This Scares Me
 

Ron mentioned Wal-Mart's fear of the Employee Free Choice Act, which got me thinking. We've discussed a number of challenges facing America these days. Mounting federal debt is a serious concern. Lots of other things are too. But there is one that I find more frightening than the others.

You see, real wages have been falling while corporate profits skyrocket. That was the plan, nicely executed. The current "administration" launched an all-out war against workers and unions beginning immediately after taking oath, and those efforts have been ongoing ever since. Again, this was the plan. The net effect has been higher profits and reductions in real wages. With inflation certain to get substantially worse in the coming months, this strategy will continue to bear fruit. In the form of reduced real wages, reduced buying power, reduced standard of living, reduced security, reduced commerce and reduced tax revenues. Worker productivity, BTW, has continued to rise throughout this period.

Increased federal debt is a problem. Solving it with rising wages would be painful. Solving it with falling wages will not be painful because it will not be feasible. Economic recovery with falling wages and rising inflation will be impossible.

Many of you guys bemoan the forced redistribution of wealth. Okay. Currently, there is a deliberate redistribution of wealth going on which I guess is okay with you guys (increasing profits and decreasing real wages). I think it is our biggest problem. Respectfully.

I look forward to a liberal administration, not because of higher taxes or increase welfare programs. I look forward to it for the reversal in labor policy. I look forward to the end of a long and effective war on workers and their wages. Because I think we are doomed otherwise. Not necessarily in four years, but certainly, inexorably, doomed unless workers' wages stop falling. Hard to imagine that this would be the deliberate policy of a patriot.....this business of reducing the earnings of Joe Lunchpail.

Conservative commandments:
* Privatize profit
* Socialize risk
* Re-distribute wealth upwards.

Exactly. Frankly, I would like to see some centrism in public policy-making. Even conservatives occasionally have some minor suggestions that could be helpful. (wink)

But the Republican agenda, neatly summarized immediately above, must be repaired. This "administration" in particular has been very effective with all three goals. In a perfect world, I would wish the next guy were closer to the center. More balanced. But this is far from a perfect world. You guys fear an ultra-liberal President, and I hope for just that. Not for raising taxes or increasing welfare. But for stopping the flow of resources from America's working men and women.......toward corporations and their investors. I hope for a labor policy that is Wal-Mart's worst nightmare. Later, if things fall into a healthier balance, then I will hope for centrism.

You are clearly under the impression that there remains a major political party in the United States that is looking out for the "little guy". Since there are only two to choose from, and you have clearly stated which one you believe is looking out for the interests of corporate America, that leaves the other. I'm sorry, but I used to believe the Dems had the interests of us "little guys" at heart. I no longer believe that. Follow the money. The Dems lead the Repubs by a significant margin in high dollar, special interest and corporate donations. Now why would that be?

The Dems have a very polished PR machine. They have better access to the major media outlets than the Republicans. I'm not refering to the news in particular, but the entertainment industry as well. Both lean heavily left. Both are used to portray the Democratic Party as something it is not. Something it once was, granted, but it drifted away from its core values long ago. They started the drift before I was born, and have long since completed it.

No, there is no "little guys'" party anymore. We see many opportunities to improve the "little guys'" lot in life that were squandered by the Clinton administration, and some clearly targeted efforts to increase corporate profits over workers' interests. Those who cannot recall these are viewing history through rose colored glasses; they are in denial.

At least on the Republican side, the evils are easily identified. That may help us bring them under control; knowing the enemy is half the battle. It's pure capitalism and greed; more for you means less for me, so I'll do everything I can to line up more for me. Pretty straightforward.

It gets much more complicated on the Democratic side. There is the unabashed greed element as well, but that is rather loathsome and unfashionable in those circles. So it must be disguised; hidden from view and called something else. It has to be presented as "good" for American workers, so as to continue to appeal to one of the Democratic bases (NAFTA comes to mind). Add to that an element wholly missing from the equation on the right, and things really get murky - this pandering intellectual elitism that drives the self proclaimed leaders of the left.

They dearly love to tell the "little guy" what is good for him. They often couch the most distasteful of legislation, policy, rules, or whatnot under the auspices of sacrificing for some greater good. They are very open in their disdain for that "little guy", as they feed him their political "castor oil" that they refuse to administer to themselves. They will never be affected by the sacrices they ask others to make; its good to be king. These used to be causes that actually meant something, that had some merit. Not any more. Like I said earlier, follow the money. Most of their followers either can't or won't, so they are left to believe they are supporting the "greater good". Unfortunately, today, that "greater good" is as often as not lining some fat cats' pockets. Just like the Republicans, only far less honest about it.

This Scares Me


everything scares you. you're a liberal.

Woolworth took on the five and dimes.

Sears took on the stodgy Woolworth.

Old Sam saw Sears lacking and downtowns with no parking.

Walmart managers must lie awake nights thinking about tax free INTERNET shopping and UPS..

American retailing follows Mao's dictum of "constant revolution"..

Jeff, that's an incredibly insightful write up.

Both parties are about power and control. The Democrats do it by owning your ambition and your soul. Democrats "think" they measure their compassion by how many people they get on welfare. Republicans measure their compassion by how many people they get OFF welfare.

