Employee Free Choice Act: How to kill jobs
The American business community, reeling from a recession that Congress and the Obama Administration may stretch into a depression, is making a last-ditch fight to save manufacturing in this country.
On Tuesday, U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), and U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, introduced the jobs-killing Employee Free Choice Act. A study sponsored by the Associated Builders and Contractors and conducted by economist Anne Layne-Farrar of LECG Consulting finds this:
“For every 3 percentage points gained in union membership through card checks and mandatory arbitration, the following year’s unemployment rate is predicted to increase by 1 percentage point and job creation is predicted to fall by around 1.5 million jobs. Thus, if EFCA passed today and resulted in an increase in unionization from the current rate of about 12% to 15%, then unionized workers would increase from 15.5 to 19.6 million while unemployment a year from now would rise by 1.5 million, to 10.4 million. If EFCA were to increase the percentage of private sector union membership by between 5 and 10 percentage points, as some have suggested, my analysis indicates that unemployment would increase by 2.3 to 5.4 million in the following year and the unemployment rate would increase by 1.5 to 3.5 percentage points in the following year.”
The bill is Big Labor’s top priority. It would eliminate workers’ rights to a secret ballot, allowing unions to gain representation simply by showing cards signed by a majority of workers.Workers who might oppose unionization in a secret ballot could easily be intimidated into signing cards. And when the union and the company fail to agree after 90 days, a government arbitrator is brought in.
The prospect of higher taxes, more regulation, cap-and-trade and labor costs that employers can’t control are clear messages to manufacturers to take their businesses elsewhere. Those who can’t go will be knocking at government’s door demanding subsidies or the right to fix prices.
Some Democrats who previously supported the EFCA, including Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu and Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor, are beginning to have second-thoughts. Well they should. This Congress and this Administration can turn a recession into a depression with an unnecessary and permanent loss of jobs.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2009 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
96 comments Add your comment
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
9:51 am
Good morning all. The proposed legislation does nothing to reduce costs for businesses – indeed, it promises only to raise labor costs. Businesses are rarely capable of raising prices during a recession, so the new costs of “Employee Free Choice” will not be passed along. There are no meaningful profits to absorb costs now.
In such an environment, employers have only the choice of “outsourcing” as a means of containing costs. India thanks the US Congress, Mexico thanks the US Congress, Philippines thanks the US Congress.
Churchill's MOM
March 12th, 2009
10:05 am
Looks like the Liberal Press is after our girl again.
Levi, Bristol break up
It’s true. You probably don’t believe it.
A source close to Bristol Palin, daughter of Sarah, mother to Tripp and her fiance, Levi Johnson, father of Tripp, told People the couple broke up a few weeks ago.
The mag reports:
“It kind of just happened,” says the source, referring to the split. “I thought they would stick it out. But I think they can work together to raise Tripp.”
“I’m not sure what caused [them to break up] – it’s common knowledge,” says another source who knows the family.
Despite the breakup, Levi still sees the couple’s son. Levi’s dad, Keith Johnston, told PEOPLE recently that his son is a devoted and “proud father.”
“As for how she is holding up after the split, the source tells PEOPLE: “Bristol’s doing okay. Tripp is fine.”
Dan
March 12th, 2009
10:05 am
Jim Wooten has been spitting out right-wing cliches for years, and I usually ignore them. This one gets my goat. Wooten’s logic is the only way to keep jobs in the US is for workers to be paid every year. If we don’t keep taking this hit, our jobs will go to Mexico. I work in a grocery store. Jim, do you really believe the peanut butter shelf is going overseas? Perhaps you should read more than one study on a topic before forming an opinion. EFCA is a small attempt to finally level the playing field at the workplace. If one truly believes in common sense, then fairness shouldn’t make one uncomfortable.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
10:19 am
Conflation, obfuscation and outright lies are being used by the so-called conservatives in trying to make themselves relevant.
The Employee Free Choice Act is about being able to sign-up for union membership, nothing more.
JIm
March 12th, 2009
10:31 am
It’s amazing to me that Republicans accuse this legislation of having possible dire consequences for our economy. Exactly how did we get into the situation we are currently suffering? It’s not like their policies favoring total employer control have done us any good. I say move over and let labor have their turn. The scare tactics surrounding government arbitration also make me laugh. Arbitrators are not government employees. Arbitrators are skilled in the area of labor relation, are often professionally certified, are ideologically neutral, and often have years of experience in labor/employment law matters. Interest arbitration, if it went that far, would be conducted by a knowledgeable arbitrator. The goal of course, it to promote bargaining between employer and union which has been the overall goal of the NLRA. It’s good legislation introduced at a great time.
MeMe
March 12th, 2009
10:31 am
Figures that a newspaper in the “FIRE AT WILL” state would publish this.
In the words of Bernie from Home Depot:
“This is the demise of a civilization,” moaned Bernie Marcus, cofounder and former CEO of The Home Depot, during an Oct. 17 conference call about card check. “This is how a civilization disappears. I’m sitting here as an elder statesman, and I’m watching this happen, and I don’t believe it.”
Mr. Marcus sketched out the doomsday scenario for his listeners, with unions going after what he called the “low hanging fruit” and proceeding to organize workers in industry after industry. He had taken it upon himself to notify the nation’s CEOs of the danger, but they were not yet grabbing their guns. “This is as important as anything that’s ever happened to these companies. And they’re not reacting, and they’re not fighting. The old time fighters are gone.”
But in the class war, as in the real deal, there are always ways of motivating the yellow. “If a retailer has not gotten involved with this, if he has not spent money on this election, if he has not sent money to Norm Coleman and these other guys,” Mr. Marcus said, apparently referring to Republican senators facing tough re-election fights, then those retailers “should be shot; should be thrown out of their goddamn jobs.”
Reality Check
March 12th, 2009
10:33 am
As a member of management in for a National distributor, I can say without question, that management in most large companies don’t want card check to come law, because it will take away THEIR ability to coerce and intimidate workers. Management has always been able to threaten workers if there was even the hint of talk about a union. Wooton, you should stop giving the company (Republican) line and make an effort to understand the issues before you trash them. The facts tend to go a long way….
Algonquin J. Calhoun
March 12th, 2009
10:40 am
Jim hates labor unions because they have successfully afforded working people protection from being worked day and night, seven days a week and being paid minimal wages. Jim subscribes to the Wal-Mart model where workers, in China and America, work long hours, receive little pay, no benefits and are subject to the whims and vagaries of management. Jim is the local mouthpiece for the Republinazi Party and refuses to realize the sun has set on the fascist era in America. Go to your farm and express your inane philosophy to the cows Jim. Soon the air will be filled with the dissatisfied lowing of those poor, sonically abused animals!
