30+ Million jobs could be created in the next year..

[Union Yes]

By repealing NAFTA, CAFTA and renegotiating or scrapping GATT altogether.

Ban the sale of goods in America by American companies that use foreign slave/serf labor. Known as reimportation.

Ban reimportation.

Tax/tariff all imports that were produced by low paid sweatshop type labor. So that said products are forced to compete with products produced by workers who are paid a fair wage.

An American company should never again be allowed to produce a product in a foreign country then reimport it back into the US to sell it in America.

It's a sad day in America when the term "American Made" has become a foreign concept.

Is it too much to ask and expect that Dems actually act like they give a fuck about the little fella?

[Odin2005]

1. Free Trade is a SCAM!

[keep_it_real]

22. I N D E E D ! ! ! for sure

[timeforpeace]

23. Health care reform is intended to be the jobs program.

[Enthusiast]

52. Globalization and free trade are scams! nt

[mod mom]

72. !

[Fearless]

88. It's not a scam... the tables are tilted...

If third-world nations had equitable labor laws and if this nation would enforce anti-trust/monopoly laws, it would work just fine.

[Chulanowa]

91. Labor laws are the antithesis of "free trade"

As are anti-trust/monopoly laws.

Free trade is a scam unless it's not free trade?

[Fearless]

99. The original idea of free trade is simply trade between countries without tariff.

The same as we do from state to state today. Any perversion from there isn't genuine.

[earcandle]

100. And THE CLINTONS started it.

[Mind_your_head]

2. Kick and kick......

This might not by "the way", but we sure as hell need to be figuring out how to bring jobs ~ good paying jobs ~ back to the the United States of America!

:kick: for jobs! (good paying jobs!) :kick:

[Hydra]

3. OMG, you can't fix the system!

Look how much effort they put into breaking it!

You can't fix it before it kills all the people it's supposed to! :evilgrin:

[Union Yes]

5. Sorry, I let my inner progressive do the talkin for me when he wrote this OP..

he's a fiesty bastage. :silly: :hippie: :rofl:

:hi:

[Hydra]

6. Serious though

When this crash was predicted and started, lots of us put our heads together and said "Why? How does this benefit the people in charge?"

I came to the conclusion that this was the easiest way to starve out all the "undesirables." What happens if this is a "jobless recovery"? I can't afford to emigrate. Unless I get an inside track, I'll probably winding up starving with my disabled relative. I bet that just makes the TPTB just cry a river, though.

[safeinOhio]

4. Why are so many afraid of a trade war?

The same ones that'll attack another country with the military in a NY minute. That is about the only war I can support. I can live without Dollar General and Wally World and I don't care if I ever talk to some one from support that can't speak English again. We can't live off of dollar menu jobs alone.

[whathehell]

7. +100

Sick of what Reagonomics, "free" trade, Outsourcing and Mega greed has done to this country.

I remember the America I grew up in...The one with an industrial base and the largest middle class in the world, the one that had the largest number of college graduates in the world...The one that was the envy of the world.

[Deja Q]

58. We can envy and build with each other, but why destroy each other?

Why do the globalists want misery and destruction?

[whathehell]

75. I have no idea.

[anonymous171]

10. I agree. I am also an unapologetic trade war monger. nt

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

16. because the US loses trade wars

[anonymous171]

17. How? We have all the resources. We have all the labor. nt

[Deja Q]

56. Would you be willing to work for the level of pay they want?

We have the labor now. Judging by product and service quality, our laborers aren't so bad despite the excuses made to be rid of them. (Though I won't deny a few definitely are, I just refuse to believe the corporate excuses thanks to empirical knowledge and evidence.)

It's about lowest costs regardless of quality and the devaluation of labor, period. In that respect the world is flat.

And that sort of exploitation is not worth supporting.

