So, call your reps and put the heat on them to audit the Fed. Don't patronize corporations that the gov subsidizes or it's lobbyists that have shoveled money to gov officials. Don't give to any church or religious group. But don't blame the free market for the fraud others commit. That's like saying free speech is the root cause of all hate.
I don't know why no one is stating the real reason they want card check where forming a union is concerned. They want card check because it's almost impossible to rig a vote if you've got solid, in your hand, proof of each & every voter's intent.
Since Obama got elected, and news concerning the Employee Free Choice Act began seriously circulating, I have gotten 3 scary letters mailed to my home from my employer trying to frighten me into rejecting the Act and/or Unionization of my workplace.
if we ddint have a system that is disighned to fail and make the richer people more rich on theyre fake money and theyre real assets we woudlnt have this probelm. maybe bring back the gold standard.
No, work hard and you won't necessarily succeed in the U.S. I worked for the wireless network for BlackBerry and for other corporations. Getting ahead was based on pandering to your boss. That involved acting unethically at times. There is far too much power for corporations in this country and you can thank the entire Republican Party, the courts, the corporate media and some Democrats.
nonono this is ridiculous Unions and the Govt go hand in hand this lady is ridiculous
A good workplace will always strive for good service and an attempt to keep the workers happy- the companies like Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel Company dont exist anymore people arnt paid pennies by the hour PLUS we have OSHA for worker safty
Unions don't want secret ballot elections because they are the ones that want to be able to harass the workers. Unions are parasites on the working class.
She makes no sense at the end of this... it's like she got distracted and started blabbering. She is wrong, the economy needs to lower worker costs or create global policy about imports. The difference is either a sped up exportation of all of our manufacturing with the EFCA or a slow and hopefully recoverable fall with a drastic difference between the upper and lower classes (this of course assuming that all of our daily living expenses drop to keep up with the falling wage).
We need to get out of the so called "free trade" agreements such as NAFTA and WTO which bring down our own standards forcing our workers to compete with brutalized child labor in the third world.
If workers had to rely on people like this in the 1930s, nothing would have changed. Liberals (such as the person being interviewed here) are about compromise, socialists are about action and right now we need socialism, not liberalism. We need action, we need defiance, we need mass mobilization, not compromise. Change does not happen unless people fight for it.
Re: this lady's comments at the very end, if an industry or company forces management and boards of directors to take drastic pay cuts, those individuals will simply leave. And how long can a company survive without good direction?
Well, obviously these companies arent going in a good direction if they are attempting to force their employees to take pay and benefit cuts. But a company will still need someone dedicated to running the business in a full time capacity. If everyone is scared off or not given a reason to take leadership positions, how long can a business last if there is no one setting the agenda for that concern?
Would you volunteer for a pay cut? The workers wouldn't, nobody would...
I would promote the end of the Internet in order to throttle the speed of wealth exodus, but the benefits from global KNOWLEDGE exchange supersede this.
Money needs to become more local/national. When capitalist can use the poorest conditions in the world to control the lives of everyone else, the benefits of globalization wane.
It needs to become illegal to move money outside a country.
Believe it or not, it is already illegal for regular citizens to move large sums of $.
Unions would be unnecessary in a Resource Based Economy, where currency no longer exists. Humanity's "micro-view" of todays global problems does nothing to address the true root of the problem. There is a solution, however , it will require a unionization of all people in all forms of labor. All workers must unite globally and send a message that the cabal that controls this planet cannot continue to enslave the entire population. What we need is a paradigm shift. Stop using patch fixes.
10:15..perhaps the answer is for workers around the world to be unionized and treated fairly.if chinas workers had labor provisions we might have to pay more at walmart, but the chinese would be able to have more also and afford to buy our cars, etc...
but this is probably wishful thinking...i will take it up with the tooth fairy
Here is what is not wishful thinking. We should all BUY AMERICAN, AND BUY LOCAL.
Sure it costs more. But it is the patriotic (and environmentally friendly) thing to do. Everything we buy should be made, or grown, as CLOSE TO HOME AS POSSIBLE. This should become every American's guiding principle of purchasing power.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Card check eliminates the secret ballot to unionize businesses.
Unions are AGAINST the secret ballot. Unreal.
That means unions are against the freedom of the individual worker. Unions working against the individual worker. No wonder union membership is declining.
It's probably unconstitutional, and that's why Obama is not going for it.
tinyurl(.)com/CardCheckSucks
And did you notice that when she explained Card Check, Gupta didn't even mention the secret ballot. She's a liar.
Wow, you totally spouted the line of the GOP, which completely ignores the issues that are addressed by card check, ie employers intimidating employees who want to unionize.
Brother, if you think Wal-Mart wouldn't crawl up the ass of each and every employee in a store that wanted to unionize I can't help you.
The idea that there wouldn't be intimidation and threats prior to a secret ballot election is simply naive.
In a bubble where everyone is ethical, a secret ballot would be ideal, but ain't no bubble bro. Do you think Wal Mart gives two shits about their low wage slaves?
If they could import chinese to work the stores here they would.
OK, unions aren't paragons of perfection, but they DO represent workers. You're daft and a liar if you want to claim that unions haven't helped workers in the USA
Do you think we'd have OSHA or MSHA without unions? Decent wages in manufacturing? Relatively fair labor laws?
C'mon dude, before unions, the worker was essentially a slave whose safety and health were not considered at all. Look at mining dude, I'm certified by MSHA.
Unions saved countless lives in that industry alone.
Please stop with the "daft or a liar" business. I've not called you names.
I'm all for the rights of workers to organize however they want. That's individual freedom. Workers should cooperate to get a better deal. Worker interests just as important as business interests. Heck, workers ARE businesses.
I'm against Card Check not against unions. Workers deserve the secret ballot and the right to organize. Both.
Please. Stop making up policy positions I've never held. It doesn't help your cause.
Your reference is past tense. The majority of unions today are as corrupt as the cabal that runs the global corporate governance. It is time, again, for a revolution. What I mean is that humanity must evolve into a new society where money no longer controls mankind. Greed, waste, apathy and materialism (promoted by the media) can be eliminated with a new global consciousness.
I like what you are saying melpuz. Its idealistic as hell. But it is a revolution that can start small, and each of us can do our part.
Just start buying local, as much as possible. Support local alternative currencies (many communities have them.) And never buy anything from Goldman Sachs, or any of their subsidiaries, (Yes, I know, that is hard to do. But with some research, it can be done.)
