We should scream this one from the rooftops as the reason.
GOP is doing their corporate masters bidding. I read through the house version and it was pretty tame. How can someone argue against giving a corporation $$ to offshore outsource American jobs. They can't! So they hide it with some other sort of B.S.
I think we should let it be known, loud and clear the GOP wants American jobs to be shipped offshore.
the corporate tax change, which would have stop the incentives for offshoring jobs, was in the tax extenders bill.
It was defeated.
I never imagined that when I wrote about June being a "perfect storm" for the unemployed, that I had underestimated the situation.
On a related note, on Monday the state appeals court ruled in favor of Gov. Schwarzenegger.
You see, the Governator wants to pay all state workers minimum wage until there is an agreement on the state budget. That's $7.25 an hour, starting with the August 1st paycheck.
Since most budget fights typically go into September before any agreement, that means hundreds of thousands of workers in the Sacramento area are going to be getting paid less than enough to afford their rent or mortgage payment alone for two months in a row.
What do you think that is going to do to the economy of Sacramento this summer?
And this was before we factor in the $2 Billion budget hole from today's Congressional stupidity.
in the early 1900's they had all sorts of people who could not speak English and either could the kids....but back then, they didn't put up with any bullshit. Seriously, even to become a teacher is so much certification crap nutso stuff and a real lack of focus on teaching the subject at hand.
So, thinking that just because parents or kids don't speak English is the issue....it's not....it's the U.S. school system today.
Back in the old days I'm pretty sure they focused in on the kids who wanted to learn too. In the 1920's was a surge in college graduates.
did the corporate tax changes, to stop the incentives to offshore outsource jobs....was that in the latest defeated Senate version?
If so, that's a major multinational corporations agenda to get tax breaks to offshore outsource U.S. jobs....so our bought and paid fors of course would defeat that.
Welcome to the rest of us, no income, never got any, that's 52% of the workforce...
I think all of America is up in arms, realizing both parties are corrupt as hell. Unfortunately we don't have much alternatives to turn to as representation.
But these @&*)$@ are going to pay, but the reality is they should have passed a direct jobs program over a year ago, maybe even 2 years ago. Direct jobs are the government manages the projects, possibly farmed out to the military and so on and it's a "bottom up" direct jobs, direct hire stucture. Aka WPA, CCC, etc.
Gee, now what projects are a disaster....let me see....something about oil....
what other things are a mess....let's see....anyone recall that buzz word superfund?
there is an economic case, namely the almost 10% unemployment numbers to put a moratorium on all immigration for a period.
I think my point is the spin in this topic is off the rails and that's due to philosophies, special interest groups, but bottom line, immigration does affect labor markets and it did also in the early 1900's....
I'm just going to ignore all other motivations from the 1920's for reducing immigration, many of which weren't pretty, but labor markets was real.
and they pay taxes as well. Of course that's less than private sector jobs in terms of adding to the economy but that's why "G" contributes to GDP. Add things like shipping public services offshore, well, not only is that the same tax dollars, but now one isn't using that money to recycle it back into the economy as well as employing some Americans to provide whatever service the job is.
I think you're getting hung up on some binary thing. Job growth, isn't binary. Government contracts with the private sector, they can add to the overall economic growth.
It's similar to war, that can pull an economy out of depression but of course it is massive deficit spending (usually).
Ted Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson re-wrote immigration law to make immigration country-neutral. Since 60 % of the worlds population is poorer than Mexico, we are basically importing the population of the 3rd world.
At high school graduations, one of the biggest language prize, sought competitively, os the prize of English as a Second Language.
I say we just shut off immigration as happened in the 1920's. We could then begin to unionize the local population. That process happened between 1925 and 1955 (peak union membership).
What is said against that is that we are a 'safety valve' for the rest of the world. The answer to the safety valve theory is that 2 million of 6 billion immigrate to the U.S. We take as much immigration as the rest of the world combined. If 4 billion people live in poverty worse than Mexico, the immigration of 2 million to the U.S. makes no significant difference.