Algonquin J. Calhoun
March 12th, 2009
10:42 am
Jim, looks like Trollop Palin is going to have to raise her illegitimate progeny alone. What are your feelings about Trollop and her two children?
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
10:49 am
Labor unions serve a valuable function in our society. If you don’t believe it, just ask General Motors.
Reality Check
March 12th, 2009
10:52 am
Ragnar, Please don’t blame the problems at GM soley on the unions… Crappy managment with worse ideas are more to blame. the union have not done the company any favors, But the were absolutely essential to the growth of the middle class in this country.
Temp
March 12th, 2009
10:54 am
OK then if the interest is really fairness, let’s make card check work the other way as well. If 50% of the employees sign a card to get rid of a union, then the union no longer represents workers at that workplace.
In the interest of fairness, workers can leave a company any time they want and employers can fire workers any time they want with no requirements by either party.
In the interest of fairness, employees can strike any time they want and employers can lock out workers any time they want.
In the interest of fairness, employees and workers can negotiate any salary and benefits they want, including something below minimum wage.
After all, it’s only fair, right?
STFU
March 12th, 2009
10:56 am
I say we just keep doing things the same way they were done the last 8 years. That’s working really well. Plus we should follow all advice from the south, seeing as they get all the welfare from the federal government.
STFU
March 12th, 2009
10:57 am
Bristol Palin is a tramp, just like her momma.
Reality Check
March 12th, 2009
11:01 am
Temp @10:54 With the exception of Min wage, that is already the case. Now what???
real conservative
March 12th, 2009
11:06 am
Enter your comments here
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:10 am
Just sign the card, Bub, and nobody gets hurt. Think of it as an “insurance” policy.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
March 12th, 2009
11:10 am
Ragweed, the workers at GM merely built the automobiles. Management drove the company into the dirt! They built ill-conceived gas hogs that were poorly designed. The workers put that crap together. They did their jobs. Management did not! Workers of the world unite!
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:13 am
Dear Reality @ 10:52/11:52, good afternoon. I don’t think the uninspired management of GM was as relevant to its destruction as CAFE and legacy health care for unionized employees.
Even now the large vehicle lines are profitable; only those small vehicle lines maintained for the sake of fleet compliance with CAFE are unprofitable. I broadly agree that, but for the misguided act of Congress, GM would have been able to survive the union’s contribution to its problems.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:17 am
Dear Algonquin @ 11:10, would you amend card check to also prohibit companies from paying any expenses for legacy employees? Would you amend card check to make it reciprocal, so that a company can produce signed cards to decertify a union?
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
11:19 am
CNN just reported that an Iraqi man was sentenced to three years in prison for throwing his shoes over Niagra Falls.
Curious Observer
March 12th, 2009
11:20 am
I’m still not getting the full picture of the mechanism for card check. Under this bill, would workers simply hand their cards to some representative, or are the workers to deposit them in some kind of locked box? If the former, I can see a basis for the argument about worker intimidation. If the latter, I don’t buy that argument at all.
In any case, the current situation is totally unfair to workers who wish to unionize, and it has been that way for many years. Not only are they subject to immediate termination if their desires are known, but also they can be forced by employers to attend anti-union meetings organized by their employers–see WalMart. The obstacles to forming a union are so severe that not many organizations will become unionized under the current system.
I would like to see what the current language of EFCA says before I comment any further. If workers are given the protection of making their wishes known secretly under EFCA, then I’m all for the bill as a way of unionizing without the hell workers must currently go through to do so. If not, I have real reservations about it.
Preparing for the Fight: EFCA « As We Now Think
March 12th, 2009
11:21 am
[...] especially corporate–interests. Led by the Chamber of Commerce, opponents of EFCA have been very effective in driving the popular narrative of the Act as an anti-democratic attempt to rob workers of their [...]
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:24 am
The biggest problem with card check is the same as with every initiative of the democrats – it raises expenses for business. Democrats imagine that businesses produce money out of air. There are only two ways for businesses to cover new higher expenses – pass those expenses along to customers, or cut other expenses.
The only significant areas of our economy not already unionized, and thus eligible for the “benefit” of card check, are the “service” sector. How much more are you willing to pay to use an ATM so banks will be able to pay for their unionized work force. Will you pay $4 for a quarterpounder? Or are those businesses going to suffer a loss of business?
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:26 am
Dear Chris @ 11:19/12:19, if he threw his shoes over Niagra Falls, the Blue Jays need him to play right field.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
11:32 am
Notice how those that do not support unions/laborers do not argue the harm the legislation will cause and associated costs.
They continue to use truisms and half-truths. No facts, not able to substantiate the arguments.
I hope they continue with this process as everyone is able to see the depth and breadth of their argument(s).
MIkey72
March 12th, 2009
11:40 am
“Curious Observer” raises a good question. My biggest problem with the bill (as I have read about it in the media) is the elimination of a secret-ballot vote. If the unions thought they had a legitimate argument to make for their organization, they should not fear a standard election. Intimidation works both ways. Companies have been guilty of scaring workers away from unions, and unions have tried to scare workers into joining their ranks. The government needs to step in as an honest referee to make sure a fair, secret vote should take place. Circumventing this process will harm, not help, all workers.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:48 am
Dear jackie and all other supporters of card check, you avoid the fundamental truth at the heart of the legislation. Unions always lose secret elections. Thus you have to find a way to avoid a secret election to unionize. Do you not grasp the implications there, the “how” that accompanies the winning campaign where there is no secret election?
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:50 am
Dear Mlkey72 @ 11:40/12:40, the proponents of the legislation will be quick to tell you that their legislation does not “abolish” the secret election, it merely adds another means of unionizing. Of course, the alternate means that permits circumvention of a secret election will become the preferred method of the unions.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
11:53 am
Dear Jackie @ 11:32, you would argue that those of us who would preserve the secret election for laborers are opposed to the laborers, and those of you who would abolish – either de facto or de jure – the secret election are protecting the laborers. A curious logic, that.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
12:16 pm
@Ragnar,
The wordsmith skills are superb.
However, a careful review of what you have said is double-speak.