And people around the world will eventually end up with the same troubles too. They just don't see it yet because they're being sold the song and dance. And if it weren't for US citizens, on top of saving world wars and donating food and money and subsidizing medicine costs around the world (why else is the price we pay exponentially higher in a "flat world"), and jobs, now our taxes are supporting the entities that just about destroyed the global economy. Irony is cool.

[Union Yes]

19. We lose because corporations write our abysmal trade policies. nt

[AdHocSolver]

41. Protecting Americans from predatory multinational corporations is NOT a "trade war".

The term "trade war" is a scare phrase as meaningless as "free trade".

The only "trade war" is the war against the American middle class being waged by the multinational corporations. There is no way American workers can compete for jobs against foreigners who are forced to work for seventy or eighty hours a week for the equivalent of fifty cents an hour.

The loss of jobs is the way the U.S. is losing the so-called "trade war".

[Deja Q]

57. *DING* *DING* *DING* we have a winner!

[Hippo_Tron]

38. Because nobody wins in a trade war unless you can crush your opponent

A trade war between Bolivia and the US would yield good results for the US. A trade war between the US and China or the US and the EU would be disastrous for both sides.

Trade is about a lot more than cheap labor and Dollar General and Wally World (although those are components of it no doubt). IMO Wally World's business model was problematic for society before it started outsourcing. If we're serious that we want to live without Wally World then we need to pass laws that make laws that would prevent such a business model from being viable.

[Hannah Bell]

42. that's just the cover story. it's global ruling class v. peons, not US v. other countries.

half of china's exports = foreign-owned.

[NYC_SKP]

8. Kicked and Highly Recommended.

This should never have been allowed to go so far.

Of course, and sadly, some will moan that things cost more.

But not me, I'll pay more for well made goods made here.

Recommended.

[Union Yes]

9. A horrible side effect: You'll be paid more too! =)

[NYC_SKP]

18. I'm going to remember that next time someone tells me they HAVE to shop WalMart!

Thanks!

:thumbsup:

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

11. oh yeah, Dependencia theory worked just fucking great in Latin America

"import-substituting industrialization" rarely produces the desired results,

[Union Yes]

13. It worked great in the '90's before NAFTA took hold and outsourcing began to undercut our economy.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

14. Much of what is attributed to NAFTA began in the 70's

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

32. What world are you living in that you think outsourcing began with NAFTA?

Hell, by the time NAFTA came into effect all of the major industrial employers in my hometown had already moved out - in some cases decades prior to NAFTA. Blaming NAFTA for outsourcing is like blaming water for being rain.

[Fla Dem]

54. Outsourcing began long before the 90's.

I was working for a company in the 80's that was outsourcing computer programming to India, I believe the company in India was TATA. And before that many companies were exporting jobs to Mexico.

[Deja Q]

59. Early 1970s, very true.

The question is, while we're building nations into richer countries - which is not a bad thing, how do we prevent our own country from losing? That's the real issue.

[smalll]

12. After all, Juche is working out so well for the North Koreans.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

33. I have no idea what you're talking about, but that photo is goddamn awesome! n/t

[Omaha Steve]

15. K&R

I saw a shirt that was Made in Guatemala from American source materials. WTF?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

20. I love how some people have a silver bullet to this problem.

Ban the sale of goods in America by American companies that use foreign slave/serf labor. Known as reimportation.

Define the terms you are using. What is "slave/serf" labor?

Tax/tariff all imports that were produced by low paid sweatshop type labor. So that said products are forced to compete with products produced by workers who are paid a fair wage.

Again, I would like to see a definition for "low paid sweatshop type labor." I suspect that any definition you provide will apply to many employers in the US.

An American company should never again be allowed to produce a product in a foreign country then reimport it back into the US to sell it in America.

Why? If I as an American businessman would like to produce, say, balsamic vinegar in Modena, Italy, why should I be prevented from selling it in the US?

Furthermore if I were in that situation I'd just sell it elsewhere anyway, since you'd like to either prevent me from doing it or tax me out of existence.

