RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:49 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:32 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36478
Democrats propose bill to strengthen labor laws:

Over recent decades, as union density has sharply declined, we have seen the largest increase in income inequality since the Great Depression. Today, working families are finding it increasingly hard to obtain basic economic security. Since the 1970s, almost all new wealth has become concentrated in the hands of a tiny sliver of the population, while wages for low- and middle-income workers remain stagnant. In the years following the Great Recession (2009-2012), 91 percent of all new wealth created accrued to the top one percent of earners. Over a broader 34-year period from 1980 through 2014, incomes for the top 1 percent rose by 204 percent while incomes for the bottom 50 percent rose by just 1 percent. In stark contrast, over the preceding 34-year period from 1946 through 1980, incomes for the top 1 percent rose by 47 percent, while incomes for the bottom 50 percent rose by more than twice that: 102 percent.

The more income inequality increases, the harder it is for working families to obtain a quality education, safe housing, sustainable work, and a secure retirement. To keep the American dream alive and allow workers to once again share in the economic prosperity of this country, we must build an economy that works for all—not just those at the top. Strengthening the collective voice and negotiating rights of workers is an essential first step. While many companies invest in their workers through workforce training, fair wages and good benefits, A Better Deal for workers’ rights fights to ensure that all Americans have a seat at the table and a voice on the job. We should be rewarding businesses that do right by their employees, not helping corporations that outsource American jobs, lower wages or take advantage of hardworking Americans.
Working people deserve A Better Deal that protects their freedom to negotiate with their employer.

Federal labor law makes two fundamental promises to working people: 1) the right to freely choose whether to join with coworkers to form a union, and 2) the right to jointly determine their wages, benefits, and working conditions through negotiation with their employers. Though unions created the middle class and lifted many working families out of poverty, it is clear that current protections are no longer adequate to guarantee these basic promises. In recent decades, corporate interests have intensified their attacks on these rights. As collective representation of workers has declined, so have the voices speaking for working people. A Better Deal on workers’ rights will give working families a real voice on the job.

Specifically, A Better Deal will:

  • Strengthen penalties on predatory corporations that violate workers’ rights, and combat misclassification of workers as supervisors and independent contractors.
  • Strengthen workers’ right to strike for basic workplace improvements, including higher wages and better working conditions.
  • Create a mandatory mediation and arbitration process to ensure corporations and newly formed unions reach a first contract.
  • Ban state laws that undermine worker freedoms to join together and negotiate.
  • Provide millions of public employees with the freedom to join a union and collectively bargain with their employers.
  • Streamline the National Labor Relation Board’s (NLRB) procedures to secure worker freedoms and effectively prevent violations.
  • Protect the integrity of union elections against coercive captive audience meetings.
  • Use federal purchasing power and policy to help expand opportunities to negotiate.


Good, common-sense changes in the legislation. More at the link.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:39 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17669
That line about unions having lifted peolle into the middle class is only partially true. If you look at the big picture of what was going on between 1948 and 1968 there are far more factors in play than strong unions.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:43 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17669
It seems when democrats are out of power they always seem to come up with proposals like this. Somehow after they get in power not so much.......remember card check. They nevet had any intention of proposing it, all that talk wss pure bs

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:59 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:34 pm
Posts: 4935
Here is what we know about you glen.

You defend and You support a Facist and a Traitor.

You a trust Communist.

Fuck you and the truck you rode in on.

_________________
Glenfs posted about the Left's War On Women. Glenfs posted this after the Cosby Verdict "Gloria Allred is a media hound and an asshole. The most dangerous place to be is inbetween her and a microphone or camera". 04/27/2018.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36478
That line about unions having lifted peolle into the middle class is only partially true. If you look at the big picture of what was going on between 1948 and 1968 there are far more factors in play than strong unions.

No, it's completely true. That was the major factor - companies weren't going to pay workers a living wage unless they were forced. Simple fact.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:07 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36478
It seems when democrats are out of power they always seem to come up with proposals like this. Somehow after they get in power not so much.......remember card check. They nevet had any intention of proposing it, all that talk wss pure bs

It'll pass if we have enough votes - remember that we had Senators that were Dems in name, but were really Republicans.

But this is something that Republicans would never do - they hate workers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:32 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 12319
Location: Sunny South Florida
No, it's completely true. That was the major factor - companies weren't going to pay workers a living wage unless they were forced. Simple fact.


The peak year for U.S. private sector unionization was 1954.

