Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
121. I don't think it's exceptional for working people wanting more job protection. Globalists
Mon Sep 30, 2013, 10:04 AM
Sep 2013

have been pushing this free trade only because they want cheap labor to exploit and to destroy the middle class in America.

Of course he's a corporate Dem. polichick Sep 2013 #1
Wages of 23 cents an hour wow warrant46 Sep 2013 #72
Reality. grahamhgreen Sep 2013 #83
I am not stumped at all. 99Forever Sep 2013 #2
In A Way I Am Not Stumped Too. TheMastersNemesis Sep 2013 #4
Funny, that period you described is the one period of real wage growth in 40 years Recursion Sep 2013 #8
........ daleanime Sep 2013 #12
Yes? Recursion Sep 2013 #14
No, daleanime Sep 2013 #15
Agreed. progressoid Sep 2013 #22
Plus one. I share your impression. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #48
I support and share your expression also. n/t truedelphi Sep 2013 #104
I agree! n/t sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #123
More what? Meth? Fast food? Prisons? Th1onein Sep 2013 #32
Goods, in total, by inflation-adjusted dollar value Recursion Sep 2013 #33
You got a link for that assertion? Are you counting cooking hamburgers as manufacturing? Th1onein Sep 2013 #34
Why not? bu$h did. RC Sep 2013 #62
It's not good for jobs. and it's really not a trade agreement cali Sep 2013 #43
Copyright is great for some working people Recursion Sep 2013 #91
EFF certainly disagrees cali Sep 2013 #100
And in terms of copyright - it is especially about truedelphi Sep 2013 #114
Notice you didn't respond to my request to a link for your assertion. Figures. Th1onein Sep 2013 #86
Sorry, I assumed you could google Recursion Sep 2013 #88
You made the assertion, not me. Of course, when flipping HAMBURGERS are counted as manufacturing Th1onein Sep 2013 #95
Line cooks at McDonalds are not counted as manufacturing Recursion Sep 2013 #96
Sorry, no link. Th1onein Sep 2013 #126
True, you did not post any link to back up your claim that line cooks are counted Recursion Sep 2013 #127
Here's another graph of the change in manufacturing output and employment. pampango Sep 2013 #97
Huh. I thought I included that one Recursion Sep 2013 #99
Fast food was re-classified as manufacturing about ten years ago. pa28 Sep 2013 #70
The huge factories where McDonalds assembles hamburgers are classed as manufacturing Recursion Sep 2013 #89
Does that include McDonald's and Burger King? That statistic isnt helping American rhett o rick Sep 2013 #76
As I said, we're manufacturing more with much fewer people Recursion Sep 2013 #90
So manufacturing more isnt necessarily a good thing. We need to protect American rhett o rick Sep 2013 #93
I don't think we need to protect *manufacturing* jobs anymore than wheat threshing jobs Recursion Sep 2013 #94
It dismantled the big manufacturing concerns concentrated in the Midwest... WCGreen Sep 2013 #73
It may be good for the giant agriculture corporations but not for workers. rhett o rick Sep 2013 #75
Do you support the TPP? If so, please explain why. nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #77
Did I say I support it? No Recursion Sep 2013 #87
. jsr Sep 2013 #19
Neither am I stumped: ye shall be known by your works and this and the Keystone Pipeline would indepat Sep 2013 #81
Maybe just a dirt magnet... pulling them out of the wall to get caught? Tigress DEM Sep 2013 #3
If he were doing that, "they" would have been caught and exposed long ago. truebluegreen Sep 2013 #80
He's already signed three "free" trade agreements MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #5
Ah yes, the f**king KORUS agreement. Chan790 Sep 2013 #59
I like to use the term COSTLY trade agreements.... It's more accurate and costly is the opposite grahamhgreen Sep 2013 #82
That's an excellent reframe of the term. truedelphi Sep 2013 #101
It's mostly about soybeans and wheat Recursion Sep 2013 #6
...... 99Forever Sep 2013 #17
"Some groups will be better off, others will be worse off." Exactly.. SomethingFishy Sep 2013 #21
Middle class? progressoid Sep 2013 #23
Looks like NAFTA slowed that decline, doesn't it? Recursion Sep 2013 #25
If all the US wanted to do was sell soybeans, Art_from_Ark Sep 2013 #27
We'd like to keep doing that, and expand it to other asian countries Recursion Sep 2013 #41
Who is this "we" you speak of? The 1%? The multinational corporations? Enthusiast Sep 2013 #49
Well, my family who grow soybeans, for one Recursion Sep 2013 #92
As Monsanto might say: Petrushka Sep 2013 #46
one more time: this is not really a trade agreement. cali Sep 2013 #45
Have you bothered to look into the effect that NAFTA had on the jobs in this country? truedelphi Sep 2013 #102
Jobs? Employment went up after NAFTA Recursion Sep 2013 #105
The emplyment going up had more to do with truedelphi Sep 2013 #111
TPP SamKnause Sep 2013 #7
Corporations and the 1% have not really changed since the 19th Century. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #50
As Krugman pointed out yesterday, deutsey Sep 2013 #57
I would say... Oilwellian Sep 2013 #98