A secret ballot would be best for everyone concerned. Letting the worker decide if they want to become a member of a union and have said union certified by the National Labor Review Board is in everyone’s best interest.
If the workers choose to decertify a union, so be it.
So, to give a a straight answer, I support the secret ballot and the workers desire to have that union represent them in negotiations with the employer.
Gary
March 12th, 2009
12:23 pm
I love my unions,AFT,NEA,AFL CIO.
Mac
March 12th, 2009
12:26 pm
If it weren’t for a union, Jim and his colleagues would be paid like folks at the Tifton Gazette and Cherokee Tribune – in other words, like rookie school teachers. Thank the Guild for your gold, Jim.
Mac
March 12th, 2009
12:28 pm
By the way, that’s the 20-year veterans being paid like rookie school teachers.
Leon
March 12th, 2009
12:30 pm
Rag, I don’t understand the aversion to CAFE standards. Fuel efficient cars? Sounds like a good idea to me. Perhaps you have a lot of big oil stocks in your portfolio? All the more reason for the USA to be beholden to the mideast oil tit right? Typical right wing short sighted thinking as usual.
Temp
March 12th, 2009
12:35 pm
@Reality Check: Completely untrue. There is no language in the card check bill to allow members to decertify a union through card check. That still must be done with a secret ballot.
Not only must employers pay unemployment insurance for workers, but employers with 100 or more full-time workers must give 60 days’ warning of a closing or layoff to both workers and government officials when shutting down an operation affecting 50 or more full-time workers. An employee can walk out the door at any moment with no notice and no obligation.
Several states require companies engaged in lockouts to pay either unemployment and/or benefits for locked out workers.
In each of these scenarios, companies have many obligations to the workers, but workers have none in return. Hardly strikes me as fair.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
1:33 pm
Dear Jackie @ 12:18/1:16, my wordsmith skills must be better than you perceive. We are in full agreement on the need to preserve secret elections. The proposed legislation would obviate the need for a secret election.
Dear Leon @ 12:30/1:30, you ask a fair question. My aversion to CAFE arises from my aversion to anything that substitutes the economic judgment of legislators for that of those with an actual stake in the success of the economic entity. I would allow the market to determine whether production of fuel-efficient cars is wise. I know that sounds like nonsense, as small cars are inherently more economical for the owners. Small cars inherently have smaller production costs, and will cover less overhead. For high cost producers (due to their labor contracts) such as the American car makers, there is no hope of competing with foreign name plates. Thus I would allow the American car makers to make only what is profitable for them, and they would thus yield the lower-profitability markets to their competitors. Win-win.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
1:37 pm
And dear Leon @ 12:30/1:30, your apology for slander is accepted. All who know me know that I own only mutual funds. I suspect the short-sighted thinker between us was the one who did not contemplate comparative production costs of the automakers.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
1:39 pm
And I amend my 1:33/2:33 answer to allow for Temp’s truthful clarification, the proposed legislation does not change the requirement for a secret election to decertify. Secret elections are appropriate in that case also – secret elections, where people are required to prove eligibility to vote, keep all parties honest.
David Miller
March 12th, 2009
1:45 pm
Go to this hyperlink THEN talk about supporting EFCA:
http://thesunnews.typepad.com/opinionblog/2009/03/employee-free-choice-would-be-a-jobkiller.html
cranky old man
March 12th, 2009
1:47 pm
Let’s assume for a moment that the right wing article of faith that says unions kill jobs is correct. What kind of jobs? Low wage jobs with no benefits or pensions. Currently, most families in this country who are “getting by” are doing so by having more than one wage-earner (or by having a wage-earner with more than one job). In the past few decades, there has been a massive increase in the number of women in the job market. Now, I’m not suggesting that they shouldn’t be there if that’s what they want. But it would be nice if one parent or the other had the OPTION of staying home because one income was enough.
The increase of women in the workforce was just the first phase in the right wing’s war against living wages. And, ironically enough, it wasn’t even something they planned, In fact, many conservatives railed against it when it first started to happen. But they were more than happy to change their tune when they realized the benefits to be had from downward pressure on wages. Next came off-shoring. And for those sectors of the job market that can’t be exported because the worker has to be physically present in the country to do the job (construction, landscaping, house painting, agriculture, hotel maids, etc.), employers have discovered the joys of illegal immigrants.
Notice how plumbers and electricians haven’t been displaced by illegal labor on a large scale? This is partly because of the specialized training required, but also due to the existence of unions and licensing requirements.
As for the off-shoring of manufacturing jobs, simply remove the incentive by adding a sufficient tariff for manufactured goods and services from countries that don’t have the same labor, safety, and environmental laws we have. The tariffs don’t need to be so high as to make it impossible for other nations to sell their goods here. Just high enough to remove the advantage of not having to buy safety and pollution control equipment and paying workers less due to the lower cost of living in other countries. Make them compete on quality and efficiency instead.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
1:57 pm
President Hussein just can not catch a break!
2 arrested in FBI raid at Obama appointee’s office
es tell WTOP.
Yusuf Acar, 40, an employee of the D.C. Office of the CTO was taken into custody by FBI agents at his home in Northwest D.C.
Sushil Bansal, President and CEO of Advanced Integrated Technologies Corporation (AITC) was also arrested, sources tell WTOP.
In 2008, Bansal’s firm received .Net Development Support and Peoplesoft Consulting Support contracts from the D.C. Office of the Chief Technology Office totaling $350,000.
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=596&sid=1622618
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
1:58 pm
For anyone who ever blogs on Bookmans corner of the AJC. If you call him a hypocrite you get banned.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
1:58 pm
CNN just reported that the guy who survived his swan dive over Niagra Falls has lost his speedo commercial endorsement deal for smoking pot. The olympics has also recalled and disqualified all his medals. (he got a 9.9 for his dive, btw)
Carly N
March 12th, 2009
2:18 pm
For all of you “free choice” supporters, please explain this data.
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/02/studies-confirm-high-unionization.html
It shows that everywhere you have strong unions, you have higher unemployment and lower wages. And the graphs also show that when you have weak unions, you have higher employment and higher wages.
The UAW’s fine example with GM, Ford and Chrysler are a perfect example.
Big union bosses are like government: monopolies that are unaccountable.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
2:29 pm
Carly N,
these libs don’t understand that the UAW has single handedly killed the American auto industry. Sam Walton was smart when he said that unions would kill Wal Mart. He’s laughing from his grave.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
2:32 pm
@Carly N
What union has design control any product?