I would say the key factor was what unions pushed for, and got, during that time period.

Economists like Krugman and Reich call this period the Great Compression (lowest levels of inequality, largest middle class).

That said, it wasn't shared prosperity, as due to segregation and sexism in pay/gender wage gap, A-As and women (among others) didn't share in that prosperity.

It's why I say our historical glasses can't be all rosy - FDR's New Deal also often left out A-A's as well ... this is why this might be, a BETTER Deal.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:51 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17669

The peak year for U.S. private sector unionization was 1954.

I would say the key factor was what unions pushed for, and got, during that time period.

Economists like Krugman and Reich call this period the Great Compression (lowest levels of inequality, largest middle class).

That said, it wasn't shared prosperity, as due to segregation and sexism in pay/gender wage gap, A-As and women (among others) didn't share in that prosperity.

It's why I say our historical glasses can't be all rosy - FDR's New Deal also often left out A-A's as well ... this is why this might be, a BETTER Deal.


In 1954 and in fact post WWII Europe was either rebuilding or just getting things going again. So there was very little if any at all foriegn competition from Europe. People in the USA would go without before they would buy anything from Japan or Asia. From Mexico south wasnt even third world yet, so again no foriegn competition anywhere.


To get a good job in the USA you had to be white and male. So of course Unions had a lot of power because of the limited work force companies had to choose from. Also because of WWII those men had something in common that band them together as one.


In todays world people don't band together, the work force is way larger [as it should be and should have been] and we have global competition. Somehow I can't see how stricter regulations, easier union rules, higher wages and higher taxes are going to inspire corporations to stay or relocate or expand in the USA.


There needs to be a balance and in the above proposal [ which the Dems will never propose] there is no balance.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17669
It'll pass if we have enough votes - remember that we had Senators that were Dems in name, but were really Republicans.

But this is something that Republicans would never do - they hate workers.



First off republicans don't hate workers. However if you believe that and I know you do then you also should believe that Democrats hate business.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:17 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 12319
Location: Sunny South Florida
Somehow I can't see how stricter regulations, easier union rules, higher wages and higher taxes are going to inspire corporations to stay or relocate or expand in the USA.


OSHA regulations lead to safer workplaces and less injured and dead workers. That's a good thing ... even for the boss, I think.
Environmental regulations lead to less sick and dead customers from pollution ... good for business.

Higher wages lead to a happier, more productive workforce. So do better working conditions, frequently fought for by labor unions.

Higher taxes ... well, if they lead to useful government investment in human capital and worker training ... again, a better, more productive workforce.

Somehow, I suspect in the business community are people who lack your short-sightedness. One can hope, anyway.

You can keep fleeing the things that are good for you in the search for the bottom of the drain of offshoring ... or eat your vegetables. And get healthy.

BTW, glen, are you familiar with the research that shows regulation can actually increase the economic efficiency of various enterprises? Perhaps you should look over it. ;)

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 17669

OSHA regulations lead to safer workplaces and less injured and dead workers. That's a good thing ... even for the boss, I think.
Environmental regulations lead to less sick and dead customers from pollution ... good for business.

Higher wages lead to a happier, more productive workforce. So do better working conditions, frequently fought for by labor unions.

Higher taxes ... well, if they lead to useful government investment in human capital and worker training ... again, a better, more productive workforce.

Somehow, I suspect in the business community are people who lack your short-sightedness. One can hope, anyway.

You can keep fleeing the things that are good for you in the search for the bottom of the drain of offshoring ... or eat your vegetables. And get healthy.

BTW, glen, are you familiar with the research that shows regulation can actually increase the economic efficiency of various enterprises? Perhaps you should look over it. ;)



The problem with regulations is there are never enough. Once stricter regulations get enacted, regulators go back the work the next day looking for more regulations. If I accidently spill diesel out of my tanks even though it is less than 100 gallons. The epa treats it as if it is a place where diesel has been spilled for decades. They dig up the ground, clean the dirt, then put it back. Costs over $10,000. Acting as if a one time spill of under 100 gallons would somehow poison the water supply.

Higher wages do not make bad workers into good workers. The person who is slacking at McDonalds is a slacker and will be a slacker at every job regardless of the wages.