Is it too much to ask and expect that Dems actually act like they give a fuck about the little fella?

Is it too much to ask that people in developing countries should be allowed to make a living?

[anonymous171]

28. Ah you again. Free Trade (as it exists today) harms the 3rd world

Everyone except John fucking Stossel knows this.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

30. Allowing people to sell goods which they have manufactured is harmful?

I have two primary issues with "free trade" as it exists today. First, I believe that free trade should be accompanied by free movement of labor between countries. This does not currently exist, except within the EU. Second, I believe that free trade should be accompanied by recognition of trade unions, and greater involvement of trade unions in the process of trade negotiations. This also does not currently exist in anything like the form that it should. However, you simply cannot state that raising tariffs against developing countries which export goods is somehow *good* for those countries. It isn't. How is making their marketable products less marketable good for them?

[anonymous171]

44. Wow. I agree wtih your conditions.

Which is why I believe that true Free Trade will never actually happen. Borders are much too useful for companies. When there are no borders and trade unions have equal standing with capital on the international trade scene, then I might support free trade. Until then, I'll take what protectionism I can get.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

50. You may agree with my conditions but you haven't answered my question.

How is punishing a country with punitive tariffs good for that country? This makes no sense at all.

[anonymous171]

77. So they can gear their industry towards making their own country better.

And perhaps start developing unique industries and exporting resources and services that other countries want, rather than just being a pen for cheap labor.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

95. You might have an argument if we were talking about countries...

...that already have an existing, strong middle class. But we're not talking about those countries, are we? We're talking about the developing world. So if you'd like to show the developing world what's good for them, have at it. Really, go right ahead. I'm sure punishing them with tariffs because "we know what's good for you" is going to go over like a sack of lead.

[OnionPatch]

61. Wow, someone finally hit on the point I always think about

They want totally free borders to bring their goods and capital across but look at how they fight to keep those strong borders in place for people (labor). What's good for labor should be good for capital.

[Hello_Kitty]

87. Putting those things in place would defeat the entire purpose of globalization.

Union busting is a feature of so-called "free trade", not a bug. And nobody is talking about tariffs on everything we import. Just on things that are, used to be, or could be made here.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

92. We used to make socks.

Nobody is going to make socks here. It doesn't make economic sense.

[AdHocSolver]

43. Is it too much to ask that people in the U.S. should be allowed to make a living?

The problem is not the Chinese. The problem is the multinational corporations which set up factories in China and set the pay scales and working conditions in that country and in other newly industrialized countries.

If you prefer the term "sweatshop" labor, "slave/serf" labor would be forcing the workers to toil seventy or eighty hours a week at the equivalent of 50 cents an hour. This represents poor wages even in countries with a lower price level than the U.S. The Chinese workers will never get rich under those conditions. The majority of them will never even make middle class status. Those people are currently not allowed to make a living thanks to the greed and predation of the multinational corporations.

Moreover, low cost production due to low wages does not translate into better prices for Americans. The markup on imported merchandise makes the cost to Americans not much less than the cost of American made goods. The corporations just keep more profit for themselves and give their executives bigger bonuses.

No economy can sustain the loss of jobs to the extent that the U.S. has lost jobs, and continues to lose jobs, without collapsing into a deep and long lasting depression.

The only way to save the U.S. economy is to produce in this country most of what we purchase. That means bringing family supporting jobs back to the U.S., and if it takes getting rid of NAFTA, the WTO, the World Bank, and other corporate cartel agreements, as well as imposing import quotas and tariffs on foreign made goods, then it better be done or this country is finished as a world power.

Already, foreign countries and financial institutions are fed up with loaning the U.S. billions of dollars to finance this country's massive gluttony on their dime. We have to take action to correct this abysmal economic situation or the foreigners will pull the plug on the U.S themselves.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

48. Yes, in fact, it is...

...if your definition of "making a living" precludes 90% of the rest of the world from trying to make a living, too. Which is basically what you propose when you talk about punishing developing countries.