It appears to me, the union members can only fabricate the product as designed and marketed by those in management.
Secondly, those areas that have low wages and are not unionized, such as Alabama, have those wages subsidized by the taxpayers. If you recall, the state gave the manufactures incentives to move to the state and provide approximately 2,000 jobs.
You indicate you have weak unions and strong wages. I would submit your numbers are wrong when it relates to wages. My research indicates the average for those weak union workers is roughly $15.00 per hour without extensive benefits.
Who was the winner here?
Leon
March 12th, 2009
2:50 pm
Rag neither apology required, nor slander inferred. Not familiar with your investment strategy. Alas it was the automakers shortsightedness that led them to believe that $1.00 per gallon gas would last ad infinitum. Why else would they lobby so ferociously against CAFE? Tsk Tsk
Fred
March 12th, 2009
2:58 pm
Unions: the only way a high school dropout can earn $60k/year for screwing in light bulbs. Life is so unfair that way.
Chaz
March 12th, 2009
3:09 pm
If a unionized workforce and near-complete control of government by Democrats leads to happiness and prosperity, please explain the state of Michigan to me.
I’ll take my Red State independence, thank you.
Debate101
March 12th, 2009
3:10 pm
TO ALL THE CONSERVATIVES ON THIS BLOG WHO BELIEVE THAT ONLY THE WORKING POOR ARE LOOSING THEIR HOMES, DUE TO BAD DECISIONS. THIS GUY IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SURVIVE, BUT I GUESS HE JUST LIKED LIVING THE HIGH LIFE. FYI.. Taken from an MSNBC article, with picture and a diary of what happened.
Rip Brown, 48, grew up in New England and, with a college degree and MBA, began a career in commercial banking in the 1980s. By the 1990s, married with two children, he was building a solid resume as a corporate controller for several Fortune 500 companies, including W.R. Grace and Wal-Mart. In 2005, he set up a global consulting business with clients in Europe and Mexico. But Brown’s fortunes shifted. In 2004, to pay for his daughters’ education, he borrowed against the rising value of the Boston home he bought in 2002. By 2006, unable to cover the cost of running his business, he declared bankruptcy but continued to pay on the house. In 2007, his mortgage rate jumped three percentage points to 11 percent, more than he could afford. Hoping to work out more affordable terms with the bank, he took on a long-term project in New York last year. In November, Brown’s client prematurely terminated the project after the banking crisis shut their credit line. Out of work since, his 18-month struggle to save his home finally ended in foreclosure on Jan. 29 at 2 p.m.
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
3:10 pm
Such a broad political spectrum, almost a cross section, of Americans I’ve known or run across for 30 years have wished for a resurgence of a union movement that could make us vigorous again. Remember in the recession during the early ’80s when we developed a Shakespearean envy of the productivity of the Japanese, when every other paperback in the last-chance airport bookshops was preaching to us about what they had and we didn’t?
The answer then was dubbed “workplace democracy”; roughly speaking, workers informing the production processes as well as the product. It all seemed to make sense then, and I just assumed that anything Stateside that still called itself the Democratic Party would snap it up in a heartbeat.
Not so. I watched again and again as the Democratic leadership rejected planks that would nail down aspects of workplace democracy into the Democratic Party Platform.
And now I know why. They preferred to rig the game for their labor paymasters and paymistresses.
And now the chickens come home.
Swell.
Bye, bye, jobs.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
3:19 pm
I’ve been banned by many blogs, andy. I tend to swoop into a blog and blow minds. I dont know why I do that. All I really want to do is make friends and have people like me.
But let’s look at these strange blogs on the AJC. Take today’s Wooten topic. In the first sentence, Wooten expects a reader to believe that he could predict which way this economy might turn and which administration would be responsible. The sheer arrogance could only foment from a bitter, confused, disenfranchised mind. Yet, I know for a fact that Jim Wooten is one of the nicest guys you can ever meet.
That brings up the new era we are all in. The era of tectonic group think. Global think. The internet has bound us all into one gigantic schizophrenic monster. We demand justice, but we don’t want to pay for it. We don’t even want to pay our taxes. Christians believe that it’s a sin to evade income taxes. Christ was crucified by men who were delinquent in their quarterly tax payments, you know. They had all received warning letters that very morning, and boy, were they in a mood to get even with someone…….
So God is a Keynesian Leviathon. I don’t know what that means.
Jackie, if you think that ragnar’s word-smithing, (”you would argue that those of us who would preserve the secret election for laborers are opposed to the laborers, and those of you who would abolish – either de facto or de jure – the secret election are protecting the laborers. A curious logic, that.”), is superb, then there is no hope for a real writer. Did you get a load of what the AJC presented as finalist’s editorials for the job of New Conservative Writer for the AJC? I’m I the only one who was dismayed? and shocked? and was I the only one who will write like a devil possessed by the illegitimate child of Keats and Yeats to punish everyone responsible for this travesty of journalistic ethic??????
I call this the “Yanni” effect. Yanni rose to superstardom with the most mediocre music I ever heard. People settled for it. Somehow. And the Yanni effect lives on these blogs. I’m sure Yanni got many emails and letters and even twitters of adoration for his Symphonic Cacophonies.
Rag is a Blogging Yawni, in every possible pun of that word. His measured ombudsmanship belongs in a crease up Rush Limbaugh’s dimpled butt, where rag’s nose for news is certain to be born again, him being such a crack christian and all……
Rag: you contribute so much to this blog. You’re always there. Commenting. We are inundated with your graceful turns. You have such a marvelously unexpected way with words. It would be a disservice to journalism if you were ever to let a few minutes go by without posting one of your 79 comments you apply to the common good each day on this poor blog.
We all wait, for the master with baited breath. What will he say next?
(camera to all lurkers everywhere showing faces expressing wide-eyed anticipation…….)
Jklol
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
3:22 pm
If the unions are so bad, why is the American manufacturing workforce the most productive in the world?
The American workforce works longer hours and takes less vacation than any other country in the world, yet, their wages are falling.
The American workforce is tied into a specific company because of health care, other benefits and pensions.
Other countries in the world do not have to concern themselves with health care as part of their overhead, therefore, their unit cost are lower. If one recalls, the USA has the MOST EXPENSIVE health care system in the wordl; not the best.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
3:24 pm
@Chris Broe,
Rag is a prodigious and profuse writer that one must read carefully to understand the point he is making.
