 |
 |
   Henry Waxmans climate change bill wont make it into law this year. Thats why hes the right guy for the job.
 Conspiracy theories are all fun and games until you become the subject of one.
|
   |
|
|
October 11, 2006
By: THE DISAPPEARING LABOR BEAT....The labor beat at daily newspapers has been on the verge of extinction for years. My local paper, the LA Times, used to have some of the best labor coverage in the country, thanks to its great labor beat reporter, Harry Bernstein, but that heritage declined and then finally died last year when labor writer Nancy Cleeland left the beat. As Michael Massing reported:
At the New Republic, John Judis observes that BusinessWeek has increasingly transformed itself from a serious chronicler of business into a Smart Money clone ("Revealed! Secrets of the Male Shopper") and suggests that its prize-winning labor coverage was one casualty of the change:
As labor unions decline in power and advertisers insist ever more vigorously on appealing to specific demographics (young, white collar, lots of disposable income), coverage of blue collar and working class issues simply fades away. It's like this stuff doesn't even exist anymore. And let's face it: if all you read is BusinessWeek or your local daily, it doesn't. —Kevin Drum 1:07 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (101)Comments
It always amazes me how anti-union newspaper writers are. If it wasn't for strong unions in their industry they'd be making next to nothing. Posted by: Rob on October 11, 2006 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINKThe "best and brightest" don't care about labor or about workers. They want services performed for them and they are willing and able to pay. The rest--workers' lives, health, wages, housing...--that's not as interesting as the useful or titillating stuff in the Style Section. The "Culture of Narcissism" has been upon us for a quarter of a century. We're not a nation anymore. We're a collection of targeted markets. Posted by: donescobar on October 11, 2006 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINKOn his radio show this morning, Bob Dylan mentioned that he was a proud union member, so that's nice. This guy Steven Adler used to be the drummer in Guns 'n Roses. It's no wonder he's driving BusinessWeek down the tubes. Posted by: Boots Day on October 11, 2006 at 1:22 PM | PERMALINK"...."They don't consider themselves hostile to working-class concerns, but they're all making too much money to relate to the problems that working-class people are facing," Once again, the myth of the liberal media is exposed. A truly liberal media would have strong reporting on labor issues. Instead, we get all the "strong economy" bulletins out of Washington. Posted by: tomeck on October 11, 2006 at 1:25 PM | PERMALINKI remember one of the exercises we did in journalism school in college involved a rewrite of a strike story. There was a lot of background about labor law. LET'S ALL GET TOGETHER ON SUNDAY TO STAND UP AGAINST POVERTY!!! LET'S SHOW THOSE ELEPHANTS OUR UNITY AND STRENGTH!!! HTTP://WWW.STANDAGAINSTPOVERTY.ORG
Working class families are in for a nasty shock when they suddenly go from being courted by the Republicans as essential political allies (via culture-war issues) to being seen as little better than the homeless -- and equally ignorable. Smart Republican political operatives will try to delay that day as long as they can, since that will be the final death of their odd-couple coalition, but their well-heeled political followers are already well down that track. I think it was Gary Hart who observed that, when -- but not until -- the economic facts of life under Republicanism finally become too ugly to ignore, the South will return to the Democrats. Posted by: bleh on October 11, 2006 at 1:35 PM | PERMALINKI'm still playing my one-note tune: The disappearance of "working class" from the American vocabulay forty years ago, and the substiution of "middle class" to placate the Cold War gods, bears its tasteless fruit. As an autoworker I was amused at this effort to blunt class consciousness. I am no longer amused. It begins with perception. I remember my eleven-year-old daughter coming home from school: "We're middle class, aren't we, Daddy?" They got to the kids first, equating the working class with street sweepers and welfare mothers. Everybody else was middle class in the best of all possible worlds. It's a lie, of course. If you live off a paycheck you're working class no matter how much you may hate it. How can there be labor reporters if there's no such thing as a laboring class? They disappeared us. Posted by: buddy66 on October 11, 2006 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK The labor beat at daily newspapers has been on the verge of extinction for years. For good reason. America is turning into the Ownership Society where almost a majority of American families own stocks in companies. Therefore, there is no need to talk about labor any more because most of us are business owners. The interest of business is the interest of America. "Another striking difference between today's economy and yesterday's is that we are turning into a nation of investors. Specifically, nearly half of all U.S. households own equities either directly or indirectly through a mutual fund, according to a study by Investment Company Institute and the Securities Industry Association. for the first time stock ownership is spreading rapidly throughout the age and income spectrum." Posted by: Al on October 11, 2006 at 1:37 PM | PERMALINK The only times in my life I've ever read Business Week were on cross-country flights when I ran through the paper I brought on board and the other passengers had looted all the free Economists and Golf Digests. We can ship all our jobs to Mexico and India, and run our government with Chinese money. And the RNC will support Al and me. So what is the problem? Posted by: Al's Mommy on October 11, 2006 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINKhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBg9p0cS48U for al Posted by: Neo on October 11, 2006 at 1:55 PM | PERMALINKThe business of America is business, got it? We don't have a labor beat because we no longer have a viable labor movement. We are just a nation of haves -- the upper 10% -- and have-nots -- the rest of us. For a brief period in time, say the 1950's, capital was more evenly distributed in this country. But that was merely due to a convergence of events, not by any means the norm. We all know what has happened since then, with the seeming the gap between rich and poor turning into a wide, unbridgable chasm. The middle class -- if it ever really existed -- has become just another myth in the unfolding history of global capitalism. This is the real crime -- not the war, not the sex scandals, not the topical trash which the media trys to pass off as "news."
