Amazon BLOCKED From Filming Union Voting
5 years ago
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
roy and seniors. cops remove the old folks
-------
my understanding, cops called and dangerous folks removed.
Monday, August 30, 2010
more teabag nonsense
from todays msnbc's countdown. another "get rid" of social security guff
------
----------
------
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
----------
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, August 27, 2010
cat food committee--debt committee and social security
cat food, staple of older Americans diets, could become even more prevelent if "debt commitee" has its way.
How do I know this? Obama selected many on the debt commitee whom are active supporters of social security "phae-out" or privatization.
Whom knows what a lame duck congress will do?
from excellent article at http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/05/10/obama-packs-debt-committee-with-supportes-of-social-security-benefit-cuts-and-privatization/
-------
go on:
President Obama has packed the Debt Commission (also known as the cat food commission) with members who have an overwhelming history of support for both benefit cuts and privatization of Social Security.
The “National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform” is operating in secret over the objections of both parties. John Boehner and John Conyers have both raised concerns that the commission will make recommendations in December that could be passed by a lame duck Congress that doesn’t have to worry about being reelected. They requested that the commission report its findings prior to the election so that the public can have a chance to factor in the recommendations into their voting decisions in the election. The commission denied the request.
As we are seeing with Audit the Fed, it is falling to Judd Gregg — who doesn’t have to worry about being reelected — to raise concerns about “populist pandering,” and he is likely to be the one to refuse unanimous consent and force a cloture vote that will impose a 60 vote hurdle. (The transpartisan support for Audit the Fed we’ve built over the year makes it difficult for anyone with re-election worries to play the Joe Lieberman role, even Joe Lieberman.) Though they have different agendas with regard to the outcome, the concerns of both Boehner and Conyers and the commission’s lack of transparency are well founded.
As we reported at the time, the Obama White House has been interested in cutting Social Security right out of the gate. David Brooks reported that three administration officials called him to say Obama “is extremely committed to entitlement reform and is plotting politically feasible ways to reduce Social Security as well as health spending” in March of 2009. The neoliberal TNR/JournoList set who cheered on the Iraq war and the corporate-friendly health care bill are already lending their support: Privatizing Social
No, Cutting Social Security, Si! says Jon Chait.
Chait conflates and confuses two separate statements. Obama has dismantled liberal opposition to many of George Bush’s policies, and whatever he wants to do with Social Security will be accepted by many just because they like him. Matt Yglesias had this to say about Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court: “Clinton & Obama like and trust [Kagan], and most liberals (myself included) like and trust Clinton & Obama.” To which Glenn Greenwald rightly responds, “In other words, according to Chemerinksy and Yglesias, progressives will view Obama’s choice as a good one by virtue of the fact that it’s Obama choice. Isn’t that a pure embodiment of mindless tribalism and authoritarianism? ”
What Wall Street wants is to wind up with a good chunk of the Social Security trust fund in its own coffers. Where that intersects with the objectives of the commission remains to be seen, but the fact is that Obama has packed it with people who have a strong history of supporting both reducing benefits and privatization. Even the token “liberals” like Jan Schakowsky have a history of abandoning their strongest principles when the President asks it of them, and Dick Durbin is now telling “bleeding heart liberals” to be open to benefit cuts for the sake of the fiscal responsibility.
How do I know this? Obama selected many on the debt commitee whom are active supporters of social security "phae-out" or privatization.
Whom knows what a lame duck congress will do?
from excellent article at http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/05/10/obama-packs-debt-committee-with-supportes-of-social-security-benefit-cuts-and-privatization/
-------
go on:
President Obama has packed the Debt Commission (also known as the cat food commission) with members who have an overwhelming history of support for both benefit cuts and privatization of Social Security.
The “National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform” is operating in secret over the objections of both parties. John Boehner and John Conyers have both raised concerns that the commission will make recommendations in December that could be passed by a lame duck Congress that doesn’t have to worry about being reelected. They requested that the commission report its findings prior to the election so that the public can have a chance to factor in the recommendations into their voting decisions in the election. The commission denied the request.
As we are seeing with Audit the Fed, it is falling to Judd Gregg — who doesn’t have to worry about being reelected — to raise concerns about “populist pandering,” and he is likely to be the one to refuse unanimous consent and force a cloture vote that will impose a 60 vote hurdle. (The transpartisan support for Audit the Fed we’ve built over the year makes it difficult for anyone with re-election worries to play the Joe Lieberman role, even Joe Lieberman.) Though they have different agendas with regard to the outcome, the concerns of both Boehner and Conyers and the commission’s lack of transparency are well founded.