Whenever I am being loaded or unloaded at a union facility literally 9 times out of 10 it takes significantly longer. If the union worker has 2.5 hours to load you, that is how long they will take. If they get you done sooner you will sit at the dock until that 2.5 hours is up. Happened to me twice last month at different facilities. I no longer haul beer or soft drinks that are union. Unless the load pay is exceptional. Because I have to make up the revenue for the time I will lose dealing with union facilities. On the 11th I hauled empty pop bottles to a coke whse. 5,000 pounds 439 miles I charged them $1300.


Higher taxes being used for worker training and economic development is a very good use of our tax dollars which I support 100%. But, don't let GoU hear you say that as he believes the money we spend on economic development should be pissed away on welfare programs. As in give a man a fish instead of teach a man to fish.


As for stopping offshoring, I have heard Thom Hartmann and various lefties some even here call for a return to tariffs, which I agree with. But, now that they have been proposed by Trump it seems those same folks are opposed to them. Also we have trillions of dollars off shore, I cannot understand why so many on the left are opposed to repatriotating those dollars by bringing them back home at a reduced tax rate.


It seems to me that 10% to 15% of something is way better than 39% of nothing. But, them I am just a dumb ole truck driver the son of dirt farmers.


As for your last point if they are done as part of a SPC study as invented? improved by Dr Demming and Walter Shewhart them I am all for them. If they are just more regulations brought about by some educated do gooder who never worker a day in their life outside of a classroom then not so much.

_________________
"my choice is for people like you to be deported -Ike Bana 5/13/18

"within weeks of being rid of the likes of you, rid of every fucking one of you,we would begin to see what kind of country this ought to be" Ike Bana 6/14/18


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:08 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 12319
Location: Sunny South Florida
The problem with regulations is there are never enough.


I don't give a shit whether you think we have too many or too little, I only care about them actually protecting workers and consumers.

Quote:
Higher wages do not make bad workers into good workers.


Lower wages lower morale and lead to lower productivity.

Quote:
As for stopping offshoring,


Stop incentivizing it. Step one. Companies continue to receive perverse tax incentives for outsourcing. End them.

Quote:
As for your last point if they are done as part of a SPC study as invented? improved by Dr Demming and Walter Shewhart them I am all for them. If they are just more regulations brought about by some educated do gooder who never worker a day in their life outside of a classroom then not so much.


WHY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION IS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY
https://publicpolicy.wharton.upenn.edu/ ... od-for-the

Research is not conducted inside a classroom, even if research results are presented there.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:24 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:27 pm
Posts: 8439
Location: miles from nowhere


The problem with regulations is there are never enough. Once stricter regulations get enacted, regulators go back the work the next day looking for more regulations. If I accidently spill diesel out of my tanks even though it is less than 100 gallons. The epa treats it as if it is a place where diesel has been spilled for decades. They dig up the ground, clean the dirt, then put it back. Costs over $10,000. Acting as if a one time spill of under 100 gallons would somehow poison the water supply.

Higher wages do not make bad workers into good workers. The person who is slacking at McDonalds is a slacker and will be a slacker at every job regardless of the wages.

Whenever I am being loaded or unloaded at a union facility literally 9 times out of 10 it takes significantly longer. If the union worker has 2.5 hours to load you, that is how long they will take. If they get you done sooner you will sit at the dock until that 2.5 hours is up. Happened to me twice last month at different facilities. I no longer haul beer or soft drinks that are union. Unless the load pay is exceptional. Because I have to make up the revenue for the time I will lose dealing with union facilities. On the 11th I hauled empty pop bottles to a coke whse. 5,000 pounds 439 miles I charged them $1300.


Higher taxes being used for worker training and economic development is a very good use of our tax dollars which I support 100%. But, don't let GoU hear you say that as he believes the money we spend on economic development should be pissed away on welfare programs. As in give a man a fish instead of teach a man to fish.


As for stopping offshoring, I have heard Thom Hartmann and various lefties some even here call for a return to tariffs, which I agree with. But, now that they have been proposed by Trump it seems those same folks are opposed to them. Also we have trillions of dollars off shore, I cannot understand why so many on the left are opposed to repatriotating those dollars by bringing them back home at a reduced tax rate.


It seems to me that 10% to 15% of something is way better than 39% of nothing. But, them I am just a dumb ole truck driver the son of dirt farmers.


As for your last point if they are done as part of a SPC study as invented? improved by Dr Demming and Walter Shewhart them I am all for them. If they are just more regulations brought about by some educated do gooder who never worker a day in their life outside of a classroom then not so much.

Keep kissing the ass of those above you. it won't get you there.

