Page 1 of 1
American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:00 am
by kalm
These, ahem, "businessman" must really love our "free market".
Despite bloated rhetoric about the virtues of “free enterprise,” the Chamber demanded taxpayer bailouts for its bank members (AIG, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc.), billions in taxpayer money for its defense contract members, taxpayer money for cleaning up BP’s oil spill, and preferential tax cuts for its millionaire executives.
Trucking Manufacturer Navistar Inc Is On The US Chamber’s Board Of Directors:
– In 2010, Navistar CEO Daniel Ustian increased his total compensation by 27%, from $6.64 million in FY 2009 to $8.43 million in the year that ended October 31. The company has enjoyed healthy profits: in 2009, it earned $320 million, or $4.46 a share, and in 2010, it made $223 million, or $3.11 a share.
– Navistar has slashed jobs at factories across the country. In Springfield, Ohio, Navistar laid off 250 workers from a truck assembly plant. At its plant in Arkansas, the company laid off 477 in 2009 after letting 300 workers go in 2008. Amid the layoffs and plant closures, Navistar, a major military contractor, opened a new factory in Mexico last year.
Health Insurance Company WellPoint Is On The US Chamber’s Board Of Directors:
– In recent years, WellPoint has reported record profits and extraordinary executive compensation. In 2009, WellPoint CEO Angela Braly was awarded a 51% compensation boost from $8.7 million in 2008 to $13.1 million.
– During the same period of high profits and highly compensated executives, WellPoint shed thousands of jobs. In 2009, WellPoint laid off 1,500 employees across the nation. Following the first round of layoffs, the company got rid of an additional 136 jobs in Missouri and 111 in Wisconsin. Notably, during this same period WellPoint’s trade association secretly transfered $86 million to the Chamber to fight health reform.
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/07/chamber-ceo-jobs/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:04 am
by Skjellyfetti
That's a good way to reduce illegal immigration. Create a bunch of manufacturing jobs in Mexico. I like it.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:35 am
by blueballs
Okay... hopefully but doubtfully for the last time: Business in a free market economy is NOT a social service.
Business are NOT run for the common good. They are not run to provide jobs or to generate taxes. They are run to enrich the owners or shareholders of the business. Period.
If a business is able to hire workers who bring a specific skill set and work ethic that enables the business to be more productive and thereby more profitable it will do so. If the worker or prospective worker does not possess a specific skill set that will make the business more productive or profitable he is not needed and will either not be hired or terminated.
The greatest enemy of business in the USA is government in the form of regulation (often by edict, not by representative legislation) and taxation. If a business locates itself in another country it is because it makes business sense for them to do so and the ire of the people in this country should not be with the business doing what is right by its ownership and shareholders, it should be at the government for making the business do so.
To prove my point look no further than states that have no income taxes and are right to work states. They have been hurt less in tougher economic times than their counterparts.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:46 am
by kalm
blueballs wrote: Okay... hopefully but doubtfully for the last time: Business in a free market economy is NOT a social service.
Business are NOT run for the common good. They are not run to provide jobs or to generate taxes. They are run to enrich the owners or shareholders of the business. Period.
1) Tell that to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
2) This is not a free market nor should it be.
3) History - the ideals of the founders and the first 100 years of this country are not on your side in this.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:09 am
by GannonFan
kalm wrote:blueballs wrote: Okay... hopefully but doubtfully for the last time: Business in a free market economy is NOT a social service.
Business are NOT run for the common good. They are not run to provide jobs or to generate taxes. They are run to enrich the owners or shareholders of the business. Period.
1) Tell that to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
2) This is not a free market nor should it be.
3) History - the ideals of the founders and the first 100 years of this country are not on your side in this.
I don't understand #3 - you don't think economic thought has progressed over the past 100 years to kinda trump the economic ideas of the signers of the Constitution or other Founding Fathers? Really, how many of those guys were economic giants anyway? Jefferson really thought the Embargo Act was a great idea and he was massively in debt for much of his life. The same goes for many of the Founding Fathers. It's one thing to go back to them when it comes to political thought and how our government is structured, but relying on them for economic theory is kind of a crazy stance. I mean, we haven't stopped our understanding of science and the natural world on only what the Founding Fathers knew.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:34 am
by kalm
GannonFan wrote:kalm wrote:
1) Tell that to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
2) This is not a free market nor should it be.
