Election Day is only two weeks away, and as John McCain and Barack Obama make their final pitches to “close the deal” with voters, a stunning new ATI-News/Zogby poll shows a clear majority of undecided voters disagree with Obama’s plan for wealth redistribution in America.
1214 likely voters were surveyed Oct 17-20th, and resulted in larger than a 2:1 margin of undecideds stating that they disagreed with the concept of distribution of wealth. 57% against, 24% for, and 19% just can’t make up their minds.
The gap was only slightly narrower for Independent voters, 52% against, 39% for, and 10% dazed and confused.
Clearly, the McCain campaign has an issue decidedly in his favor. Will Obama, the DNC and their media continue to “distract” the American electorate from Obama’s own words to Joe the Plumber?
Or will McCain refuse to let them get away with this utter nonsense, and drive home the documented membership of Obama in the New Party?
Is this the same as the Democratic Socialists of America? Officially, no. But the New Party was always included in the DSA’s newsletters updates. Why? Because philosophically, they are closely aligned.
From the Chicago Democratic Socialists of American website in July 2007
New Party Update
by Bruce BentleyThe Chicago New Party is increasely becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base.
First, in relation to its infrastructure, the NP’s membership has increased since January ’95 from 225 to 440. National membership has increased from 5700 in December ’95 to 7000. Currently the NP’s fiscal balance is $7,000 and receives an average of $450/month is sustainer donations.
Secondly, the NP’s ’96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. The lone loser was Willie Delgado, in the 3rd Illinois House District. Although Delgado received 45% of the vote, he lost by only 800 votes. Delgado commented that it was due to the NP volunteers that he carried the 32nd Ward. Delgado emphasized that he will remain a visible community activist in Humbolt Park. He will conduct four Immigration workshops and encouraged NP activists to get involved.
If fact, at the same time as this New Party report on Obama’s IL Senate win, the DSA was exploring formal affiliation with the New Party that same year during their DSA Convention.
The only controversial business at the meeting was a proposal that Chicago DSA affiliate with the New Party. Ultimately, the meeting voted to, in effect, explore affiliation with both the New Party and the Labor Party.
And just what is the mission of the Democratic Socialists of America?
Our mission is to establish democratic socialism as a political force in the United States and around the world by training and mobilizing socialist activists to participate in a vibrant and diverse socialist organization at both the local and the national level. DSA both educates the public about democratic socialist values and policies and builds progressive coalitions to win victories that move the U.S. and the world toward social democracy.
In the near term, democratic socialists struggle for reforms that shift power and resources away from corporate elites and put them in the hands of ordinary citizens. In the long term, democratic socialists fight for a world in which all people share equally in the governing of the economic, political and cultural institutions and relationships that shape their lives.
The Obama faithful are quick to insist the New Party was hardly socialist. New Party activist, and Obama associate, Carl Davidson issued this statement:
The New Party in Chicago was never a socialist party. DSA in Chicago had little to do with it in any practical way. It was a pragmatic party of ’small d democracy’ mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the US.
The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist. Most socialist left groups either ignored it or opposed it, even if a few of their members took part in it. That’s the truth of the matter.
A passionate believer that social justice could be achieved through American democracy, Saul Alinsky methodically showed the “have-nots” how to organize their communities, target the power brokers and politically out-maneuver them. The lessons he taught people about the nature of power, imparted dignity to the poor and helped create a backyard revolution in cities across America. His work influenced the struggle for civil rights and the farm workers movement, as well as the very nature of political protest. He was a mentor to several generations of organizers like Ed Chambers, Fred Ross and Cesar Chavez. Alinsky’s still thriving Industrial Areas Foundation became the training ground for organizers who formed some of the most important social change and community groups in the country.
uh huh… Well, at least we can see where a younger, socialist Obama cast his future in the business of “community organizing”.
But back to the New Party, and the DSA. Considering this major socialist party was exploring formal affiliation, and includes New Party updates as part of their regular newsletters, I’m hard pressed to believe that “ignoring” or “opposing” of the NP comment by Carl Davidson of the New Party. Distancing the New Party and the DSA is an uphill battle indeed.
And be sure to read up on the “fusion voting”… or the ability of a candidate to be nominated by more than one party, appearing twice on the ballot as the candidate for each of those parties, and the ballots “fused”/combined for the total tally.