The only way to save the U.S. economy is to produce in this country most of what we purchase.

Name a single modern Western state that does that. None of them do.

Moreover, low cost production due to low wages does not translate into better prices for Americans

Yes it does. Most companies that do business in China compute their profit margin based on FOB or something quite similar. You can get a flat screen TV for not a lot of money right now primarily because of low cost of labor and the effect of economies of scale on large displays (which is itself a direct result of US demand) FOB is higher in Taiwan because labor is more expensive. This is why nobody makes socks in Taiwan any more. Hell, nobody makes socks in China any more. It's cheaper to do it in southeast asia.

Already, foreign countries and financial institutions are fed up with loaning the U.S. billions of dollars to finance this country's massive gluttony on their dime.

US government securities are the single safest investment in the history of the human race, and that has not changed, nor will it change any time soon. This is all just so much gibberish.

[AdHocSolver]

102. You know the capitalist talking points. You have not been paying attention to U.S. economic problems

The rest of the world would make a much BETTER living if the corporate cartels were prevented from exploiting them.

No worker made it into the middle class working for low pay under sweatshop conditions. The growth in the American middle class grew hand in hand with the successes of the union movement. When workers were able to afford to buy the products that they made, could afford to go to college to enhance their educations, could send their kids to college, then the U.S. economy grew and the middle class prospered.

The corporate cartels are turning this country into a banana republic with a handful of super rich royalty manipulating a large population of working poor and the unemployed.

Every empire of the past collapsed from waging constant warfare, impoverishing its own population by flooding home markets with cheap imports, and effectively enslaving foreign populations. Read some of the books of economist Kevin Phillips, such as "Wealth and Democracy". Phillips was Richard Nixon's economics advisor.

If you aren't aware that several foreign countries are getting real skittish about the U.S. dollar, including the Chinese who are looking to getting paid in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, then you haven't been keeping up with the economic news.

[C_Lawyer09]

21. Well, how about something as simple as

Closing the loophole that allows domestic corporations with a foreign p.o. box to renege on 70b worth of tax revenue? Also, hate to say it, because I disagree, but the reality is will the American public stand up for unions versus cheap labor, when they can't buy cheap Chinese crap at huge outlets. Further, will municipal governments quit giving massive subsidies and free land to the big chains? My point, sadly, it will take more than repealing the decisions of the neo-con globalism vision.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

31. " will municipal governments quit giving massive subsidies and free land to the big chains?"

Yes, when it stops being profitable to do so.

[C_Lawyer09]

24. I'm going to add another regional comment

When we didn't have much global competition, we got used to setting the rules. An example of one of three big events that worked to usurp our previously number one timber industry is: The Asian market asked for lumber cut to specs. Our big timber industries, like Weyerhauser disagreed. The Canadians said, how much, and when do you want it? The competition came on so fast, and we werent used to the competition, so we got caught flat footed in many respects. This is a phenomenon that would take decades to reverse, if we could at all. We let unions die in place over thirty years, and this is the outcome.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

36. When did we not have much global competition?

Aside from the four or five years after the end of WW2, when most of the rest of the world was a flaming fucking ruin, we have always had this kind of competition. I see a lot of people here pining for a period in American history that never existed except as a total aberration due to massive military buildup and subsequent sell-off of military hardware to civilian firms (which vastly increased ability to harvest natural resources.)

[Hippo_Tron]

39. It took a lot more than 5 years to rebuild the world's industrial capacity

America was pretty much the only game in town throughout the 1950's and still had a huge advantage in the 1960's. By the 1970's, the rest of the world did start to catch up.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

49. Point taken. Thank you for your thoughtful post. n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

82. Don't get me wrong, this wasn't the golden age people make it out to be

Remember we did have a permanent underclass of people back then. Pretty much everybody with dark skin fit into that category. Lots of rural poverty as well.

