Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Are_grits_groceries

(17,111 posts)
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 05:37 AM Dec 2013

Who speaks for the unemployed? Who?

Who is speaking for the unemployed?

And the poor, those living from paycheck to paycheck, veterans living on the edge, and others who are considered the least, the last, and the lost?

There is a budget than unconscionably cuts unemployment benefits 3 days after Christmas. This is on top of cut after cut that has already decimated the safety net. Children in this country are going hungry. Yet, the 'representatives' of somebody are denying them even more food.

Congress gets paid. So do all the people that work for them. The lobbyists aren't going hungry. The Pentagon has been receiving money in bits and pieces because those giving it to them hope nobody notices. They all have voices.

The banks got paid. Financial institutions were bailed out. Corporations retain tax breaks and brazillions in profits. The rich suck up every crumb of wealth in any form that they can.

As some of these groups were being helped, they were dumping people out of their homes, cutting jobs, wages, and benefits. They were refusing to put their money back into the economy. So they created a hot mess that affected many people adversely and then turned their backs on these same people who were hit the hardest through no fault of their own.

It was an economic hit and run that left pain and misery behind. It's no secret who ran over them. Yet they are not being called into account. They continue to flourish.

So where are those voices for those who can't be heard or who won't be listened to. The Democrats have usually been their champions yet they are unaccountably quiet. Why? It's too risky to ask for more gruel?

Congress will get to go home. Think about that. HOME. At the same time they will have visited more misery on those who have no homes or are holding on to the ones they have with their fingertips.

They all should be locked in the Capitol with no heat and only bread and water. Then they might have one inkling of what it's like to do without. As it is, they don't know and worst of all, they don't care.

Meh! They all deserve to have ghosts at the end of their beds rattling chains every night.

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Who speaks for the unemployed? Who? (Original Post) Are_grits_groceries Dec 2013 OP
Rec. The answer, sadly, is that the poor have no party or voice in Washington... Demo_Chris Dec 2013 #1
We have become a country of "me first", "it's my money" and fuck you. mnhtnbb Dec 2013 #2
One would assume the current... ReRe Dec 2013 #3
I think his name is Tom Perez rusty fender Dec 2013 #4
I can't ever remember hearing that name! ReRe Dec 2013 #8
Well obviously, if the poor felt that strongly about it they should hire lobbyists. Joe Shlabotnik Dec 2013 #5
not the dem party, that's fer sure. KG Dec 2013 #6
This message was self-deleted by its author delrem Dec 2013 #7
There is no Munificence Dec 2013 #9
Fewer unemployed = dickthegrouch Dec 2013 #11
DURec. bvar22 Dec 2013 #10
They deserve to be made poor and have to live in the world they created. n/t Egalitarian Thug Dec 2013 #12
 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
1. Rec. The answer, sadly, is that the poor have no party or voice in Washington...
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 05:47 AM
Dec 2013

Even here on DU they are largely off the radar.

mnhtnbb

(31,382 posts)
2. We have become a country of "me first", "it's my money" and fuck you.
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 06:10 AM
Dec 2013

I wish I were more optimistic that the course the country is on could change,
but it saddens me to see the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer,
the middle class disappearing and very few people giving a damn.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
3. One would assume the current...
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 06:30 AM
Dec 2013

... Labor Secretary would. And I swear, I can't name the current Labor Secretary! Hilda Salis resigned, didn't she? Robert Reich, Clinton's Labor Sec, is the only one I can think of that trumpets the underpaid, under-employed and unemployed. Maybe Alan Grayson, and Bernie Sanders.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
8. I can't ever remember hearing that name!
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 07:37 AM
Dec 2013

Maybe he's one of the appointments that has been held up because of McConnell & the Senate Repubs. There IS a backlog, afterall... 4.5 yrs of appointees. He might not be confirmed and sworn in yet.

Tom Perez. Well, what do you know. Thanks.

Joe Shlabotnik

(5,604 posts)
5. Well obviously, if the poor felt that strongly about it they should hire lobbyists.
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 06:47 AM
Dec 2013
Actually the lobbyists that they did have, namely Occupy, were ignored, ridiculed, surveiled, beaten and arrested.

Response to Are_grits_groceries (Original post)

Munificence

(493 posts)
9. There is no
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 07:38 AM
Dec 2013

profit to be had in putting forth an effort to speak for the unemployed...there's your answer for why there's no "Who".

dickthegrouch

(3,172 posts)
11. Fewer unemployed =
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 03:35 PM
Dec 2013

Less drain on public money
More tax revenue
More economic activity in general
Fewer bankruptcies

What do you mean "there's no profit to be had"?

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
10. DURec.
Mon Dec 16, 2013, 01:24 PM
Dec 2013

Well Done.
I agree completely.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises or excuses.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Who speaks for the unempl...