Today the New Party is considered an umbrella organization for grassroots political groups working to break the stranglehold that corporate money and corporate media have over our political process.
Their website links to the Working Families Party out of New York… more Obama supporters, of course.
The Working Families Party is fighting for a more just world.
One where the economy works for everyone. One where politicians are held accountable to working people, instead of big-money backers. One where all of us, no matter where we come from, can find a good job, get healthcare when we need it, afford a home, send our kids to good schools, and have a secure retirement.
Then, of course, we have Obama and William Ayers, blowing lots of cash on politics and very little on education reform during their joint educational experiment, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Ayers, of course, is an outspoken proponent for a socialist/Marxist agenda in the public school system.
The “spread the wealth” comment obviously is not a one of a kind gaffe, or off the wall philosophical statement. Yet the media, the DNC, the “faithful” and Obama himself insist there isn’t a socialist bone in “that one’s” body.
The level of this denial leads me to believe they are either blinded by adoration, or they are ready and willing to embark on a socialist/Marxist/Communist path while refusing to be labeled what they are.
If this poll of the undecideds and independent is any indication, Obama, the faithful and the media will have to work overtime to disprove the obvious… that Obama has a history of, and proposes a future of American progressive socialism. If you’ve been blind and deaf, it’s time to wake up.
And if you’re one of the faithful, recognize just who Obama is and… if you still want to vote for him… please do not pretend to the rest of us we’re insulting you when we call you socialists. It’s time you took a good, hard look in the mirror and have the courage to admit openly just who and what you are.
But for those that still think this warm, if not smoking, gun is still insufficient to draw the parallel between Obama’s socialist political and philosophical past and present alliances, Henry Lamb makes it simple for you to weigh the socialist philosophy against the policies of the man in his Oct 19th article in the Canadian Free Press.
I’m going to post just the opening paragraphs, then have you link directly to the article to finish reading.
Socialism, according to Karl Marx, is the transition between capitalism and communism. To achieve communism, Marx says, there must be continuing revolution in which the fundamental principal is: the end justifies the means.
For more than half a century, capitalism in the United States has taken a beating from the socialist revolution. Despite the best efforts of conservatives, since the Roosevelt era, socialists have made great strides toward converting the nation to socialism. Apparently, the majority of Americans either fail to recognize the transition, or welcome it. The enthusiastic support for Barack Obama, especially among young people, is abundant evidence.
Obama has declared that he believes every person has a “right” to health care. The Socialist Party USA believes every person has a “right” to health care.
Obama believes that labor unions should be allowed to organize without a secret ballot. The Socialist Party USA calls for unions to be recognized without a secret ballot. (Hear Obama’s words here.)
The Socialist Party USA recognizes the “right” of adequate housing for everyone. Obama trained ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) workers to secure mortgages for unqualified people, in sufficient numbers to collapse the housing and home-financing industries.
The Socialist Party USA believes that “capitalism is fundamentally incompatible” with socialism. For years, Obama worked in Chicago through the Annenberg Challenge, along with Bill Ayers, to funnel more than $50 million to anti-capitalist education projects. In November, 2006, Ayers traveled to Venezuela to speak at Hugo Chavez’s Education Forum where he railed against “the failings of capitalist education,” and praised the “…Bolivarian Revolution and the profound reforms in education made by Hugo Chavez.”
The Socialist Party USA believes in open borders and six months residency as the only requirement for U.S. citizenship. Obama marched with illegal aliens in Chicago in support of “comprehensive” immigration reform. Listen to Obama’s promises to La Raza in 2007.
Continue reading, and to use the articles hotlinks, click here
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Mata- the only thing I disagree with you is that they are EXACTLY the same. A Communist is a Communist no matter what name they pose under. We have fallen into a bad habit of calling a Communist a Socialist, there IS NO DIFFERENCE!
Yesterday’s AP-GfK internals also showed that 35% of likely voters consider themselves to be “moderate,” while another 38% consider themselves strongly or somewhat conservative, versus only 28% who are strongly or somewhat liberal.
Yet Obama led in that poll by 1 point.