Tense. What you said is completely untrue, and YOU KNOW IT. Watch this video ALL THE WAY TO THE END. She explains that your BOGUS argument is a flat-out lie.
Corporations are AGAINST "card check."
But that is just because the corporations ARE JUST LOOKING OUT FOR OUR CIVIL RIGHTS!!
The corporations are SO NICE. They LOVE US!! They dont want BIG EVIL GOVERNMENT to take away our right to a secret ballot!!!
The "secret ballot" cunnard, is a cunnard. As is explained IN THIS VIDEO. And you, Tense, are an INTENTIONAL LIAR -- You refuse to admit that your cunnard is REFUTED INCONTROVERTABLY, IN THIS VIDEO.
Any worker who would vote AGAINST card check, or AGAINST EASIER UNIONIZATION -- is a fool who didnt pass American History.
But corporations dont intimidate workers who want to unionize? That is your assertion?
When you have licked the assholes of the corporate executives COMPLETELY CLEAN, let me know. I'll send you over to Goldman Sachs, and you can start licking the stock broker's asses.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I love this oxymoron logic: Employee Free Choice Act - an act promoted as giving employees free choice to unionize. Reality check: union control of the workplace; your job is not your own, and you get to pay the union for the privilege of working. Just another union snow job.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I'm all for freedom of association. I'm not for compulsory association. Employers should never have the right to endanger employees, and should never be able to seek legal protection or indemnification for creating hazardous working conditions.
Glad to hear that :). Children don't work for 12 hours per day because of ''compulsory'' association. Employers don't ''give'' anything, you need to fight for it. This is a class war babe ;)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
And where in the US are children compelled to work 12 hr days? So that's an empty assertion. And when was the last time you worked for free? So you do get something from your employer. And what 'class' must one belong to in this 'class war' that you claim exists? I tend to want to work for what I earn, not engage in some war to get what I don't have a right to take from another.
So you dont mind it if Goldman Sachs creates three Wall Street bubbles in a row, resulting in millions and millions of Americans losing their homes and retirement savings?
You dont care that all the manufacturing jobs have been outsourced, and that most jobs created in the last 8 years were minimum wage jobs?
AIG, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs STEAL BILLIONS FROM AMERICAN TAX PAYERS.
None of this bothers you?
If class warfare doesnt ruin YOUR LIFE, it doesnt exist?
Your problem is you think gov will protect you form the likes of Goldman Sachs and the bums on Wall Street. You think the free market and capitalism caused these problems. I can't help it if you believe these things, but don't expect me to buy into your delusions. None of this would have been possible without gov interference. And if you don't get this, that's your fault. Your class warfare is totally misguided. You should be angry with gov and it's bail outs, not with free market capitalism.
The ''free market capitalism'' isn't possible without massive protection. And security companies are made of workers. In government we can have some influence, without them it would resolve in revolution.
No, it's not free market capitalism that needs gov protection, it's corporatism that benefits from gov protection. You are meshing together concepts that have nothing to do with each other. What do you mean by 'security companies' and how are they made of workers? What is your concept of how companies are formed and what role do you think workers have to companies? It is precisely gov interference that creates tension between employers and workers. Do you have any idea how contracts work?
I know what ''free'' market capitalism is. Security companies that should prevent workers from taking over. Without unemployed benefits and minimum wage workers in companies are wage slaves. Exploitative nature of capitalism is what makes tension.
Contracts are papers invented by pricks like kings and queens.
I take it you don't have any concept of what free market capitalism is, since you've explained nothing and offered nothing but opinion. You certainly don't have a clue about contracts, since you've only expressed an opinion without offering any explanation. So, you can keep your opinions, I just don't have any use for them.
Every moron can copy/paste wiki definitions if is that what you want? Exclusiveness of ''the right'' economics can make any religious cult with their ''right'' theology ashamed. There is nothing invisible with capitalist order! No paper can make a fraud any better! And yes, this system is a fraud.
If copy and paste is all you can do, then go ahead and act like a moron. Exclusiveness . . .capitalist order? What the hell are you talking about?! And a contract is no more than a piece of paper? Like I said, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Do you even know what fraud is? It's like I'm talking to a blind guy who got his information from a deaf mute.
Yes, I 'no' (sic) what every word in my sentence is. Your ignorance is your problem, not mine. You were done long ago, and convincing you isn't even a worthy project for a two-year old. You and your socialist blood sucking ideas have left you with no clue as to how the world works. The only agenda you subscribe to is the one that justifies stealing from someone else what you can't earn by your own efforts. Pathetic.
Actually these problems arose with corporate interference in government. The banking institutions were able get a $850 billion blank check last year precisely because they have bought off of the of the republicans and democrats in congress.
bbburton: there's no free market. What we have is crony capitalism / corporatism which has allowed the likes of Goldman Sachs to slowly but surely replace our civil servants (with degrees in constitutional law) with corporate lawyers, corporate executives, and other corporate puppets whose mission it is to gnaw away at our Constitution & Bill of Rights so that they can finally seize control of the wealth & power they haven't already acquired from us.
Capitalism is not corporatism, and Goldman Sachs is a bank, hardly what I would call a icon of free market capitalism. I'm not a supporter of corporatism, but I do adhere to a free market system that makes capital investment the backbone of productivity and commerce. I will never jump on the socialist bandwagon as an alternative to the free market. Vilifying capitalism with arguments against corporatism is pointless. One has nothing to do with the other.
bbburton: One has NOTHING to do with the other? Corporate America is not comprised of and presided over by capitalists? Capitalists who own or are deeply invested in Corporate America have infiltrated the government (think characters like Dick Cheney), and while serving their terms have influenced legislation in favor of the corporations they are invested in. Banks & corporations OWN the money & markets; and:
Capitalistic corporatists + governmental power = fascist corporatism.
That's right, one has nothing to do with the other. Corporations are legal entities. That means that their existence is controlled by gov. They exist under many types of gov, as you pointed out for instance fascism, socialism, communism, etc., not just our form of gov. Capitalism has no such connection to gov. I'm not advocating for corporatism. The problem isn't capitalism, it's corporatism. And your continual lambasting of capitalism is just plain wrong.