The reason for unionization is
Union Membership = Member Matriculation = Border Control.
No english spoken at home and too many people stuffed into small apartments etc etc etc.
Teachers are being paid to basically baby sit - I have seen teachers say the same things themselves concluding that there is no way to change the results when the parents can't speak english and really are not part of the process.
That begs the question as to why are we paying for babysitting these types of students? I'm talking about kids in 9th grade with 5th grade skills. There is no way they will ever make up what they don't know and move ahead at the same time.
90% of K-12 budgets go to pay and benefits. Thats outside of building costs which are usually through bonds.
I see no one can figure out this riddle so I'll give it a try.
Public employees add to debt. They do not contribute a positive cash flow to the economy. Adding more public employees merely adds to the deficit so in effect there is no way for any amount of public employees to pay for even a single public employee.
Juicing the economy during the depression was completely bailed out by WW2 in that afterward we stood as an intact industrial giant while manufacturing in other countries was destroyed by the war.
Besides The Oil Drum, another source for detailed, technical information is Upstream Online.
It's another industry niche trade online rag, but you can get some details the MSM just doesn't cover.
The New Orleans local newspapers is doing a good job of coverage as well.
It's hard to locate the beyond inane never ending blocking of efforts, technologies to save wildlife, clean up the mess, the politics and money in one place.
Next Tuesday supposedly BP will have 53,000 barrels per day collection/burn capacity, but as one can see, all it takes is one storm and everything shuts down.
Supposedly they were working on something underwater to continue collections during a storm, but don't see an update/latest.
Might be technically not feasible, unknown at this point.
I'll bet money it will take analysis a while to find out all of the loopholes, but regardless, I imagine derivatives reform will be rendered useless, simply because it was in the House version. More later.
But for now, the Reuters is reporting 110 amendments, that's just today on just derivatives.
Unfortunately the technical info is more and more lacking, but looking at spillcam you can see the cap now. I don't know if that is the ROV camera angle or what, but let's hope it means a larger percentage of capture.
On the other side of things, it's just a horror show. Literally they stopped the sand barriers claiming Louisiana did not have the right "building permits". Building permits. We have an ecological Armageddon in the gulf and so asshat stops them due to "building permits".
This is the great crime on top of the oxygen levels potentially dropping. That will kill, God knows how much sea life.
Of course they are also running out of boom and other supplies, yet supposedly there is tons of it literally in warehouses.
It's unclear if they accepted foreign help, last I read it was still blocked.
Of course I imagine no administrators will take a cut from their 6 figures (cough, cough). (serious boat in K-12!)
That said, in minorities and many areas, now only 50% even graduate high school. These numbers are 3rd world frankly.
Now they are cutting and dumping even more on the remaining teachers. This isn't my area of expertise but one of the most amazing American social benefits was free education through K-12, it helped build America, plus was the great "melting pot" stirrer, but nowadays it sure seems like it's going to the dogs! I'd hate to be a kid these days. 50% and even when one gets a college degree, that doesn't mean one is going to get a job.
If the Fed is interested in reflating the housing market, and wants low interest rates to "rebuild capital," why not rebuild the capital of the American people by a program of direct lending through public intermediaries? Let the Fed guarantee mortgages at 1 percent over the 10 year Treasury -- that's a 33% markup at the current rate for the 10 year bond. Banks could service government-issued mortgages. Yes, it would cut them out of the origination loop and deprive them of the array of fees they charge for largely fictitious products like title insurance-over-and-over again, but it might benefit the Americans who are struggling with usurious rates to keep their homes and bring home buyers into the market. And then there are local governments in hard-hit areas that might see an increase in revenues
and I sincerely doubt this one because a signal comes up with the same #SS being checked. The reality is the agenda is flood the labor market, not enforce the law, never punish employers and never secure the borders. Therefore anything that stops that agenda is labeled "racist xenophobe" and they try to block....case in point is the refusal to implement e-verify. A host of so called Progressive Dems ran on "punish illegal employers"
which of course hasn't happened. Why? Well, beyond the business interests demanding their cheap,exploitive labor, there is also this cold hard reality, eventually some illegals are going to have go back home. If you cannot use illegal labor, you cannot have it both ways and say those same illegals should keep those jobs.
