American Workers Got What They Deserved

[sosa]

Quote:Are you an American employee? If so, today’s column will likely offend you. If you’d rather not be offended, read no further. If you continue and then complain, I’m sorry, but that simply proves you’re, well, stupid. But then again, stupidity plays a large role in today’s topic.

Still reading? OK. You’ve had fair warning.

So you’re an American employee. Maybe you make car parts. Maybe you’re an engineer or designer. Maybe you’re an accountant, store clerk or tradesman. Whatever you do, you’re probably stupid or lazy. Yes, I wrote it, and I mean it. You are either stupid or lazy. Maybe both.

Now, I’m not referring to your work ethic or job performance. No, most of you are competent and devoted to your profession or vocation. I’m addressing the way you view economics and employment. I’m challenging your gumption to advocate for yourself and your fellow Americans. Here’s what I mean.

Remember the Reagan standard? Are you better off today than you were a decade ago? Two decades? Three? Unless you make more than $380,000 a year, the answer is no. In fact, your standard of living over the last quarter century has actually decreased while millionaires have added 30 percent to their net wealth. Why? Two reasons.

First, hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs went overseas while the politicians you elected did nothing to stop them. Yet you continue to elect leaders who offer nothing but tax cuts, as if that would stem the flow of disappearing jobs.

Did you demand your leaders address America’s trade imbalance or continuous outsourcing of jobs? Did you demand your leaders require foreign countries to buy a dollar’s worth of American goods for every dollar of goods they sell here?

No and no. You didn’t bother. You simply crossed your fingers and prayed, “I hope my job’s not next.” You made concessions to your employer and hoped that would stem the exodus of jobs, or at least yours. How’d that work for you?

Second, you bought into the myth that unions are the cause of America’s demise. You didn’t bother to learn America became a world power when union membership was at its peak. You didn’t bother to learn America became the envy of the world while 1 of every 3 Americans was a union member.

So, how are things going for you? How do your benefits compare to a quarter century ago? Are you paying a higher or lower percentage of your income for health insurance? Does your company offer a pension plan, or do you now fund your own 401(k)?

Maybe you’re thinking, “I’m not a union worker, so this doesn’t affect me.”

Stop being stupid. Union benefits provide a standard other companies have to match, or at least come close to. When those benefits are cut, yours are, too. Or do you think you operate in your own little employment vacuum?

To make matters worse, you’re again being played for a chump. The same puppets who did nothing while your standard of living decreased are now using the oldest gimmick in the book — jealousy — to continue their assault on American workers. Rather than protect Americans’ jobs, they deflect your attention through jealousy.

“Cut the pay of government workers,” they cry. “Increase their health premiums. Decrease their pensions. Break their unions. After all, you’ve suffered so they should suffer too.” And in your misery, you buy their argument while more jobs head oversees. Pretty stupid, eh?

If their antics weren’t so pathetic, if the consequences weren’t so dire, if they didn’t prey on your stupidity, and if you didn’t buy into their convoluted reasoning, this whole situation would be laughable. But of course it’s not.

I warned you I’d likely offend you, and I suspect I did. But once you overcome your anger, consider my analysis. Then, either wise up and do something about it, or resign yourself to a lower standard of living for the next decade.

http://www.hollandsentinel.com/opinions/...y-deserved

[Lilith Pride]

He didn't offend me much, I'm aware of these things and try to do what I can to fix them. I don't know how much is possible through legislation, but I'm not gonna go out and riot by myself =p Well... maybe if the bus ride commentary continues. This is a nice article which unfortunately will not be understood by it's target audience who will say it has to be wrong because they wouldn't screw us like that. I love those people.....it's one thing to be optimistic about what others will do in regards to yourself, but just plain ignoring it? Too many people in the US are willing to see someone get screwed over and say "it wasn't me". If people are being screwed over you pay attention because the economy is not going to be helped by losing a buyer. When the people who hoard money find ways to spend less money it means more money is hoarded. But I suppose at this point pretty much everyone is starting to see that, and just still willing to let the media convince them of the unimportance of things like unions.

[gaglamesh731]

I love this comment on the article :
"A CEO, a teapartier and a union member are sitting at a table when someone brings them a plate of a dozen cookies, The CEO immediately takes 11 of the cookies, then turns to the teapartier and says, 'Watch out for that union guy, he wants half of your cookie.'"

By the way sosa , what's your opinion on the article ? Do you agree with it or just find it interesting ?