Something doesn’t add up. Somehow, Americans are just not getting the message that Obama is a liberal, possibly even an extreme one. At best, he’s a rhetorical moderate who will nevertheless rubber-stamp whatever abomination Nancy Pelosi sends to him to sign.
At worst? Who knows (except maybe Joe Biden?)
Philosophically, yes, jainphx. In political stages of political/private enterprise structure? Very different. A society cannot structurally move immediately to Communism overnight without a revolution and force.
Socialism (practice)/Marxism(theory) is the transitional step to Communism. Obama proposes ownership of “windfall profits”, not takeover ownership of the private enterprise… i.e. Venezuela and Chavez. This makes him socialist… 1st stage.
From Marxmail.org:
I’ve been reading irregularly…if this is a repeat link posting, I apologize.
This is a very long report on the book written by the Weathermen. Ayers is not included as an author although his wife Bernardine Dohrn is. Nevertheless, he claims authorship on his blog.
http://www.zombietime.com/prairie_fire/
“On Jan. 10, 1963, Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida read a list of 45 Communist goals into the Congressional Record. The list was derived from researcher Cleon Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.” These principles are well worth revisiting today in order to gain insights into the thinking and strategies of much of our so-called liberal elite. ”
Go to this link for the list of Communist goals. Check where we are today. I’d post the whole thing but it’s pretty long for a comment section.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1561529/posts
Dan Cleary – or they’re just not willing to tell the pollster that they’re not going to vote for the media’s Golden Calf.
Wow! You have got to see this. Obama’s plan is very clearly explained here by a specialist of Social security.
WELFARE STATE?
Criticism that Obama’s tax plan would give money back to non-taxpayers and give them benefits at retirement
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3160143&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/
No need to post it, Suek#4… Curt posted on the manifesto yesterday.
Heh:
@Aye
i LOVE this image.
This little bit of wishful thinking is where Socialism fails every time, and in every form it is tried. Human beings are imperfect. Call it greed if you wish, but most of us expect to be rewarded for putting forth honest effort, and I don’t mean rewarded with a crappy government housing project apartment and just enough basic foodstuffs not to starve. I am not even talking about getting rich. Most of us find a comfortable balance between effort and reward that is reminiscent of the Peter Principle. The key is that we are free to work as much or as little as necessary to accumulate whatever rewards will make our lives comfortable. If you remove the chance for greater rewards, you remove most of the incentive for greater effort.
The other end of the stick that Socialists really fail to properly understand is the lower end of the spectrum. In their half century long campaign to cultivate more and more people who will accept government handouts because they have been told that the American Dream does not apply to them, they have been teaching people the exact opposite of working “because they want to” or out of “responsibility to society”. The very people who would gladly vote themselves a free welfare state ride are the ones who will drag such a socialist scheme down into a vast slum if the more productive sections of society stop bothering to put forth more than a halfhearted effort. Even if you brainwash people out of the desire for expensive things, you are still going to have major problems with the workforce’s efforts degrading towards the minimum necessary.
Idealistic Socialists don’t care if everyone is poor, as long as everyone is equally poor. Then there are the sorts of Socialists who just want power and control. They would rather rule a slum than share anything better.
In case any trolls want to mistake me for a rich Capitalist, I make closer to 30K than 40K , drive a 12 year old economy car, and live in a 50 year old two bedroom house …and I’m happy as a clam because I worked my way up from being a runaway living on the street and eating from dumpsters. I am living the American dream, and if the Obamunists want to take it from me, they will have to pry it from my cold dead hands.
It has now become imperative that we help, in any and all ways we can, defeat Barack Hussein Obama.
It is a matter of the highest priority that we compel every single voter to vote in favor of John McCain.
There can be no other outcome except that John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin win — their losing is not an option.
http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/?p=73
http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/?p=68 (Updated blog)
Barack Obama is a national security risk (with socialist tendencies)
http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/?p=32
May God bless America.
PS: I remember this from high school typing class: NOW IS THE TIME FOR ALL GOOD MEN TO COME TO THE AID OF THEIR COUNTRY. And, now WOMEN, also.
Lightbringer, you doth “bring light” to the argument. But perhaps one overlooked bit… the timeline.
ala
I don’t think those wanting to vote Obama’s welfare state into existance are either all in the slum now (i.e. Hollywood…), nor do I think those in the lowest incomes are trying to drag everyone else down.