Everytime those illegals lost their jobs, the wages went up and they had a line out the door for U.S. workers applying.
This is the reality, we have more than enough workers already and we do not have enough jobs and jobs with good wages and benefits. That's just the way it is and no philosophy or some sort of unionization agenda is going to make this disappear.
This is where reality and political terms part company. People either realize immigration affects labor markets, supply and thus wages or they refuse to do so. Bottom line. Even Paul Krugman recently commented on these economic realities.
Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration, and that is because illegals were being used to union bust them. It was started by Harris Miller in the 1980's as a massive campaign, hitting farm workers first.
But you have all sorts of special interests trying to claim their agenda is "Progressive", ahem, I do not think wage repression, worker displacement is "Progressive", and if they cannot claim that, then everything else is "racist xenophobe".
The bottom line answer is a nation-state must control and limit it's immigration numbers at maximum per the demands of labor markets but that's not what is going on. One can see that in STEM/professional jobs with guest workers displacing U.S. workers and it's been going on for 20 years now.
You can unionize to death but if you flood a labor supply past demand, it doesn't matter, you will get worker displacement and you will get wage repression and erosion of worker's rights, bargaining power. It was true n 1400 AD and it's true now.
I'm pretty much a stickler on this because there is so much bullshit out there when this topic is mentioned and believe me, I know my labor econ fairly well at this point.
We should scream this one from the rooftops as the reason.
GOP is doing their corporate masters bidding. I read through the house version and it was pretty tame. How can someone argue against giving a corporation $$ to offshore outsource American jobs. They can't! So they hide it with some other sort of B.S.
I think we should let it be known, loud and clear the GOP wants American jobs to be shipped offshore.
the corporate tax change, which would have stop the incentives for offshoring jobs, was in the tax extenders bill.
It was defeated.
I never imagined that when I wrote about June being a "perfect storm" for the unemployed, that I had underestimated the situation.
On a related note, on Monday the state appeals court ruled in favor of Gov. Schwarzenegger.
You see, the Governator wants to pay all state workers minimum wage until there is an agreement on the state budget. That's $7.25 an hour, starting with the August 1st paycheck.
Since most budget fights typically go into September before any agreement, that means hundreds of thousands of workers in the Sacramento area are going to be getting paid less than enough to afford their rent or mortgage payment alone for two months in a row.
What do you think that is going to do to the economy of Sacramento this summer?
And this was before we factor in the $2 Billion budget hole from today's Congressional stupidity.
in the early 1900's they had all sorts of people who could not speak English and either could the kids....but back then, they didn't put up with any bullshit. Seriously, even to become a teacher is so much certification crap nutso stuff and a real lack of focus on teaching the subject at hand.
So, thinking that just because parents or kids don't speak English is the issue....it's not....it's the U.S. school system today.
Back in the old days I'm pretty sure they focused in on the kids who wanted to learn too. In the 1920's was a surge in college graduates.
did the corporate tax changes, to stop the incentives to offshore outsource jobs....was that in the latest defeated Senate version?
If so, that's a major multinational corporations agenda to get tax breaks to offshore outsource U.S. jobs....so our bought and paid fors of course would defeat that.
Welcome to the rest of us, no income, never got any, that's 52% of the workforce...
I think all of America is up in arms, realizing both parties are corrupt as hell. Unfortunately we don't have much alternatives to turn to as representation.