But yes it was a time where if you were white you could achieve middle class status without having a college education and support a family on one income. Those days are never coming back.

[Greyhound]

46. And why was it possible for the American industry to be that stupid? n/t

[unkachuck]

25. KICK!

"Is it too much to ask and expect that Dems actually act like they give a fuck about the little fella?"

....yes.

[C_Lawyer09]

26. I'm going to add another regional comment

When we didn't have much global competition, we got used to setting the rules. An example of one of three big events that worked to usurp our previously number one timber industry is: The Asian market asked for lumber cut to specs. Our big timber industries, like Weyerhauser disagreed. The Canadians said, how much, and when do you want it? The competition came on so fast, and we werent used to the competition, so we got caught flat footed in many respects. This is a phenomenon that would take decades to reverse, if we could at all. We let unions die in place over thirty years, and this is the outcome.

[unkachuck]

27. KICK!

"Is it too much to ask and expect that Dems actually act like they give a fuck about the little fella?"

....yes.

[Larry Ogg]

29. So why do you think the status quo pick and choose who we the sheepeople get to vote for?

It’s because they want all of the coulda woulda shoulda’s to favor the bottom line of the powers that be, aka the predator class / eminence grise et al…

And what really sucks is that it’s not extremely difficult to learn (as I for one - am no genius) how too see when a venal politician is in their pocket before they get elected, so as they can allegedly make the predictable decisions that will affect / fuck us all once they are elected...

Is it too much to ask and expect that Dems actually act like they give a fuck about the little fella?

Guess what, that’s the oldest trick in the book; and their not going to stop using it until the hypnotized blind followers wise up; and by my estimations that will be sometime after it’s too fucking late…

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

35. Last time I checked you were free to vote for whoever you wanted to vote for.

Perhaps more people chose to vote for the accomplished guy who understands policy instead of the dildo who hasn't bought a new suit or had a haircut since his previous UFO encounter.

Just maybe.

[Larry Ogg]

53. That’s why the M$M (main stream media) is so important.

So as all the Rush Limbaugh and Faux news fans can feel good about being hypnotized and brainwashed into freely voting for the most esthetic / venal snake oil salesmen society has too offer. Such as it may be, when and if blind followers ever do check facts, their psychologically impoverished world view requires that they not check any facts at all, but rather, it’s all about finding agreement with the other like minded simpletons within their clique, and of course the corporately owned snake oil salesmen whom they like to call their elected leaders will tell them exactly what they should agree on and who to vote for.

And let’s not forget, that the censoring of objective premise because it is uncomfortable; (i.e. it is offensive to the political paradigm created by the snake oil salesmen for the blind followers…) and replacing it with what you are told believe is something blind followers do naturally; and when everything goes to hell in a hand basket they can just blame it on the ”dildo who hasn't bought a new suit or had a haircut since his previous UFO encounter.” Why? Because that’s what makes you feel good, about being free to vote for whomsoever you want to vote for; even though that decision is based on the lies and propaganda fed to you by the M$M and the corporately owned venal politicians snake oil salesmen that you like too call leaders!

[Hippo_Tron]

34. Worked great when Smoot and Hawley proposed it

:eyes:

[Toucano]

37. I am inclined to agree, but how do we define "reimportation"?

Take an American company like Levi Strauss.

If I don't want to face your "reimportation" legislation, I simply dissolve my U.S. corporation and register a new corporation in Mexico called Levi Strauss.

Or I sell my brand identity to a foreign entity. Hence, no reimportation.

I guess we could say if the majority of shareholders are American, it is an American company.

Not sure, though.

[NoUsername]

40. Hey, c'mon now. You know what you posted isn't a realistic solution.

Mainly because the PTB will never EVER let any one of those things pass, much less all of them.

