74900 by Point Blank on 6/02 at 7:24 pm witnesses a:

“battle of wits”

Where was that?  I must have missed it.

Boy! are you ever correct, Skruff.

My fault, I always assume when someone only gives opinions that all they need is facts to think rationally.

Oh, well....win some, lose some, and some are not worth your concern.

74819 by Point Blank on 6/02 at 10:34 am

“Just WHAT have you done to make your mark in life, EXCEPT cry because you don’t get your way. Dept. of the Army, CIC, is who I worked for and I DAMN sure did NOT need some robber union speaking for me.  WHY should I throw facts at you? Just so you can come up with some pinko rationalization. You and others like you have a GREAT PENCHANT FOR DISTORTING ACTUAL FACTS, and for that I have absolutely no use you you or your kind.  I would NOT doubt that you were probably one of the many who spit on troops returning from Vietnam. I do hope you know what the vernacular for a female dog is as that is my opinion of you.  Keep your trash coming.  You won’t win except in your disturbed mind.”

Hope you are seeing someone about that paranoic anger. PHEW!!! You are sure one pissed off dude.

OK, you worked as a union member, had three businesses, were in the service, worked at DOA, which could either be the Dept of Ag., or Dead on Arrival, but in all that long life and varied experience you never learned to check facts for yourself?

PB. It´s usually when one´s facts are weak that personal insults are all that is left in the arsenal.

Nearly 1,100 fewer air traffic controllers are working in U.S. facilities than three years ago, despite increasing air traffic.
The number of controllers who chose to retire exceeded the Federal Aviation Administration’s expectations for the third year in a row.
As the FAA replaces veteran controllers, as high as 20 percent of the workforce will be less experienced trainees.
The FAA says some facilities need more controllers and some less, but overall staffing is satisfactory.
Short staffing is causing some controllers to periodically work 10-hour days and six-day weeks, increasing the possibility of mistakes from fatigue, according to the union.
Mistakes made by controllers rose 68 percent between 1998 and 2005, according to FAA data.

These are the present concerns listed on the website.

I AM ASSUMING YOUR 3 BUSINESSES DID NOT HAVE THE LIVES OF SEVERAL THOUSAND PEOPLE DEPENDING ON YOUR CLEAR HEAD AND ABILITY TO CONCENTRATE COMPLETELY.

When I am one of those people up in the sky, I would be happy to know the people responsible for getting me on the ground in one piece are rested, happy in their work, well paid, and just had a coffee and pee break. But, that´s just me,maybe you would be happy for the FAA to privatize the towers so some company can put some guys with 30 minutes training, being paid $10.00 an hour with no overtime and no breaks, you know, like Walter Reed.

74641 by Point Blank on 6/01 at 2:51 pmsays:

“Come now, Skruff, I’m far from being “wet behind the ears” to believe that is ALL they wanted.  No, I will NOT take the time to list ALL the crapola they demanded.  You, apparently, know it all.”

have it your way!

“And just exactly WHAT were the asinine DEMANDS of the union.”

The Air traffic controlers wanted more frequent breaks for stress reduction, no double shifts (at straighttime because it’s a government agency, not bound by most labor laws) and an end to the practice of “supervisory breaks” where during your traffic control break, you supervised three other controlers.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Forgot to say that info is from an article by Dick Meister, a journalist from San Francisco, who has covered labor and political issues for more than 40 years, named THE UNFRIENDLY SKIES OF GWB.

PB......Here´s something to warm your heart.....if you are not flying anywhere.

Hundreds, if not thousands of air traffic controllers work a day shift—typically from 6 a.m. to 2 p.m.—then report back to work that night, eight or nine hours later… On a good evening, I get four hours sleep. A typical evening I get 2 1/2. That’s right,

2 1/2 hours of sleep for an already sleep-deprived mind and body that has been going all week. Then it’s in the shower, a snack, pack up and drive back to work to separate airplanes from the ground and from each other.”

