Will unemployment benefits be extended?

[HenryReardon]

Historically, that's not just bullshit, it's rancid, diseased bullshit. Unions are what gave us a strong middle class, and that's what gave us such unprecedented prosperity.

Sure. Unions are so great they've driven industry after industry out of the country, leaving the destruction of middle-class America in their wake.

 

[darden]

So what helium were all those people in the 50's and 60's smoking that made them just "imagine" that they had homes and decent pay and good living on retail store manager and other h.s. diploma jobs in the period after WWII?

we always point to the 50's as the economic golden era, but isn't it really more the exception than the rule as a decade?

after WW2, the US had pretty much the only factories and manufacturing in the world that wasn't blown to bits or behind the Iron Curtain. I don't think that's ever been true before or since.

of course, if you want to propose revitalizing the economy by carpet bombing European and Asian factories, that's probably a stimulus package Republicans could get behind

 

[chrisrobin]

we always point to the 50's as the economic golden era

Not. We were in the midst of a serious recession. However, Eisenhower did some major spending: NASA and the Interstate Highway system, for example. We had the revenue because the highest tax bracket was 91%.

but isn't it really more the exception than the rule as a decade?

No. The economy was manageable until we became subjected to Reagan's "trickle down" economics.

after WW2, the US had pretty much the only factories and manufacturing in the world that wasn't blown to bits or behind the Iron Curtain.

The Western European economy was bolstered by the Marshall Plan. The Warsaw Pact (economically) was irrelevant to the U.S. After American occupation, Japan regained its prominence in the world (minus a military).

if you want to propose revitalizing the economy by carpet bombing European and Asian factories, that's probably a stimulus package Republicans could get behind

When Republicons rule, the U.S. will become another Somalia. (with no middle class)
a Republicon paradise.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Notice that both your unions and your prosperity are in the past tense. Much of the heavy industry which paid such good wages were unionized right out of existence. That is why the unions have lost membership so dramatically. That, and the fact that for the remaining unionized companies, foreign competition provides a ceiling, limiting union demands and results.
It is absurd nonsense to think that raising the minimum wage does not have an inflationary effect, and inflation affects the poor and unemployed the hardest.

No they weren't. They were globalized out of existence. It's disingenuous to say industry left because of the wages unions demanded when minimum wage is higher than what you can pay in third world countries.

 

[xbuzzerx]

What tripe. Nobody has to do anything. Companies should be free to pay what the jobs are worth, and employees are free to accept or reject those wages. None of which is any business of the government. It's not their job to "step in" and make up for anything.

So you support debt/wage slavery, even if it accounted for 90% of the workforce.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Not. We were in the midst of a serious recession. However, Eisenhower did some major spending: NASA and the Interstate Highway system, for example. We had the revenue because the highest tax bracket was 91%.


No. The economy was manageable until we became subjected to Reagan's "trickle down" economics.


The Western European economy was bolstered by the Marshall Plan. The Warsaw Pact (economically) was irrelevant to the U.S. After American occupation, Japan regained its prominence in the world (minus a military).


When Republicons rule, the U.S. will become another Somalia. (with no middle class)
a Republicon paradise.

+1 on this post.

 

[chrisrobin]

.
NEWS FLASH: The Senate has just attained the necessary 60 votes to bring a vote to the floor... so Herr Boner can squelch the unemployment benefits extension... DOA in the house.

*he posts a middle finger*

 

[HenryReardon]

So you support debt/wage slavery, even if it accounted for 90% of the workforce.

I support being able to apply for a job in a free and open marketplace, where I can reject jobs I do not want, and accept those that I do.

"Debt/wage/slavery," if it exists, is totally self-inflicted.

 

[Jack Springer]

Democrats are pushing this only for one reason -- they want to make republicans look bad if they vote against it.

The budget deal passed last month did not expand the benefits -- democrats voted to end benefits. It's all fake politics.

Why not create an environment that will create jobs -- stop Obamacare, cut unnecessary regulations that the Administration has been pumping out at incredible rate, create some calm in the economy -- it's not the end of the world all the time like Obama says.

 

[chrisrobin]

Democrats are pushing this only for one reason -- they want to make republicans look bad if they vote against it.

The budget deal passed last month did not expand the benefits -- democrats voted to end benefits. It's all fake politics.

Why not create an environment that will create jobs -- stop Obamacare, cut unnecessary regulations that the Administration has been pumping out at incredible rate, create some calm in the economy -- it's not the end of the world all the time like Obama says.

they want to make republicans look bad

The Democrats don't need any help with this.

Stop Obamacare? Obama was elected in 2008. Obama was re-elected in 2012. Obamacare was judged as being constitutional by the SCOTUS. Your buddy, AKA the Boner, brought up a "Stop Obamacare" bill 43 times. Time to grow up.

 

[xbuzzerx]

I support being able to apply for a job in a free and open marketplace, where I can reject jobs I do not want, and accept those that I do.

"Debt/wage/slavery," if it exists, is totally self-inflicted.

This is an extension of exactly the same mindset that, 20 years ago, said "the solution to everything is a college education."

What's a college degree worth today, exactly? It's not even a guarantee of employment, let alone good or well-compensated employment.