I think they believe they will achieve a less than crappy govt house, and more than enuf basics and foodstuff. The thing about socialism to communism is it sounds good in theory… the ol’ love the one you’re with – happily sharing utopia. The two flaws with reality are the failed economic structure, and humans themselves. Neither are capable of any form of utopia.
Love you’re last graph, BTW… LOL
Dan, I forgot I wanted to comment on your statement:
The socialist word, since Joe the plumber, is coming up more and more. When that, combined with the Ayers and other sundry news that’s almost peeked thru, more than a few Americans are getting the message. And I suspect that the more Obama denies being a socialist, the more the message will be getting out.
The inherent trouble is so many just do not want to believe Obama is a socialist. The evidence is right there… plain as the light of day before their eyes. Yet they still refuse to believe. They say “he is not a socialist”…
… and then click their ruby red heels together three times saying
there’s no place like a free hospital and college
there’s no place like a free hospital and college
there’s no place like a free hospital and college
I herd Obama mention “Tom the Ironworker” (Or some such name) supports him! WTF!
Fascinating….
All that ‘research’ and you still don’t get it.
Alinsky is a ‘Marxist’ because he encourages the poor to organize and fight for their interests? What a hoot!
Goodness, that makes for an awful lot of ‘Marxists’ in this world, practically every priest, nun and union leader. As a real Marxist, I only wish it were so!!!
How about you guys? Are you against poor people organizing for their own immediate interests? Or only if they organize to support the plans and programs of their ‘betters?’
Alinsky was a militant liberal oppositionist and redistributionist, militant but still a liberal–and a decent guy, but hardly a Marxist.
The New Party, save for NYC, where ‘fusion’ is allowed, including for small parties on the right, is long defunct, an experiment in small ‘d’ democracy that failed after a bad Supreme Court decision. A few of the Democrats we endorsed back then, before we dissolved in most places, are still around.
As for DSA ‘exploring’ an ‘official’ connection to the Chicago New Party, that’s really a stretch, and even if it were so, it would have meant little, since I could count the Chicago DSA activists on my fingers. But they never did, because the few active members they have around the country were already tied up in the Greens, Peace and Freedom Party, and a few Democrats. They never saw the New Party as a big deal. My group, CCDS, thought even less about it, and most of the left simply ignored it or opposed it outright as too reformist.
But keep spinning you wheels here, if you like. It’ll keep you busy on irrelevancies, and just get you deeper into the mud.
Speeking of free Hospital, Mata. Please watch this video about free Health Plan in Canada, comparing it with USA. Anyone who sees this video, will never ever think about wanting a free Health care system.
A SHORT COURSE IN BRAIN SURGERY
Courtesy embed for Craig..
“How about you guys? Are you against poor people organizing for their own immediate interests?” (Carl Davidson)
We are not against it, as long as they don’t come and take the money out of our own pockets. Why don’t they focus on working, instead?
And, please watch the video I have posted in comment #17. Thanks Mata for having enbed the video.
As yes, Carl Davidson. Alinsky methods of achieving his end are so admirable. Or as the old Time Magazine profile of Alinsky said:
But of course, Rules for Radicals is just filled with those feel good, love your fellow man tactics. How silly of me to not recognize Alinsky’s Chicago thuggery, used on behalf of “the people”, to achieve the objective of “social justice” as anything but all-American. Naturally we would all deign to classify, say Mother Teresa, right along side Alinsky.
Feh…
The problem with you and I, Mr. Davidson, is we have a chasm between us for our visions of America, and what either of us would believe is “social and economic justice”. I believe you can not mandate human charitable actions, and you seek to do just that… allowing the government to be the decider of the amount of charity, and the recipient. Thus you are an admitted Progressive (and, as you at least have the balls to say, a Marxist), and I am not.
On the other hand, a capitalist America – whether flourishing or not – always digs deep into her pockets to help each other, and foreign nations. All without the government’s demand. She rewards personal achievement of individuals. And we are not a people that seek the homogenous mediocrity that is the quest of socialism.
You do, however, have Alinsky’s 5th rule of thuggery down pat…
Only problem here is I am not infuriated… and I know “the enemy”, as Alinsky calls his opposition, well.