Temp
March 12th, 2009
3:24 pm
@cranky old man
“Let’s assume for a moment that the right wing article of faith that says unions kill jobs is correct.” I would rather state my article of faith as being, “A person and an employer are free to negotiate any and all terms of the job as they see fit.” If employees want to organize, by all means do so. If an employer wants to fire anyone who joins a union, by all means feel free. The choice and the freedom should be there for all.
“The increase of women in the workforce was just the first phase in the right wing’s war against living wages.” Surely you jest. The increase of women in the workforce was driven first by World War II (Rosie the riveter, et al) and then the women’s liberation movement starting in the 50s. Hardly a right wing conspiracy there.
The reduction in wages is simple economics. You have a large increase in available workers due to more women working, without a corresponding increase in the number of jobs.
As for off shoring, there is nothing sacred or special about the American worker. Why does a worker in India or China or the Philippines not have the same right to a job that you do? They work just as hard, have the same level of education and charge 1/3 the price. Why would I not offshore? Just as companies have to compete in the global economy, so do workers.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
3:30 pm
Jackie,
do you have documentation to prove that?
David S
March 12th, 2009
3:34 pm
I certainly hope that if this legislation passes that the anti-union employees in companies band together and proactively inflict harsh violence and intimidation on the union organizers. It may be their only means of self defense in the face of what will likely be a wave of violence and imtimidation upon intelligent american workers who know better than to join unions. The history of the depression chronicles thousands of incidents of violence against employees once pro-union legislation was enacted. Look for either the same to happen or as many have rightly said – flight to more business friendly countries.
David S
March 12th, 2009
3:37 pm
Jackie, Union memebership has never been lower. Most manufacturing jobs in this country are not unionized. That is why they are so productive. Look at the ones dominated by unions (GM, FORD, CHRYSLER)need I say more?
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
3:48 pm
Jackie and others,
The Democratic Party seems to have become “democratic” in name only. Something like the German National Social Workers Party, which was certainly German and certainly nationalistic, but which was not really a party and which, above all, regarded “workers” as slaves of a despotic State; or, consider the fabulist moniker, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Today’s Democratic Party actively seeks to topple the workers’ secret ballot, the chief pillar of workplace democracy. What better proof do we need that the Party truly does “seek power for its own sake”, as Orwell put it, in this disgusting pecuniary exchange for the unions’ help in seating a new Democratic incumbent?
Barack Obama is as shameless as an old Emperor in new clothes getting older and moldier by the minute.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
3:51 pm
@Communist AJC
Run a Google on any information I presented.
@David S
You are correct, union membership is the lowest it has ever been because most southern states have adopted the policy of “Right To Work.”
As you know, the quantity of people working in an facility does not equate to efficiency. It is the number of units produced in the least amount of time and with the least cost.
The union members of the UAW are in fact more productive than those at Toyota, Honda, Kia, Hyundai, Mercedes, BMW facilities. One can not equate efficiency of the product with the engineering as the workers do not have control over what is designed and why the design is such that it may fall off the auto after a period of time.
I think it is design obsolescence as to why so many of the past American products were so bad.
Four of the top 10 autos in the J.D. Powers ratings are from the Big Three.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
3:57 pm
@Glenn,
Good to speak with you, but have to vehemently disagree with you.
The Democrats have many faults, but being National Socialists is not one of them.
If you have ever heard the term, “…either you take the jobs to the slaves, or take the slaves to the jobs” leads one to believe that the current movement of jobs outside the USA is by design.
As you know, one of the easiest way to directly affect the bottom line of the Balance Sheet is to reduce your Direct Labor costs.
I have argued that one of the most corrosive terms used in our business lexicon is Return On Investment (ROI). How and why do you measure this?
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
4:04 pm
A eye-popping example of why the Repubs are one the verge of being irrelevant.
“To receive the full amount of stimulus money available, lawmakers would need to adjust the time period used to determine whether people are eligible for benefits.
Texas also is being asked to expand eligibility to include thousands of low-wage workers. Lawmakers have said the change would help part-time employees like single mothers, college students and senior citizens.
Perry’s decision comes despite warnings from Texas Workforce Commission Chairman Tom Pauken that the state’s unemployment compensation trust fund could be operating at a deficit by October. Pauken told lawmakers recently that insolvency might not be not far behind.”
Was this decision made to help the people or help the politician?
Keep it up Repubs, you have not run out of ammunition that you use to shoot yourselves in the foot. You might right out of feet.
JLK
March 12th, 2009
4:12 pm
Yo, so called “conservatives”: Why were unions formed in the first place? Anyone? Anyone? If you don’t like unions, then I suggest you work to ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR UNIONS.
Employees are well and fairly treated are much less likely to rock the boat and make demands on the Captain. It was slave wages, unsafe working conditions, inhumane hours, and the knowledge that no matter how hard they worked, they could NEVER get a tiny fraction of the rewards the boss was reaping for their labor, that resulted in the rise of unions in this country. YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW. That the “conservative” tactic is to lie, strong-arm, and use their bought & paid-for legislators to remove the thorn of unions from the side of big money indicates that the fight for unionization IS warranted. As usual, you prove the point while trying to disprove it.
Dusty
March 12th, 2009
4:28 pm
Well, I am not an authority on such matters as discussed here today. But I always thought that unions were very good back when they were needed. Coal mines without safety standards, factory workers with low wages, long hours and bad working environments. Steel mills with little protection against obvious dangers. Unions were needed.
But time moved along and “business” got wiser (with uniion impetus) and saw that good working conditions meant better output. That investors not millionaires alone had something to say about working conditions. Times changed.
It seems to me that unions are now the fake dinosauers of today. They try to be big, step on companies, demand their rights and not the individual’s. But their effect on management is small when economic times are difficult.
Perhaps unions should concentrate on new goals to increase employment, not find faults with the companies supplying jobs. The government is strong enough to set standards. The unions can only quibble about them now and work for union power, even political power, but not necessarily worker power.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
4:36 pm
The american auto industry is not a good example of how unions affect our economic cycle. You’d have to live in Detroit in the decade of the Seventies to understand what the Unions meant to the American Dream. You’d have to pretend that the Great Depression and WW2 didn’t happen, or that the baby boomers in Detroit didn’t all eat a reality sandwich called, “you’ll have to forgive my parents, you see, they grew up during the Depression.” You’d have to imagine that Detroit wasn’t populated by upwardly mobile blue collar racists in the Seventies.