3) History - the ideals of the founders and the first 100 years of this country are not on your side in this.
I don't understand #3 - you don't think economic thought has progressed over the past 100 years to kinda trump the economic ideas of the signers of the Constitution or other Founding Fathers? Really, how many of those guys were economic giants anyway? Jefferson really thought the Embargo Act was a great idea and he was massively in debt for much of his life. The same goes for many of the Founding Fathers. It's one thing to go back to them when it comes to political thought and how our government is structured, but relying on them for economic theory is kind of a crazy stance. I mean, we haven't stopped our understanding of science and the natural world on only what the Founding Fathers knew.
The basics haven't changed much, and you could submit that our understanding has been confused. The founders certainly were capable of seeing the danger of entrenched wealth and I believe Jefferson in particular spoke to threats from the banks. Almost prescient if you think about it. In any event, economics is just another form of politics, or vice versa. It's pretty tough to seperate them out.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:57 am
by GannonFan
kalm wrote:GannonFan wrote:
I don't understand #3 - you don't think economic thought has progressed over the past 100 years to kinda trump the economic ideas of the signers of the Constitution or other Founding Fathers? Really, how many of those guys were economic giants anyway? Jefferson really thought the Embargo Act was a great idea and he was massively in debt for much of his life. The same goes for many of the Founding Fathers. It's one thing to go back to them when it comes to political thought and how our government is structured, but relying on them for economic theory is kind of a crazy stance. I mean, we haven't stopped our understanding of science and the natural world on only what the Founding Fathers knew.
The basics haven't changed much, and you could submit that our understanding has been confused. The founders certainly were capable of seeing the danger of entrenched wealth and I believe Jefferson in particular spoke to threats from the banks. Almost prescient if you think about it. In any event, economics is just another form of politics, or vice versa. It's pretty tough to seperate them out.
There's nothing prescient about understanding that rampant speculation, taken to an extreme, can go horribly wrong. I think you're confusing prescience with obviousness. And heck, Jefferson was as much wrong about the good of banks as he was the danger from them.
As for economics just being another form of politics, that's probably just the problem we have today - everyone tries to use economics to fit their particular political stance. It doesn't mean that economics is inherently political (it's not, it's very much a social science that can be viewed objectively outside the realm of politics), but you're right in that the current use of economic theory (or more aptly, certain slices of economic theory, depending on which slice you want) is politically based.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:00 pm
by Bronco
Not to worry our D student president with absolutely no business experience who seems to be doing everything he can to slow the recovery and F up the future for the kids doesn't seem to have the confidence of the worker class.
The respondents said that there must be something in his hidden past that will kick in soon and get us out of this dem recession.
"Gallup shows Obama at 27% approval on handling deficit, 37% on economy"
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:03 pm
by GannonFan
Bronco wrote:Not to worry our D student president with absolutely no business experience who seems to be doing everything he can to slow the recovery and F up the future for the kids doesn't seem to have the confidence of the worker class.
The respondents said that there must be something in his hidden past that will kick in soon and get us out of this dem recession.
"Gallup shows Obama at 27% approval on handling deficit, 37% on economy"
Why do you keep referring to him as a "D" student? By all accounts, he was very successful in school. And we've had plenty of Presidents with no business experience - I wasn't aware that was a criteria for the job.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:10 pm
by Grizalltheway
Bronco wrote:Not to worry our D student president with absolutely no business experience who seems to be doing everything he can to slow the recovery and F up the future for the kids doesn't seem to have the confidence of the worker class.
The respondents said that there must be something in his hidden past that will kick in soon and get us out of this dem recession.
"Gallup shows Obama at 27% approval on handling deficit, 37% on economy"
You mind giving us some specifics on that? I'm no economist, but GDP is growing by 3.2%, which isn't all that bad considering the housing sector is still fucked.
Re: American Workers II
Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:46 pm
by houndawg
Bronco wrote:Not to worry our D student president with absolutely no business experience who seems to be doing everything he can to slow the recovery and F up the future for the kids doesn't seem to have the confidence of the worker class.
The respondents said that there must be something in his hidden past that will kick in soon and get us out of this dem recession.
"Gallup shows Obama at 27% approval on handling deficit, 37% on economy"
D student? I guess they'll let anybody run the Harvard Law Review.