BTW, Carl Davidson… INRE your comment:
If you’d follow the link to the Chicago DSA site I provided in that sentence, you would find it *is* so.
Alinsky Rules for Radicals # 2:
Problem is, I have no fear, confusion, nor will retreat. I went inside your camp to the Chicago DSA to get the information. Therefore I am not as “confused” as you for that “stretch”.
Aah my lovely Mata I have been schooled. Thank you.
Maybe you should take a look at this video, Carl Davidson.
THE FOUNTAINHEAD-HOWARD ROACK SPEECH (AYN RAND)
Single payer (if I may be brutally upfront) is a evil/backdoor way of killing off the old, the severely sick, the unborn and the invalid. Under the guise of “compassion” they will simply be killed by forcing them to wait for rationed care. The government, in essance, gets rid of the non-tax payers (aka: “non contributers”) from the system.
Carl Davidson wrote:
A little honesty slipping through? What is in somebody’s “immediate” interest is quite often not in their long term interest. That roll in the hay with the drunk coed? Fun in the here and now, but the unwanted child or case of AIDS that is the long term result may not be in your long term best interest. That $1,000 check that Obama stole from some small business man? It may be fun to spend now…at least until he or she goes out of business and you or your spouse lose your job. Sooner or later, as the economy grinds to a halt under the dead weight of more and more freeloaders demanding fewer and fewer productive citizens pay their way, all that free stuff that sounded so wonderful becomes watered down, cheap, third rate crap. That seems to be how Socialists sell their snake oil. Promise the poor folks shiny trinkets and immediate gratification, always at the expense of someone else, and never with any thought of future consequences. I have known crack dealers who cared more about the future welfare of their victims/customers than most left wing politicians care about building a better future for the poor.
How about the poor organize themselves to make plans and programs to “better” themselves, instead of just following blindly behind someone offering them bribes stolen from those who have more than they do?
@MataHarley
You are, of course, correct. Poor people, as a general rule, do not have explicit wishes to impoverish everyone else. The worst I can accuse them of is being bamboozled by slick talking politicians and ill informed about cause and effect in the economy. As for leftists in “Hollywood”, “Big Media”, politics, and academia… these groups live in their own little worlds where the rules, standards, responsibilities, and hardships of the “real” world do not often intrude. Where else would you expect Utopian fantasies to flourish but among those with the least grip on reality?
-Light
Poor Carl doesn’t get it. When he says “Alinsky is a ‘Marxist’ because he encourages the poor to organize and fight for their interests? ”
Does Carl think the destruction of capitalism is in the interest of the poor? I wonder if Carl ever visited the Soviet Union during the glory days of communism when everyone but the ruling elites were much poorer than any downtrodden poor person in the United States.
And look around at our “poor” today… most of them have cell phones, color televisions, automobiles and refrigerators. Capitalism has been much better to them than all the Saul Alinsky’s and William Ayers of this world who seem more intent on weilding power than serving others.
There are still way too many persons who truly do suffer in the squalor of real poverty in this county. But they won’t be helped by the radical left who seems to prefer to keep them on the plantation as a class of permanent victims to be trotted out every two to four years and exploited for their vote.
Look at all the large cities in this country where liberals have ruled for decades. Despite massive federal, state and local spending and transfers of wealth from the “rich” to the poor the problems that afflict the poor never seem to cease and the promises of liberalism and Marxism are never, ever realized.
Only a fool would want MORE of that and that is exactly why Obama will NEVER come right out and admit his own fascination with that failed socialist/marxist/communist ideology.
Drill ‘Bama Drill:
Sigh…You guys still are missing the point.
The whole idea behind ACORN, the New Party, even Alinsky was to make capitalism work for EVERYONE, not just a few capitalists.
We had a batch of capitalists around here in Western Pensylvania back in 1980 who bought up the steel mills, gutted them, then took the proceeds to Marathon oil to speculate in oil futures. Their wisdom? ‘We’re in business to make money, not steel.’ That’s a direct quote from one of these jerks. So hundreds of thousands of workers are screwed, and our towns are largely ghost towns. Obama’s backing plans to re-open some of them to produce high-tech windmills, for Green Jobs for Green energy, a decent highroad capitalist industrial policy. And he’ll use some tax money as a wise investment to get them started, and hopefully he’ll subtract it from what your speculator ‘we’re in business to make money, not steel’ capitalist buddies are holding out their hands for in bailouts.