LOL, why don't you say something relevant to the conversation, like child labor laws have been around for about a century. This is a conversation about exploited workers, not children. Pay some attention.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
If you are going to use insults to continue this conversation, you might want to reconsider. I didn't make the point about child labor laws, another poster did. My response was that there is nowhere in the US children are compelled to work 12 hour days. Now try to keep up.
You insult people and then cry when they return the favor. You make some feeble argument that children are no longer required to work long hours in the workplace, yet ignore that it was Unions that brought about child labor laws. You are not having a conversation, you are spreading corporate propaganda and misinformation. You have no facts, and ignore those that do. You are a typical hired stooge of the corporations or worse yet a corrupt employer.
Just another Canadian socialist. You haven't a clue about US labor laws, and your opinions don't count as facts. You've been in a diaper so long you need a union just to help you change the one you just crapped in. Keep pushing that group think, apparently you can't think for yourself.
lol, you are a corporate troll. You have no knowledge of your own countries labor history or you would have at least made some sort of realistic argument. So get as angry as you need to make yourself feel like a big person. It is ok. We understand your aggression. It was fun chatting with you. Have a great night.
FOA, you're a Canadian socialist. It's your ignorance that shines. Your responses speak volumes to your Canadian education. Your condescending remarks show your lack of knowledge and the ability to overcome your own shortcomings. Let me know when you get out of the crib and start to act like an adult.
When did you ever work in a unionized job where the Union ran the workplace? If you are going to make up fictional boogiemen, stick to socialized health-care kills old people or cats steal peoples breath during sleep.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The reason that there are no union run workplaces is that they would all fail. There is no restriction on workers getting together and starting a business owned and operated by the workers. The reason they don't is because they know that union ideology leads to business failure and unsustainable/ unprofitable workplaces.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Name a successful union run workplace.
GM and Chrysler are close in their emergence from bankruptcy as quasi fascist socialist organisations. Are you excited about their future prospects?
There is a reason most jobs are offered by for profit organisations and not collectives. Collectives just don't work in reality in that they are unable to sustain themselves through productivity or provide scalability for job growth.
So why are the costs higher for the unionised car companies and why is it they that went belly up? The parasites sucked their hosts dry. I say parasites because they attached themselves to the host rather than respect the voluntary nature of contractual relationships.
Anyway now that GM and Chrysler have been reinvented as union run we will see how they compete. Though retired workers are turning on the new
I notice you did not offer an example of a successful union run company/workplace.
The costs are higher for those unionized companies because they have been around for 100 years and have 3 times as many employees who are retired and because medical insurance has doubled in the past few years. But you already knew that if you actually paid attention to the news. Unions, as you very well know, are not company managers, and do not run companies. All your arguments are just corporate propaganda.
Like I said the longer unions are around the more certain they are to make the businesses they forcibly involve themselves in unsustainable. In this case drowning their employers in medical and retirement costs as well as inflated labour costs. How could they have expected these businesses to stay alive when they were being bled from every orifice.
So you are blaming the unions for keeping the car companies in business for over a hundred years???? Thank-you for coming around. If is good to be on the same side.
Like a cancer unions kill the host slowly but reliably suck the life out of the host over a period of time. The combination of weaker or smarter unions or the stronger companies can withstand the onslaught for a longer period of time but in the end they all succumb unless the cancer can be cut out in good time.
The real question is can the workers be replaced and the business thrive. If we look at GM, the union has agreed to exclude new employs from the benefits they have secured in order to eke out a few more breaths from the host they knew they were killing. Smart, predatory perhaps, and hardly idealistic, but also aligned to reality. And so much about being for the workers...at least we know they are not for all workers.
stratvic: it is actually the corporate business model which has made most businesses unsustainable because even if a company is no longer as profitable as it used to be the corporate business model demands (via contract) that CEO & executive salaries (plus obscene bonuses) compound over time and dividends to preferred stock holders be paid out FIRST before meeting the company's cost of doing business and obligations to its employees.
Dividends and bonuses are paid out last. Even preferred stock holders stand in line behind suppliers, salaries, banks, and unbelievably taxes.
If the private ownership of business model is so unsuccessful why are our most successful organisations that support our SOL privately held and our least successful publicly held. The problem with socialist and communist ideology is that at some point you have to compare the theory to reality and then work out why the theory falls down in that reality.
I see. So the guys who go to work EVERY DAY, and actually BUILD THE CARS that others sell, and advertise, and design and lobby for -- the WORKERS, the ACTUAL BUILDERS, are the parasites.
The conservative way:
State THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE TRUTH with enough confidence, and fearful ignorant hicks will believe you.
I'm so glad there arent enough fearful ignorant hicks around any more to win an election. Ask Sarah Palin. She will find that out real soon.
Anyone who attaches themselves to a host who is no longer welcome and insists on taking from that host what is no longer voluntarily offered or more than they otherwise would absent of force or coercion is a parasite.
Most workers do not fit into this category. They work in a symbiotic relationship that is mutually beneficial and voluntary for both parties.
Unions turn workers into parasites and pollute an otherwise virtuous relationship.
Lets see the car companies survive without the men and women who build the cars. So who is the host, and who is the parasite? The ESSENTIAL LIFE BLOOD OF THE COMPANY -- the worker? Is HE the parasite?
Or the CEOs, and financial traders, and Wall Street hedge fund managers who MAKE MONEY off of other people's losses. Who is the parasite again?
Workers are indeed essential. They just need not secure their position by force.
Companies that rely on political power/force to compete and survive are also parasitic, though we usually call them and their political friends fascists.
In fact, if we look at history, EVERY ADVANTAGE THAT THE WORKING MAN AND WOMAN HAS EVER GOTTEN OUT OF THE SUPER-WEALTHY SCUM, the greedy mother-fuckers who run America, WAS GOTTEN BY FORCE (if by "force" you mean striking, sit-ins, protests and boycotts.)
Without ORGANIZED ACTION, children would still work in factories with doors locked, to die in fires, lose hands, Chinese railroad workers died in explosions by the thousands every year, miners by the thousands. Thank a striker EVERY DAY!!!
The advantage the every day worker gets from selling his labor and skills is a wage. A sale they make for a profit given that they value their time less than their wage and that they prefer the quality of the work an/or the wage better than other alternatives.
You can thank a union and a striker for making the relationship between employer and employee adversarial through the imposition of force into an otherwise voluntary and mutually beneficial relationship.
Yeah, because before unions, the super-wealthy voluntarily worked people to death, under horrible conditions, for peanuts. Like they do in third world countries today, that are not unionized.