All you need to know about how Business Week has collapsed as a real, broad sprectrum, business weekly is that they recently gave Jack Welch and his most current doxie a full page to spew their pap on the last page in the magazine. The rest of the reporting in the magazine has seen a similar decline in incisive reporting. Most of the reports about economic, industrial, and structural changes reflect the happy face reporting favored by right-wing rags. I've been a long-term subscriber to Business Week, but I'm within a gnat's eyelash of terminating my subscription because the magazine's coverage has deteriorated so badly. I would not encourage anyone to buy a copy off the newstand much less subscribe these days. Posted by: PrahaPartizan on October 11, 2006 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINKIt's like this stuff doesn't even exist anymore. And let's face it: if all you read is BusinessWeek or your local daily, it doesn't. So, where do you recommend getting this type of information? Who are the best labor reporters? Posted by: joe on October 11, 2006 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINKIs there really that much to right? People with low value labor are still gaming the system to get paid more than they're worth. It's gone down in the past few decades, but it's an ongoing problem. Other than that, there's not much to say. Posted by: American Hawk on October 11, 2006 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK*write, not right, obviously. Preview is my friend. Or should be... Posted by: American Hawk on October 11, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINKI agree with the comment on Gary Hart. I am originally from GA but now in VA. The conservative DEMS went REP, but many are considering a return to the fold. I say we WELCOME THEM BACK! Labor and Economics are this year's election issues, and we will soon see which side cares about anyone...... Posted by: MsRex on October 11, 2006 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINKI alway thought Forbes was the People of business magazines. Posted by: Dan on October 11, 2006 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINKIt's a lie, of course. If you live off a paycheck you're working class no matter how much you may hate it. How can there be labor reporters if there's no such thing as a laboring class? They disappeared us. Posted by: buddy66 on October 11, 2006 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK Working class and proud. Preview is my only friend. Or should be... There, fixed that for you. Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on October 11, 2006 at 2:39 PM | PERMALINKI agree with the comment on Gary Hart. I am originally from GA but now in VA. The conservative DEMS went REP, but many are considering a return to the fold. I say we WELCOME THEM BACK! Labor and Economics are this year's election issues, and we will soon see which side cares about anyone...... The way this Foley thing is working out, it sounds like the choice the Republicans are facing now is: If they lose the Redneck base - maybe the Redneck base will turn to Buchanan's Reform party (which is a very different animal from Ross Perot's Reform Party - ideologically OPPOSITE, in fact). Finally, the religious wingnut crowd is seeing the hypocrisy of the Republican Party. The only one's left in the Republican Party after this, will be the crypto-Libertarians, However, if the party ejects Hastert, and does a purge of the Log Cabin wing, (in order to retain the Evangelical/redneck vote) where will the Social-Liberal/Economic-conservatives go? And what will the Republicans do without the support of the Plutocracy? Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on October 11, 2006 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINKxqj_1 I am a working class health care provider. It disgusts me to read jerks like American Hawk condescend about low value labor. I'd like to see how AH would squeal about "low value" laborers taking care of him in the hospital. Posted by: repug on October 11, 2006 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINKI mentioned this in another thread but Democrats have to recognize that the very nature of work has changed for nearly all Americans. Fewer and fewer find themselves on an assembly line. Every worker has greater and greater responsibility. We have to being thinking realistically about the needs of working men and women and where those needs correspond with the needs of American business to remain competitive in the world economy. Universal health care and enhanced and portable retirement savings are two such needs. We can't become competitive in the world again until we deal directly with both. We have to get over old fashioned unions, or better put unions have to change to meet the needs of labor and the new business organizational models. How? I don't know, but I do know the same old same old will result in a Democratic congressional majority that will last about 2 years. Posted by: Ron Byers on October 11, 2006 at 3:00 PM | PERMALINKRepug: I am a working class health care provider. It disgusts me to read jerks like American Hawk condescend about low value labor. I'd like to see how AH would squeal about "low value" laborers taking care of him in the hospital. STFU and go change a bedpan. Posted by: American Hawk on October 11, 2006 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINKAw, you're gonna make me get out my Walter Karp quote again. Writing at the beginning of the "Reagan Revolution," he said: The republics historic assertion that all men are created equal, which Lincoln regarded as a stumbling block to tyranny, is also a stumbling block to [the Republican plan called] National Renewal. That we are created equal has never meant that Americans were supposed to live alike. What it does mean, what it has always meant, is that the citizens of this republic cannot be treated in law and by government as mere social and economic functions. Yet this is exactly how the Reaganites propose to treat the citizens of the commonwealth. The administration intends to bestow wealth upon the wealthy because it is their function to invest in productive enterprise. The administration intends to impoverish the poor because it is their function to perform menial services and not be a drag on investors. ... The Reaganites do not even care about the so-called free market, which is merely another one of their confidence games. A market dominated by price-fixers is neither very free nor much of a market, yet every would-be monopolist and conglomerateur in the country knows he has an ally in the White House. ... What the Reaganites really care about is this: they want capitalism in America to become what Karl Marx thought it would be by nature the transcendent force and the measure of all things, the power that reduces free politics to trifling, the citizen to a worker, the public realm to the state, the state to an instrument of repression protecting capitalism from the menace of liberty and equality, with which it grew up as Cain grew up with Abel. To secure the transcendence of capitalism the Reaganites must shrink the public realm drastically. What Americans have now established as public concerns the quality of the environment, the safety of the workplace, fair employment, equal opportunity, the preservation of small business, the hundred and one conditions that secure or endanger the liberty, the dignity, and the independence of the citizenry all such public matters the Reaganites hope to turn into private ones. As the public realm shrinks, the citizen fades, for the citizen is simply each of us in our public capacity, freely swapping opinions about public affairs. As the citizen fades into the jobholder, capitalism gains immeasurably in power and freedom. As in the 1920s, we would cease to judge the economy by any standard save that of the most successful capitalists; cease to ask whether a result is equable or democratic, or whether an economy that gobbles up thousands of small private enterprises bears any resemblance to private enterprise at all. Indeed, we would cease to wonder why we should despise representative government and submit to the arbitrary rule of private economic power. So why is labor coverage disappearing? Because those people don't matter. It is their job to perform such services. Shut up and don't ask such questions. This is the natural order of things. Posted by: Alek Hidell on October 11, 2006 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK"So, where do you recommend getting this type of information? Who are the best labor reporters?" Probably the best around is David Moburg at In These Times. The Prospect online and TPMCafe have some good labor posts, as does this blog.
Some hired stooge of Karl Rove's just crashed a small plane into an apartment building in NYC. American Hawk, I can imagine how awful a patient you will invariably be. I would prefer to be a humble bedpan changer than an insufferable ass like you. Posted by: repug on October 11, 2006 at 3:40 PM | PERMALINKSome hired stooge of Karl Rove's just crashed a small plane into an apartment building in NYC. That's a rather hasty assumption, though its hard not to note the convenient timing of that, along with the announcement today that an American al-Qaeda spokesman who the FBI has targetted for years is being indicted as the target of the first treason charges in the US in half a century. Posted by: cmdicely on October 11, 2006 at 3:51 PM | PERMALINKThank God we got the torture bill through in time! We'll be able to get to the bottom of this evil act, at least. Holy Joe make a statement yet? prahaPartizan: "All you need to know about how Business Week has collapsed as a real, broad sprectrum, business weekly is that they recently gave Jack Welch and his most current doxie a full page to spew their pap on the last page in the magazine." Totally agree. And the further insult to thinking readers was that jackass Welch and his current doxie replace what had been one of most thoughtful editorial pages around. I have read BusinessWeek for 25 years and have let my subscription lapse. They may be doing more serious work on their website. Whatever. Posted by: PTate in MN on October 11, 2006 at 5:00 PM | PERMALINKThe closest thing to a labor reporter at the LA Times recently was Michael Hiltzik,who was taken down by self-important wingers because he used a pseudonym to defend himself on blogs. He is missed. Posted by: Jim 7 on October 11, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINKYou never hear "working class" now; instead, you hear odd concepts like "political class". They like that last term in Europe. Totally bogus. Posted by: Guy Banister on October 11, 2006 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINKI have to agree with American Hawk that "People with low value labor are still gaming the system to get paid more than they're worth". But AH is completely wrong that it's gone down recently. I'm sure CEO pay has gone UP, way up, and faster then ever. Unless AH meant low-pay labor rather than low-value. Then AH would be completely wrong about everything. As usual. Posted by: lemonzest on October 11, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINKhey, too, concern themselves with teacher pay and benefits and protect even incompetent teachers' right to lifetime employment and the feed leftwing propaganda to their classes. The ones who pay are the students. And I'm sure you'll be happy to provide specific examples that prove your charges, in order to demonstrate to us that you're not just a right-wing hack pulling shit out of your ass... Posted by: Winda Warren Terra on October 11, 2006 at 5:51 PM | PERMALINKThis is yet another trend that started under the DLC and our previous Maximum Leader, Slicckus Williamus. That's why all the techie/coastal Dems were so hot for NAFTA. They didn't live in Detroit or St. Louis. Well, now that the WTO is in place, the outsourcing of gray- and white-collar jobs to India is giving rise to all the old cliches about pinching shoes and hoisting petards. I truly feel and sense the problems here. As for the solution? A social democratic party comes to mind. Argument No. 944 for parliamentary government in America. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 11, 2006 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINKRob: Outside of the Northeast and Midwest, I don't believe most seven-day dailies are unionized in the editorial and graphics areas, at least until you get to the Pacific Coast. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 11, 2006 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINKA social democratic party comes to mind. Argument No. 944 for parliamentary government in America. No, its an argument for a multiparty electoral system. A parliamentary system doesn't give you more or different parties. Posted by: cmdicely on October 11, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINKOctoberSurprise, Cory Lidle, who pitched for the New York Yankees and perhaps a flight instructor, were killed when Cory's small plane crashed into the building. Now, OctoberSurprise, you sick Fuck, go fuck yourself. Posted by: thethirdPaul on October 11, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINKSocraticGadfly: That's why all the techie/coastal Dems were so hot for NAFTA. This coastal techie Dem was dead set against it. I was calling bullshit on the whole "post-industrial" line at least ten years before anyone had ever heard of NAFTA (or, as the Canadians call it, Not Another Fucking Trade Agreement, eh). I'll claim it was prophetic of me to say that the engineering jobs would follow the manufacturing jobs, but only after I claim that it's prophetic to say that the sun will rise in the east. BTW, a lot of engineers I know were saying the same thing back then. Engineers, I dare say, are more cognizant of the significance of manufacturing than the average person (being at least loosely connected to it, and all). Much as I opposed NAFTA, its significance pales next to China. Yup, Slick Willie pushed hard to get PNTR and WTO membership for them. Thanks in large part to Chinese manipulation of our currency, the US dollar is overvalued by probably around 30-40%. Our trade (current account) deficit was over 6%/GDP last year, and may hit 7% this year (the same point at which Thailand took a powder and started the Asian financial crisis). Even Reagan eventually realized the problems of an overvalued dollar and the associated trade deficit. Hence the Plaza accords in 1985, when our deficit hit 4% (those were the days). Brought down the value of the dollar and the trade deficit to about 0.5% in 1989. The current crew is completely oblivious. Posted by: alex on October 11, 2006 at 6:56 PM | PERMALINKThe increaslingly anti-labor, pro-business slant of media seems clear. Earlier this week in the San Francisco Chronicle, for instance, an article by their "Washington Bureau" reporter Carolyn Lochhead was a typical "he said / she said" piece but included a quote from an individual indentified as being with the "nonpartisan American Enterprise Insitute." Hah. True, the American Enterprise Institute is not an *explicitly* partisan prop of the Republican Party. But it's certainly a stand-in for the Chamber of Commerce (pro-business, anti-union, anti-labor, anti-regulation) on any given issue. And I have never seen the Chronicle describe any other major lobbying group that way, i.e., "the nonpartisan American Civil Liberties Union," or the nonpartisan Sierra Club. Posted by: baked potato on October 11, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINKThe current crew is completely oblivious. Maybe they're just not as smart as you. The US economy is in very solid shape and NAFTA was a terrific deal as are the series of trade deals GWB has since negotiated. Manufacturing remains a very significant part of the economy very close to 1985 levels. It is manufacturing employment that has catered. As you already know with a 4.6% unemployment rate and average earning growing at 4% the economy has benefitted from the continued shift toward service sector employment. The Dow is at record levels for many good reasons. One of them is savvy investors don't over-react to a single stat especially when it's so distorted by energy prices and they will soon settle down to 'normal' levels. OPEC announced a production cut of 1M and prices still dropped to a 2006 low. The fact is the doubling of investment in supply is just starting to pay off with substantive and steady inceases from the non-OPEC producers as demand starts to slow due to improved conservation. There is a high probability prices have peaked and OPEC has lost control. Venezuela, Iran, Nigeria and Russia to name just 4 are dependent on oil revenues and cannot cut production while global and US inventories are at 8-yr highs. Moreover US production of Ethanol is expanding 40% per year while Canada is increasing Tar Sands production at a rate of 350,000 daily barrels per annum while total investment in exploration remains sky-high. The US needs foreign labor. The economy will continue to grow 3.5% for many years as the boomers retire and the labor force starts to shrink. With unemployment at 4.6%, below the rate many economist consider full employment, the US is looking at severe labor shortages. Trade is a good thing. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 8:20 PM | PERMALINKRDW, you need to stop watching the cheerleaders on CNBC and take some econ classes at your local community college. As the US continues to stop producing and innovating, and instead moves continually towards the service and financial sectors, it will continue to lose its ability to create wealth. More importantly, our entire economy is predicated on cheap oil. Once it becomes prohibitively expensive to ship goods from China and elsewhere, we will be doubly-screwed. We won't be able to produce, nor will we be able to afford, the things that we need. Rich holders of capital don't care about this, because they have no allegiance to the US in particular. They can simply move to wherever they want to live in the finest fashion they possibly can. The rest of us, however, will have some big problems on our hands. Posted by: OhNoNotAgain on October 11, 2006 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINKOhNoNotAgain There's no denying you're a lib. The cost of shipping goods is a fraction of the cost of the goods. The US hasn't stopped innovatng which you might know if you've paid any attention to the nobel prize announcements. In fact if you read the WSJ op-ed by the american winner of the Nobel prize for economics you'd know why the US continues to lead in innovation while the EU doesn't innovate at all. The republic will survive the transfer of clothes, toy and sneaker manufacturing to China although it did not help Mexico much. The rich holders of capital are all Americans you twit. There are 100,000,000 stock holders including all of the unionized workers who have their pensions, 401k's and their kids college funds invested in stocks. Your working class hero crap died with Lennon. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINKLooks like WW went to the rmck1 school of spacing ; ) Posted by: Thomas1 on October 11, 2006 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK
rdw: Maybe they're just not as smart as you. That's one theory, though I lean towards the one that says they just don't care. NAFTA was a terrific deal Of course. Our trade deficit wasn't nearly high enough. And look what it's done for Mexico - a stuning 1%/yr GDP growth! as are the series of trade deals GWB has since negotiated Oh yeah, I forgot about our free trade deal with Morocco. Manufacturing ... very close to 1985 levels. In absolute terms, yeah. So if our population and the GDP hadn't grown in the last 21 years, our level of manufacturing would be just about par. The Dow is at record levels Only if you ignore inflation, which doesn't sound very business savvy. In reality it's still about 20% below its peak. it's so distorted by energy prices and they will soon settle down to 'normal' levels Recent increases and decreases in oil prices have had remarkably little effect on our trade deficit. It's been climbing steadily since the late '90's, and is largely in manufactured goods. Our vaunted surplus in services is a joke by comparison, and, despite many years of happy predictions to the contrary, shows no sign of ever compensating for our deficit in other areas. the US is looking at severe labor shortages My heavens. BTW, what exactly is a "labor shortage"? Is that where demand for labor increases to the point where its compensation as a percentage of GDP increases to pre-Bush post-war levels? Can't have that now, can we. Trade is a good thing. Such a profound statement. Where, exactly, did I oppose foreign trade, per se? As opposed to grossly imbalanced trade or labor arbitrage. The republic will survive the transfer of clothes, toy and sneaker manufacturing to China So 20th century. You forgot to add electronics, semiconductors, cars, machine tools, aircraft parts, etc., etc., etc. It's funny you know, but I was looking idly at a few curves the other day, and it almost seems as though the boom in share ownership among the lower classes has arrived just as the value of stocks has stagnated. After all, the DOW is still at the same level it was six years ago...So we might as well have just put the dough under our matresses, hmmm? And by coincidence, the income of the upper classes continues to skyrocket. As we lowly plebes got the bright idea to invest in the market, they laughingly bailed out to concentrate on lobbying for preferential tax treatment, and to pay themselves huge bonuses (that rightly should have gone to shareholders as dividends). That makes RDW's screed, reproduced below, rather entertaining. Oh, and dude? Lennon will still be remembered with reverence a thousand years from now. George Bush? He'll be a comma, in a sentence something like: 'The worst elected official in all of American history, George Bush, was eventually lynched by a mob of pitchfork carrying texans, who after 7 years finally realized that the joke was on them.' RDW spews: Your working class hero crap died with Lennon. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK In absolute terms, yeah. Manufacturing as a percent of GDP has been relatively stable. Manufacturing employment has dropped reflecting American productivity increases. We are headed toward labor shortages because Americas alway grows but the labor force is about to stop growing. We are going to be addng about $450B of GDP per year with the same size work force. There will be no choice but to shift MORE manufacturing offshore. The US imports about 60% of it's oil. Each $10 incease adds $36B a year to the trade deficit. It's is meaningless. Liberals have been bitching about the trade deficit for 30 years. we are still by far the mot powerful economy in the world. So 20th century. You forgot to add electronics, semiconductors, cars, machine tools, aircraft parts, etc., etc., etc Oh yeah, I forgot about our free trade deal with Morocco I like that too. As well as Chile, Australia, Singapore, Columbia, Cafta, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Bahrain, Israel, Malaysia, Jordan, Oman, Panama, South Africa and the UAR. I think it's rather cool that Hugo Chavez can stand on his front porch and looking North see a free trade zone all the way to the North Pole. Then he can go stand on his rear porch and see one all the way to the South pole. GWB has also inked a series of trade deals with improving trade with India, Pakistan, Japan and a number of other nations. While it's a pity the French scuttled the global deal the USA didn't sit still. That's why America grows richer while Western Europe falls behind. The CIA factbook shows the per capita GDP of the EU at a pitiful 67% of US levels and at relative growth rates it'll be lss than 50% in a decade. And you think they hate us now? Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 10:43 PM | PERMALINKOh, and dude? Lennon will still be remembered with reverence a thousand years from now. Lennons music will die with the boomers much as Frank Sinatra is dying with his generation. John was the quintessential liberal. While preaching to the twits he was buying stocks. bonds, real estate, cattle, record companies, etc. He wasn't quite as famous as God but he nay have had more money. He was the one who wrote 'the taxman' wasn't he and the 1st to mov out of the UK to avoid their taxes? Perfect lib!