Under such circumstances, the potential for serious accidents is obvious. Consider the crash of a Conair jet on takeoff from the Lexington, Ky., airport last August that killed all 49 passengers and crew members. Only one controller was on duty, although staffing requirements called for two, and the lone controller had had only nine hours between shifts - and only two hours sleep.

The controllers have tried through their union to improve the situation. But the FAA, as unabashedly anti-labor as all other federal agencies under Bush, rejected union demands for improvements during negotiations for a new contract last year. The agency then unilaterally imposed new work rules that made the situation even worse.

YEP, THEY PUT THE QUIETUS ON YHAT PESKY UNION, WHICH IS UNNECESSARY SINCE WE CAN TRUST THE FCC TO KEEP US SAFE.....NOT!!!

Does this sound remotely familiar to any of you?

Colonial exploitation necessitated the development of a transportation system to facilitate the flow of British ready made goods, and the export of Indian raw material. Although construction of the railroad began in the period, shortly before the Sepoy Mutiny, improvements in the system following the rebellion significantly altered the interior of India as new towns came into existence specifically for the purpose of transporting Indian resources to market. Additional enlargments to the infrastructure of India came in the form of new roads, as well as improvements of the communications system and the harbor at Bombay.

British economic policies further worsened the situation for India’s poor. Increasingly, village artisans were squeezed out by competition from English machine-made goods. The destruction of the Indian craft industry forced large numbers into poverty, relegating them to working the land. During the American Civil War (1861-1865), Indian agriculture shifted from foodstuffs to cotton to supply the English textile industry. The transfer to staple production, coupled with a drought in the 1870s, however, resulted in widespread famine throughout India.

After WW2 the Brits recognized that they had a choice to make.....they could have a somewhat democratic government at home or they could have empire and total control from the top, because, among other new problems, communication had improved too much for the secrets of keeping an empire, i. e. murder and mahem, to be kept. Also, empires are very expensive to administer and control, as the US has found. After a while you are hip deep in debt to the money people, the big banks, who answer to no country, or in our case, to China and Japan who become richer as we become poorer.

The international corporation is the tool of the big money movers, so must endevor to control the governments under which they operate. Is it so strange, then, that they would buy politicians?

#73638 by Skruff on 5/29 at 5:26 am

Thanks for the links, Skruff, but those are opinion pieces, not evidence of an outsourcing problem in the US.  They cite no figures whatsoever and are about Walmart only.  What I’d like to see is some real data on number of actual outsourced jobs, taking into account cost savings, insourcing, and other mitigating factors.  You won’t find anything because the outsourcing issue (like the minimum wage issue) is a bogus political issue, not a real one.

73656 by Point Blank on 5/29 at 6:40 am informs:

“Skruff, the term I used was, is, an old mountain man, western term used when someone died on their woolen blanket and was buried wrapped up in it.”

I’m an old dawg, but still learning.... Thanks for the info.

#73643 by Point Blank on 5/29 at 5:52 am

“… died in the wool...”

It’s a textile term spelled “Dyed in the woll”

73551 by Marshall on 5/28 at 5:49 pm

“I would challenge you to cite some valid figures on the supposed “outsourcing” to which you refer.  I think you’ll find that this issue, which we haven’t heard about since the last Presidential campaign, was a partisan football that turned out not to have any air.”

Oh, there’s plenty of air there!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/ secrets/shots.html

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2007/03/23/weiss-walmar t-india-oped-cx_gw_0326weiss.html

Point Blank - I wish I did have a vested interest in Wal-mart… at least from the 1980’s.  In the last several years, it’s stock has gone down so I’m glad I’ve never had any.

I would challenge you to cite some valid figures on the supposed “outsourcing” to which you refer.  I think you’ll find that this issue, which we haven’t heard about since the last Presidential campaign, was a partisan football that turned out not to have any air.

What is the relationship?