If the Reagan Republicans have there way, and bust all American unions, they'll be doing it again.
The only conditions where people work for peanuts is where they value their own time in peanuts. Where there is absence of slavery people choose whether to offer their time for the wage offered.
Without unions, subsidies, and immigration restrictions the US would still be a manufacturing superpower instead of the ponsi financial services economy we are running now.
Yeah. That is because the parasites (financial traders,) cant make as much money as they used to in manufacturing, because they have to pay workers a decent wage, and health care, in America. (Except for illegals, who are still exploited like third world workers.)
I think all the WalMart employees should refuse to work for peanuts, and value their time more highly. (That is called a strike.) And as soon as WalMart is unionized, and the workers organize, IT WILL HAPPEN.
Why do you thing the Walmart workers do not find for themselves better paying with the thousands of alternative potential employers competing for good workers?
Because WalMart, by purchasing ALL ITS PRODUCTS FROM CHINA AND INDONESIA, where workers arent even paid in peanuts, they are paid in dogshit, UNDERCUTS THE PRICE of all the "thousands of alternative potential employers." SO THEY GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
Then there is ONLY WALMART!!
Want a job? Take it or leave it.
The key word in your argument is "potential."
Yes, do away with HUGE MULTI-NATIONAL MONOPOLIES, and these "POTENTIAL" employers will COME BACK. They used to be here, before WalMart.
Well I'm from Scotland my friend so can't do too much about Obama. But your point is equally valid over here. A labour government in power but on most things they are so far to the right it's hard to recognise them as labour
The right at least used to be less government. You get to make your own choices. Now both sides are statists. There is hardly anything left or right about either anymore.
I agree that there isn't any left or right any more which I suppose is what bothers me about labour. I'm not bothered about big government in the right areas because if we were in a real democracy then the government would be us ( instead of a single vote every few years). But I do agree that some of the things labour's been up to, i.d cards, detention, etc. Just gets me mad.
Jimmy Carter was COURAGEOUSLY pushing us toward oil independence, energy conservation and innovation, and RENEWABLE ENERGY.
It was a bold political position to take.
IF WE HAD LISTENED TO CARTER. We would all be driving electric cars, have public transit in every city, and between cities, have community wind/solar power plants, and NEVER BUY A BARREL OF OIL FROM SAUDI ARABIA.
Exactly. The last Democrat we had, Clinton, was NO DIFFERENT than Republicans Eisenhauer, Nixon, Ford, and Daddy Bush. (Reagan and Baby Bush were psychotic corporate ass-licking freaks. So there is always that chance with Republicans.)
But the country has been pushed SO FAR TO THE RIGHT -- (Corporations own Congress, and television and radio,) THAT PEOPLE DONT EVEN REMEMBER WHAT LEFT-WING GOVERNMENT IS LIKE.
If you arent old enough to remember Carter. You HAVE NEVER SEEN IT IN AMERICA.
Don't bother arguing with darktoadthesticky. This guys a Canadian socialist with the knowledge and skills of a two year old throwing a tantrum. You can't explain anything to him, and he only understands what the union suckers feed him. He can't think for himself, and I'm sure his education is as good as Canada can provide - second rate at best.
So, call your reps and put the heat on them to audit the Fed. Don't patronize corporations that the gov subsidizes or it's lobbyists that have shoveled money to gov officials. Don't give to any church or religious group. But don't blame the free market for the fraud others commit. That's like saying free speech is the root cause of all hate.
bbburton 2 years ago
I don't know why no one is stating the real reason they want card check where forming a union is concerned. They want card check because it's almost impossible to rig a vote if you've got solid, in your hand, proof of each & every voter's intent.
Since Obama got elected, and news concerning the Employee Free Choice Act began seriously circulating, I have gotten 3 scary letters mailed to my home from my employer trying to frighten me into rejecting the Act and/or Unionization of my workplace.
FriedDaisy 2 years ago 2
if we ddint have a system that is disighned to fail and make the richer people more rich on theyre fake money and theyre real assets we woudlnt have this probelm. maybe bring back the gold standard.
gjljhjb1 2 years ago
No, work hard and you won't necessarily succeed in the U.S. I worked for the wireless network for BlackBerry and for other corporations. Getting ahead was based on pandering to your boss. That involved acting unethically at times. There is far too much power for corporations in this country and you can thank the entire Republican Party, the courts, the corporate media and some Democrats.
stanjz 2 years ago
Work hard and you won't need a union.
Paetaor 2 years ago
nonono this is ridiculous Unions and the Govt go hand in hand this lady is ridiculous
A good workplace will always strive for good service and an attempt to keep the workers happy- the companies like Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel Company dont exist anymore people arnt paid pennies by the hour PLUS we have OSHA for worker safty
starsjoe 2 years ago
Unions don't want secret ballot elections because they are the ones that want to be able to harass the workers. Unions are parasites on the working class.
stratvic 2 years ago
FAIR TRADE.
Unions.
Labor standards.
THE NWO, NAFTA, WTO, IMF and so on are totally about greed and controlling societies - PERIOD.
These crooks need to be in jail or put to death.
cosmicwoman 2 years ago 4
She makes no sense at the end of this... it's like she got distracted and started blabbering. She is wrong, the economy needs to lower worker costs or create global policy about imports. The difference is either a sped up exportation of all of our manufacturing with the EFCA or a slow and hopefully recoverable fall with a drastic difference between the upper and lower classes (this of course assuming that all of our daily living expenses drop to keep up with the falling wage).
ekaw83 2 years ago
We need to get out of the so called "free trade" agreements such as NAFTA and WTO which bring down our own standards forcing our workers to compete with brutalized child labor in the third world.
ArcticSlicer 2 years ago 2
If workers had to rely on people like this in the 1930s, nothing would have changed. Liberals (such as the person being interviewed here) are about compromise, socialists are about action and right now we need socialism, not liberalism. We need action, we need defiance, we need mass mobilization, not compromise. Change does not happen unless people fight for it.
blackiron60 2 years ago 2
don't confuse liberals with centrists. Centrists are the compromisers not liberals.
captcrais101 2 years ago
I hate people who speak in questions. People who raise their voice at the end of a statement so as to make a statement sound like a question.
ls1z28chris 2 years ago
hmmm...
Re: this lady's comments at the very end, if an industry or company forces management and boards of directors to take drastic pay cuts, those individuals will simply leave. And how long can a company survive without good direction?