[GassyKitten]

Ray Buursma, doesn't offend me one bit. Rather, he should be ashamed of his own ignorance of the American political system. Sure, American's elect the Politicians that are in power, those that are to blame for what's going on right now and has for decades. But after the November ballots are counted, that's pretty much the end of our control.
After that, special interests, Corporate sharks, and Lobbyists, work the system.

Simply put, and one wonders if he votes, at the end of the day it's all chalked up to one fact. Politicians are simply doing what they're paid to do.

[sosa]

As much as this is true, I don't know if pissing people off is gonna get them over to our side. Though after decades of voting this way, I can't help but wonder if they warrant a harsh rebuke. There's certainly a line to pick between patronising commiseration- "It wasn't your fault! The mean old capitalists, why, they tricked you!"- and hostile condemnations- "You made the bed, you idiot, now lie in!". The line we want to take, I suppose, is something like "Look, you fucked up. We all did. Let's see if we can fix it."

[GassyKitten]

(26-03-2011 12:42 PM)sosa Wrote:  As much as this is true, I don't know if pissing people off is gonna get them over to our side. Though after decades of voting this way, I can't help but wonder if they warrant a harsh rebuke. There's certainly a line to pick between patronising commiseration- "It wasn't your fault! The mean old capitalists, why, they tricked you!"- and hostile condemnations- "You made the bed, you idiot, now lie in!". The line we want to take, I suppose, is something like "Look, you fucked up. We all did. Let's see if we can fix it."

But how do we fix it? Term limits, so as to oust the entrenched Good old boy network, isn't realistic an expectation because Congress has to vote by 2/3rds majority to amend the Constitution to that end.
So then, doesn't it become a real life matter of that old axiom? "The definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over again,expecting a different result. "

We the people are only able to elect, or re-elect who will sell out by majority.
I've had the opportunity to rub elbows with members of our State legislature when they're, shall we say off the clock. And suffice to say I've been told that by and large on major issues, because in many cases the Fed subsidizes Bills that are passed that apply to certain new State laws or proposed amendments to same, (Like the case of secondary offense seat belt laws being elevated to the status of primary offense. Our State had formerly received hundreds of thousands from the Fed. for secondary offense. But when the Legislature voted to move that to primary offense, the State then received millions from the Fed. ), the matter has pretty much been decided behind closed doors. The public sessions, where I've sat in before and one could tell just by the banter back and forth between all the Representatives present that it was for show, and it then becomes a matter of putting it on the record, before the public, and moving on.

One of the worst things that happened to America was the advent of the "Career Politician". And that came to pass with the founding fathers making the status possible by not limiting the term of the Legislature. (Term limits for the Judicial Branch is imperative too, but never going to happen)Even at the inception of this nation the Administrative Branch (Presidency) didn't have a term limit.


"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away." Barry Goldwater

[BnW]

I always vote against the incumbent and if there is a third-party option will vote for the third party, pretty much regardless of who it is. The lone exception was the 2008 Presidential Election when the Libertarian candidate was Bob Barr, who is one of the 5 biggest ass holes in the universe. There was no way I could bring myself to vote for that tool, so I sucked it up and voted for Obama. I should have gone with my original plan to vote for Bruce Springsteen. The Boss would solve all our problems with a good songs and a sax solo by Clarence Clemens. Plus - and I've said this before - the world would be a better place if we just had more people from Jersey.

Just a comment on term limits. I see this all the time and I don't get it. The argument for term limits is if you restrict how long they can be in office they will have less time to build empires, or something like that. I seem to be in the minority but I think that is completely backwards. In my mind, if you give a guy a job that he can only have a for a short period, and can be heavily influenced by lobbyists and industries who can give him a high paying job when he leaves office, the likelihood is that politicians are going to be more bought and paid for, not less.

[catdance62]

Didn't offend me at all.
And yes, I am better off than I was a decade ago, definitely more than 2 decades ago, and For gosh sakes, 3 decades ago I was barely scraping by (but I was 18 years old, so I didn't really care as long as I wasn't living with my parents).
American jobs left because we demand cheap sh*t from Walmart, but we want to get paid $15.00/hr or more. Ain't happenin'.

[trillium13]

I really liked the article, thanks for posting it. I don't see how anyone with half a brain could actually be offended by it at all. As far as I can see, it's all true.

I really think that if everyone made a TRULY living wage, not just a barely able to scrape by wage, we wouldn't need the cheap shit from Walmart. Maybe I'm wrong. I do shop at Walmart for some things, but I'd rather not. The fact of the matter is that based on my current wage, I have to look for the lowest costs.