Roflmao

Agree 100%, Jeff. I would like to think the Democrats have the best interests of the working men and women at heart but I'm not THAT naive. They are just as power-hungry, and just as beholden to corporate interests as their Republican counterparts. And so, like everyone else, my choices do not include leaders. Only the least of two evils. I still think (and believe this to be so obvious as to be factually true) that the chances of some 'good' public policy are far greater with the Dems as opposed to the Reps. Not by a wide margin, but I think it's crystal clear that in a Republican administration, there will be all-out war on workers in which there will be no quarter offered or taken. And so there will be a backlash of repair once a Dem takes the wheel. Back and forth in ferocious swings of partisanism. Perhaps the centrism of which I speak would be the product of the leadership I crave, and you have correctly pointed out that this, leadership, centrism, is not the goal of any camp or political strategy.

I do not abhor capitalism. It excites me in some ways. I have a great deal of respect for capitalism and for America, notwithstanding Sammy's frightening perception of me. But I also know that this greed, for money and power, is the problem. That has been the problem for all of recorded human history. We don't always manifest that with battlefields soaked in human blood. In this case, it is manifest as a widening social and economic gap. That brings me back to my fear. I don't bemoan differences in peoples' successes and resources. But I do think that the economic plunderers right here in America may have a rude awakening in store. No, actually, many of them, and/or their dollars, will go overseas. When America has been squeezed dry.

Put another way........Joe and Sally Lunchpail are an integral part of the successful capitalistic economy here that benefit investors, CEO's, etc......and when Joe and Sally lose their jobs, or cannot buy anything besides subsistence goods, the house of cards falls. While it seems to be the goal of conservatism to transfer wealth from regular folks to folks who already have more than they can consume......it is ultimately not in their best interests to succeed. Tax cuts will not lift this current recession. But an increase in real wages could. The foundation of our economy is not the corporation. It is the carpenter.

C'mon, Hugh. That's not true and you know it. Democrats do not rejoice in increased welfare rolls. Let's look at it this way, which I believe is less of a mischaracterization than yours: Democrats show their compassion by helping people who need it. Republicans show their compassion by denying their help.

Stop it. Really. It does you no good spouting that same Cant that has no basis in reality.

Hugh started it. (wink)

Seriously though, I have heard here many many many many many times the notion that welfare simply makes people lazy and the serious suggestion I hear next is that if welfare were abolished in its entirety, the problem would be fixed. The very EXISTENCE of welfare is, according to many conservatives, precisely the problem. So actually......it is barely an exaggeration, if at all.

Supe:

I recently posted here a story about a housing project in LA where this women was lamenting about how the housing police were starting to crack down on public drinking, etc., etc. A small point in the article was about this women reflecting on how things had changed in this housing project over the 50 years she had lived there. FIFTY YEARS that she'd lived there (she was 72, I think). What have I done in 50 years?? Lets see, entered kindergarten, completed HS and undergrad and grad school (at night) , worked for about 30 years.... The point is that putting people on just enough cash flow that they don't feel a need to improve their lot in life is not a good thing.

There is nothing like the fear of losing everything to get someone motivated to go out and succeed at something. I personally know three Trust Fund Babies, each gets a nice amount of money, like $75 to $100 grand/year. None of them are worth a crap, they have enough to survive, and be comfortable so they have no incentive to bettter themselves. Oh, and all three are bagging groceries or some other gainful employment by August, cause they've spent their money for the year.

What about the indians on reservations without gaming, most are dirt poor and have no education. There is nothing stopping them from getting on the bus and going to the city to find a job, like I did (no I didn't come from a reservation). What's the difference between an indian reservation and my property. If I don't pay my property taxes, they'll take my house.

Lastly, Supe. It looks to me like the Republicans are turning into Democrats with all their giveaways, and what do the Democrats have to say about it? "It's not enough".

I forget, is Dubya a moron who can't tie his own shoes and runs every business he touched into the ground, or a wealth-hoarding genius?

At least stay consistent!

(Personally, I vote for moron.)

IMNSHO, both parties operate under the same philosophy. I.e., secure your base by making them dependent on your continued existence. Democrats do this through entitlements (bread) and entertainment (circuses), and Republicans do this through fearmongering (for the masses) and $ (for the elite).

If I come back in another life, I want to be one of the guys who comes up with the names for these Acts and things.

"Employee Free Choice Act," "Patriot Act," "Fairness Doctrine," etc.

Those guys have to just be cracking up when they're coming up with those names.

I dunno but "fearmongering" is so yesterday of a word...

LOL! Pwned.

:D

Good thing I didn't have food or water in my mouth when I read that!

Yup, that's me. Scaredy kat. We liberals are so scared that we're willing to set aside any and all civil liberties so the terrorists don't use their WMD on us.

If you base on what they contribute to profit margin and how they perform their jobs, the majority of people working at Walmart are over paid in the first place.

We should tax all corporations 100 on every penny of profit, and set the minimum wage at $200 an hour.
No one would have a job, but we'd be worth a lot.
Unions are bad for our country. They make us weak. They make excuses for incompetence, they squash all motivation for excellence, they reward laziness. They force companies to treat all employees exactly the same and pay them the same wages and it makes it extremely difficult to terminate or discipline a union employee, even if many of them do little or no work at all.

Most people I know who are strongly pro-union are the ones who couldn't make it on their own merit so they have to have a union reward their ineptitude and cover for their shortcomings.
Most people I know who are strongly anti-union are hard working talented people who know a union would just hold them back and prevent their exceptional work from being recognized or rewarded.

Unions use extortion and coercion to get their way. Is it any wonder that unions and organized crime have always been so intertwined? they are basically the same thing.
If it was up to me unions and their actions would be illegal.