ArjeeBhajee 2 years ago
What good direction?
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago 4
Well, obviously these companies arent going in a good direction if they are attempting to force their employees to take pay and benefit cuts. But a company will still need someone dedicated to running the business in a full time capacity. If everyone is scared off or not given a reason to take leadership positions, how long can a business last if there is no one setting the agenda for that concern?
Would you volunteer for a pay cut? The workers wouldn't, nobody would...
ArjeeBhajee 2 years ago
Now that I reread my original comment, it should be: "And how long can a company survive without 'a' direction."
ArjeeBhajee 2 years ago
Money is too fungible.
I would promote the end of the Internet in order to throttle the speed of wealth exodus, but the benefits from global KNOWLEDGE exchange supersede this.
Money needs to become more local/national. When capitalist can use the poorest conditions in the world to control the lives of everyone else, the benefits of globalization wane.
It needs to become illegal to move money outside a country.
Believe it or not, it is already illegal for regular citizens to move large sums of $.
morelshaman 2 years ago
Unions would be unnecessary in a Resource Based Economy, where currency no longer exists. Humanity's "micro-view" of todays global problems does nothing to address the true root of the problem. There is a solution, however , it will require a unionization of all people in all forms of labor. All workers must unite globally and send a message that the cabal that controls this planet cannot continue to enslave the entire population. What we need is a paradigm shift. Stop using patch fixes.
melpuzon 2 years ago
10:15..perhaps the answer is for workers around the world to be unionized and treated fairly.if chinas workers had labor provisions we might have to pay more at walmart, but the chinese would be able to have more also and afford to buy our cars, etc...
but this is probably wishful thinking...i will take it up with the tooth fairy
practicalmagic9 2 years ago
Here is what is not wishful thinking. We should all BUY AMERICAN, AND BUY LOCAL.
Sure it costs more. But it is the patriotic (and environmentally friendly) thing to do. Everything we buy should be made, or grown, as CLOSE TO HOME AS POSSIBLE. This should become every American's guiding principle of purchasing power.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
individual indepence (or as close as possible) is what its going to take.
each individual stop looking to government, ceo's, corporations, unions etc.. they not only dont care, they're also economically crippled themselves
see when times are good, everything is ok, now that money is tight, this is the sort of crap that goes on
you, me, everyone: get your costs down and boost your own profits and budget
cut energy or produce your own alternative
reduce spending
get rid of debt
cool70200 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Card check eliminates the secret ballot to unionize businesses.
Unions are AGAINST the secret ballot. Unreal.
That means unions are against the freedom of the individual worker. Unions working against the individual worker. No wonder union membership is declining.
It's probably unconstitutional, and that's why Obama is not going for it.
tinyurl(.)com/CardCheckSucks
And did you notice that when she explained Card Check, Gupta didn't even mention the secret ballot. She's a liar.
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
Wow, you totally spouted the line of the GOP, which completely ignores the issues that are addressed by card check, ie employers intimidating employees who want to unionize.
Thanks for the one sided view.
Bunnicula71 2 years ago 5
Bunnicula, if you think one side is wrong and the other right, you're going ot be "one sided."
But do show us your fairness. What's the best argument against Card Check?
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
Brother, if you think Wal-Mart wouldn't crawl up the ass of each and every employee in a store that wanted to unionize I can't help you.
The idea that there wouldn't be intimidation and threats prior to a secret ballot election is simply naive.
In a bubble where everyone is ethical, a secret ballot would be ideal, but ain't no bubble bro. Do you think Wal Mart gives two shits about their low wage slaves?
If they could import chinese to work the stores here they would.
Bunnicula71 2 years ago 4
Unions intimidate workers to unionize. So why is it better to allow MORE intimidation?
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
OK, unions aren't paragons of perfection, but they DO represent workers. You're daft and a liar if you want to claim that unions haven't helped workers in the USA
Do you think we'd have OSHA or MSHA without unions? Decent wages in manufacturing? Relatively fair labor laws?
C'mon dude, before unions, the worker was essentially a slave whose safety and health were not considered at all. Look at mining dude, I'm certified by MSHA.
Unions saved countless lives in that industry alone.
Bunnicula71 2 years ago 4
Please stop with the "daft or a liar" business. I've not called you names.
I'm all for the rights of workers to organize however they want. That's individual freedom. Workers should cooperate to get a better deal. Worker interests just as important as business interests. Heck, workers ARE businesses.
I'm against Card Check not against unions. Workers deserve the secret ballot and the right to organize. Both.
Please. Stop making up policy positions I've never held. It doesn't help your cause.
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
Your reference is past tense. The majority of unions today are as corrupt as the cabal that runs the global corporate governance. It is time, again, for a revolution. What I mean is that humanity must evolve into a new society where money no longer controls mankind. Greed, waste, apathy and materialism (promoted by the media) can be eliminated with a new global consciousness.
melpuzon 2 years ago
I like what you are saying melpuz. Its idealistic as hell. But it is a revolution that can start small, and each of us can do our part.
Just start buying local, as much as possible. Support local alternative currencies (many communities have them.) And never buy anything from Goldman Sachs, or any of their subsidiaries, (Yes, I know, that is hard to do. But with some research, it can be done.)
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Tense. What you said is completely untrue, and YOU KNOW IT. Watch this video ALL THE WAY TO THE END. She explains that your BOGUS argument is a flat-out lie.
Corporations are AGAINST "card check."
But that is just because the corporations ARE JUST LOOKING OUT FOR OUR CIVIL RIGHTS!!
The corporations are SO NICE. They LOVE US!! They dont want BIG EVIL GOVERNMENT to take away our right to a secret ballot!!!
What a crock of shit.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Taoofmichael sets up a straw man.
It is both true that (a) corporations are not looking out for us, and (b) UNIONS are not looking out for us. The only ones looking out for us - is us!
Workers that don't want the end the secret ballot. And for good reason. It's probably unconstitutional.
Come on, liberals. The secret ballot was one of the sacrosanct elements of modern progressivism. Now you want to throw it away?
Makes no sense. Unless you want reward special interests. That's bad.
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
The "secret ballot" cunnard, is a cunnard. As is explained IN THIS VIDEO. And you, Tense, are an INTENTIONAL LIAR -- You refuse to admit that your cunnard is REFUTED INCONTROVERTABLY, IN THIS VIDEO.