The Seventies: Power to the People. Right on! Far out! Got any Peyote? The Doobie Brothers. Dont Bogart that Joint, my friend. Happiness is walking to your neighborhood school (vs Busing). Pre-aids, sex was wide open, and never has sex been a ubiquitous presumption for dinner and a movie like it was in the Seventies.
What economic cycle is being deranged by unions? America is as America does. History is destiny. We The People are finally communicating in real time. 1776.com. Lafayette Twitter: “The British are a bore. They keep attacking us here on Breed’s Hill, and we keep killing them. Yet they insist on returning to close range, where we kill more of them and then they run back down the hill like little little baby bunnies. Oh darn, I went over the 25 words or less limit on Twittering. Cheerio!”
But the British went to the pubs and spent money that night. The economy there boomed. Get real. Don’t blame Obama for Bush or Ike or Nixon or Teddy Roosevelt or Garfield.
In fact, don’t do nothing. Just sit there and stfu. Que sera, sera, what ever will be will be, the future’s not ours to see……..Nobody saw this recession coming. Nobody except the end of the spectrum of bulls and bears that exist at any given moment.
Jklol.
Betsy Ross was naked when she sewed our flag.
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
4:40 pm
I still say we’re pretty close to being on the same page here. What I mean is that there’s old-timey unionism — the muscle play, the bosses, the teriff-wall protectionism, the throwing around of pension funds and election foot-soldiers to gamble on temporary political power — and then there’s what we’ve long hoped for: a newer unionism based on the obvious need of workers to have a larger hand in decisions that shape their lives through the lives of the companies that employ them.
In American Law, are acknowledged to possess — because the unions won them, more-or-less fair and square — special consideration in the area of property rights, the principle concern of our federal Constitution. Chief among these special considerations is the right to collective bargaining, which was gained because a long succession of court cases found that labor unions have constituted something like the closest we’ve ever come, as a People, to direct democracy. Closer than the House of Representatives; closer than county, parish or city governance.
If we institute a new regime in which union membership, and therefore union votes, are dictated by intimidation, then the courts eventually will, I think, begin to roll back the right to binding arbitration. Binding arbitration is, by definition, a contract, and all contracts are, by definition, entered into volitionally by all parties.
Coercion is not an option.
Suasion is.
Let’s win this time fair and square.
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
4:45 pm
I wish I’d edited that. I meant “principal” when I typed “principle”, and I’d meant to say, in opening the second paragraph, that UNIONS “…are acknowledged”.
Sorry. I get heated in these debates. So many hours, for such small wages…
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
4:54 pm
Jackie, I want you to write, in 25 words or less, why you love being an American. If you succeed, then I will know that you understand the power of words. Then I will know that your appreciation of Rag has merit, other than being a cliche of a groupie wrapped in a grouping of cliches.
I gave you an example of rag’s problem. I used quotes. He wrote that bountiful feast of implication, inference, and deduction.
Be careful. This comment is a test and a trap, and if you fail, nobody will read you ever again.
Jklol
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
4:55 pm
Chris Broe,
You fricking brain worm.
The thought of Robin Williams as plagiarist was bad enough, but Betsy Ross as nudist — I tell you…
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
5:00 pm
Glenn, R U insane? I minored in psych and I gotta say, you need teams of psychiatrists working around the clock at the university level in Vienna. (Seinfeld).
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
5:12 pm
@Chris Broe
Sorry!
Trying to prove that I love America is a false negative, which can never be proven.
Secondly, my comments about Rag are an overview of how Rag constructs his sentences with vague innuendo and duplicity. As stated previously, one has to read his postings very, very carefully to understand what he IS NOT saying.
Third, I could never prove to YOU that I have an understand of words and their power.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
5:19 pm
Most of the shorts have covered. If this isn’t the bottom then Cash is King.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
5:21 pm
THIS ISN’T GOING TO END WELL FOR DEMOCRATS.
Waters Helped Bank Whose Stock She Once Owned
California Democrat Has Championed Minority-Owned OneUnited on Capitol Hill and Criticized Its Government Regulators
By SUSAN SCHMIDT
WASHINGTON — When Rep. Barney Frank was looking to aid a Boston-based lender last fall, the Massachusetts Democrat urged Maxine Waters, a colleague on the House Financial Services Committee, to “stay out of it,” he says.
The reason: Ms. Waters, a longtime congresswoman from California, had close ties to the minority-owned institution, OneUnited Bank.
Ms. Waters and her husband have both held financial stakes in the bank. Until recently, her husband was a director. At the same time, Ms. Waters has publicly boosted OneUnited’s executives and criticized its government regulators during congressional hearings. Last fall, she helped secure the bank a meeting with Treasury officials.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123682571772404053.html
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
5:22 pm
Jackie,
why would I google what I asked YOU to present?
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
5:24 pm
That’s not fair, Jackie. You protect a premise with a conclusion. No, a false negative is like a edible jockstrap. You commit to sodomy long before your soul gets the sugar rush. I wont be trifled with. Y do U luv America?
Answer true, or I call Homeland Security. U R A sleeper cell trying to trick the patriots who blog here.
Jackie: U R on the spot: Y do U luv America?
Oh, be quick. (dialing here)
Ragnar Danneskjöld
March 12th, 2009
5:27 pm
Dear PoFo @ 4:36/5:36, “.Nobody saw this recession coming.” You cut me to the quick. I forecast the recession every day for a year after Nancy Pelosi proclaimed that the Bush tax cuts would not be renewed. I’m quite certain you even chastised me for saying the same thing over and over. Must I sew flags naked to be noticed?
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
5:35 pm
@Communist AJC
You can Goggle because you are adept keyboard warrior.
@Chris Broe,
You can go play in the traffic, as I do not have to prove nor explain any thing to you. As for your snide conjectures, you have stated nothing more than what you fantasize. Are you still counting pervert?
Glenn
March 12th, 2009
5:38 pm
Chris Broe,
You minored in Psych? Really? That must’ve been Home Ec. for you. They made me study that BS for seven — count ‘em, seven — years, and I never, ever saw a bigger pantload (excepting maybe the Developmentalists, and perhaps Jung). Still, I toadied, and bellied up to The Bar.
How could an honorable Cynic such as yourself so deign?
Horseslop.
gtg
P.S. Although Abnormal Psych seems always to have been robust, productive and full of promise. I’ll give them that.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
6:01 pm
Jackie,
if I rant and rave about a certain subject I usually back it up with facts. I don’t ask others to do it for me. Thanks for playing.