'The worst elected official in all of American history, George Bush, was eventually lynched by a mob of pitchfork carrying texans, who after 7 years finally realized that the joke was on them.' Not my George. He'll be well remembered by history. Not quite as well remembered as Reagan but well remmebered. There won't be any blue dresses or pardon sales. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINKAnd by coincidence, the income of the upper classes continues to skyrocket. Judging by all of those McMansions out there the upper classes represent about 60% of the population. Sounds about right. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 10:53 PM | PERMALINKThere is the NY Times however and their truly good Steven Greenhouse and crew who cover the labor beat exclusively and well. Too bad more people don't get a chance to read them. Posted by: Michael Slater on October 11, 2006 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINKThere is the NY Times however and their truly good Steven Greenhouse and crew who cover the labor beat exclusively and well. Too bad more people don't get a chance to read them. Posted by: Michael Slater on October 11, 2006 at 11:07 PM | PERMALINKWhat an irony that the best labor coverage came from the L.A. Times, a paper staunchly anti-union for decades (remember the "True Industrial Freedom" slogan on its flag?). Of course, it was too good to last. Posted by: Vincent on October 11, 2006 at 11:15 PM | PERMALINKrdw: Manufacturing as a percent of GDP has been relatively stable. Between 1987 and 2003 manufacturing dropped from 20.3 to 14.9%/GDP. Not exactly my idea of stable. And lets see, domestic production is about 75% of domestic demand. There's a difference of around 5%/GDP. Hey, that accounts for most of the trade deficit, doesn't it? We are headed toward labor shortages because Americas alway grows but the labor force is about to stop growing. You still haven't defined what a "labor shortage" is. Didn't you say the exact same thing about Japan 20 years ago? Why, yes I did. Liberals have been bitching about the trade deficit for 30 years. Probably explains why that notorious liberal Ronald Reagan decided to do something about it. He pushed through the Plaza accords with Japan when the trade deficit hit 4%/GDP, and it worked. Meanwhile, we're due to hit 7%, and GWB is asleep at the switch. Speaking of liberals concerned about the trade deficit, try the likes of Martin "Commie" Feldstein these days. Posted by: alex on October 11, 2006 at 11:16 PM | PERMALINKDid anyone mention that BNA still publishes the (very very good) Daily Labor Report, as well as a number of less expensive weeklies and monthlies, and that they are all available both in print and on line? Between 1987 and 2003 manufacturing dropped from 20.3 to 14.9%/GDP. Not exactly my idea of stable I was wrong to say stable as a percent of GDP. Manufacturing as a percent of GDP has been fallnig for 50 years as the service side of the economy has been exploding. But manufacturing has not been falling. While the WRI data doesn't go past 1987 your search would have shown this. Here's more on manufacturing: Much has been written about the fact that the U.S. is in transition from a manufacturing economy to a service and information society. But experts warn against writing off the importance of manufacturing. Analysts report that manufacturing output is higher than at any other time in the nation's history and manufacturing jobs are just about as numerous as ever. Manufacturing's decline appears real if one looks at each year's current prices for the manufacturing sector as a part of gross domestic product -- which indicates it has dropped from 18.7 percent of GDP in 1987 to 16.4 percent in 1998. But if one relies on constant, inflation-adjusted dollars, manufacturing's share of GDP has only dropped from 17.4 percent in 1987 to 17.1 percent in 1998 -- and, although comparisons aren't available for earlier years, some economists believe that manufacturing's share has declined little, if at all, since the late 1940s. From 1992 to 1999, in a period when the economy as a whole grew by 29 percent, the Federal Reserve's index of manufacturing output climbed 42 percent. What really counts is that U.S. manufacturing, which contributed a staggering $1.43 trillion to GDP in 1998, is huge in absolute terms -- and has been growing at a fast clip. You still haven't defined what a "labor shortage" is. How about this, "too few workers for too many jobs". The signs of a shortage beginning have been around for years and we see them everytime we walk into a supermarket, retail store, or pass by a shopping center or a truck on the highway and see the help wanted signs. Manufactures have been complaining about a shortage of workers as has the healthcare industry. A two-yr nursing degree will get a starting salary of $45K per year with excellent benefits and the shortage of nurses is only going to get worse. Of course the healthcare field is much more than nurses. The unemployment rate is 4.6% and this is as the boomer just start turning 60 and after massive downsizings in the auto industry. We are going to strengthen NAFTA because we need Canadian energy supplies and Mexican labor. CAFTA will also expand our available labor pool to Central America. All of America is going to boom much as the USA has since 1980. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 11:46 PM | PERMALINKHe pushed through the Plaza accords with Japan when the trade deficit hit 4%/GDP, and it worked. Meanwhile, we're due to hit 7%, and GWB is asleep at the switch. Democratic Japan is not the same as totalarian China with an economy still centrally controlled. Japan in the post 85 era is not necassarily the model China wishes to emulate. It's silly to manage an economy based on one stat and it's dangerous to manage one as unbalanced and as rigid as China's. The cure could easily be worse than the disease. I am not against a plaza type accord nor do I think a large trade deficit is a good thing. But it's not evidence the economy is about to collapsed as has been alleged by your kind for 30 years now. We can at least agree Reagan was a brilliant economic manager. Posted by: rdw on October 11, 2006 at 11:58 PM | PERMALINKI used to love the LA Times. But since it was bought a few years ago it has become unrecognizable to me. It's now a shadow of its former self. Sic transit gloria mundi. Posted by: Metrodorus on October 12, 2006 at 12:04 AM | PERMALINKSpeaking of liberals concerned about the trade deficit, try the likes of Martin "Commie" Feldstein these days.