Now, as for your insulting remark regarding do-gooders...asshat, who do you think does the WORK of researching the genetic impact of chemicals and pollution? What, you think because somebody doesn't drive a truck, that they don't work? You arrogant prick. Maybe the engineers who designed your truck didn't work either. Or the ones who design highways for schmucks like you to be safe.

You understand nothing about capital and economics. And btw, I am against tariffs. Not because they don't work but because once you abandon them you cannot get them back.

Finally, why has Western and Northern Europe, far more regulated than the U.S., been successful? What, all you conservatives can't find the means to make a profit because the man is holding you down? Adapt.

_________________
bird's theorem-"we the people" are stupid.

"No one is so foolish as to choose war over peace. In peace sons bury their fathers, in war fathers bury their sons." - Herodotus

The new motto of the USA: Unum de multis. Out of one, many.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:28 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36478
glen is the kind of guy that will work for free to suck up to the boss. Some guys want to be judged on what they do on the clock. If there were no labor laws, and glen's view of the world was the way we did things, you would be given work to do, and if you didn't get it done during work time, you'd have to clock out and finish it. It didn't matter if the company loaded more onto you than was possible to finish.

No, there must be balance, and it's OBVIOUS that everything is imbalanced towards the corporations now, and they abuse their power and their workers. This bill would bring the balance back, that's all.

As for glen's bullshit about union docks, it's bullshit. I've worked in union shops for 25 years, and they were far more productive than non-union. If a workplace isn't productive, it's management's fault. There's a management's rights clause in every union contract, and it outlines that the company has the right to direct the work. If your truck isn't unloaded or loaded quickly, it's because the boss don't give a shit about your truck.

In my experience, I'd rather deal with union workers. When we got work done on our house, we always hired union. Why? Because union workers were PROFESSIONALS, and the work was done right the first time. You hire a cheap fly-by-night, you get what you pay for.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 7:26 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3817
political opposition to the owner class in Michigan is silenced through impoverishment

Detroit janitors, politicians rally for higher wages

Quote:
"I was down here (downtown Detroit) when people didn't want to be down here, but the janitors were here early in the morning and catching the bus with no police protection. You come back and build up our city, which is good, but you're trying to leave us (janitors) behind," Owens-Moore said, referencing the gentrification in the city.

The rally, attended by hundreds of union members and supporters, posed as the launch of One Detroit, a campaign spearheaded by the SEIU Local 1 Detroit to get higher wages for janitors working in downtown Detroit buildings.

Owens-Moore was later joined at the mic by Detroit City Council President Brenda Todd, who expressed her support of the One Detroit campaign and the movement for service workers in Detroit to be paid more.

"If you know anything about me, you know that I fight every day for jobs for Detroiters with every tax incentive," Jones said. "But I know that fighting for jobs is not enough. Fighting for jobs that allow Detroiters to raise their families is where the real fight is."..........


what would make people think basic necessities and food on peoples table is where cuts should be made?

Quote:
..........Janitors in downtown Detroit are paid hourly wages ranging between $9.25 and $12.45, according to the labor union. The One Detroit campaign aims at getting downtown building owners to pay janitors a $15 hourly wage. Its launch comes nearly a month before the janitors' contracts expire, which will be on July 31. While One Detroit starts with janitors, the campaign will be expanded to workers from different sectors such as fast food, arena, airport and others, the union said.

"We think fifteen (dollars an hour) is not enough, but we figured it's a good place to start," Stephanie Arellano, director of SEIU Local 1 Detroit.

Carrying signs that read "Together we stand for One Detroit" and "Majority Black Detroit Matter" hundreds from the rally took to the streets of downtown to bring attention to their cause. The march started and ended at the Spirit of Detroit monument as protesters chanted by Cobo Hall, Campus Martius and other dowtnown sites, demanding that service workers be paid a sufficient wage...........

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:14 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3817
Report: No 2-bedroom rentals anywhere on minimum wage

Quote:
(CNN) - There's not a single state, county or metropolitan area in the entire United States where a full-time worker earning the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour can afford a modest 2-bedroom apartment.

And if those workers wanted to? They'd have to work 122 hours a week. Every week. All year.

This is according to a new report from the National Low Income Housing Coalition, or NLIHC, which calls attention to the gap between low-income wages and the high cost of rent throughout much of the United States.

The NLIHC found US workers need to earn $22.10 an hour to afford a "modest" two-bedroom rental. That's about three times the federal minimum wage.