Jackie
March 12th, 2009
6:09 pm
@Communist AJC
I have not ranted nor raved about any subject.
My facts can be found by you or anyone else that cares to verify.
CommunistAJC
March 12th, 2009
6:32 pm
Can anyone explain how we are supposed to believe PresBo?
Obama: Economic crisis ‘not as bad as we think’
WASHINGTON (AP) – Confronting misgivings, even in his own party, President Barack Obama mounted a stout defense of his blueprint to overhaul the economy Thursday, declaring the national crisis is “not as bad as we think” and his plans will speed recovery.
Challenged to provide encouragement as the nation’s “confidence builder in chief,” Obama said Americans shouldn’t be whipsawed by bursts of either bad or good news and he was “highly optimistic” about the long term.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96SP30G5&show_article=1
bja
March 12th, 2009
6:33 pm
Small independently owned businesses will find themselves targeted by union representatives if this bill passes.
In Michigan, it is common for businesses with only five employees to end up with a union.
This proposed rule would allow union organizers to take employees out to the bar, and after getting them all drunk, get them to sign the card check. And with that, the union is in.
Don’t think this won’t happen, because it is how unions operate.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
6:44 pm
Liberalism defined here: Justice. (google it)
Now that you’ve googled it, lets talk: what if 2,598 billionaires managed to thwart the six billions of people on this planet by using legal and constitutional means available to anyone so that they could possess and control 90% the wealth of the entire planet? That would not be justice.
Capitalism only works in the arena of war. We are systematically destroying ourselves. It only takes one country to launch a global nuclear war. We are sellouts. We write what we are paid to write. If we are to be financially successful we must pander to Common Sense Conservatism. The Common Sense Conservatism is whatever Wallstreet and the Bomb Industry pays the Wootens to say it is.
There is no way we can survive. We need war to show economic projections that point upward. That’s the only way to get to the top. That’s the only way that a properly-educated christian American can fulfill the American Dream.
We are as finished as completely as the Sioux Indians were finished, in 1876, when they decided to leave the reservation and attack the US Army’s Seventh Cavalry, who were only obeying our Constitutionally elected mandate to properly align our topographical demographics with the media-inspired Rush of Capitalization upon which our Christians riffed the justification of laws from which we distilled the disenfranchisement of our muddied multitudes: National Resources against National Population. The end game of Capitalism: the salt is worth more than the salt of the earth.
Well, Glenn et al, I’m here today 2 tell U 2 tell who ever sent U that we don’t just jury-nullify, but instead, we human-nullify your laws. U R obsolete.
Wooten, Glenn, and Andy, and JBMlaw: I suggest you conform to the human paradox: Is a human being a particle or a wave? That is, is one human worthy as all humans are worthy? Or, is one human only one human with some arbitrary vision of progressive potential, and damned be those who were in the path of the toxic dumps that never occurred to the opportunistic visionary?
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
7:04 pm
Why do jackie, glenn, rag, and andy use the same exact syntax? Are they in the same boiler room/bar with laptops drinking and drunk-mob ruling? Sure reads like that to me.
You know you clowns represent the ideology that hasn’t worked for two hundred years. We get it: The economy is cyclical. Yes, capitalism is great when it’s great ( for a handful), but what about the masses? For two hundred years you’ve given us Bud Light.
It’s over. Just leave. I suggest Dubai. Cheney and Bush are Kings over there. You’ll be quite popular!
Obama is not the end of Conservatism. He’s the beginning of the end of Conservatism. Rag, you should be ashamed trying to mix analchord with compromised republicanism. You cant be me. I know that hurts. But you can levy justicefor all by foreclosing your own greed. You can be a living trust for trust itself. You can make a difference.
We face obliteration. Decide quick or sit next to me near the campfire. I’ve got the marsh mellows. Someone grab a guitar. Pass the bong. Lets just sing in unison till conservatism destroys us all.
Should there be billionaires? NO! Any profit over 100 million dollars for any individual should be taxed at 90 per cent. The death tax? 90 per cent! Yes! If someone dies, then he should forfeit what ever he earned to society. He’s dead! His offspring? Let them know the human experience of belonging to the times and the mass condition. Nobody deserves anything more than anybody else. Period.
I’m willing to civil war over it. I dont care what you think you deserve over me or anyone other american. Soon that sentiment will extend to the starving in Sri Lanka.
Kamchak
March 12th, 2009
7:15 pm
Mr. Wooten cites a report by Anne Layne-Farrar of LECG Consulting. The title of this study is: An Empirical Assesment of The Employee Free Choice Act: The Economic Implications. Perhaps The Associated Builders and Contractors sponsored the study, funny that she didn’t them. She did however acknoledge financial support by a gruop with the rather innocuous sounding name The Alliance to Save Main Street Jobs. This is a moniker that has spinmeister Frank Luntz stink all over it. Dig a little and the HR Policy Association turns up.
“HR Policy Associationbrings together the Chief Human Resource Officers of more than 260 of the largest corporations in the United States. Representing nearly ever major industry sector, HR Policy members have a combined market capitalization of $7.5 trillion and employ 18 million employees worldwide The association mission is to assist large employers in using their collective leverage of the membership to further critically important business and societal objectives.”(http//www.hrpolicy.org/about_indexaspx)
Wow a membership that uses a collective leverage. Sounds kinda like a union. Also sounds a bit like “don’t do as we do, do as we tell you to do.” A membership with 18 million employees world wide. I can see why unionization is a threat to their $7.5 trillion market capitalization, less money for $1 million dollar office makeovers with $1200 waste baskets and golden commodes.
In her study Ms.Layne-Farrer uses mathematics that admittedly are beyond my education level, but a wise man (the late Robt. Heinlein) once said “if you torture numbers enough they can be made to say anything.” A study financed by an association of 260 of the largest corporation in the U.S. that says unions are bad– I’ll try to restrain my shock and awe.
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
7:39 pm
I was WAY too long-winded. I meant not so much “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”, as, “Pay no attention to what the Man’s been saying about the man behind Iron Curtain.”
“It’s the perceived threat of war that justifies facism, whether there exists a threat or not.” (W, 2002)
Chris Broe
March 12th, 2009
7:43 pm
Kamchuk, nobody understood a word you wrote. Trust me on that one. Distill your comment into one 25-word sentence. I can.
Can U?