73061 from Point Blank....
Marshall & Russell, are you both so naive to believe anything that is put out from “think tank?” Perhaps the both of you lack the intelligence to realize FACTS ARE, AS A RULE, MANUFACTURED TO SUIT A CERTAIN PURPOSE OR PURPOSES!

Then.......

72555, from Mariam Russell
Most union avoidance consultants and law firms pay lip service to “preventive” or “positive” labour relations (i.e. solving workplace problems so that unions are rendered unnecessary). In reality, however, the vast majority of their work consists of running union avoidance campaigns, as employers hire them only when confronted by organizing drives.[3]

Several union avoidance firms operate internationally, but only in the US has this industry developed into a multimillion-dollar concern that operates throughout the country and in every sector of the economy. And only in the US do employers, policy makers and (to a lesser extent) the general public consider the activities of union avoidance experts a legitimate part of mainstream industrial relations. ”

John Logan, The Union Avoidance Industry in the United States, 2006.[3]

Union busting is a field populated by bullies and built on deceit. A campaign against a union is an assault on individuals and a war on truth. As such, it is a war without honor. The only way to bust a union is to lie, distort, manipulate, threaten, and always, always attack. ”

Martin Jay Levitt, 1993, Confessions of a Union Buster[2]

73146 by Marshall on 5/27 at 1:07 am says:

“The downside of Walmart is ...”

You mention ONE downside? 

A communist nation, using prison labor to compete with US employees, unbalancing further our trade balance, allowing China to use this new found wealth to buy up our notes?

I’d rather do business with the MAffia.

We have learned nothing through two oil embargos. we have learned nothing while chinese ingrediants poisioned our pets. actually, we’ve learned nothing even from 9/11, ‘cause it is Walmart that blocked the tougher inspection legislation for container imports.  For money we’re selling our (supposedly the greatest) way of life to folks who do not like us very well.

If thye Chinese embargo, it will take a long while to replace what they will no longer sell.  Oh yeah, as the WW II generation dies off, we will lose the lesson of Pearl Harbor too!

Hello Leefeller - Interesting to hear your personal story about farming.  I do realize that the kinds of jobs americans have has changed over the years due to globalization, demand, competition, and other factors.  Your example of Walmart is a good one.  The downside of Walmart is a reduction in the number of “mom and pop” businesses which did some of the same things.  The upside is the convenience, wide selection and low prices offered by a large retailer like Walmart… which is exactly why they are so popular.  The public is the driving force behind this kind of change, as they’ll go where they think they can find the best service/pricing/product availibility/etc…

As to Hillary - the engine behind US politics is private and corporate contribution, and many corporations give to both Democrats and Republicans so it’s no surprise that Hillary is part of that.  If you believe that campaign funding needs to be reformed, then this may be a problem.  On the other hand, running a political race is hugely expensive and the money has to come from somewhere.  It’s up to the politicians not to provide quid pro quo for those contributions.

<<Your fictional writings are so far afield of the facts that it seems a waste to even respond further, so I don’t intend to.  If you want to continue with your dishonest mumblings, that is your prerogative.>>

Ernest - People who can’t support their claims with facts often choose this way out of a discussion; blanket dismissal of the other person as not credible.  This is often the liberal escape hatch - speeches about tolerance but, when it comes down to it, they’re anything but when it comes to differing viewpoints and short on facts to back up their own.

I’ve backed up my statements with facts but apparently all you have to do is invoke the name of an ecnomist that few other professionals agree with (and his “odd man out” status somehow makes him MORE credible?) Have it your way.  Maybe someone else with a better education and some informed opinions will pick up this thread in your absence.

<<As to the so-called “progressive” nature of the tax code, The Bushies have already substantially eroded that even as to wages, and have made it a complete joke with respect to non-wage income and the numerous loopholes that allow wealth to often escape taxation altogether.>>

Please tell me how?  You make the claim but don’t supply a single bit of evidence, yet you dismiss me as not credible.  Amazing.

<<During four of the five years that Cheney was CEO, Halliburton paid no federal corporate income tax whatsoever. >>

I could find no reference (or even claim) about this on the internet.  Can you please supply a credible link?