And Dems always act like they give a fuck about the little fella. But only during the campaign season. They haven't actually cared about us since I don't-know-when. Not in my lifetime anyway. Well, except for Paul Wellstone (who truly was exceptional) and perhaps a few others. But as far as the party itself goes, hell, they're happy as hell reaping the benefits of the support of the big corporations and the rich bastards. They definitely have no intentions of "stepping down" to represent the poor and middle class anytime soon. They like the $$$$ too much.

That said, I initially clicked on your post because I wanted to call bullshit on your claim that "30+ Million jobs could be created in the next year.." Heh, then I read your post and couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, it's not whether I or DUers or even Americans in general agree with your post. What matters is whether or not the bastards in DC that supposedly "represent" us agree and, by and large, I'd have to say they don't. They like the big campaign contributions they get from the corporations and rich people far too much to willingly give them up. And therein lies the problem.

The solution, of course, is public financing for campaigns. Unfortunately, since the elected officials that love the current system would be the ones that would be called upon to vote it out of existence and institute public funding instead, that's something that will never happen. As long as campaigns are financed by the rich and the corporations, we (the poor and middle class) will always be screwed. Expatriating is looking better and better every day.

[dreamnightwind]

79. Another part of the solution...

is articulating and developing progressive alternatives to the corporate policies we're force-fed. And the Op did a pretty good job of this.

You're completely correct about the importance of public campaign financing, of course. It's not everything, though.

In politics, money spent on political campaigns is part of the picture. Another part is ideas. We need to own the issues when it comes to ideas and policy. We'll lose out sometimes to money and deception, but if we get our act together to articulate and stand by true working alternatives to corporate policy, we'll make some progress and gain credibility.

I like the idea of banning reimportation and imposing tariffs on companies who would just organize outside our borders to get around reimportation rules. I don't know enough to say where the pitfalls may lie with this kind of approach, but I'd like to see it explored in more depth, seems promising.

[Mithreal]

45. Huge K&R

[reggie the dog]

47. not going to happen, we must think of chinese jobs, mexican jobs

etc. before our own lest we are "racist" see.....

[B Calm]

51. If labor cost $1.00 to make a product in the US, and China's or etc

labor can make the same product for 10 cents, then there ought to be a 90 cent tarriff when they send their product into the US. It's that fucking simple!

[Deja Q]

60. And, apart from labor costs, we have environmental standards.

Even Apple, building in China, isn't as Green as they claim to be.

[Vinnie From Indy]

55. An issue that is rarely discussed is the enabling of despotic, authoritarian regimes

It is fascinating that just a few decades ago it would have been impossible for any American company to survive the onslaught of criticism from politicians and the media if they moved significant manufacturing capability to communist countries like China and Russia. One can only imagine the outcry in the early 1970s if major companies like GM entered into a mfg. deal with Red China to produce vehicles used by the US Army. Politicians of all stripes would have been screaming to high heaven about the dangers of enabling communists to build things using our technology. Wal-Mart is the real reason the "red scare" message was put back on the shelf. It seems that Lenin was right about one thing - the capitalists will indeed sell the rope that eventually will be used to hang all of them.

In short, American politicians are doing the bidding of their corporate overlords. IS there any doubt that money always trumps freedom for these people?

[Lorien]

62. China now owns much of our debt, which means hat they own US to a degree

Cut military spending, tax the rich, and then maybe we'll have the leverage to stand up to our debt holders.

[Deja Q]

68. Agreed; the rich need to pay their way and taxes for them have dropped immensely since the 1950s.

Yet they still whine despite all their cuts and breaks and incentives to fleece and ruin their fellow countrymen.

[Unvanguard]

63. Google "Smoot-Hawley Tariff" and come back to us. n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

84. You'll get a bunch of bullcrap corporatist propaganda about it.

Smoot-Hawley didn't worsen or prolong the Depression. Foreign trade was too small a part of our economy at the time for it to have had much impact. The economy wasn't improving in the early part of the 30s because FDR was compromising and capitulating to the GOP and business elites (sound familiar?) and it wasn't until he grew some stones and implemented full scale Keynesian policies did things start to turn around.