But these @&*)$@ are going to pay, but the reality is they should have passed a direct jobs program over a year ago, maybe even 2 years ago. Direct jobs are the government manages the projects, possibly farmed out to the military and so on and it's a "bottom up" direct jobs, direct hire stucture. Aka WPA, CCC, etc.
Gee, now what projects are a disaster....let me see....something about oil....
what other things are a mess....let's see....anyone recall that buzz word superfund?
there is an economic case, namely the almost 10% unemployment numbers to put a moratorium on all immigration for a period.
I think my point is the spin in this topic is off the rails and that's due to philosophies, special interest groups, but bottom line, immigration does affect labor markets and it did also in the early 1900's....
I'm just going to ignore all other motivations from the 1920's for reducing immigration, many of which weren't pretty, but labor markets was real.
and they pay taxes as well. Of course that's less than private sector jobs in terms of adding to the economy but that's why "G" contributes to GDP. Add things like shipping public services offshore, well, not only is that the same tax dollars, but now one isn't using that money to recycle it back into the economy as well as employing some Americans to provide whatever service the job is.
I think you're getting hung up on some binary thing. Job growth, isn't binary. Government contracts with the private sector, they can add to the overall economic growth.
It's similar to war, that can pull an economy out of depression but of course it is massive deficit spending (usually).
I guess that's why god made banks. to be robbed when our government fucks us.
Ted Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson re-wrote immigration law to make immigration country-neutral. Since 60 % of the worlds population is poorer than Mexico, we are basically importing the population of the 3rd world.
At high school graduations, one of the biggest language prize, sought competitively, os the prize of English as a Second Language.
I say we just shut off immigration as happened in the 1920's. We could then begin to unionize the local population. That process happened between 1925 and 1955 (peak union membership).
What is said against that is that we are a 'safety valve' for the rest of the world. The answer to the safety valve theory is that 2 million of 6 billion immigrate to the U.S. We take as much immigration as the rest of the world combined. If 4 billion people live in poverty worse than Mexico, the immigration of 2 million to the U.S. makes no significant difference.
The reason for unionization is
Union Membership = Member Matriculation = Border Control.
No english spoken at home and too many people stuffed into small apartments etc etc etc.
Teachers are being paid to basically baby sit - I have seen teachers say the same things themselves concluding that there is no way to change the results when the parents can't speak english and really are not part of the process.
That begs the question as to why are we paying for babysitting these types of students? I'm talking about kids in 9th grade with 5th grade skills. There is no way they will ever make up what they don't know and move ahead at the same time.
90% of K-12 budgets go to pay and benefits. Thats outside of building costs which are usually through bonds.
How would unions check on illegal aliens any better than e-verify or a licensing procedure?
I see no one can figure out this riddle so I'll give it a try.
Public employees add to debt. They do not contribute a positive cash flow to the economy. Adding more public employees merely adds to the deficit so in effect there is no way for any amount of public employees to pay for even a single public employee.
Juicing the economy during the depression was completely bailed out by WW2 in that afterward we stood as an intact industrial giant while manufacturing in other countries was destroyed by the war.
They don't care that the unemployed workers cannot find jobs and have no way to pay their bills. Should we send our bills to Washington?
Besides The Oil Drum, another source for detailed, technical information is Upstream Online.
It's another industry niche trade online rag, but you can get some details the MSM just doesn't cover.
The New Orleans local newspapers is doing a good job of coverage as well.
It's hard to locate the beyond inane never ending blocking of efforts, technologies to save wildlife, clean up the mess, the politics and money in one place.
Next Tuesday supposedly BP will have 53,000 barrels per day collection/burn capacity, but as one can see, all it takes is one storm and everything shuts down.
Supposedly they were working on something underwater to continue collections during a storm, but don't see an update/latest.
Might be technically not feasible, unknown at this point.
I'll bet money it will take analysis a while to find out all of the loopholes, but regardless, I imagine derivatives reform will be rendered useless, simply because it was in the House version. More later.