<<I am sure that if you took a poll of Americans, asking whether they are better off today than they were in 2000, 95% would say “no way, no how.”>>

Ironic that you’re asking the question Reagan used to deflate Carter’s run for reelection.  Unfortunately, your answer is entirely your opinion.  The fact is that the current strong economy is sustainable because it’s not built on the rampant internet speculation of the late 90’s.  We’re near full employment with strong job creation and job availability across the board, not just low paying jobs as some would have you believe.  Feel free to check the official figures if you want proof:  http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t10.htm

Since Ernest is apparently at a loss to continue this discussion, anyone else can feel free to jump in… just bring some sustainable opinions this time.

The reason corps have been buying politicians for a very long time is to engineer what has been happening for a 50 year period, but speeded up under the Raygun and Bushit regimes.......

New Haven, Connecticut (April 16, 2007) From Combined News Services and Evolution Solutions Newsroom—A 2004 analysis of data by the US Census reports that 60 million Americans now live on less than $7 per day. That’s one in five in the U.S. living on less than $2,555 per year. At the same time, the richest 1 per cent now garners about 16 per cent of national income, double what they earned in the 1960s.[1]

While global income inequality is probably greater than it has ever been in human history, with half the world’s population living on less than $3 per day, and the richest 1% receiving as much as the bottom 57%, the fact that so many Americans are living on so little, is particularly confounding.

This is the start of an article by William Shanley, POVERTY IN AMERICA, that you can find at Global Research.ca

Marshall and PB, if this is the world you want to live in, there is a goodly supply of greedy, power hungry sociopathic conmen who will ensure that you have it. All you have to do is ¨get the government (that´s all of us who have to live with the consequences of their whim of the day) out of their bizness¨, de-regulate, fail to enforce the existing laws, and pass new ones to make it impossible for the citizens to demand an accounting for their actions. Buy into the idiocy of the world´s resources being owned by a few because they have the guns to back their appropriation and holding of these resources.

72883 by Marshall on 5/26 at 12:44 am

“This claim that “only the wealthy got tax cuts” is left-wing propaganda.”

Funny, I didn’t see my “tax cut” in fact in my 40 years of paying taxes Ive seen NO tax cuts.  I’ve always made less than $30,000 and NEVER taken dollar one from the Government.  I am a NASCAR fan, a member of the NRA live in a red county, whhere the average income is less than $18,000 and can’t stand the government… I never thought of myself as “left wing” BUT no one in my shop nor any that I’ve spoken to have seen any “tax cuts”

the tax rate for the very rich is 23.49 percent (top 1 percent)

As recently as 1968 it had been in excess of 50%

Those are just facts AND In my humble opinion the rich SHOULD pay more..  When looking at money the rich control 80% of the wealth, so (in fairness) they should pay 80% of the taxes....  It’s not about numbers of people who make little or no money, it’s about cash, and how has it!

Ernest Canning - I guess you’re not understanding my comment, or the tax cuts.  I never referred to “average” tax cuts.  The US has a progressive tax system whereby people pay tax as a percentage of their income.  Those who paid more tax would obviously get more back, in total dollars, than those who paid less (unless you’re suggesting everyone gets the same amount back?) Amongh other things, the Bush tax plan introduced a lower tax bracket (10%) for low income people (was 15%).  This claim that “only the wealthy got tax cuts” is left-wing propaganda.

<<The fact is that under the Bush tax cuts, wages are taxed at a much higher rate than non-wage income.  >>

The fact is, you’re wrong.  This depends entirely on what tax bracket you’re in.  If you’re in a low (10%) bracket, then cap. gains taxes are, at the least, the same but likely higher depending on how long you’ve possessed the asset.  As to the higher wage brackets, it has always been this way (ie. nothing changed significantly under the Bush tax cuts), so you’re wrong there.