Any worker who would vote AGAINST card check, or AGAINST EASIER UNIONIZATION -- is a fool who didnt pass American History.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Taoofmichael, you can call names at people who disagree with you, but it only hurts your cause.
This is exactly how unions intimidate workers: name calling, abuse of language, yelling (with all caps).
I'm for less intimidation for everyone. Increasing the ability of unions to intimidate workers doesn't help workers.
You can try to intimidate me all you want, taoofmichael. This worker isn't backing down.
Free workers! Free markets! Free people! Secret Ballot!
TenseAlcyoneus 2 years ago
But corporations dont intimidate workers who want to unionize? That is your assertion?
When you have licked the assholes of the corporate executives COMPLETELY CLEAN, let me know. I'll send you over to Goldman Sachs, and you can start licking the stock broker's asses.
taoofmichael 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I love this oxymoron logic: Employee Free Choice Act - an act promoted as giving employees free choice to unionize. Reality check: union control of the workplace; your job is not your own, and you get to pay the union for the privilege of working. Just another union snow job.
bbburton 2 years ago
So this have nothing to do with free association?
Reality check: this is called capillary fascism.
Unionized workers have better working conditions - fact! And this scare the shit out of bosses.
organdva 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm all for freedom of association. I'm not for compulsory association. Employers should never have the right to endanger employees, and should never be able to seek legal protection or indemnification for creating hazardous working conditions.
bbburton 2 years ago
Glad to hear that :). Children don't work for 12 hours per day because of ''compulsory'' association. Employers don't ''give'' anything, you need to fight for it. This is a class war babe ;)
organdva 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And where in the US are children compelled to work 12 hr days? So that's an empty assertion. And when was the last time you worked for free? So you do get something from your employer. And what 'class' must one belong to in this 'class war' that you claim exists? I tend to want to work for what I earn, not engage in some war to get what I don't have a right to take from another.
bbburton 2 years ago
So you dont mind it if Goldman Sachs creates three Wall Street bubbles in a row, resulting in millions and millions of Americans losing their homes and retirement savings?
You dont care that all the manufacturing jobs have been outsourced, and that most jobs created in the last 8 years were minimum wage jobs?
AIG, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs STEAL BILLIONS FROM AMERICAN TAX PAYERS.
None of this bothers you?
If class warfare doesnt ruin YOUR LIFE, it doesnt exist?
taoofmichael 2 years ago 5
Your problem is you think gov will protect you form the likes of Goldman Sachs and the bums on Wall Street. You think the free market and capitalism caused these problems. I can't help it if you believe these things, but don't expect me to buy into your delusions. None of this would have been possible without gov interference. And if you don't get this, that's your fault. Your class warfare is totally misguided. You should be angry with gov and it's bail outs, not with free market capitalism.
bbburton 2 years ago
The ''free market capitalism'' isn't possible without massive protection. And security companies are made of workers. In government we can have some influence, without them it would resolve in revolution.
organdva 2 years ago
No, it's not free market capitalism that needs gov protection, it's corporatism that benefits from gov protection. You are meshing together concepts that have nothing to do with each other. What do you mean by 'security companies' and how are they made of workers? What is your concept of how companies are formed and what role do you think workers have to companies? It is precisely gov interference that creates tension between employers and workers. Do you have any idea how contracts work?
bbburton 2 years ago
I know what ''free'' market capitalism is. Security companies that should prevent workers from taking over. Without unemployed benefits and minimum wage workers in companies are wage slaves. Exploitative nature of capitalism is what makes tension.
Contracts are papers invented by pricks like kings and queens.
organdva 2 years ago
I understand what you mean I work for a security company myself and we have no insurance or anything else it kind of sucks.
johnied8509 2 years ago 3
I take it you don't have any concept of what free market capitalism is, since you've explained nothing and offered nothing but opinion. You certainly don't have a clue about contracts, since you've only expressed an opinion without offering any explanation. So, you can keep your opinions, I just don't have any use for them.
bbburton 2 years ago
Every moron can copy/paste wiki definitions if is that what you want? Exclusiveness of ''the right'' economics can make any religious cult with their ''right'' theology ashamed. There is nothing invisible with capitalist order! No paper can make a fraud any better! And yes, this system is a fraud.
organdva 2 years ago
If copy and paste is all you can do, then go ahead and act like a moron. Exclusiveness . . .capitalist order? What the hell are you talking about?! And a contract is no more than a piece of paper? Like I said, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Do you even know what fraud is? It's like I'm talking to a blind guy who got his information from a deaf mute.
bbburton 2 years ago
Do you no what every fucking word in your sentence is? Define every one of them now ! lol
Invisible hand don't scratch my back. I'm done with you capitalist chillider. It is not profitable trying to convince me, save calories :P
organdva 2 years ago
Yes, I 'no' (sic) what every word in my sentence is. Your ignorance is your problem, not mine. You were done long ago, and convincing you isn't even a worthy project for a two-year old. You and your socialist blood sucking ideas have left you with no clue as to how the world works. The only agenda you subscribe to is the one that justifies stealing from someone else what you can't earn by your own efforts. Pathetic.
bbburton 2 years ago
Actually these problems arose with corporate interference in government. The banking institutions were able get a $850 billion blank check last year precisely because they have bought off of the of the republicans and democrats in congress.
ArcticSlicer 2 years ago 2
It takes two to dance, and gov has been a willing partner.
bbburton 2 years ago
bbburton: there's no free market. What we have is crony capitalism / corporatism which has allowed the likes of Goldman Sachs to slowly but surely replace our civil servants (with degrees in constitutional law) with corporate lawyers, corporate executives, and other corporate puppets whose mission it is to gnaw away at our Constitution & Bill of Rights so that they can finally seize control of the wealth & power they haven't already acquired from us.
FriedDaisy 2 years ago
Capitalism is not corporatism, and Goldman Sachs is a bank, hardly what I would call a icon of free market capitalism. I'm not a supporter of corporatism, but I do adhere to a free market system that makes capital investment the backbone of productivity and commerce. I will never jump on the socialist bandwagon as an alternative to the free market. Vilifying capitalism with arguments against corporatism is pointless. One has nothing to do with the other.
bbburton 2 years ago
bbburton: One has NOTHING to do with the other? Corporate America is not comprised of and presided over by capitalists? Capitalists who own or are deeply invested in Corporate America have infiltrated the government (think characters like Dick Cheney), and while serving their terms have influenced legislation in favor of the corporations they are invested in. Banks & corporations OWN the money & markets; and:
Capitalistic corporatists + governmental power = fascist corporatism.
