Both Democrats and Republicans
playing ostrich with citizens and pandering to corporate greed
by
Mike Crane
For the last few years both Republicans and Democrats have
sacrificed the future of American citizens to pander to special
interests. Economic policies have focused on providing "cheap labor"
to their corporate benefactors without regard on the long term
effect on our citizens and our future generations.
I am sure that many of you have heard both Republicans and
Democrats tell us how Expensive Trade Agreements, excessive
immigration and Outsourcing are all good for us! How each of these
flawed policies generates more jobs and economic growth than it
costs.
Here in Georgia our own Senator Saxby Chambliss even spoke in
favor of a bill that would allow any corporation to replace an
American worker, with a cheaper H1-B visa worker by simply paying a
$500.00 fee. Selling American jobs for $500.00 - what a corrupt
racket!
But if these flawed policies are good for us, why are they now
debating on how many billions of dollars they need to borrow to
subsidize displaced Americans?
Of course this is about as stupid as Senator Chambliss's sell
your job for $500.00 plan.
Many do not remember that not so long ago our country was the
world's leading creditor nation. Many have been raised their entire
life in the world's leading debtor nation.
Today our economy is based upon the infusion of over a
trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000.00) of debt every year to
sustain flawed policies to give large corporations "cheap labor."
Now due to the increasing drain on American workers, Congress is
going to let the tax payers (or their children and grandchildren)
pick up a new tab to subsidize the drop in income for American
citizens.
What happens when the gravy train runs out?
The answer is very simple - nothing good! Will the gravy train
run out? Well you decide. How long can the addition of a trillion dollars of debt a
year be sustained?
If you believe that we can sustain adding a trillion dollars of
additional debt a year, then you should be reading a Republican,
Democratic or other fairy tale web site! For the rest - that are concerned
about these flawed policies - perhaps it is time to wonder why the
Republicans and Democrats have created laws which restrict political
competition.
Just remember - nothing will change until you - the citizens -
make a change.
In the meantime you will get debates such as the one
below. Note that neither the Democratic - "subsidize lower income"
or the Republican - "give 'em unemployment then goodbye and good
luck" - policies address the real problem.
The real problem is excessive special interest influence
resulting in flawed economic policies!
Nothing will change until you - the citizens - make a change.
Email
This page
As a closing note: When Joseph was sent to Egypt he was not sent
to squander and disperse Egypt's resources to the far corners of the
earth for the profit of merchants.
Easing Downward Mobility
Ross Eisenbrey and Maurice Emsellem
March 08, 2007
Ross Eisenbrey is the vice president and policy
director of the Economic
Policy Institute (EPI). Maurice Emsellem is the director
of public policy for the National
Employment Law Project (NELP).
Congress will soon debate whether to renew
President Bush’s fast track authority to negotiate trade
deals, and lawmakers—and even corporate America—will talk
about the fate of U.S. workers hurt by increased imports or
offshoring exacerbated by past deals.
Several Democrats are proposing the idea of “wage insurance,”
giving laid-off workers up to $10,000 a year for two years—but
only if they lost their job due to offshoring and only if they
take a job with a big pay cut, unlike traditional unemployment
benefits that are given to all workers that lose their jobs.
What’s wrong with helping out workers who are having a hard
time finding a good job? Even with the new Congress, this push
for wage insurance could do more harm than good to laid off
workers and the programs that they and their families rely on
to get back on their feet.
Wage insurance does nothing to improve the economy, give the
workforce new skills, or create jobs. Essentially, it is a
game of musical chairs that rewards higher-paid people whose
jobs disappear with a subsidy for taking lower paying jobs, at
the expense of other unemployed people who otherwise would
have had those jobs. One study even declared “virtually all
the employment gains experienced by dislocated workers as a
result of the wage subsidy come at the expense of other
workers.”
And despite its $3.5 billion price tag, wage insurance doesn’t
address the most pressing concern of workers who lose their
jobs—other than finding a new job, especially those with
families: the loss of health insurance.
Before debating whether to spend another penny on wage
insurance, Congress should ensure that every trade-impacted
worker, including those in the service sector, is fully
protected from the loss of health insurance. Right now, only
28,000 workers who lost their jobs because of trade (or about
11 percent of the total officially certified as “trade
impacted”—a significant undercount by many estimates) get help
with their health insurance under the Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) program, which provides jobless benefits and
training for some people who lose jobs because of increasing
imports. They are crushed by the burden of paying for 35
percent of their health insurance premiums on an average of
$280 a week in unemployment benefits.
Given that only 36 percent of jobless workers receive any
unemployment benefits, the next place to look if new funds
become available is reform of the unemployment insurance
system to ensure that more of the unemployed get help, for
longer durations and in larger amounts. The extra time workers
have to look for work with their unemployment benefits has
been shown to help them find a new job that pays better and
provides health benefits.
Not surprisingly, the Bush administration wants to allow
states to substitute wage insurance for unemployment benefits.
Its priority is to move people into jobs quickly, not to help
them find quality jobs with health insurance.
By contrast, a high quality job training program with adequate
income support can raise the skills of workers and improve
productivity. It makes more sense to invest in the opportunity
to learn and earn more, rather than to subsidize employees’
downward mobility. Right now, the program that funds training
for trade-impacted workers is capped at $220 million a year,
which means that 19 hard-hit states have had to suspend
training, including several Midwest states.
The priority of our leaders in Congress should be to help
families and communities hardest hit by major layoffs to
access good-paying jobs with health insurance, to provide them
with marketable skills and to take care of their families
until they can do so on their own. With record manufacturing
losses and mounting losses in trade-impacted service
industries—and more trade deals yet to come—now is the time to
consider proposals that really ensure the nation’s economic
security.
Source:
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/03/08/easing_downward_mobility.php |
|