Bottom line: the wealthy pay a far larger percentage in taxes than the poor.  In fact, the wealthy are paying more in taxes now than ever before in history, and the poor are paying less (many actually receiving govt. money and paying NO taxes) than ever before.  Fact.

<<Oh, and real good retort.  Just call Paul Krugman a “liberal” as if that somehow discredits what he has to say.>>

You may not have noticed that my criticism of Krugman was that he’s a “minority viewpoint economist” - meaning: virtually no other prominent economists agree with him.  Unless you misquoted him, he already got the “tax cuts were for the wealthiest 1%” wrong, so he’s not difficult to refute.

Ernest Canning: Manufacturing moved out of the US because union labor costs are too high.  American auto makers, continually out of touch with consumer demand, have made bad decisions coupled with tough competition from foreign auto makers.  On the other hand, many foreign auto makers have opened (non-union) plants in the US providing thousands of jobs.  It’s called “insourcing” and is never mentioned by the left because it contradicts their bogus “outsourcing” claims.

As to your Krugman piece (surprise! A liberal viewpoint from the Times!), I beg to differ.  Krugman is a minority viewpoint economist, but you’ve obviously swallowed his opinion as fact.  For example, the article states the tax cuts were for the wealthiest 1%.  That would be wrong - tax cuts were across the board.  And for Krugman’s proof?  A British periodical commenting on the US economy - making the assertion that Repubs want the economy to fail.

I’ll not grace you with a reply on that one because it’s absurd and if you don’t know that, then I’m wasting my breath.

To Ernest Canning - I might remind you that US manufacturing has been shrinking for 30 years in an age of modernization and high tech.  You can choose to blame specific people, or instead blame the real culprit; a changing world.  You may also be surprised to learn that US manufacturing employment INCREASED in from March 2006 to March 2007.

<<what was left of American labor was Wal-Mart-ized>>

Not true.  US job creation has expanded in just about all areas, not just low paying service sector jobs.

<<increasing numbers of Americans find they can’t make ends meet and have leveraged their finances>>

That leveraging isn’t from “not making ends meet” - it’s from tapping the equity in their appreciating houses and the associated credit offers to buy luxury goods (their choice, not necessity).

<<the gap between rich and poor has grown>>

Yes - as wages are driven down by illegal immigrants who take jobs away from citizens while, at the same time, an upwardly mobile middle class joins the ranks of the wealthy and sees real wages increase.

<<the number of Americans without health insurance has gone from 40 million to 47 million>>

Won’t argue with you there - US healthcare needs attention.

<<as the housing bubble bursts>>

It’s clearly a soft landing and the concensus among economists is a resumption of more sane appreciation late this year or next.  Hardly a burst bubble.

<<the price at the pump (and oil industry profits) has more than trippled in the past six years>>

Yes - the unfortunate affect of high global demand, uncertain oil markets, and the discouragement of US refinery construction that took place during the nineties.

<<Again, Marshall, I ask, please give us the name of the planet you are living on.>>

It’s called Earth.

<<During the period of the Ante Bellum South, there was a form of full employment amongst the slaves.>>

If you feel like you’re a slave to your job (assuming you have one), then I suggest you get another.

That´s OK, PB, read Howard Zinn anyway.

72582 by Point Blank on 5/24 at 9:45 pm

“I suppose, in some areas they are still needed, but union members have, in my opinion, become spoiled brats”

My family has Union blood back to the beginings of the textile indrustry, and I have also researched Union history. 

First when you say “Unions have become spoiled brats” I can see what you are saying, BUT it is like saying All Mexicans are lazy, all Blacks are Democrat, and all whites are rich.  “The A.F.L&C;.I.O. The Teamsters, have bade a mockery of unions searching out new areas only within the high wage folks.  The folks needing to be unionized, retail store clerks, harvesters, and personal home service personnel have been by-passed.  BUT as far as “spoiled” goes you don’t need union membership to join that group.  Trying to get a small business to complete a sale, or attempting to get goods delivered in a timely manner is impossible in this part of Maine, and we have very few Unions.  The Teachers Unions which congregate around big cities seems to be absent here. teachers have no breaks in our local (two room) school. and they recieve no social security from ANY job they had before, or have after teaching in Maine. There pay is so low student lenders get only interest payments on student loans, and they use their own money to purchase necessary student supplies. 