But for now, the Reuters is reporting 110 amendments, that's just today on just derivatives.
Unfortunately the technical info is more and more lacking, but looking at spillcam you can see the cap now. I don't know if that is the ROV camera angle or what, but let's hope it means a larger percentage of capture.
On the other side of things, it's just a horror show. Literally they stopped the sand barriers claiming Louisiana did not have the right "building permits". Building permits. We have an ecological Armageddon in the gulf and so asshat stops them due to "building permits".
This is the great crime on top of the oxygen levels potentially dropping. That will kill, God knows how much sea life.
Of course they are also running out of boom and other supplies, yet supposedly there is tons of it literally in warehouses.
It's unclear if they accepted foreign help, last I read it was still blocked.
Of course I imagine no administrators will take a cut from their 6 figures (cough, cough). (serious boat in K-12!)
That said, in minorities and many areas, now only 50% even graduate high school. These numbers are 3rd world frankly.
Now they are cutting and dumping even more on the remaining teachers. This isn't my area of expertise but one of the most amazing American social benefits was free education through K-12, it helped build America, plus was the great "melting pot" stirrer, but nowadays it sure seems like it's going to the dogs! I'd hate to be a kid these days. 50% and even when one gets a college degree, that doesn't mean one is going to get a job.
and takes money out of the pocket of the Banksters is automatically dismissed!
(great idea).
If the Fed is interested in reflating the housing market, and wants low interest rates to "rebuild capital," why not rebuild the capital of the American people by a program of direct lending through public intermediaries? Let the Fed guarantee mortgages at 1 percent over the 10 year Treasury -- that's a 33% markup at the current rate for the 10 year bond. Banks could service government-issued mortgages. Yes, it would cut them out of the origination loop and deprive them of the array of fees they charge for largely fictitious products like title insurance-over-and-over again, but it might benefit the Americans who are struggling with usurious rates to keep their homes and bring home buyers into the market. And then there are local governments in hard-hit areas that might see an increase in revenues
and I sincerely doubt this one because a signal comes up with the same #SS being checked. The reality is the agenda is flood the labor market, not enforce the law, never punish employers and never secure the borders. Therefore anything that stops that agenda is labeled "racist xenophobe" and they try to block....case in point is the refusal to implement e-verify. A host of so called Progressive Dems ran on "punish illegal employers"
which of course hasn't happened. Why? Well, beyond the business interests demanding their cheap,exploitive labor, there is also this cold hard reality, eventually some illegals are going to have go back home. If you cannot use illegal labor, you cannot have it both ways and say those same illegals should keep those jobs.
Everytime those illegals lost their jobs, the wages went up and they had a line out the door for U.S. workers applying.
This is the reality, we have more than enough workers already and we do not have enough jobs and jobs with good wages and benefits. That's just the way it is and no philosophy or some sort of unionization agenda is going to make this disappear.
This is where reality and political terms part company. People either realize immigration affects labor markets, supply and thus wages or they refuse to do so. Bottom line. Even Paul Krugman recently commented on these economic realities.
Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration, and that is because illegals were being used to union bust them. It was started by Harris Miller in the 1980's as a massive campaign, hitting farm workers first.
But you have all sorts of special interests trying to claim their agenda is "Progressive", ahem, I do not think wage repression, worker displacement is "Progressive", and if they cannot claim that, then everything else is "racist xenophobe".
The bottom line answer is a nation-state must control and limit it's immigration numbers at maximum per the demands of labor markets but that's not what is going on. One can see that in STEM/professional jobs with guest workers displacing U.S. workers and it's been going on for 20 years now.
You can unionize to death but if you flood a labor supply past demand, it doesn't matter, you will get worker displacement and you will get wage repression and erosion of worker's rights, bargaining power. It was true n 1400 AD and it's true now.
I'm pretty much a stickler on this because there is so much bullshit out there when this topic is mentioned and believe me, I know my labor econ fairly well at this point.
Pages