"This year's findings," the report says, "demonstrate how far out of reach modestly priced housing is for the growing low-wage work force, despite recent wage growth, and for other vulnerable populations across the country."...........

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:08 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3817
Sens. Warren, Sanders Hear Directly From America’s Poor At U.S. Capitol

Quote:
Lawmakers on Tuesday held a hearing at the U.S. Capitol to listen to the stories of people living in poverty across the nation.

At the congressional hearing, convened by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), members of the House and Senate listened to leaders of and participants in the Poor People’s Campaign, a new movement co-led by the Rev. William Barber against poverty and racism in America. About half a dozen lawmakers attended, including Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). ...........


https://twitter.com/SenWarren/status/1006622981458718726
video at link

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:24 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3817
Everybody’s Got the Right to Live: Jobs, Income and Housing

Quote:
Dear America,

To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity — Nelson Mandela

Human rights means the right to a living wage, the right to safe and affordable housing, and the right to a quality education. Many politicians in our nation’s capital and in state capitals across the country have continued to deny these basic rights to the poor. On Monday we continued with our fifth week of nonviolent moral fusion direct action in Washington D.C. and over 30 states across the country. This week, our theme was Everybody’s Got the Right to Live: Jobs, Income and Housing.

There are 140 million poor people living in the United States. While many extreme politicians will argue that the nation’s poor aren’t working hard enough or can pull themselves out of poverty, they also refuse to raise the federal minimum wage, state minimum wages and they are denying people access to care. These state and federal lawmakers are keeping our nation’s poor in poverty. There are 64 million workers making less than $15 per hour, meaning they can’t afford other basic needs like adequate housing. In our nation’s capital, the average minimum wage worker would have to work 91 hours per week just to afford a very modest 1-bedroom apartment. This is a crime. Congress should fulfill Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of guaranteeing every American a universal basic income. Millions of hardworking people struggle to meet their basic needs every month because they are living on minimum wages. They can barely afford to pay rent and run the risk of being thrust into poverty or homelessness if an emergency should occur. A guaranteed universal basic income would ensure that all people have the means to actually live instead of just barely scraping by..........

more at link

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:14 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:37 am
Posts: 3817
using tarriffs as an excuse to expand overseas because falling sales due to wage stagnation and underemployment in America.

Harley-Davidson, stung by tariffs, shifts some production overseas

Quote:
..........The company is already struggling with falling sales. In January, it said it would consolidate its Kansas City, Missouri, plant into its York, Pennsylvania, facility. U.S. motorcycle sales peaked at more than 1.1 million in 2005 but then plummeted during the recession.

Asked about the Harley decision Monday, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker addressed the issue of tariffs in general but not specifically the situation faced by the company.......

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA3APlQeIAU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:27 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 36478
Something DOES need to be done on trade, but it needs to be done through negotiation and diplomacy. Trump is an idiot, and a trade war is NOT the answer. And, the truth is, our trade problems started with our corporations in America, who wanted to move their factories to places were child and slave labor were accepted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 9:01 am 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 12319
Location: Sunny South Florida
Donald is, as I predicted, not doing anything to halt outsourcing of American corporations and jobs. In fact, he may be making the problem worse.

He is not a progressive on trade. Real progressives care about working people in America, AND working people in Canada, Mexico, China, England, Germany, etc.

We can debate how much Donald is really doing for the working people of the U.S. As I've long said, all he's mostly offered is a lot of bullshit, while taking away their health care, making their workplaces more dangerous, making it harder to form unions, and even letting employers steal their tips. Honestly, he really didn't reduce most working people's taxes and what little they got will be eaten up by inflation. But he and his confrere Bannon really seem to believe in a zero-sum dog-eat-dog world where helping American workers means we have to shaft Canadian ones, etc. It's bullshit.

They could work out fair trade deals that benefit workers in this country AND other countries, not corporations. Donald is not doing this. Again, just like he is the poor victim of everyone in the world, his model is that America is being screwed on trade by every other country in the world. That is f'n nonsense. We can complain about what was wrong with previous free trade deals, but this idea that somehow in every one of them American trade negotiators made sure our country got screwed at every other country's expense is just fucking laughable.

It's the wrong problem - they were more concerned with advantaging American-based multinational corporations. Over workers here, and workers there.

Economic nationalists like Trump and Bannon appear to want a weird kind of quasi-socialism but only for their own nation. You know what we call that? National Socialism. I.e. Nazism.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ike Bana, rainwater, RoyPDX and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group