FriedDaisy 2 years ago 3
That's right, one has nothing to do with the other. Corporations are legal entities. That means that their existence is controlled by gov. They exist under many types of gov, as you pointed out for instance fascism, socialism, communism, etc., not just our form of gov. Capitalism has no such connection to gov. I'm not advocating for corporatism. The problem isn't capitalism, it's corporatism. And your continual lambasting of capitalism is just plain wrong.
bbburton 2 years ago
LOL, why do you think there are child labor laws? Learn some history.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
LOL, why don't you say something relevant to the conversation, like child labor laws have been around for about a century. This is a conversation about exploited workers, not children. Pay some attention.
bbburton 2 years ago
bbburton "And where in the US are children compelled to work 12 hr days? ..."
If your own points are too complicated for you too follow, maybe it is time for your nap.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If you are going to use insults to continue this conversation, you might want to reconsider. I didn't make the point about child labor laws, another poster did. My response was that there is nowhere in the US children are compelled to work 12 hour days. Now try to keep up.
bbburton 2 years ago
bbburton "Pay some attention. "
You insult people and then cry when they return the favor. You make some feeble argument that children are no longer required to work long hours in the workplace, yet ignore that it was Unions that brought about child labor laws. You are not having a conversation, you are spreading corporate propaganda and misinformation. You have no facts, and ignore those that do. You are a typical hired stooge of the corporations or worse yet a corrupt employer.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
Just another Canadian socialist. You haven't a clue about US labor laws, and your opinions don't count as facts. You've been in a diaper so long you need a union just to help you change the one you just crapped in. Keep pushing that group think, apparently you can't think for yourself.
bbburton 2 years ago
lol, you are a corporate troll. You have no knowledge of your own countries labor history or you would have at least made some sort of realistic argument. So get as angry as you need to make yourself feel like a big person. It is ok. We understand your aggression. It was fun chatting with you. Have a great night.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
FOA, you're a Canadian socialist. It's your ignorance that shines. Your responses speak volumes to your Canadian education. Your condescending remarks show your lack of knowledge and the ability to overcome your own shortcomings. Let me know when you get out of the crib and start to act like an adult.
bbburton 2 years ago
So your for Unions then?
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
how a bout the Clean Air act. polluters heaven
the healthy forest act want so great either.
1mealperday 2 years ago
When did you ever work in a unionized job where the Union ran the workplace? If you are going to make up fictional boogiemen, stick to socialized health-care kills old people or cats steal peoples breath during sleep.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The reason that there are no union run workplaces is that they would all fail. There is no restriction on workers getting together and starting a business owned and operated by the workers. The reason they don't is because they know that union ideology leads to business failure and unsustainable/ unprofitable workplaces.
stratvic 2 years ago
lol, OK, What ever you say. No need for any facts with you. Just corporate propaganda and fear mongering. lol.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Name a successful union run workplace.
GM and Chrysler are close in their emergence from bankruptcy as quasi fascist socialist organisations. Are you excited about their future prospects?
There is a reason most jobs are offered by for profit organisations and not collectives. Collectives just don't work in reality in that they are unable to sustain themselves through productivity or provide scalability for job growth.
stratvic 2 years ago
GM and Chryslers failures are NOT the fault of Unions. They are the fault of the excutives.
captcrais101 2 years ago 2
So why are the costs higher for the unionised car companies and why is it they that went belly up? The parasites sucked their hosts dry. I say parasites because they attached themselves to the host rather than respect the voluntary nature of contractual relationships.
Anyway now that GM and Chrysler have been reinvented as union run we will see how they compete. Though retired workers are turning on the new
I notice you did not offer an example of a successful union run company/workplace.
stratvic 2 years ago
The costs are higher for those unionized companies because they have been around for 100 years and have 3 times as many employees who are retired and because medical insurance has doubled in the past few years. But you already knew that if you actually paid attention to the news. Unions, as you very well know, are not company managers, and do not run companies. All your arguments are just corporate propaganda.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
Like I said the longer unions are around the more certain they are to make the businesses they forcibly involve themselves in unsustainable. In this case drowning their employers in medical and retirement costs as well as inflated labour costs. How could they have expected these businesses to stay alive when they were being bled from every orifice.
stratvic 2 years ago
So you are blaming the unions for keeping the car companies in business for over a hundred years???? Thank-you for coming around. If is good to be on the same side.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago
Like a cancer unions kill the host slowly but reliably suck the life out of the host over a period of time. The combination of weaker or smarter unions or the stronger companies can withstand the onslaught for a longer period of time but in the end they all succumb unless the cancer can be cut out in good time.
stratvic 2 years ago
Here is another way to tell the parasite from the host. If the parasite is cut off, will the host die? Or thrive?
But the workers off, the company dies.
Cut off the financial gamblers, and the company thrives.
So, again, who is the parasite?
taoofmichael 2 years ago
The real question is can the workers be replaced and the business thrive. If we look at GM, the union has agreed to exclude new employs from the benefits they have secured in order to eke out a few more breaths from the host they knew they were killing. Smart, predatory perhaps, and hardly idealistic, but also aligned to reality. And so much about being for the workers...at least we know they are not for all workers.
stratvic 2 years ago
stratvic: it is actually the corporate business model which has made most businesses unsustainable because even if a company is no longer as profitable as it used to be the corporate business model demands (via contract) that CEO & executive salaries (plus obscene bonuses) compound over time and dividends to preferred stock holders be paid out FIRST before meeting the company's cost of doing business and obligations to its employees.
FriedDaisy 2 years ago 2
Dividends and bonuses are paid out last. Even preferred stock holders stand in line behind suppliers, salaries, banks, and unbelievably taxes.
If the private ownership of business model is so unsuccessful why are our most successful organisations that support our SOL privately held and our least successful publicly held. The problem with socialist and communist ideology is that at some point you have to compare the theory to reality and then work out why the theory falls down in that reality.
stratvic 2 years ago
I see. So the guys who go to work EVERY DAY, and actually BUILD THE CARS that others sell, and advertise, and design and lobby for -- the WORKERS, the ACTUAL BUILDERS, are the parasites.
The conservative way:
State THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE TRUTH with enough confidence, and fearful ignorant hicks will believe you.