You can parrot off any platitude you want about how anyone's failure in the current American economy is personal sloth or poor choices-- that doesn't change the fact that the structure of our economy only allows a small number to deviate upwards from month to month living, regardless of how many of them attain the qualifications to move up. This Republican idea of everyone who deserves to move up will has always presupposed that for every college degree issued, a new professional job appears somewhere in the workforce.

- - - Updated - - -

The Democrats don't need any help with this.

Yup. Don't forget the tantrum-esque shutting down of the government.

 

[HenryReardon]

-- that doesn't change the fact that the structure of our economy only allows a small number to deviate upwards from month to month living, regardless of how many of them attain the qualifications to move up. .

Wrong, yet again. Even the far left loony tunes Huff and Puff post reported 1.1 million new millionaires in 2012.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/02/us-one-million-new-millionaires-obama_n_2066177.html

 

[xbuzzerx]

Wrong, yet again. Even the far left loony tunes Huff and Puff post reported 1.1 million new millionaires in 2012.

I'm sorry, how exactly does the concentration of larger amounts of wealth in smaller numbers of people translate, in your mind, into everyone has more access to wealth now?

What you and most Republicans do not seem to comprehend is that to even maintain a structure where some people are earning 1, 5, 10, 15 million dollars a year, there's a whole crapload of people making dirt. And I'm sure you don't believe that's true, but your beliefs don't change reality. The pay of people at the CEO level has increased exponentially in relation to the pay of their typical employee over the last several decades. Any increases in wealth across the American economy are not "trickling down", and haven't, for more than 30 years now.

 

[CowboyBob]

Democrats are pushing this only for one reason -- they want to make republicans look bad if they vote against it.

The budget deal passed last month did not expand the benefits -- democrats voted to end benefits. It's all fake politics.

Why not create an environment that will create jobs -- stop Obamacare, cut unnecessary regulations that the Administration has been pumping out at incredible rate, create some calm in the economy -- it's not the end of the world all the time like Obama says.

So you're saying voting against extending benefits is bad. I agree.

You obediently goose step behind your party and their talking points. How will stopping the ACA and allowing corporations to pollute more create jobs?

When did President Obama say it's the end of the world? Got a link?

 

[Benvolio]

I'm sorry, how exactly does the concentration of larger amounts of wealth in smaller numbers of people translate, in your mind, into everyone has more access to wealth now?

What you and most Republicans do not seem to comprehend is that to even maintain a structure where some people are earning 1, 5, 10, 15 million dollars a year, there's a whole crapload of people making dirt. And I'm sure you don't believe that's true, but your beliefs don't change reality. The pay of people at the CEO level has increased exponentially in relation to the pay of their typical employee over the last several decades. Any increases in wealth across the American economy are not "trickling down", and haven't, for more than 30 years now.

That simply is not true. In our economy the path to great wealth is to sell something for a small amount to millions of people. Oprah, for instance, is worth 2 billion. Is she causing others to make dirt? Is she causing others to be poor? Bill Gates is worth 40 billion or so. Is he stealing from the poor? Leonardo di Caprio, 200 million. Getting a small amount from millions of people. Zucherman of Facebook, 20 bill or so. The days of feudal, zero sum economics is long gone.

 

[xbuzzerx]

That simply is not true. In our economy the path to great wealth is to sell something for a small amount to millions of people. Oprah, for instance, is worth 2 billion. Is she causing others to make dirt? Is she causing others to be poor? Bill Gates is worth 40 billion or so. Is he stealing from the poor? Leonardo di Caprio, 200 million. Getting a small amount from millions of people. Zucherman of Facebook, 20 bill or so. The days of feudal, zero sum economics is long gone.

So the path for everyone from struggling to well-to-do is simply to be a mass mainstream televised entertainer.

Is that what you're saying? The economy can support 40 or 50 million people doing this, yes?

 

[Benvolio]

No they weren't. They were globalized out of existence. It's disingenuous to say industry left because of the wages unions demanded when minimum wage is higher than what you can pay in third world countries.

Our heavy industry was not sent elsewhere, it lost to foreign competition, while the unions were squeezing the life out of US companies.

 

[Kulindahr]

What tripe. Nobody has to do anything. Companies should be free to pay what the jobs are worth, and employees are free to accept or reject those wages. None of which is any business of the government. It's not their job to "step in" and make up for anything.

Companies don't want to pay what jobs are worth, they want to pay as little as they can get away with. And with their persistent and determined efforts at opposing human freedom of association, they can get away with quite little. Wages today are set not by a free market, but by coercion pure and simple.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure. Unions are so great they've driven industry after industry out of the country, leaving the destruction of middle-class America in their wake.

You'd better stop drinking water -- after all, water can be abused, so it must be inherently dangerous.

 

[Kulindahr]

So you support debt/wage slavery, even if it accounted for 90% of the workforce.

Of course. Today's GOP, especially the Tea Party, are the most ruthless practitioners of relative morality (lifeboat ethics) and social Darwinism seen since there was such a thing as Darwinism. They don't believe that a country is actually a community of any sort, they see it as a system to be run so they can practice the law of the jungle without hindrance.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Our heavy industry was not sent elsewhere, it lost to foreign competition

As I said, globalization. It continues to be irrelevant whatever damage you feel unions did when even minimum wage cannot compete with what you can pay a worker in rural China or Indonesia or the Phillippines.