Republicans Stunned Into Silence After Obama Economy Posts Massive Jobs Gains

[SassySue]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

If something other than the market sets the price of wages. If the wage is set artificially high, there will be a surplus of labor (unemployment). Major companies will move toward robotics. Fast food companies will install more kiosks to lower the number of people they employ. Walmart and large retailers will expand their self check out lines for the same reason. Small businesses will have to lay people off, or increase prices, both of which puts a strain on the economy. That's why arbitrarily raising the minimum wage increases unemployment, especially among the classes that are hard to employ. Unskilled and low skilled workers are hurt the most. Black teenage unemployment is astronomical now. Increase the minimum wage, and it will increase even further. Employment and wages have not done well under Obama. It will be worse under Clinton.

You didn't read any of the articles I posted in the Minimum Wage Thread. They have proven, over and over, through statistics and research, that raising minimum wage, has little to minimal effect on small business and the economy, and actually boosts the economy.

[TheDaliLama]

Sassy, Do you even listen to real business owners or do just blindly accept the garbage articules you post?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Sassy, Do you even listen to real business owners or do just blindly accept the garbage articules you post?

And they are in English!!!!!

Do they also show you how much change you get?

Not to worry ... she's emigrating to Mexico soon!

She'll get to know the phrase: "Bizness, es Bizness!!!"

[TheDaliLama]

Production costs increase. Jobs or hours are either cut or cost gets passed to the customer. Creates inflation which is not a good thing for the economy and your raise doesn't buy anymore than it used too.


Oh yeah.....less work hours so I'll have more time to goof off,

It's not rocket surgery Sassy.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Production costs increase. Jobs or hours are either cut or cost gets passed to the customer. Creates inflation which is not a good thing for the economy and your raise doesn't buy anymore than it used too.


Oh yeah.....less work hours so I'll have more time to goof off,

It's not rocket surgery Sassy.

When Caesar Chavez started attempting to "organize" workers in the Rio Grand Valley the farmers "co-oped" the equipment to pick the cotton, got rid of the pickers, and kept a few to run the equipment and off load the cotton to drive it to the gin. The pickers were no longer provided shelter on the farms and able to harvest for themselves produce grown on the farms for consumption by their families who were also allowed to live there.

Many went home who weren't able to get jobs at the packing sheds/gins, which required being bonded to remain in the U.S. for the most part.

Liberals have on blinders. If the haven't figured that out with Obamacare, they never will. Physics: An action causes a reaction. Anybody who shoots pool knows that!

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by SassySue

You didn't read any of the articles I posted in the Minimum Wage Thread. They have proven, over and over, through statistics and research, that raising minimum wage, has little to minimal effect on small business and the economy, and actually boosts the economy.

I read them, but there are just as many articles, or more that say the exact opposite. I'm explaining the common sense behind the topic. Artificially high wages create a surplus of labor. Unemployment. That's a basic economic fact.

[i'va biggen]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/18/obama...791&yptr=yahoo

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by SassySue

Naturally, if there's any good news under Obama's presidency, the GOP will find a way to downplay it. All right then, it's a crock full of shit, okay?

Since your present employment is questionable. I have to ask, why aren't you a recipient of one of those jobs Obama has created?


Jim

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

WAIT!!!

http://www.bls.gov/soc/2000/socguide.htm ..... Reclassified in 2016!!!!!

"Classification Principles

In order to ensure that all users of occupational data classify workers the same way, the following classification principles should be followed.

1.The Classification covers all occupations in which work is performed for pay or profit, including work performed in family-operated enterprises by family members who are not directly compensated. It excludes occupations unique to volunteers. Each occupation is assigned to only one occupation at the lowest level of the classification.

2.Occupations are classified based upon work performed, skills, education, training, and credentials.

3.Supervisors of professional and technical workers usually have a background similar to the workers they supervise, and are therefore classified with the workers they supervise. Likewise, team leaders, lead workers and supervisors of production, sales, and service workers who spend at least 20 percent of their time performing work similar to the workers they supervise are classified with the workers they supervise.

