you. One more time: why are you entitled to payment for your services, but other public employees (for that is what your are) not?”

    Extremes! Libby, you will never understand as long as you need to control everything and go to such extremes.

    I have NEVER said public employees should not be paid for their work!!!!!!!!!!

    I have said that government is too big and inefficient and has gotten so out of hand that taxpayers can’t afford the huge expense, or the waste and fraud, that comes with the bloated expensive bureaucracy.

    The product I sell could be installed by private sector companies, and I would be more than happy to participate if it was done that way. But you’d howl about that too…wouldn’t you!!!

    “Is it that, for all your industriousness, you are not a PERS employee? Well, that is something you will have to address in your next contract … but don’t go defaming the other PERS employees for your lapse, inadequacy, spinelessness.”

    I have no desire to become a part of an unsustanable burdensome tsxpayer paid system. I have also NOT defamed PERS employees but have decried a system that is unsustanable and extremely wasteful. YOU refuse to hear that, which is typical of extremist progressives, and doesn’t surprise me one bit.

    Now let’s hear you defend those government workers that have been so generous and thoughtful as they accepted union negotiated contracts that stick it to the taxpayer so spectacularly. Tell me why that is a much better deal for citizens and taxpayers than a product that is needed, that benefits all citizens at little expense, and that doesn’t have a big pension and healthcare program attached to it.

  26. Libby says:

    “I have no desire to become a part of an unsustanable burdensome tsxpayer paid system.”

    First, who says it is? Some day the fund’s investments will recover, and the employees are already paying more of their salary toward their retirement. The situation in in hand.

    Second, isn’t saying the public employees shouldn’t have a pension plan the same as saying they shouldn’t be compensated for their labors, i.e., paid? Aren’t you just being resentful cause they got a better deal than you? The more productive thing to do would get a good deal for yourself, wouldn’t it?

    You need a union.

  27. Tina says:

    Libby: “First, who says it is?”

    The budget and debt say it is.

    “Some day the fund’s investments will recover…”

    Not if the left continues its war on business.

    “isn’t saying the public employees shouldn’t have a pension plan the same as saying they shouldn’t be compensated for their labors, i.e., paid?”

    I didn’t say they shouldn’t have a pension plan, so your question is moot.

    “Aren’t you just being resentful cause they got a better deal than you?”

    Defending myself against your uncalled for accusation and misrepresentation of my position has nothing to do with resentment or any other emotion.

    I don’t know that they “got a better deal” than I. I paid for MY OWN PENSION AND HEALTHCARE…and was asked to pay for theirs too. Somehow you lefties think this is “fair” while telling people in the private sector they aren’t doing enough. You got some cheek lady.

    “The more productive thing to do would get a good deal for yourself, wouldn’t it?”

    I got the deal I wanted and it has been both productive and successful.

    “You need a union.”

    Extortion is always the preferred way with you progressive types. Taking from others is all you know. But there’s a flaw in your thinking that leads to such disrespect of the private sector. I’ll ask again…WHEN WE ALL WORK FOR BIG GOVERNMENT WHO WILL BE LEFT TO CREATE THE WEALTH TO PAY FOR IT?

    You need to think about resentment. Progressives resent independent people, the wealthy, the private sector, freedom, and personal accountability and responsibility.

  28. Libby says:

    “WHEN WE ALL WORK FOR BIG GOVERNMENT WHO WILL BE LEFT TO CREATE THE WEALTH TO PAY FOR IT?”

    Public employees don’t pay taxes? News to me.

    And nobody’s suggesting that everybody should work for the government. I’m suggesting that private employees should get as good a deal as public ones.

    “I paid for MY OWN PENSION AND HEALTHCARE…”

    And with my tax dollars. I’m glad you have got yerself a good deal, and am hoping your employees have likewise.

  29. Tina says:

    Libby: “Public employees don’t pay taxes?”

    If public employee taxes could fund all the crap you lefties want government to do you wouldn’t constantly demand that the wealthy pay their “fair share”.

    I know you can’t be this stupid. Who creates the wealth that make government salaries (including the taxes they pay) possible? they don’t get it from the public sector which is totally a service sector…they create nothing!

    Without the private sector wealth producers there would be no funds for government…period!

    “I’m suggesting that private employees should get as good a deal as public ones.”

    and all I’ve ever suggested is that they be paid for their services but their demands for goodies and perks should be reasonable. They should be responsible about their demands since the taxpayer foots the bill. You will never convince me that most government employees ever think about that. Most have come to believe that there’s this vast pool of money that they are entitled to take and they have no idea what it takes to create that pool of money. Their disdain for and willingness to attack the private sector is evidence of their ignorance and irresponsible attitude!

    “And with my tax dollars. I’m glad you have got yerself a good deal, and am hoping your employees have likewise.”

    We all got a very good deal for those tax dollars spent on my product…I can’t say the same for my education tax dollars, my green energy tax dollars, my welfare tax dollars and any number of other program tax dollars spent with abandon and a very poor result. to add insult to injury people like you continue to treat all people in the private sector like criminals. I think your attitudes stink. I think you support a side of politics that lies, cheats and steals every dime they can get…with zero responsibility or accountability.

Comments are closed.