[treestar]

64. We still make plenty of things and are the world's #1 manufacturer

Enough of this self pitying BS. We can compete. In fact, we have the advantage.

[B Calm]

66. self pitying BS. . . Amazing how you bought into the free market BS

You work on Wall Street?

[treestar]

74. Do you not realize we are the largest manufacturer

So it is Bs to claim we don't make anything?

Who do you work for? Someone who miraculously has no connection to Wall Street? You don't use banks? You have no insurance (you wouldn't patronize those evil insurance companies?).

I'm sure you never ever buy anything either.

How do you have access to a computer? (A product of one of those evil corporations?). Get off the computer. You're contributing to Wall street every time you post.

[B Calm]

78. I don't doubt we are still the largest manufacturer in the world, but

thanks to unfare trade policies, the working man wages are falling.

the US is an over developed country, and the easy money's been made. The tax code policy over the last 20 years has successfully provided incentives for US industry to make many Americans and America the richest country in the world. However, at this juncture, we have an aging population with a high cost/high benefit workforce, a mature consumer base, the easy natural resources have been mined or exploited, and the soils in our bread basket called the Midwest are nutrient depleted and require significant intensive farming methods e.g.; pesticides and petrol chemical fertilizers to maintain yields, which also cause the highest levels of cancer on the planet.

As far as Global industries are concerned, there are cheaper and more plentiful natural resources elsewhere to exploit, cheaper labor and younger developing consumer markets outside the US that present more attractive investment opportunities. Industry would prefer not to make any further investments into the US, thus capital flight is inevitable. Now days the US is a Cash Cow to be milked and harvested and to funnel our 401K investment funds internationally. The good times have come to an end, and no one dares tell you this, because it might cause a panic.

[Deja Q]

67. Care to claim why?

Most Americans pay for their education at obscene levels. Others get it subsidized.

We pay out of our teeth for prescription medication. Everywhere else, people pay much less. (We, in effect, subsidize the costs.)

How long a list would you like, but it seems more fair to let you justify the position before we in reality-land denounce it.

[B Calm]

70. delete

[TheFarseer]

65. Agree 100%

This is what we should be working on. If we don't have a functioning economy, there's no way health care reform will work. There's no way anything we want to do will work. I expect republicans not to give a shit about this, but I'm extremely disappointed with the Dems on this.

[Deja Q]

69. GM used to whine health care costs were killing them.

Funny how they were silent throughout 2009 about the issue.

A government-sponsored single-payer system would do far more to cut costs than 20 major insurance providers who can't begin to keep costs the same as they up premiums 9~20% every year. How does "competition lower costs", again? (the claim is bullshit and more people know it to be true.)

[bvar22]

73. Agree.

*The very FIRST thing that needs to be addressed to help the American Working Class is to institute a Single Payer Universal HealthCare system...Expand Medicare and get health care costs OFF the Back of the American Worker.
I can NOT understand WHY the Employer Based system is being protected BY The Democrats.
Set My People FREE from Employer Based Health Care Slavery!

*Renegotiate every single "Trade Treaty" on a bi-lateral basis with priorities on Humanitarian (wages, working conditions, health care, safety, pension, collective bargaining) and Environmental conditions. In countries where the standards are equivalent, let the workers compete with American Workers.

*Enact "Fair Competition" legislation that allows Mom & Pop(small locally owned business and farms) to compete with WalMart (Big Boxes) on a level playing field.
(Among other things, when WalMart uses their size to force low prices from their vendors in another country, THAT country MUST make THAT price the standard for ALL American businesses.)