I'm so glad there arent enough fearful ignorant hicks around any more to win an election. Ask Sarah Palin. She will find that out real soon.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Anyone who attaches themselves to a host who is no longer welcome and insists on taking from that host what is no longer voluntarily offered or more than they otherwise would absent of force or coercion is a parasite.
Most workers do not fit into this category. They work in a symbiotic relationship that is mutually beneficial and voluntary for both parties.
Unions turn workers into parasites and pollute an otherwise virtuous relationship.
stratvic 2 years ago
Lets see the car companies survive without the men and women who build the cars. So who is the host, and who is the parasite? The ESSENTIAL LIFE BLOOD OF THE COMPANY -- the worker? Is HE the parasite?
Or the CEOs, and financial traders, and Wall Street hedge fund managers who MAKE MONEY off of other people's losses. Who is the parasite again?
Get your head out of Goldman Sach's ass.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Workers are indeed essential. They just need not secure their position by force.
Companies that rely on political power/force to compete and survive are also parasitic, though we usually call them and their political friends fascists.
stratvic 2 years ago 2
In fact, if we look at history, EVERY ADVANTAGE THAT THE WORKING MAN AND WOMAN HAS EVER GOTTEN OUT OF THE SUPER-WEALTHY SCUM, the greedy mother-fuckers who run America, WAS GOTTEN BY FORCE (if by "force" you mean striking, sit-ins, protests and boycotts.)
Without ORGANIZED ACTION, children would still work in factories with doors locked, to die in fires, lose hands, Chinese railroad workers died in explosions by the thousands every year, miners by the thousands. Thank a striker EVERY DAY!!!
taoofmichael 2 years ago
I think it would be safe to add thank Ralph Nader if you've survived a car crash. I have and I do.
Capitalocracy 2 years ago
The advantage the every day worker gets from selling his labor and skills is a wage. A sale they make for a profit given that they value their time less than their wage and that they prefer the quality of the work an/or the wage better than other alternatives.
You can thank a union and a striker for making the relationship between employer and employee adversarial through the imposition of force into an otherwise voluntary and mutually beneficial relationship.
stratvic 2 years ago
Yeah, because before unions, the super-wealthy voluntarily worked people to death, under horrible conditions, for peanuts. Like they do in third world countries today, that are not unionized.
If the Reagan Republicans have there way, and bust all American unions, they'll be doing it again.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
The only conditions where people work for peanuts is where they value their own time in peanuts. Where there is absence of slavery people choose whether to offer their time for the wage offered.
Without unions, subsidies, and immigration restrictions the US would still be a manufacturing superpower instead of the ponsi financial services economy we are running now.
stratvic 2 years ago
Yeah. That is because the parasites (financial traders,) cant make as much money as they used to in manufacturing, because they have to pay workers a decent wage, and health care, in America. (Except for illegals, who are still exploited like third world workers.)
I think all the WalMart employees should refuse to work for peanuts, and value their time more highly. (That is called a strike.) And as soon as WalMart is unionized, and the workers organize, IT WILL HAPPEN.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Why do you thing the Walmart workers do not find for themselves better paying with the thousands of alternative potential employers competing for good workers?
stratvic 2 years ago
Because WalMart, by purchasing ALL ITS PRODUCTS FROM CHINA AND INDONESIA, where workers arent even paid in peanuts, they are paid in dogshit, UNDERCUTS THE PRICE of all the "thousands of alternative potential employers." SO THEY GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
Then there is ONLY WALMART!!
Want a job? Take it or leave it.
The key word in your argument is "potential."
Yes, do away with HUGE MULTI-NATIONAL MONOPOLIES, and these "POTENTIAL" employers will COME BACK. They used to be here, before WalMart.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
we are slaves to the system
gjljhjb1 2 years ago
We are slaves to nature.
stratvic 2 years ago
Alot of truth in what you say my friend. Thanks
alwayswilling1232000 2 years ago
Right on brother. Lets PUSH OBAMA TO THE LEFT!!
The new Two Part System: Democrats (centrist) and Greens (Progressive)
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Well I'm from Scotland my friend so can't do too much about Obama. But your point is equally valid over here. A labour government in power but on most things they are so far to the right it's hard to recognise them as labour
alwayswilling1232000 2 years ago
The right at least used to be less government. You get to make your own choices. Now both sides are statists. There is hardly anything left or right about either anymore.
sirellyn 2 years ago
I agree that there isn't any left or right any more which I suppose is what bothers me about labour. I'm not bothered about big government in the right areas because if we were in a real democracy then the government would be us ( instead of a single vote every few years). But I do agree that some of the things labour's been up to, i.d cards, detention, etc. Just gets me mad.
alwayswilling1232000 2 years ago
Jimmy Carter was COURAGEOUSLY pushing us toward oil independence, energy conservation and innovation, and RENEWABLE ENERGY.
It was a bold political position to take.
IF WE HAD LISTENED TO CARTER. We would all be driving electric cars, have public transit in every city, and between cities, have community wind/solar power plants, and NEVER BUY A BARREL OF OIL FROM SAUDI ARABIA.
But we got Reagan instead.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Exactly. The last Democrat we had, Clinton, was NO DIFFERENT than Republicans Eisenhauer, Nixon, Ford, and Daddy Bush. (Reagan and Baby Bush were psychotic corporate ass-licking freaks. So there is always that chance with Republicans.)
But the country has been pushed SO FAR TO THE RIGHT -- (Corporations own Congress, and television and radio,) THAT PEOPLE DONT EVEN REMEMBER WHAT LEFT-WING GOVERNMENT IS LIKE.
If you arent old enough to remember Carter. You HAVE NEVER SEEN IT IN AMERICA.
taoofmichael 2 years ago
Don't bother arguing with darktoadthesticky. This guys a Canadian socialist with the knowledge and skills of a two year old throwing a tantrum. You can't explain anything to him, and he only understands what the union suckers feed him. He can't think for himself, and I'm sure his education is as good as Canada can provide - second rate at best.
bbburton 2 years ago
Hello!
Pirate!...
Ooops I meant Politician!
shampoovta 2 years ago 2
Obama never planned to pass the employee free choice act. As soon as he was elected he started to distance himself from the "Promise" . He lied.
darktoadthesticky 2 years ago 8
all he does is lie he also lied about being a member of the C.F.R. or knowing anything about the N.A.U.
johnied8509 2 years ago