ACORN, to their credit, was the early bird on the streets opposing predatory lender capitalists, while at the same time helping thousands of low-income people get mortgages, almost all with an excellent record of being very sound even today. You see, they helped hard-working low-to-middle income people get homes, the key to getting a stake in this system. But they were not the least bit interested in helping fly-by-night yuppies buy McMansions out in the burbs that were way beyond their means.
And as for suggesting that the poor ‘go to work,’ any time any jobs are advertised around here, there are always far more applicants than positions. And after what your deregulation neoliberal low road capitalists have done to the markets, I expect it’s going to get worse.
I’m a socialist, but my immediate program these days is to get new businesses jump-started creating new wealth and new jobs in a Green way that benefits everyone here. McCain just wants to cut taxes which, it’s true, will give some businesses the means to expand. But why should they expand HERE rather than, say, Malaysia, where they can make a quicker, bigger buck? He has no real answer to that one, save those he’s borrowed from Obama.
Again, you guys don’t even know what the problems are, let alone the solutions. You’re off tilting at windmills, and not even the kind we need.
Interesting thought, incorporating to my thought process. But, not sold on the presentation.
THE PERFECT STORM FOR A DEPRESSION …
A far left Media …
A far left President …
A far left Congress …
A far left Senate …
A far left Supreme Court …
This would eliminate all the checks and
balances that our democracy is based upon.
Barack Obama formed his political and economic
ideology, and his radical associations, during the
TWENTY YEARS … yes, that’s TWENTY YEARS … when
he followed Marxist Black Liberation Theology, in
Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American, racist church.
And, now, with our country on the brink of depression,
Obama wants to impose new laws which would change
America into a third world country.
You may be upset with George Bush, but in spite
of Obama’s slogans, John McCain is NOT George Bush …
so don’t over react to Obama’s 600 million dollar
Propaganda campaign designed to highjack America !!!
A vote for Obama is a vote for changing America beyond
recognition … and, it would be a vote for voter fraud,
a corrupt media, socialism, and the end to America as we know it.
Keep America free, strong, safe, and American …
Elect McCain/Palin on November 4th.
Agrees, incorporated and accepted, Howard wins!
>>The whole idea behind ACORN, the New Party, even Alinsky was to make capitalism work for EVERYONE, not just a few capitalists.>>
Wrong. The whole idea behind ACORN et al was to lie, cheat and/or steal their way to power by perverting elections.
What will they do with the power when they get it? Check out USSR in all it’s glory years.
Thanks but no thanks.
Carl said:
You’re overplaying your Alinsky “ridicule” card, Carl. We might be able to converse if you don’t keep doing an imitation of your friend, Obama, and looking down your nose at everyone. So keep your pompous superiority ‘tude in check here, if you please.
I know you’re not a young dude, but I doubt you have much on me. You may be able to play the Obama “distraction” game with other younger types, but your revisionist history on steel isn’t going to play well with me. My father worked in those steel mills.
You spit out the “batch of capitalists” moniker like a good little Marxist, then distort the story from there. Perhaps the very notion that “profit” is integral to a business’ survival is foreign to you. Breaking even doesn’t cut it. There needs to be money to update, improve, expand, and accommodate for the morphing realities.
i.e. the US steel industry was some of the first “outsourcing”, as you and ilk like to call it today.
Why? Business outsources because it can no longer compete financially. They are not non-profits, tho you may wish they were. And in the case of the US steel mills, it came down to steel was cheaper from foreign sources… countries that became more than competitive and adept because the US graciously provided the technology after WWII, and they had workers that didn’t have union wages, and benefits safety regs, and high corporate taxes… not to mention the sundry class action lawsuits.
Add to that the need to import the raw materials as the resources nearby were depleted. The older the factory’s equipment gets, the farther away the raw material must be shipped, the higher the union wages and insurance costs… all results in the more profit a company needs to make to stay competitive. Otherwise it’s a slow business death… as history showed us.