History will be extremely kind to Ronnie. He inherited twin deficits as well as high unemployment and inflation and high interest rates which according to standard keynsian thinking could not happen at the same time. Thus was born the God of supply-siders. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 12:10 AM | PERMALINKIt's obvious why a marketing decision would eliminate labor coverage. Con-men need to believe that the rubes deserve to be fleeced --"a sucker is born every minute". The truth would show them that their fat paychecks come at the cost of ripping honest hard-working people off and destroying those people's families' security. American turkey Alright you self-rightous jackasses, why don't you just explain to the rest of us how someone on the perpetual verge of bankruptsy and living in a trailor just far enough off the interstate so that you won't have to trouble your sensitive mind by seeing their poverty is going to game a system run by billionaires. Posted by: joe on October 12, 2006 at 12:31 AM | PERMALINKthethirdPaul: Now, OctoberSurprise, you sick Fuck, go fuck yourself. Aww! Did I slander the completely innocent Karl Rove? Did I insinuate that he may have been responsible for the deaths of two people? I understand your indignation. Never mind that he has the blood of thousands on his hands, by calling me a "sick fuck," you can make a good show of sticking up for him, after the fact, when a suggestion is made that he might be responsible for something which later turns out not to be so. Do you plan to also defend Rove's boss someday in the Hague against charges that, separate from murdering thousands of innocent people, he also paid for an illegal abortion for a prostitute he impregnated? What kind of a sick mind would even imagine something like that could be true about our president? Keep up the good fight, you healthy fuck. People with low value labor are still gaming the system to get paid more than they're worth." and RDW and lemonhead chime in with hurrahs. I don't know who wrote this but RDW did NOT chime in with hurrahs. The capitalist system is based on individuals 'gaming' the system to make as much as they can. Gaming the system meaning working hard and making smart decisions within the law. I am assuming the low labor value means the union jobs we typically associate with people who get their hands dirty. I am thrilled today that drug-free high school graduates with a work ethic can make an outstanding life for themselves just by keeping off drugs and working hard. Last year while getting my oil changed at the area Goodyear tire center I asked the manager if they hire and how's the money. "I'm always looking for talent and a good mechanic makes $75K here and 10% - 30% more at a dealership. We'll take a kid out of HS if they can pass a urine test and if they show a solid work ethic we'll give them the chance for training. They can go as far as they want." I think that is fabulous. My son-in-law is a union carpenter making $62K with excellent benefits and the union is hirings. My daughter is a nurse with a 4-yr degree and has 2 of her friends in a 2-yr community college program they will finish this May and start at $45K with excellent benefits. Delaware Country Community College has a 2-yr nursing program they've expanded 2x's in 5 years and still have a waiting list to get in and guarranteed jobs for graduates. This is a fabulous time to get getting out of college and/or high school. College isn't for everyone. If you can't make it in America you can't make it anywhere. There are those who can't pass a urine test. That's their failure. It is not societies failure. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 8:33 AM | PERMALINKOctoberSurprise: Aww! Did I slander the completely innocent Karl Rove? Did I insinuate that he may have been responsible for the deaths of two people? My take on this is that you made a tasteless joke and a regular commenter - aka, thethirdPaul - called you on it. thethirdPaul would most definitely rejoice at the sight of Karl Rove being dragged from his home kicking and screaming by the police. What he did, and I completely agree with him, is that using an unfortunate tragedy to get on a blog thread and jack yourself off with a snide little remark is worthy of a little pushback. You got pushback. What's a matter--are you sad that we don't think you're funny? Is that what this is REALLY about? Well, guess what--the world doesn't owe you a chuckle. I understand your indignation. Never mind that he has the blood of thousands on his hands, by calling me a "sick fuck," you can make a good show of sticking up for him, after the fact, when a suggestion is made that he might be responsible for something which later turns out not to be so. That's a bit of a stretch. By the way, you can actually be a "sick fuck" without having to hide behind your lame little joke. I doubt very much if your goal was to point out the war crimes of Karl Rove. We get back to you thinking that we owe you a chuckle and you getting some much deserved pushback in return--grow up and deal with it. Do you plan to also defend Rove's boss someday in the Hague against charges that, separate from murdering thousands of innocent people, he also paid for an illegal abortion for a prostitute he impregnated? What kind of a sick mind would even imagine something like that could be true about our president? Whoa, dude--are you on some sort of abortion kick here? Are you projecting? Did you have to do the same thing Karl Rove did and are you now projecting your indignation? Sounds like bullshit to me. "False indignation" is what you have, and let me be the first to point out that making your like joke is all you really care about and the issues are secondary. Here's the extent of your comedic stylings: Some hired stooge of Karl Rove's just crashed a small plane into an apartment building in NYC. Where to begin? The extent of your contributions to the thread consist of that gem and: Foley who? Pardon me if I don't bust a gut--your posts are just misdirected snark that fail to hit the mark. You throw these things onto the thread and they land with a thud. And when you get pushback--well, your demonstrably false indignation flares up and you make yourself apoplectic trying to defend what is, by and large, just you wanking off in public to the detriment of a conversation. You seem to think you're on "our" team, meaning you seem to think that by making these little comments, you are immune from criticism because this is a progressive blog. Well, there is no real team. There are people who give their opinion and make comments in a chaotic sort of way. thethirdPaul rubbed your immature little nose in a pile of doggydoo and you didn't like it. Wah, wah, wah. Aww, guess you're not as cool as your Mom says. Welcome to the world of pushback for lameasses like yourself. Is your snarling little take on things winning you kudos? Doesn't look like it. Now, shut the fuck up and let the grownups continue talking.
My son-in-law is a union carpenter making $62K with excellent benefits and the union is hirings. My daughter is a nurse with a 4-yr degree and has 2 of her friends in a 2-yr community college program they will finish this May and start at $45K with excellent benefits. Delaware Country Community College has a 2-yr nursing program they've expanded 2x's in 5 years and still have a waiting list to get in and guarranteed jobs for graduates. Think of how much better they'd be doing if Unions weren't under vicious attack by the Republican Party. rdw's son-in-law would probably be making half of what he's making if it wasn't for his Union. If it wasn't for the funding for education and job training Democrats push all the time (and get rewarded with being called Tax and Spend Liberals) your daughter wouldn't have the opportunity to get her schooling and have a guaranteed job. That's liberalism for you--substantive training and employment, tied together. Let me play the part of the Republican here and ask you this: Why the fuck can't your kids pull themselves up by their bootstraps? Why do they need a handout from the government? Just ask the non-Union guys how things are these days. Habla, rdw? Go ask them how it is without a Union. Thank you, rdw - excellent points as always in favor of Unions and the Democratic Party. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 9:28 AM | PERMALINKThat's liberalism for you--substantive training and employment, tied together. Oh yeah, liberals invented training and work. They would not exist if not for liberals. You my twit friend are why both are conservatives. It's just like a lib to take credit for the success and hard work of others. No one would have ever know you needed training to become a nurse. What would we do without you and these brilliant insights? Actually their conservatism has little to do with you trying to take credit for their success. It has more to do with you trying to get more of their paycheck. They're under this conservative illusion they actually earn their paycheck not you. You can babble on all day about creating their success. They don't watch perky Katie or CNN. They do read their check stubs and pay taxes. They do know you think they should pay more than their peers who decided their bar stool was more fun than overtime. They think you're no better than a common thief. I think you'll find the single greatest success of Reagan in changing America into a Red Country was in convincing young Americans they earn their salary and the money is rightfully theirs not the Governments. The creation of this mindset has destroyed post-68, welfare-state liberalism. The Democratic party will live on forever. But liberalism is dead in America and has destroyed Europe. Young Americans have a vastly different view of their paychecks than the 60's libs now retiring. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINKJust ask the non-Union guys how things are these days. Habla, rdw? Go ask them how it is without a Union. You mean like those 150,000 members that once had jobs in the Michigan region? Or those 150,000 they're hiring to make cars in the South? Of yeah, they're non-union. The cool thing about Unions in the Philly area is how slick the members are. They know how to work the system and the difference between gross and net pay. That's why they often stop working after 1,000 hours for the union and start working more of their side jobs under the table. You do know virtually all carpenters, electricians, painters, do a healthy 'side business'. These guys know 401k's from IRA's and how to plan for retirement and how to keep Uncle Sam's slice to a minimum. My son-in-law owns two fixer-upper duplexes that have been fixed up with union labor only Uncle Sam has no clue. You do know how these carpenters and electricians trade favors. He will eventually use some tax advantages swaps to turn these positive cash flow properties (not to uncle sam) into a vacation house. There was a time a middle class couple working as a carpenter or a nurse were lifelong democrats. Reagan taught them to think like corporations. You still get the guys who can't pass drug tests. In America, they're a minority. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINKShorter rdw: as long as my dopey kids have the government's titty in their mouth, the rest of you can go to hell... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 10:23 AM | PERMALINKMy son-in-law owns two fixer-upper duplexes that have been fixed up with union labor only Uncle Sam has no clue. You do know how these carpenters and electricians trade favors. He will eventually use some tax advantages swaps to turn these positive cash flow properties (not to uncle sam) into a vacation house. Right, so breaking the tax laws is how he does it? Good lord, man. The stink of hypocrisy just rolls off you. This is what America is becoming--your family is using benefits put there to give them an opportunity to make a good living and then they reward the system that provided it with sneers, with law breaking and then they piss all over it. Hate to tell you this, but it's kind of hard to build a community with people who have no regard for the rules. But you think the rules apply to everyone else but you, apparently. Hopefully, someone will come along and put your son-in-law out of business for his illegal practices. You'll squeal like a stuck pig when that happens, won't you? And you'll squeal and squeal, but the fact is, neither of your kids is doing anything other than gaming the system. They're not doing it honestly and they're not pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. They're just pulling fruit off the tree and running off like the thieves they are. Meanwhile, the rest of us get to stay behind and play by the rules. You have taught them well. That's the Republican Party in a nutshell. I got mine, fuck you, to hell with everything. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 10:31 AM | PERMALINKWho increased funding for the community college where rdw's dopey kid goes to school? Governor Ed Rendell. A Democrat! Who'd have thunk it? Did little Ricky Santorum do that? Of course not--little Ricky Santorum had to pay back the tuition he gamed the system out of. Fancy that--someone games the system and then they have to pay back the money the stole. Boo hoo, rdw. When will your kids put something back? Update on the 2005-2006 state budget The Pennsylvania 2005-2006 budget includes a significant funding increase for Pennsylvanias community colleges over last years appropriation. Again, rdw. Tell your dopey kids to pull the government's titty out of their mouth and pull themselves up by their bootstraps. 1993 PR, My entire family pays taxes. We just pay the minimum and we've very good at making it the minimum. We even have the advantage of living very close to Delaware which does not have a sales tax so we even save a bundle on sales taxes. This is why flat taxes are so smart. Trying to stiff the smartest with a higher tax bill just does not work. They make more than you because they are smarter than you. They keep more because they are smarter than you. You can't win. This is why the US can innovate and the EU cannot. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK"The cost of shipping goods is a fraction of the cost of the goods." Not when you figure in all of the ancillary social costs that we all pay for to keep up the current oil importation. The military costs by themselves are staggering. Add to that the trade deficits that we're racking up, and you start to get into some real money. "The US hasn't stopped innovatng which you might know if you've paid any attention to the nobel prize announcements." If we were truly producing and innovating, then we wouldn't be stuck in a bullshit war in the middle east because we would have developed viable alternatives to oil by now. We should have started the process back in the 70's. But no, you and your ilk keep the fantasy about plentiful oil going, and everyone keeps buying it. "The republic will survive the transfer of clothes, toy and sneaker manufacturing to China" Please, do you really believe that all that is made in China is clothes, toys, and sneakers ? I wish it were that simple. "The rich holders of capital are all Americans you twit. There are 100,000,000 stock holders including all of the unionized workers who have their pensions, 401k's and their kids college funds invested in stocks." Yeah, jackass, that 10 grand worth of life's savings for some working stiff really compares to having actual ownership and control of a corporation. The two people are exactly the same. Posted by: OhNotAgain on October 12, 2006 at 12:42 PM | PERMALINKYeah, jackass, that 10 grand worth of life's savings for some working stiff really compares to having actual ownership and control of a corporation. You really need to read and do some independent research. My daughter has been a nurse less than a year and has her 2nd job. She left one paying $28 an hour to get one paying $47 but much reduced benefits and more travel ahd shift work. Her husbands gets the benefits. She still has a saving plan that matches 50% on 6%. She will put in 6% to get the free money. She will put in about $7K the 1st year have have about $50K by 6 and $100K by 10. She'll be 35. her husband has 3 union plans outside his pension and he's saving 16% of $62K or $10K. He's got over $35. He'll have over $150K by the time he's 35 and that does not count Roth IRAs he's using for college funds. Those two will have $250K by the time they are 35 not counting his pension or equity in two duplexes. This is the next generation. 401ks are the path to real wealth. They know how to invest in real estate and they know how to take advantage of tax deferred free money and most important they know the most powerful force in the Universe is compounding. 401ks might be the worst thing to happened to liberalism in the last 25 years. We even have the advantage of living very close to Delaware which does not have a sales tax so we even save a bundle on sales taxes. Now you admit that you cross state lines to buy consumable products and cheat your own community out of the revenue it needs to support the school your daughter goes to for nursing training. See, the taxes you would normally be paying in Pennsylvania would have gone to help pay for the increase in funding granted to DCCC. It's interesting that you fail to see the linkage between the benefits you TAKE from the state that you live in and the free ride you get from crossing state lines to avoid paying your fair share. Again, please pull your mouths off the government's titty and pull yourselves up by your bootstraps--your free ride is being paid for by honest citizens in Pennsylvania. How proud you must be of that type of hypocrisy. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINKPale rider, The operative term is savvy consumer. I pay taxes. More than most. I refuse to pay exhorbitant taxes to pay for liberal welfare programs. DCCC is an outstanding example of an effective community/private sector cooperative which my community taxes and tuition payments support. It pays it's own way. The idea with running deficits and ramping up defense spending is to starve the rest of the beast. One of Slick Willie's biggest headaches as President was his good friend Robert Reich who spent most of his term in the cabinet seething at Bill for doing more prison spending than welfare program spending. My effort to hold down taxes is patriotic. The smaller our government the better our economy. Just take a look at Europe. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK401ks might be the worst thing to happened to liberalism in the last 25 years. Really? Well, I guess you better thank liberals for creating it: In 1978, [a Democratically-Controlled]Congress amended the Internal Revenue Code to add section 401(k). Work on developing the first plans began in 1979 (see History of 401(k) Plans: An Update, February 2005). The Reagan administration introduced legislation that would have totally eliminated 401(k) during 1985. Jeeeez-hus Aitch Keeeeerist!!! Let's go to the replay: rdw: 401ks are the path to real wealth. They know how to invest in real estate and they know how to take advantage of tax deferred free money and most important they know the most powerful force in the Universe is compounding. 401ks might be the worst thing to happened to liberalism in the last 25 years. And then the reality: The Reagan administration introduced legislation that would have totally eliminated 401(k) during 1985. Whooooooooooo doggies! It don't get any better than that! I actually fell under my desk at work, I was laughing so hard. I now have to go explain to people what all the laughing was about... Tears...from laughing so hard. Unbelievable. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINKrdw becomes hysterical: The smaller our government the better our economy. Reality: ...procurement spending increased by over $175 billion between 2000 and 2005, making federal contracts the fastest growing component of federal discretionary spending. 500 reports, audits and investigations by government and independent bodies, including the Government Accountability Office and the Defense Contract Audit Agency, were used to compile the data. That spending increase -- an astonishing 86 percent -- puts total US federal procurement at $377.5 billion annually. The increase means spending on federal contracts has grown more than two times as fast as other forms of discretionary government spending. You fucking hypocrite! Stop posting while you still have some dignity! I have the hiccups from laughing so hard... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 2:38 PM | PERMALINKIn 1978, [a Democratically-Controlled]Congress amended the Internal Revenue Code to add section 401(k). Work on developing the first plans began in 1979 (see History of 401(k) Plans Very nice but where did the votes come from? I do love the irony. Would the headline be, "Democrats sow own seeds for disaster!" Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINKThat spending increase -- an astonishing 86 percent -- puts total US federal procurement at $377.5 billion annually. The increase means spending on federal contracts has grown more than two times as fast as other forms of discretionary government spending. OK, lets go slowly. How much of this is for defense spending? How much is for welfare? None is for welfare which keeps dropping. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINKDow tops 11,900 for 1st time Oil sets another new 2006 low Consumer confidence at 2-yr high Deficit sets 5-yr low GOP rolls out best ever GOTV system. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 3:09 PM | PERMALINKVery nice but where did the votes come from? From the majority party at the time. In 78, it was Democrat Tip O'Neill who ran things. What part of that don't you understand? Nowadays, Hastert doesn't let the Democrats do anything. He's too busy chasing his butt pirate caucus up and down the Capitol grounds... OK, lets go slowly. How much of this is for defense spending? How much is for welfare? None is for welfare which keeps dropping. How big of a piece of the pie is welfare spending? Are you still buying into the lie that the government handed out a trillion dollars last year so that poor people in Philly could go buy Cadillac Escalades and shiny new gold dental grilles? The size of the Federal Government has always included spending on Defense. You said a smaller government is best and that's why Cheney put drastic cuts into reality when he was Defense Secretary. Now you're trying to say defense spending doesn't matter when YOUR guy is blowing up the size of the Government? Please...don't you have some dignity to locate? Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 3:49 PM | PERMALINKFrom the majority party at the time. In 78, it was Democrat Tip O'Neill who ran things. What part of that don't you understand? I have no idea what point you are making? Who said the GOP invented 401k's and what difference does it make? You have no idea what the vote was or if it was written in the house, or the Senate or the WH. My point is the fantastic wealth creating aspects of 401ks, and IRAs, has been very bad news for liberals. Liberals hate capitalists. 401ks make us all capitalists. We are a wealthy people. The thread started about a disappearing labor 'market' and followed on previous threads lamenting the 'loss' of the working class. Liberals are actually dsappointed these people now have real wealth and they don't want to hear about tax increases. Liberals want to create dependencies. You want people to depend on the govt. Conservatives want the exact opposite. the 401k has been the pathway to real wealth for millions. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINKNow you're trying to say defense spending doesn't matter when YOUR guy is blowing up the size of the Government? I am saying the exact opposite. The larger the percentage of defense spending and other mandated spending the smaller the amount available for pork and liberal programs. BTW: Like most conservatives I find GWB a major disappointment on spending. He is not a Reagan conservative so I'm less surprised than most conservatives but he is disappointing nevertheless. No matter what you hear regarding the 2006 elections on Foley or any other issue the only chance Pelosi has to be Speaker is if conservtives stay home and they'll only stay home because their furious about spending. Foley is meaningless. Spending is real and it's a problem. If the Democrats had half a brain they would have run on something other than Bush and it should have been spending. Are you still buying into the lie that the government handed out a trillion dollars last year so Newt and WJC have taken Welfare and gun control off the table. Welfare hasn't been an issue since welfare reform in the mid-90's and no national candidate runs for gun control or lessor sentencing. In fact welfare payments keep dropping in a robust economy and the removal of so many incentives to stay on welfare. The most amazing aspect of that bill might be the collapse of minority birth rates. While single parent families are still increasing they contain fewer kids. The disgrace for conservatives to hammer liberalism on isn't welfare but urban education. Posted by: rdw on October 12, 2006 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINKPale Rider: My take on this is that you made a tasteless joke There was no joke, tasteless or otherwise -- that is, not until ttP's misplaced invective and your ridiculous lecture. a regular commenter - aka, thethirdPaul - called you on it. thethirdPaul would most definitely rejoice at the sight of Karl Rove being dragged from his home thethirdPaul rubbed your immature little nose in a pile of doggydoo Are you two engaged? (tasteless joke) There was no joke, tasteless or otherwise -- that is, not until ttP's misplaced invective and your ridiculous lecture. Some hired stooge of Karl Rove's just crashed a small plane into an apartment building in NYC. You're right--no joke there. Twisted little fucks like you actually believe that shit. My bad... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINKMy bad... Yes, and this was your bad also (because it looks so much worse bolded): My take on this is that you made a tasteless joke and a regular commenter - aka, thethirdPaul - called you on it. thethirdPaul would most definitely rejoice at the sight of Karl Rove being dragged from his home kicking and screaming by the police. What he did, and I completely agree with him, is that using an unfortunate tragedy to get on a blog thread and jack yourself off with a snide little remark is worthy of a little pushback. You got pushback. What's a matter--are you sad that we don't think you're funny? Is that what this is REALLY about? Well, guess what--the world doesn't owe you a chuckle. That's a bit of a stretch. By the way, you can actually be a "sick fuck" without having to hide behind your lame little joke. I doubt very much if your goal was to point out the war crimes of Karl Rove. We get back to you thinking that we owe you a chuckle and you getting some much deserved pushback in return--grow up and deal with it. Whoa, dude--are you on some sort of abortion kick here? Are you projecting? Did you have to do the same thing Karl Rove did and are you now projecting your indignation? Sounds like bullshit to me. "False indignation" is what you have, and let me be the first to point out that making your like joke is all you really care about and the issues are secondary. Here's the extent of your comedic stylings: Where to begin? The extent of your contributions to the thread consist of that gem and: Pardon me if I don't bust a gut--your posts are just misdirected snark that fail to hit the mark. You throw these things onto the thread and they land with a thud. And when you get pushback--well, your demonstrably false indignation flares up and you make yourself apoplectic trying to defend what is, by and large, just you wanking off in public to the detriment of a conversation. You seem to think you're on "our" team, meaning you seem to think that by making these little comments, you are immune from criticism because this is a progressive blog. Well, there is no real team. There are people who give their opinion and make comments in a chaotic sort of way. thethirdPaul rubbed your immature little nose in a pile of doggydoo and you didn't like it. Wah, wah, wah. Aww, guess you're not as cool as your Mom says. Welcome to the world of pushback for lameasses like yourself. Is your snarling little take on things winning you kudos? Doesn't look like it. Now, shut the fuck up and let the grownups continue talking. You sound really grown up, all right. You stand on a soapbox yelling, veins popping, all to the purpose of ingratiation and self-righteousness. You're right--no joke there. Twisted little fucks like you actually believe that shit. No, you droning moralist, people who have watched them misdirect, mislead, maim and murder actually know that there is nothing they wouldn't do. So when it turns out they didn't do some speculated about thing, it doesn't make speculators "twisted little fucks;" it makes them lucky. No, you droning moralist, people who have watched them misdirect, mislead, maim and murder actually know that there is nothing they wouldn't do. Really? But I thought all you cared about was making your little funny-funny comments and then bitching and screaming when someone called you on a worthless throwaway comment. I'm thinking you're just here for the giggles. Too bad, kiddo. Nobody's even remotely interested in your juvenile shit... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINKCome on, October Surprise... Tell us all about how you're single-handedly saving us from Karl Rove with your one-note song and dance... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 7:07 PM | PERMALINK"You really need to read and do some independent research" How about you start looking outside of your immediate family and area and see how most of America lives ? Most people have jack-shit for savings, even in their 401ks, and are living paycheck to paycheck. That's a fact. Just because your cousin's uncle's brother's daughter is an RN and in high-demand right now doesn't prove anything. Most of the people in this country do not live in hot job markets, nor could they afford to move there if they wanted to. Posted by: OhNotAgain on October 12, 2006 at 7:21 PM | PERMALINKI thought all you cared about was making your little funny-funny comments and then bitching and screaming when someone called you on a worthless throwaway comment. Happy to have anyone read my initial remarks and ttP's response to them (not to mention yours) and then decide for themselves which were "bitching and screaming." Tell us all about how you're single-handedly saving us from Karl Rove This makes as much sense as would my saying, "Tell us all about how your cure for cancer is coming." Nobody's even remotely interested in your juvenile shit... You could prove that by getting your nose away from my ass, you know. Good boy! This makes as much sense as would my saying, "Tell us all about how your cure for cancer is coming." So you admit you have no ideas? Poor kid. Someone gave you a little too much encouragement. Now look at you, with your little outbursts and your little tantrums. You could prove that by getting your nose away from my ass, you know. Nah, your boyfriend has that piece of real estate covered. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINKSome hired stooge of Karl Rove's just crashed a small plane into an apartment building in NYC. people who have watched them misdirect, mislead, maim and murder actually know that there is nothing they wouldn't do. Uh, by the way-- Can you explain how Karl Rove is going to convince a couple of white guys to fly a plane into a NYC condo in order to win the November election? Can you piece that together and show us how that works? I'm thinking that would be one hell of a fanciful read... Posted by: Pale Rider on October 12, 2006 at 9:32 PM | PERMALINKHow about you start looking outside of your immediate family and area and see how most of America lives How about taking a ride? I can go in any direction but can't go 5 miles without passing several new developments of McMansions. They're all over the place. The seashore has had it's greatest building boom ever and these are all 2nd homes. The boom extends into the City of Philadelphia which has seen it's biggest residential boom in over 50 years. 401ks and IRAs are in fact surging and have been for 25 years. With the Dow setting records every day they're surging even more. Unemployment is low in every state and city in the country with the exception of Michigan and the auto belt. Make that the northern auto belt. Nurses are a shortage in every state and will be for another decade. The entire healthcare industry is booming as is financial services and education as white collar and professionals constitute an even larger portion of the jobs pool. At the same time demand for skilled labor,i.e., Carpenters, electricians, mechanics will also remain high. The economy has never been in better shape and the wealth gap between the USA and Western Europe continues to widen at an accelerated pace. We've had a 25% drop in oil prices that is likely to be followed by another 25% as major supply starts to come online amid slower demand. Capitalism is a beautiful thing and American style capitalism the most beautiful of all. The ONLY reason for someone to remain poor or lower middle clase is due to poor life decisions. As Juan Williams has made clear in his new book everyone can be financially successful if they remain off drugs, work hard and wait until they're married to have kids. It could not be any simpler. BTW: This generation coming up gets it. They're all post-Reagan babies. Tell them liberals tried to stop Reagan from dropping 70% tax rates and they won't believe we ever had rates anywhere near 70%. Tell them anyone could get welfare for life and they won't believe it. Tell them we rewarded those having babies on welfare with more money and they won't believe it. Tell them you could murder someone and be on the street in less than 5 years because 'it was society's fault' and they won't believe it. Tell them a felon could have 10 felonies on his resume and liberal judges would blame society and they won't believe it. A wide majority under 30 supports 3-strikes and would support 2-strikes in most cases. This is a vastly different world. This generation is almost the opposite of the liberal boomers. The USA will never approach European taxation and regulation. We'll become less like Europe and vastly richer. Posted by: rdw on October 13, 2006 at 7:14 AM | PERMALINK401ks and IRAs are in fact surging and have been for 25 years. With the Dow setting records every day they're surging even more. I know! Thank God Ronald Reagan wasn't allowed to kill them off in 1985 by a stern, defiant Democratically-controlled Congress! More of that, please! Hey, here you go rdw - Reagan's legacy: The Crash of '87 "This is going to make '29 look like a kiddie party," predicted one trader on the floor of the Pacific Stock Exchange. Indeed, the stock market collapse of October 19, 1987 -- a day that would forever after be known as Black Monday -- was considerably larger in volume than the one that had occurred in October 1929 and sent the world plunging into a Great Depression lasting a decade. On Black Monday the Dow Jones industrial average plunged 508 points -- 22.6 percent of the market (almost double the 12.8 percent drop on October 28, 1929) -- and closed the day at 1738.74. What happened on Wall Street happened as well in Tokyo, Hong Kong, London, Paris, and other markets around the globe. It was the worst week in Wall Street history, and in the aftermath many people wondered anxiously if a global economic disaster would follow. A poll taken shortly after the crash revealed that two out of three Americans expected a serious economic downturn By the end of the week, one marked by wild market fluctuations, the Dow was still down a record 295.98 points; the industrial average stood 28.3 percent below the 2722 peak of August. Volume for the week, which included the four heaviest days in exchange history, totaled an incredible 2.3 billion shares on the Big Board. But there was not much chance that an economic collapse like that which had followed the Crash of '29 would happen again. There were a number of stabilizing factors. One was the existence of federal deposit insurance. In 1929, people had made a run on the banks; after Black Monday banks seemed a far safer repository for savings than the stock market. A second stabilizer was a quick response by the Federal Reserve. The Reserve had been sharply criticized in 1929 for allowing the supply of money and credit to shrink, exacerbating the financial debacle. This time, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan announced on Tuesday morning that the Reserve would "make as much money available as might be needed." In fact, the Reserve pumped enough money into banks that interest rates dropped. A third factor significant in easying the adverse effects of Black Monday was the government's response. After a few days of denying that the crash was anything worse than a correction, President Ronald Reagan acknowledged that federal deficits were one reason for market jitters, and indicated he would consider a modest tax increase as part of a deficit-reduction package, a turnaround from his previous intransigent refusal to contemplate a rise in taxes. What caused the crash? By August 1987 the bull market that had existed since 1982 was the longest in 50 years. The total value of stocks in all markets had increased from $2,472 billion in 1980 to $5,995 billion in 1986. The average number of shares trades daily on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) tripled, from 65 million in 1982 to 180 million in 1987. But experts worried that stock prices were too far ahead of expected corporate earnings. Prior to the crash, the average price-earnings ratio on American stocks was 23, the highest since World War II. "We were 700 points ahead on sheer greed," conceded Shearson Lehman's senior vice-president, Frank Korth. Even though the market was overspeculated, investors were reluctant to bail while stocks continued to rise. Savvy Wall Streeters knew the market was overheated, and many expected a correction of 150 to 250 points. They were concerned about rising budget and trade deficits, and wondered how long the current period of prosperity could last, But no one expected a crash. Two weeks before the crash, investors were shaken by news that the U.S. trade deficit had not declined as expected -- in fact, the $15.7 billion deficit reported in August was 50 percent worse than anticipated. Then an increase in West Germany's interest rates provoked Treasury Secretary James A. Baker into threatening a currency war by driving the dollar down, in open defiance of February's Louvre Accords (by which the U.S., West Germany and five other nations agreed to keep their currency values within a mutually beneficial trading range.) The U.S. objected to higher foreign interest rates because they would mean lower American exports and less available capital on the international market, capital needed to cover the federal budget deficit. A declining dollar, it was feared, would result in a flight of foreign capital from the U.S. These events caused many investors to begin bailing out of the market in anticipation of rocky economic days ahead, especially in light of the chronic failure by a Republican president and a Democratic Congress to agree on how to reduce budget and trade deficits. Posted by: Pale Rider on October 13, 2006 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINKPale Rider, That 'crash' was a short term correction and won't be remembered as anything like Clintons destructive asset bubble. Reagan will go down as the greatest President of the last Century due in large part to his dramatic reformation of the American economy from a highly taxed and regulated European type economy back to a quintessentially American brand of capitalism featuring low taxes, low regulation and massive innovation. We are the envy of the world. Ronnie ended the era of Kenynes and created supply-side economics. His actions grow even more impressive after his death with the ever widening gap between the USA and Western Europe. Nationoal Malaize my ass! That's liberal terminogy. Clinton by contrast has one legacy and one legacy only and it's a blue dress. 
July 2009
June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