4.First-line managers and supervisors of production, service, and sales workers who spend more than 80 percent of their time performing supervisory activities are classified separately in the appropriate supervisor category, since their work activities are distinct from those of the workers they supervise. First-line managers are generally found in smaller establishments where they perform both supervisory and management functions, such as accounting, marketing, and personnel work.

5.Apprentices and trainees should be classified with the occupations for which they are being trained, while helpers and aides should be classified separately.

6.If an occupation is not included as a distinct detailed occupation in the structure, it is classified in the appropriate residual occupation. Residual occupations contain all occupations within a major, minor or broad group that are not classified separately.

7.When workers may be classified in more than one occupation, they should be classified in the occupation that requires the highest level of skill. If there is no measurable difference in skill requirements, workers are included in the occupation they spend the most time.

8.Data collection and reporting agencies should classify workers at the most detailed level possible. Different agencies may use different levels of aggregation, depending on their ability to collect data, and the requirements of users."

[LexusLover]

Does this sound remotely familiar?
http://www.workers.org/ww/2000/aflcio0525.php

"The AFL-CIO and the China Trade Relations Act

By Milt Neidenberg

The AFL-CIO has embarked on a furious campaign to oppose the Permanent Normal Trade Relations Act, which would normalize trade relations with the People's Republic of China and speed that country's entry into the World Trade Organization.

President Bill Clinton has assembled an array of powerful forces--including Wall Street, its allies and congressional supporters--to overwhelm the AFL-CIO opposition. Getting the act passed in Congress is a must for a substantial section of the ruling class. Their plan is to exploit the markets in China where there are over 1 billion people.

This is what progressives, class-conscious workers and the activist youths who battled in Seattle and Washington must oppose as they continue to fight the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the World Trade Organization. The forces of capitalist globalization would like to turn China into one huge sweathshop.

The corporate-owned media have charged the AFL-CIO with a return to protectionism and isolationism. They charge the labor leaders with a rerun of the Cold War times of AFL-CIO Presidents George Meany and Lane Kirkland.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney has emphatically denied this. But leaders from the Auto Workers, Steel Workers, Teamsters, and Union of Needletrades, Industrial, and Textile Employees have created such an anti-Chinese frenzy to defeat the bill that there's a grave concern that there is some truth to the charge.

These union leaders say China has conspired with transnational corporations to bring about an exodus of U.S. factories, used low-paid Chinese labor to produce for the market in this country, repressed independent unions, illegally exported goods produced in forced-labor camps, and so on.

These unsubstantiated and virulent charges have begun to isolate the AFL-CIO from other sectors of the international labor movement.

The attacks smack of such rampant racism that Zwelinzima Vavi, general secretary of the Congress of South African Trade Unions, questioned the hypocrisy of the campaign. Vavi noted that the Chinese government and labor movement supported the liberation struggle against apartheid in South Africa.

Vavi suggested a meeting with the Chinese unions to discuss these so-called problems. To date there has been no response from the AFL-CIO leadership.

These AFL-CIO charges against China--itself a target of U.S. imperialist attacks--divert attention from Corporate America's ever-expanding prison-industrial complex, child and sweatshop labor, and the myriad forms of national oppression that permeate this country.

The attack by union leaders here can only be interpreted by the 103 million members of the All China Confederation of Workers as a hostile act. And as one of the largest organized union movements in the world its influence is immeasurable.

It's a no-win, dead-end strategy. The AFL-CIO needs to build international labor solidarity and renew its efforts to rebuild the labor movement here.

The fight should be against U.S. corporate globalization. China is not the enemy.

Fairer capitalist exploitation?

The shame of it all is that Teamster President James P. Hoffa is providing much of the leadership for the anti-China campaign. He has enlisted a myriad of forces led by Pat Buchanan--racist, anti-Semitic, anti-communist, anti-immigrant, anti-gay and anti-abortion.

Along with other right-wing and anti-labor forces, their agenda has nothing in common with the welfare of the labor movement.

Unfortunately the AFL-CIO leaders have not disavowed the Buchanan elements or denounced Hoffa for involving the Temasters in this dangerous coalition. On April 12, during the Washington marches and rallies against the IMF, World Bank and WTO, Hoffa disgraced the AFL-CIO's biggest union by inviting Buchanan to be a featured speaker at a separate rally.