You are right, of course.............nt Enthusiast Sep 2013 #106
Do we know exactly what is in it? dkf Sep 2013 #9
It Is Very LIkely To Be LIke NAFTA. It Will Be More Far Reaching. TheMastersNemesis Sep 2013 #10
Why doesn't just the secrecy itself get this put on the radar? dkf Sep 2013 #11
Just read this post and my stomach is sinking. dkf Sep 2013 #13
dfk...Public Citizen has the best detailed explanation and links KoKo Sep 2013 #64
They say that he is very smart. Could he be planning for his retirement? AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #16
you're stumped whether he's a corporatist or not? Doctor_J Sep 2013 #18
Obama's support of TPP is easily explained. HooptieWagon Sep 2013 #20
Obama has some tricks up his sleeve mwrguy Sep 2013 #24
Oh, good grief, REALLY? Th1onein Sep 2013 #31
I think mwrguy is being sarcastic Skittles Sep 2013 #35
gfbnr'tbj]pobm WilliamPitt Sep 2013 #63
As Ed says "Lets Get To Work" Left Coast2020 Sep 2013 #26
MSNBC will slap Ed down. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #53
"Besides the TPP is primarily a GOP initiative." not according to this solarhydrocan Sep 2013 #28
You mean the person I keep hearing is our inevitable next president? hughee99 Sep 2013 #125
Saw printouts for this 2naSalit Sep 2013 #29
Nth dimensional chess and shit, doncha know? Th1onein Sep 2013 #30
Isn't this the 124on234x234 time were Obama is "supposed" to fuck something up and doesn't? uponit7771 Sep 2013 #36
Virtually every facet of his .. sendero Sep 2013 #37
+1 That's it, right there. n/t Egalitarian Thug Sep 2013 #67
I wish people would stop pretending that this is a free trade agreement. Democracyinkind Sep 2013 #38
I don't understand it either. Looking for a good explanation. n/t Laelth Sep 2013 #39
Soybeans Recursion Sep 2013 #42
You sure this isn't a move to lock up markets before China can enter them? Laelth Sep 2013 #47
We need tariffs, not trade deals! B Calm Sep 2013 #40
Exactly. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #55
I guess your response means you aren't very willing to kickstart truedelphi Sep 2013 #103
If tariffs magically produced a strong middle class, FDR would have been for them not against them. pampango Sep 2013 #107
We didn't need tariffs in the 1930's and 40's. We had a strong union labor movement back then and B Calm Sep 2013 #108
People were not making a "livable wage" in the 1930's. FDR lowered tariffs because pampango Sep 2013 #113
Everybody loved FDR, but just like Obama, I don't agree with everything he did. B Calm Sep 2013 #115
Indeed we disagree. I think Europe proves that FDR's ideas still work today. pampango Sep 2013 #118
Ronald reagan was a globalist too. I am more B Calm Sep 2013 #120
"... the Smoot Hawley Tariff caused almost 0 damage to our economy" seems to be damning with faint pampango Sep 2013 #122
you're stumped? really? piratefish08 Sep 2013 #44
I don't understand why you are stumped. LWolf Sep 2013 #51
Payback For His Corporate Benefactors cantbeserious Sep 2013 #52
among other things for me. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #54
How is this confusing? TBF Sep 2013 #56
Good synopsis. DADT and gay marriage didn't cost the owning class money Doctor_J Sep 2013 #68
I don't understand why a lot of seemingly-liberal Democratic Congresspeople support it either. Chan790 Sep 2013 #58
Where do they get the majority of their enlightenment Sep 2013 #61
The Supreme Court's decision for "Citizens United" allowed Corporations KoKo Sep 2013 #65
+1000 !!!! orpupilofnature57 Sep 2013 #79
Obama may be able to get 'fast track' and the TPP itself through the Senate, but pampango Sep 2013 #66
Hell the House will fight just because they hate him. TBF Sep 2013 #69
Part of it is racism and ODS but their base has been skeptical of trade for a long time. pampango Sep 2013 #71
That actually makes a lot of sense - TBF Sep 2013 #85
The house approved Obama's Korea free trade deal w/ 219 R's and 59 d's. pa28 Sep 2013 #74
The deal that Bush had largely crafted years ago, no surprise they supported it. tritsofme Sep 2013 #84
A thinking person has to wonder just how many tens of truedelphi Sep 2013 #112
Maybe the reason you don't understand it is... gulliver Sep 2013 #60
Give an example. WinkyDink Sep 2013 #117
SCOTUS deciding to give corporations the Privilege of Owning orpupilofnature57 Sep 2013 #78
23 cents an hour is more than is paid either to Salvation Army for Good Will handicapped workers. lonestarnot Sep 2013 #109
Oh no! Not the "Precious Merican Sovereignty" card!!! RB TexLa Sep 2013 #110
Yes, American workers should lose out to "the world." WinkyDink Sep 2013 #116
People in most places know their country is a small part of a big world and pampango Sep 2013 #119
I don't think it's exceptional for working people wanting more job protection. Globalists B Calm Sep 2013 #121
Of course not. The question is - do we the real protection of strong unions, progressive taxes and pampango Sep 2013 #124
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I Simply Do Not Understan...»Reply #121