On the other hand the UFW union has done fantastic things notablly in the area of removing younger children from the fields and getting them into schools.

There are a number of things (list to long for this venue) that need changing in the employee-employer system.  Admittedly the Unions have fallen down on the job,,, Like many US institutions. The cure is not Union bashing, but union membership.  Needed, new blood.

PB.....No, back to 1850 or so, no one in my family ever belonged to a union. Pioneers in North Central Florida....Farmers.

This is not a contest for me to be right and you to be wrong, or visa versa. This is about information...not emotions or parading any or all of our prejudices, however we acquired them. I recognize that you feel that you have cause to be against unions, but, I do think it worthwhile to explore the origins of our most prized thoughts. To do that, it is necessary to know just what has been happening in an area....history you will find hard to get in history courses. You can read Howard Zinn´s History of The American People for starters.

Here´s a few tidbits from Wikipedia under Union Busting.....worth reading

When a chief executive hires a labor relations consultant to battle a union, he gives the consultant run of the company and closes his eyes. The consultant, backed by attorneys, installs himself in the corporate offices and goes to work creating a climate of terror that inevitably is blamed on the union. ”

Martin Jay Levitt, 1993, Confessions of a Union Buster[2]
John Logan, a labor expert at the London School of Economics, observes:

Most union avoidance consultants and law firms pay lip service to “preventive” or “positive” labour relations (i.e. solving workplace problems so that unions are rendered unnecessary). In reality, however, the vast majority of their work consists of running union avoidance campaigns, as employers hire them only when confronted by organizing drives.[3]

Several union avoidance firms operate internationally, but only in the US has this industry developed into a multimillion-dollar concern that operates throughout the country and in every sector of the economy. And only in the US do employers, policy makers and (to a lesser extent) the general public consider the activities of union avoidance experts a legitimate part of mainstream industrial relations. ”

John Logan, The Union Avoidance Industry in the United States, 2006.[3]

Union busting is a field populated by bullies and built on deceit. A campaign against a union is an assault on individuals and a war on truth. As such, it is a war without honor. The only way to bust a union is to lie, distort, manipulate, threaten, and always, always attack. ”

Martin Jay Levitt, 1993, Confessions of a Union Buster[2]

I did work at L.M. Berry, when it was a contractor to the phone company to do the yellow pages, a business my boss called ¨a license to steal¨. I recognize some of the psycological union avoidance plans described in the Wikipedia article. The phone cos and everyone connected with them have a history of being rabidly anti-union, so we were treated to the full spectrum of propoganda, threats (veiled, of course), open door policies, etc, etc.

Nope, never belonged to a union in my long life. Have been here long enough to have observed that every worker benefited from unions, so, no, I will not join your analysis of the tit for tat fight between unions and management, but, while unions were not perfect, they were the only power the worker had, as the government, from the git-go, supported the corp and even sent the national guard to kill strikers. There has also been a long smear campaign with the same sort of urban legend stories created to destroy unions that are used to convince a credulous public that we need ¨tort reform¨. Of course, the anti-union campaign has had a longer life than the campaign to get us to give up the last bit of power we have over the corps.

Do corps need slave labor to make a profit? I think not, but, of course, their profits are very much higher with slave labor, and they have actually codified into law that they must make all the profit possible, which makes them total sociopathic ¨persons¨ who need to be controlled by law if we, the citizens and necessary work force of the world, are to have a decent life and freedom from the slaughter of our families to make resources available at firesale prices for these sociopathic ¨persons¨.

#72363 by Nitro on 5/24 at 11:17 am

“Well Skruff (#72262), I hate to rain on your parade a little, but maybe TAO can verify this for me, but I don’t think ANY TREATY developed or signed, was ever honored by the white man or his government, just gave them the time to get “whomever” surrounded and massacred or driven to some “convenient” place for white man to rape & pillage the resources.”