The BIGGEST problem facing the American Working Class is THIS:

The DLC New Team
Working Class Democrats Need NOT Apply

(This graphic was Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

”I am a New Democrat!”---Barack Obama
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254931&kaid=85&subid=900184

"The American Worker CAN WILL (be FORCED to) compete (with Slave Labor) anywhere in The World!"
Get used to IT!

[SmileyRose]

80. GM got it's ass handed to them on this issue by an auditor.

GM whined because of upcoming contract negotiations with the UAW. GM was trying to dump the retirees as much as possible and kill retirement benefits for the active UAW workers they still had.

GM kept bitching the cost of retirees were killing them. Implying they would have to drop medical coverage for retirees. The audit showed GM had enough money set aside to provide HOURLY retirees pension and basic medical care benefits for the next 100+ years - thanks to the fact the Federal government required them to put money aside for that purpose. Unfortunately Uncle Sam didn't demand GM put money aside for SALARY retirees. Not a dime was put aside for the golden parachutes being handed out willy nilly. Fine by me, since they can't actually take the money from the HOURLY pool to pay it.

What GM was doing was reporting ALL retiree costs in one lump and using that in the media to leverage against the Union. Once a union auditor made the truth well known all over the internet and newspapers, GM had to shut the fuck up.

That's my understanding.

[Imagevision]

71. Mean while, foreclosures continue to climb but the M$M doesn't go there anymore...

[Union Yes]

97. Driven by outsourced jobs once held by our middle class... nt

[dana_b]

76. K&R!!

if the politicians would only listen!!

[asdjrocky]

81. Sure. While we're at it we'll get rid of the WTO.

Oh wait, that was just a dream. I thought the people ran things for a minute there. Sorry.

[Union Yes]

90. WTO cut their teeth ensuring "the people" don't run anything. nt

[Hello_Kitty]

83. K and R. I wish more people would realize there's a difference

Between investing in other countries and outsourcing. If Heinz Ketchup builds a factory in Mexico to sell ketchup to Mexicans, that will improve their economy and not hurt ours. If Heinz Ketchup relocates its entire operation to Mexico to sell ketchup back to us, that's an entirely different story.

[Politicub]

85. Sigh - I would love to see NAFTA, etc. repealed, too

But this thread is deceptive. It will take legislative will for this to happen, which will take more time than "next year."

When I clicked on this thread, I thought there may have been a new leading indicator or study that would indicate that massive job growth will happen next year. Instead, I found a time wasting rant.

I hope job creation does happen on a massive scale -- we certainly need to put many Americans back to work. But in the short term, proposals such as your own are more of an exercise in mental masturbation.

However, with that being said, I would like nothing more than to see NAFTA and CAFTA repealed, as well as a lock down on reimportation.

[winyanstaz]

86. and many more billions raised in taxes by legalizing hemp...

and many more factories opening as well as the huge savings on prison space.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

89. Kick and kick again

Try to buy American, spend more if you have to, it's hard but YES, WE CAN

[lovuian]

93. Yep

you said it

[RedCloud]

94. And shoot those who profit from low quality items.

That shit ought to be free.

[Daemonaquila]

96. Your point is perfect, but I suggest a different strategy.

Trade wars are ugly - and unnecessary in the end to get the job done.

The simpler solution is a new TAX on US corporations that produce goods overseas then reimport. The tax is the difference between the price of the good as reimported, and the price of the good if it was manufactured in the US in a facility that complies with safety standards, and paid the national average living wage.

The tax funds go to grants and loans for worker retraining and new manufacturing startups in the US as subsidies for the first few critical years.

[RagAss]

98. And then they'd bring in 30 million employees from India and give them the jobs...

....let's wake up and face it....they want us dead. Is this obvious only to me?

[defendandprotect]

101. It took them decades to do this -- and obviously a deal with China to get debt financing . . .

Everything in the stores now is made in China ---

I don't buy it if I can possibly avoid it --

The trade agreements should be overturned . . . but lots that should be getting done and isn't --

from re-regulating capitalism --

to ending the wars --