Communication itself is at stake. Try twittering. You are forced to be brief. They only allow 25 words or less. It’s the greatest thing to evolve from human communication. And guess what? I invented it.
Kamchak
March 12th, 2009
8:08 pm
Chris Broe
While I feel the need to agree with you, your postings at 3:19,4:36,6:44 and 7:44 seem to exceed 25 words. Again someone telling me “don’t do as I do, do as I say do.” That sentiment doesn’t inspire trust.
Jaye
March 13th, 2009
5:43 am
People can vent to the AJC and whine and moan, as if this really helps. Let your representatives hear from you and if they’ve made legislative decisions that adversely affect your life, vote them out of office next time you have the opportunity.
REPUBLICANS EVIL TIMEISUP
March 13th, 2009
8:49 am
JUST LIKE JIMBO AND HIS OLD REDNECK CREW WHO DONT WANT TO PAY AMERICANS THEIR FARE SHARE,WHO WOULD LIKE TO GET RID OF THE UNIONS SO THAT THE GREEDY CEOS CAN SLAVE AMERICANS AT LOW WAGES.
THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE LIKE SUXBY PERDONT JOHNNY BOY PHIL GIMMY ARE ABOUT,THEY USE THE SOUTHERN IGNORANCE TO KEEP THE GOOD OLE BOYS AND GIRLS BROKE STUPID AND BLIND.
zeke
March 13th, 2009
9:29 am
UNIONS ARE THE SOCIALIST SCOURGE OF A FREE SOCIETY! UNIONS ARE THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF THE BIG THREE ECONOMIC TROUBLE! THAT COUPLED WITH THE INSANE MANDATES PUT ON THEM BY OUR SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT WILL CONTINUE TO DEPLETE OUR ECONOMY! HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU THINK THAT A BUNCH OF SCUMBAG LAWYERS IN CONGRESS CAN DETERMINE THE BEST CAR TO MAKE, THE BEST OPTIONS TO PUT ON THAT CAR AND HOW TO MAGICALLY MAKE THAT CAR EFFICIENT, LOW COST, LESS POLLUTING AND STILL SELL IT TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT WANT IT! STUPID POLITICOS WILL RUIN US COMPLETELY! THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION IS TO BAN ALL UNIONS BY CONSTITUTIONAL AMMENDMENT!
cranky old man
March 13th, 2009
9:53 am
@Temp,
“The reduction in wages is simple economics. You have a large increase in available workers due to more women working, without a corresponding increase in the number of jobs. “
“As for off shoring, there is nothing sacred or special about the American worker. Why does a worker in India or China or the Philippines not have the same right to a job that you do? They work just as hard, have the same level of education and charge 1/3 the price. Why would I not offshore? Just as companies have to compete in the global economy, so do workers.”
Well, here are a few problems I see with that:
1. Businesses are off-shoring, in part, to avoid having to obey safety and environmental regulations. Even if such laws exist in the countries to which they export the jobs, they are often not enforced, either as a deliberate policy to lure businesses, or as a result of bribery. Pollution, left unchecked, will eventually affect the entire planet.
2. This practice does at least as much harm as good for most of the people living in the countries to which the factories are re-located. Yes, I am aware that most Third World subsistence farmers would gladly take a job in a sweatshop working 12 hours per day with no break for $1.25 per hour, because it’s still better than subsistence farming. But, as soon as the local economy starts to improve enough that the workers realize what they are missing and start agitating for better wages, the businesses re-locate yet again to the next untapped market of cheap labor, leaving the locals out of work, and now without their farms to go back to.
2. These businesses have been built using the resources of the United States, much of it funded with our tax dollars. Every business benefits from roads, bridges, canals, ports, law enforcement, fire departments, etc. The workforce that built these businesses was educated in public schools. The founder and the executives may have gone to college on the GI Bill. And now, having taken what they can from our society, the businesses abandon their responsibilities to benefit a few fat cats at the top, leaving the workers who built the businesses unemployed and local economies devastated.
3. Something else I’ve noticed is that free trade fanatics seem to think it’s perfectly reasonable for businesses to take advantage of the difference in the cost of living to hire cheap labor. But, apparently, it’s not okay for consumers to take advantage of these same differences. Remember a year or two ago when there was such a stink about people getting drugs (the legal kind) from Canada because they were cheaper? Oh, no, we can’t have that. American consumers are our captive cash cows. Another example is DVDs. I found this out when my sister (who lives in Europe) sent my wife a DVD collection. The DVDs won’t play on an American DVD player. So we watched some of them on my laptop. But guess what? There is a limit to the number of times the software is allowed to switch back and forth between US and European compatible DVD formatting. And I’m not talking about anti-piracy software. These were legally purchased DVDs. But, the thing is, due to the difference in the cost of living around the world, movie distributors who charge $20 in the US can only charge, say $4 in Indonesia. So we have to prevent some industrious Indonesian entrepreneur from buying legal copies and shipping them back to the US to sell for $10 each.
Kamchak
March 13th, 2009
4:45 pm
@ cranky old man
Thank you for a lucid, cogent argument that needed evey word that you used– proving that two and a half bumper stickers of twittering is insuffficient in a civilized conversation
Sally Bemis
March 16th, 2009
10:31 pm
I am sick and tired of your worn out negative comments and I am fed up with you and your opinion of yourself that you know everything. I am referring to your snide remark at the beginning of your article regarding President Obama and Congress putting us into another depression. Let me refresh your memory, sir. Your party ran this country right into the position where we now find ourselves, and you and your party do not even have the moral fiber to feel ashamed for your acts and deeds. Instead, you have the audacity to open your mouths and spew comments that have absolutely no value. Get this, sir, I and many other citizens of this country do not and will not listen to those who caused these problems. You supposedly knew everything then also. Oh, let’s also not forget, former President Bush was in office when the first stimulus money was given out with absolutely no reporting requirements as to how the money was spent; another brilliant decision. Just like the person who sells me a car that won’t run, or the grocery that sells spoiled food, or the person who lies to me, I no longer give them my business and I certainly don’t listen to what they have to say. You and the Republican party lost your credibility and took 8 long years in proving how to lose it. The voters told you loudly in November how they felt and what they wanted. Unfortunately, once again, your were talking and couldn’t hear above the deafening noise of your own voices.
EFCA: Huh? « Travis’s Thoughts
March 20th, 2009
2:35 pm
[...] http://blogs.ajc.com/thinking-right/2009/03/12/employee-free-choice-act-how-to-kill-jobs/ [...]