At a time when the labor movement is under attack--with more strikes being forced on it and Corporate America mounting increasing resistance to labor's efforts to organize the unorganized--this can only isolate labor from the growing struggle against corporate globalization, the IMF, World Bank and WTO.

And it misleads the multinational, service-oriented, women, young and low-paid immigrant workers who are turning to the labor movement to be organized. The AFL-CIO leaders have put the struggles of these workers on hold as it pursues the anti-China policy.

Politically it is a no-brainer. These union leaders have put together a coalition that lumps a sector of Democratic Party pro-capitalist politicians with right-wing and cold-war militarists who want to overthrow China's socialist system. It's a nightmare that can only come back to haunt the labor movement.

The AFL-CIO slogan, "Wage a campaign for global fairness," is going nowhere. Is there any fairness when it comes to corporate profits and global exploitation?

Will the transnational corporations and their investment bankers listen to the pleas of the billions of workers who face hunger, disease, unemployment and all the other social ills? Will they accept language in their trade agreements that penalize them when they violate basic human and labor rights?

The 1 percent that owns the majority of the wealth will continue to plunder the resources of the Third World and emerging markets for production and super-profits.

Yet according to AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney, this "campaign for global fairness" must be the response to make "the global economy work for working families." That is what he told the 10,000 union members rallying in Washington on April 12.

Sweeney did expose these corporate forces in the April issue of America @ Work--the national magazine of the AFL-CIO--before the protests against the IMF and World Bank. In his column "Out Front" he wrote that it is wrong when "a global economic system rewards companies for abusing workers, despoiling the environment and encouraging government repression of basic freedoms."

He continued, "Today, the same spirit of greed, and contempt for workers and their communities that created America's Rust Belts is shaping our global economy."

Yes. Corporate policy has created rust belts across the country, decimated communities and the environment, and ravished the resources. The corporations have been rewarded with tax relief and abatements, tax write-offs on layoffs and plant closings, and other freebies too numerous to mention.

It's been going on since long before China decided to exert its rights to Permanent Normal Trading Rights with the United States and to become a member of the WTO.

Rust belts stem from many corporate and government policies. And these policies began decades ago when the high-tech revolution was introduced into the basic industries.

In the giant integrated steel plants, the basic oxidizing furnaces replaced tens of thousands of steel workers. Mini-steel mills grew up, providing cheaper non-union labor.

Auto, rubber and other related industrial workers were decimated by similar revolutionizing changes that increased production and speedup on assembly lines. The Big Three auto makers became predators in the international markets.

And the process continues.

Is China or an emerging Third World country to blame for this? Of course not. Then why has the AFL-CIO opened such a virulent attack on China?

One fact is clear. While Sweeney and his Executive Council members attack Corporate America and its allies, the AFL-CIO has in effect an unspoken agreement that it calls the social contract. Implicit in the social contract are management-rights clauses in union contracts, which let these corporations shut down plants and lay off tens of thousands of high-paid industrial workers with impunity. These rights are considered untouchable and off limits to any negotiation.

Under this social contract, workers can only bargain for the price of their labor power. And when their labor is no longer needed they are scrapped like any other commodity. That includes shutting down any and all of the facilities their labor built.

The government provides the laws to assure these capitalist property rights, along with anti-union legislation.

Herein lies the critical need: for the most profound discussion of strategy and tactics in this complex and difficult period of global domination by U.S. corporations and banks.

Thirteen million members and 68 international unions make up the AFL-CIO. Together they constitute a powerful force--if they would unite to embark on an independent course that prepares them for the deepening of the class struggle. The fight for jobs, job security, organizing the unorganized and all the other social and economic needs must take place here in the citadel of the United States.

How is all this to be accomplished? The first step is to recognize the enemy. It's not the People's Republic of China. The enemy is right here in the United States, surrounded by a population of over 250 million workers and oppressed people."

Bill and Hillary ....... remember where she got her experience in the W.H.?