Obviously you are not familiar with Peter LaFarge?  There’s been rain on most parades I support since Wounded Knee.

POINT BLANK.....

O.K. FOR THE CEO TO MAKE UMPTEEN GILLION DOLLARS ON THE BOOKS AND ALL HE CAN STEAL OTHERWISE,BUT NOT O.K. FOR THE WORKER, WHO ACTUALLY PRODUCES THE PRODUCT THAT PRODUCES THE UG DOLLARS, TO MAKE A DECENT LIVING AND HAVE HEALTHCARE AND BE ABLE TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE?

The moving of production to countries who will tolerate no labor law because they are run by thugs who have the same dream of slave labor to provide their rich life by working long hours, being paid almost nothing, no safe working conditions, no health care, and an early death, to be easily replaced because of the high birth rate promoted both by governments and religion.

Now that “Democrats” have “caved in” to “Republicans” on Iraq troop withdrawal,are there any doubts left that we have only one Party which is nothing else than the AIPAC Party, the one that wants as many wars and bloodshed as it takes to make Israel secure?
This fact makes all these discussions here trivial, reminding only of that medieval controversy of “how many angels can dance together on the top of a needle”.
Since you can’t see what this war is doing to this Country of ours, folks, you absolutely don’t deserve to win and much less to receive the votes of us who are anti-War.
It is time to make a new Party, one that is dedicated to re-building our shattered Nation.

72220 by TAO Walker on 5/23 at 11:47 pm says:

“You might even get the benefits of some Native guidance.”

You said a mouthful!  Ferr land to walk upon, free water to drink, and the death penalty for betraying “the people”

Lets make a treaty to last as long as the grass grows, and as long as the rivers flow.

(appoligies to Peter LaFarge)

AFL-CIO site.......


The nation’s economy has nearly 79,000 fewer private-sector jobs than when President George W. Bush took office.

During the last full month before Bush took office in January 2001, the unemployment rate was 3.9 percent. In March 2005, the official U.S. unemployment rate was 5.2 percent—representing 7.7 million unemployed workers. The manufacturing sector has lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs since January 2001.

What’s more, the 7.7 million officially unemployed represents only about 57 percent of all U.S. workers—approximately 13.6 million, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics—who are either unemployed, underemployed in part-time jobs out of economic necessity or who have become so discouraged that they have given up looking for work.

After the official end of the last recession in March 1991, the nation embarked on nine straight years of solid job growth. But although this recession officially ended in November 2001, jobs are coming back only slowly, economists say, because companies are sending well-paying manufacturing—and now white-collar—jobs to countries with few, if any, protections for workers and the environment. And these jobs probably aren’t coming back anytime soon unless the Bush administration, Big Business and their congressional allies reform the trade and tax policies that encourage employers to send jobs offshore.

Since 2000, corporations have shipped more than 525,000 white-collar overseas, according to the AFL-CIO department of professional employees.  Some estimates say up to 14 million middle-class jobs could be exported out of America in the next 10 years.

Accountants, software engineers—even X-ray technicians—are losing their jobs as corporations look for low-wage workers in countries such as India and China.

At the same time, 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since the Bush took office, many of them because corporations have shipped them to countries such as China, which is creating a booming manufacturing industry on the backs of its poorly-paid workers.

Meanwhile, the jobs being created in the United States often are low-wage jobs that don’t offer health coverage or ensure retirement security. Nearly one-quarter of the nation’s workers labor in jobs that generally pay less than the $8.85 hourly wage the U.S. government says it takes to keep a family of four out of poverty. Sixty percent of such workers are women, and many are people of color.

ME......

THIS IS NOT DEM VERSUS REP. THIS HAS BEEN PLANNED AND IMPLEMENTED THROUGH BOTH DEM AND REP ADMINISTRATIONS.