I have mixed feelings about unions… being a former union member myself. I believe they had a place in time where they did good. But today, between the unions, OSHA, the EPA plus US high corporation and payroll taxes and licensing, our manufacturing and other production industries cannot compete with other countries.
Frankly, you “community organizing Alinsky types” played your own part in this downfall of American manufacturing. But now you whine about the lost jobs, giving your predecessors and yourselves a pass for their involvement in the demise then, and the continuing demise of other businesses today.
Losing a basic necessity such as steel, in this country is something I have long lamented. Frankly, I believe this country should be independent for manufacturingm textiles and energy. But it’s too late for that now in this global economy.
You want to blame greed. I blame people like Alinsky and unions, plus government, who drove the business into the ground.
Which, of course, brings me to your final closing… pre-snippy “ridicule”, that is
I swear you Obama types have a hearing problem. Or perhaps it’s just the talking points you put out.
McCain has most certainly provided the answer… and that is to cut corporate taxes. They are the 2nd highest in the world. Of course businesses are going to go where they are more competitive. It’s called survival. You want them to survive here? You need to allow them to compete. So you’ll have to give up something…. the workers environment, wages, health insurance, equipment modernization, or give ’em a break on the taxes so they can afford all of the above.
What’s Obama’s answer? He seems to believe there’s a bottomless pit of profits he can tap into. He’s as much a fool as the rest of Congress… both sides… who believed that bail out money was going to cut loose with more credit liquidity. right…
Obama can’t seem to recognize that the expansion of government into business that he proposes is going to result in profits that he wants to tax drying up. Perhaps not in his potential terms, but it won’t be long after… just as it’s done in every socialist/communist structure in history. But then, that has always been the fatal flaw in socialists. They are short sighted and immediate, as Lightbringer points out above.
And oh, BTW, quit frivolously suing the living begeezus out of corporations at every turn. Otherwise you can add more business failures to your belt with class action suits and money hungry trial lawyers.
Mata…
Check the link in #5…it’s not to the PrairieFire book….
#4 link _is_ a Prairie Fire book link…
#5 is a link to a list of goals of the Communist Party for the USA in 1963. When you read it, you’ll see that they have nearly completed their goals.
It’s pretty stunning.
Yes, SueK. I’ve read that document that the Florida Representative read into the Congressional Record doc many times. I believe it made the rounds again in the news last spring. It resurfaces every once in awhile, pointing out that the “dumbing down of America” is truly making headway.
Well, Mata Harley, first point is I’m a real Marxist, not an ‘Alinsky type’, although I have worked with them from time to time. My critique of them is that they’re mainly just another liberal pressure group, once the militant veneer wears off. I know a little more than just ways to make a ruckus.
The mills around hear were profitable, just not super-profitable. True, they were old, and in need of reinvesting profits into upgrading technology and even shrinking the work force. That’s what happened in Chicago, which still produces as much steel as ever, but with one-third of the work force.
Instead, LTV bought them from US Steel, formerly Jones and Laughlin Steel, then did exactly what I said, they took the ‘low road’ and screwed everyone.
Don’t blame it on the union. I’ve got a grandfather and a cousin dead in that mill, which was one of the largest in the world, and without the union fighting for safer conditions, there would be a lot more dead and injured. Not to mention that we have ‘weekends’ now. And after a bitter fight where we had to take to the streets in the 1980s, we managed to save at least part of our pensions. Without the union, we wouldn’t have a penny of that money which belonged to us, the steelworkers and their families, that paid into it over many years.
We can curb the export of capital, or at least slow it down. We can put a capital export tax on firms that received public subsidies. We can at least take away subsidies for those into outsourcing jobs. Then we can take those same tax credits and subsidies and apply them to Green industrial development.
We already have one reconverted mill in Pennsylvania now making wind turbines. It was put together by the steelworkers union, local government and–guess what–high tech capital FROM SPAIN! So that mean the profits, or at least a chunk of them, will be going back to Spain, rather than recycling and multiplying here. Our local capitalist guys, it seems, would rather use their capital gambling on casino-economy derivatives, betting on something really ‘productive’ and ‘helpful,’ like whether the Yen goes up or down today. The final outrage is now they expect us to bail them out! If we do, they better exchange some equity and control for it, rather than just get free money from our pockets. If they’re not willing to do that, then let them sink or swim by the ‘free market’ they claim to love UBER ALLES.
