Posted on 07/23/2002 10:41:52 AM PDT by Sweet_Sunflower29
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:39:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
For more information see: Boeing...JFK
That sounds like about, say, one or two degrees of separation from slavery. It should serve your case well, good luck finding it...JFK
I don't hold up the democrats as a positive example. I hold out both parties as a negative example. I'm well aware that in the mid 60's the nation's politics was completely dominated by democrats. I'm also well aware that if you analyze the actual voting patterns of the two parties that the republicans have stuck so close to the democrat party that it is not so easy to distinguish the two. In rhetoric you can distinguish between the two, not in action.
Lower income people have suffered consistently in that their real incomes have gone down since 1970 with the exception of about 5 years' time during the 1980's after Reagan's tax cut came into play. I strongly disagree with anyone who says the Republicans should get credit for that because the Republicans of today oppose everything that Reagan stood for. Reagan was opposed to New World Order types of institutions, Reagan would never have tolerated the trade deals we made that were biased against the interests of the american people, Reagan didn't stand for run-away government spending like Bush does, Reagan believed in real tax cuts, not phony ones like Bush. Reagan didn't believe in regulating the economy into the ground, but republican presidents since reagan certainly have. So, Reagan was an aberration, don't give the repubs credit for what he accomplished.
But the Republicans deserve special scorn over the minimum wage issue. The Republicans do not want minimum wage to be adjusted with inflation. That's the whole problem. If we made the 1965 level the standard and adjusted it for inflation since then, then this would mean an increase in the minimum wage that the republicans are against.
Republicans only care about big corporations and upper income people who are members in good standing of the country club. The interests of these corps and this class of people is what matters to the Republicans. They arrange our trade deals to help big corps leave america, produce elsewhere and export to us, every time a big corp lobbyist has a special project the repubs are right on it. But the interest of the big corps is not the american interest. The big corps (biggest 400/500) in america are employing a smaller and smaller percentage of the workforce every decade. I believe even that in 1980 they employed fewer people in america than in 1970, in 1990 fewer people than in 1980, and in 2000 fewer than 1990.
Republicans are the type of people that are completely out of touch with very large portions of americans, especially lower income people. With the rapid growth in poulation due to immigration over the last 30 years we have not seen corresponding increases in the growth rate of the economy that one would expect. The average american is getting poorer in real terms. It means nothing to the republicans. If you are a republican and you have the types of sentiments that I'm promoting, then you will be ostracized from the party, people like George Bush will refer to you as being too conservative and you will have strong primary opponents financed by republican snobs.
The main obstacle to going with Reagan's type of politics today, lower taxes, more reasonable regulations, trade deals that benefit us, for the purpose of lowering unemployment as a means of creating the higher types of wages for the bulk of our people that our nation has throughout its history enjoyed is the Republicans. If the Republicans were to go strong in that direction, then the democrats would either follow or be voted out of office.
Nobody taught me that it's the government's job to A,B,C,D,E....
In a country where 50% of ones money is put to use by government to provide you with W,X,Y,Z...
In a country where government jobs outnumber jobs in manufacturing...
In a country where the legal system, regulation, etc give large corps an advantage over small entrepenuers due to efficiencies in scale in handling all that overhead...
In a country that throws the throttle wide open to free trade without much concern as to the impact on its citizens...
In a country where people accept the idea of taking money from another by force of majority rule....
What do you expect?
We live in what I term to be a 'successful stealth communistic system'. It only feels and seems like freedom.
Given that, why shouldn't people want things like this- its all part of the 'deal'.
it's MY job to make responsible life decisions and to develop marketable job skills so I can maintain a decent lifestyle.
How many college grads it take to run a McDonalds, a Walmart, an Office Max?
The animal known as the medium-pay grade is dying off. The idea is to make all labor SKILL-LESS, and all management heirachies flat and cellular as possible.
You are either a cog, a cog prodder, or hyper-skilled.
Business has disavowed a portion of the social responsibility to invest in people and want a just-in-time, on/off 'skills resource'. Downsizing, outsourcing.
All this is great for one type of efficiency, but is it generationally stable. There is already concern in government sector about the passing of a generation without a human resource to replace them. I think the number was 22% of all government employees being turned over (retired) in the next 8 years. These are elderly who have been the 'keepers of the game' so to speak. Upper level.
I wonder how the private sector compares reguarding this phenomena. Are we making people upwardly mobile fast enough (in experience, not booklearning)?
The leading edge of the baby boom is about to retire, how well will such a large 'up-shift' be pulled off?
But it is incorrect to assume that christianity doesn't have anything to say about minimum wage and how lower income workers are treated in the economy. The bible lays it out and holds us responsible for treating the lower wage people that we employ well. It even says that it is very good to seek out the unemployed and make sure they have work.
The modern attitudes of the Republicans where they believe that high unemployment is good are simply un-christian attitudes. I've seen a republican economist who worked for George Bush say that it was ideal to keep unemployment at 6.5% precisely so that workers will be hungry for work. Alan Greenspan, a very prominent republican, raised interest rates repeatedly in 1999 with his own stated rationale that unemployment was below 5.0% and therefore way too low.
Prior to the 1960's the republican party did in fact stand for a low unemployment rate. Eisenhour, Coolidge, Hoover and others would not have tolerated high unemployment the way that Bush does.
Christians were prominent early in the 20'th century in the original 'family wage' movement. They publicly ridiculed business leaders who did not pay their workers enough to support families. They successfully shamed business leaders into paying better wages. The 'family-wage' movement back then was a private sector, voluntary effort.
Where it should stay.
The Leftists create one problem, and need more leftism to fix the problem they created. Nice trick!
Other than a four year stint in the Marines (when I made less than minimum wage), I never looked back. I never got a college education either. I don't know why so many people think they need a college education in order to make a good living for themselves (not that I'm discouraging getting a good education). All it takes is a positive attitude, a good work ethic and the ability to get along with people. Those attributes will take you very far in life.
Most of the people pissing and moaning about "living wage" are probably lousy workers. They probably bang out sick all the time, have attitude problems, slack off at work and think the world owes them a living.
Unless you are a kid just starting out or an elderly person looking for a little extra income, you have no excuse for making minimum wage. If you are, you need to take a hard look at yourself in the mirror, for the problem lies with YOU.
If we can't return to sanity and stop this terrible malicious regulation of some industries, if we can't have a government that doesn't spend us into the ground and tax us to death, if we can't have a federal government that represents our interest in international treaties, then the end result eventually will be that conditions for americans will be so bad that it will bring movements into office that will be even worse than what we have now.
If current trends continue we won't be able to pay for medicaire and social security. What's going to happen when that hits home with our people? We will be a high tax welfare state along the lines of some west European nations, that's what.
So, are you saying that George Bush and the republicans are 'leftist'?
The US Chamber of Commerce says that it is good that we bring in 200,000 indentured servants a year through H1B to drive wages down. They want it expanded to 400,000 people a year and they want these people to be able to work in any line of work. They say that if only american 'business' can have 400,000 people a year who each must work for 1 employer for 5 consequtive years before they can get a green card, then this supply of willing workers bent on working 60 hours a week at low pay so they can become citizens is what american 'business' needs. US Chamber of Commerce politics is the same thing as Republican politics. So, according to your definition, the chamber of commerce is leftist.
People who think that the US Chamber of Commerce/Republican Party type of politics is really in the interest of the average american are fools.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.