Obama’s not perfect, but he’s our best shot. He started his political career dealing with the impact of this problem, and knows it well. McCain doesn’t have a clue. McCain’s in the pocket of those who created the problem, not those who stand a chance to solve it. Obama’s not even close to being a socialist, but at least his brand of industrial policy capitalism might get us back on track.
Actually, Carl, I have more respect for you being up front and stating your beliefs are Marxist. Then again, I doubt you’d have a shot at the Oval Office, because as left as this country has become, they still don’t want socialism or wealth redistribution.
Thus I’d never expect Obama to admit his socialism publicly, nor outline as bold a plan as to make his beliefs more overt than they already are. But I suspect if you get your President Obama, combined with Pelosi and Reid, you’ll find him almost perfect for your beliefs…. or at least well on the path to the Marxist America you desire.
Even tho we disagree vehemently on so many issues, I absolutely agree that green technology is a must include. However I am not for the abandonment of oil since it is not just fuel and energy, but also the mainstay of the majority of US exports. We will never be without the need for oil. And, when the wind doesn’t blow, the sun doesn’t shine, and droughts affect hydro power, oil is the only constant.
And frankly, I believe they are attacking this all wrong. It would be a wiser solution instead to reduce demand on existing power grids by building and retrofitting homes capable to be energy independent. This would allow for even more “under $249K” businesses to start up, and decrease the load. I’m quite sure that when the original grids were designed, it was not thought wise to concentrate such huge dependence upon so few locations.
However in some ways, you get no argument from me. Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, you name it. I’m an all of the above type of girl. But the future I see is a lot of alternative energy manufacturers popping up, and no where to install them. The enviros file lawsuits and halt everything from transmission lines to solar panels in the deserts. State citizens block any effort to run a transmission lines thru a park. They stop clean coal. They stop nuclear.
Quite frankly, the problem with alternative energy is two fold…
1: it’s going to be more expensive to the consumer at the end than oil, and at a time we can’t afford that extra expense.
2: it’s going to be not only more expensive after the lawsuits that will impede the progress, but possibly a very long time in court before anything comes to fruition.
And what will all those manufacturers of windmills and solar panels do when they can’t move their product? We can’t afford to wait it out. Drill and expand petroleum, plus work on alternatives. It’s suicidal not to.
BTW, somebody want to talk to Chappaquiddick Ted as to why he has consistently blocked the wind farm off his vacation home? The NIMBY attitude is rampid, and knows no party lines.
INRE the tale of your particular steel mill… they all have a story. But ultimately it all comes down to the same. A “small profit” cannot last when equipment is aging, wages are rising, OSHA and EPA controls more demanding. It is a slow and inevitable death.
And of course where the unions are good is ensuring that there are safe work environments. As I said, if you want good wages, health and pension, plus safe work environments, EPA controls, the company has to get a break somewhere. So corporate taxes is the way to do that.
BTW your capital export idea spins on the requirement they receive public subsidies. Again, we go back to our inherent differences… I believe government should stay out of the taxpayer financing of the free market, and their regulations minimal – confined mostly to emissions and safety.
Even at that, they need to be realistic on their OSHA regulations, and the cost. I’m not interested in OSHA/EPA putting in outrageous demands, forcing the public to fund meeting those demands with subsidies.
Please vote for Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president.
Why vote for McCain? He voted for the bailout, just like Obama. And both McCain and Obama voted for US government investment in big commercial banks, which is socialist, Socialism, maybe even Communism. Why not send a message to both parties that it is time to vote on principles? Why not? YES, we should!
Only Bob Barr is moral enough and conservative enough to deal with the issue of housing, Wall Street, and the rest of the current mess. He has not taken a cent from Fannie or Freddie or from any of the Wall Street firms that profit from the bailout. And Bob Barr has the support of Rep. Ron Paul, who did so well in the Republican primary debates.
Here’s Bob’s Web site: http://www.bobbarr2008.com/
By voting for Bob Barr, the only message being sent would be Welcome to the White House, Obama. Soooo, if you want Obama as your president, vote for either Obama or Bob Barr, the result of your vote would be the same.