As we reported at the time, the Obama White House has been interested in cutting Social Security right out of the gate. David Brooks reported that three administration officials called him to say Obama “is extremely committed to entitlement reform and is plotting politically feasible ways to reduce Social Security as well as health spending” in March of 2009. The neoliberal TNR/JournoList set who cheered on the Iraq war and the corporate-friendly health care bill are already lending their support: Privatizing Social
No, Cutting Social Security, Si! says Jon Chait.
Chait conflates and confuses two separate statements. Obama has dismantled liberal opposition to many of George Bush’s policies, and whatever he wants to do with Social Security will be accepted by many just because they like him. Matt Yglesias had this to say about Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court: “Clinton & Obama like and trust [Kagan], and most liberals (myself included) like and trust Clinton & Obama.” To which Glenn Greenwald rightly responds, “In other words, according to Chemerinksy and Yglesias, progressives will view Obama’s choice as a good one by virtue of the fact that it’s Obama choice. Isn’t that a pure embodiment of mindless tribalism and authoritarianism? ”
What Wall Street wants is to wind up with a good chunk of the Social Security trust fund in its own coffers. Where that intersects with the objectives of the commission remains to be seen, but the fact is that Obama has packed it with people who have a strong history of supporting both reducing benefits and privatization. Even the token “liberals” like Jan Schakowsky have a history of abandoning their strongest principles when the President asks it of them, and Dick Durbin is now telling “bleeding heart liberals” to be open to benefit cuts for the sake of the fiscal responsibility.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
more economics--entitlement cuts and more
entitlement: social security is one and presently one overpaid by workers. The "overpayent" has resulted in the $2.5 trillion dollar pile of 't'bills. This is the largest pile of cash in history. any wonder it up for grabs?
how many years of continued tax cuts would the result from looting the fund?
--------
----------
how many years of continued tax cuts would the result from looting the fund?
--------
----------
Monday, August 9, 2010
radioactive scabs and the lockout 2
This ia a letter to the editor in today's St Louis Post Dispatch on the locked out steelworkers:
Posted: Monday, August 9, 2010 12:00 am |
Locking out workers in a time of war
Regarding "Uranium plant dispute rocks town" (Aug. 1): At the Honeywell Corp. plant in Metropolis, Ill., workers process "yellow cake" uranium. The United Steelworkers have been negotiating with Honeywell for months. Despite an offer by the union to continue working without an agreement, corporate officials locked out the workers.
These workers have performed this dangerous work for more than 50 years. There is growing proof that workers, families and area residents have a cancer rate much higher than normal.
In wartime, unions give up raises and agree to "no-strike" clauses and pay freezes. US Steel, Ford, GM, Alcoa and others continue to make huge profits from war production. What would the public say about a union that went on strike against the steel, aluminum, aircraft or automotive industry in a time of war? The workers would be reviled.
The United States is engaged in two wars that have killed more than 6,000 Americans. If this plant does not produce, it could endanger national security. Why are patriots not crying out against the unpatriotic Honeywell?
Honeywell CEO David M. Cote got $9.7 million last year. It's time for Honeywell executives to do the right thing for the people who make the sacrifices for the corporation: the workers.
Gary Gaines • Granite City
Posted: Monday, August 9, 2010 12:00 am |
Locking out workers in a time of war
Regarding "Uranium plant dispute rocks town" (Aug. 1): At the Honeywell Corp. plant in Metropolis, Ill., workers process "yellow cake" uranium. The United Steelworkers have been negotiating with Honeywell for months. Despite an offer by the union to continue working without an agreement, corporate officials locked out the workers.
These workers have performed this dangerous work for more than 50 years. There is growing proof that workers, families and area residents have a cancer rate much higher than normal.
In wartime, unions give up raises and agree to "no-strike" clauses and pay freezes. US Steel, Ford, GM, Alcoa and others continue to make huge profits from war production. What would the public say about a union that went on strike against the steel, aluminum, aircraft or automotive industry in a time of war? The workers would be reviled.
The United States is engaged in two wars that have killed more than 6,000 Americans. If this plant does not produce, it could endanger national security. Why are patriots not crying out against the unpatriotic Honeywell?
Honeywell CEO David M. Cote got $9.7 million last year. It's time for Honeywell executives to do the right thing for the people who make the sacrifices for the corporation: the workers.
Gary Gaines • Granite City
Support Honeywell Workers --vid
more on locked-outworkers in Metropolis
------
ThePaducahMoon | July 09, 2010
AT 6:30 P.M ON MONDAY JUNE 28, 2010 THE COMPANY LOCKED THE UNION OUT OF THE PLANT EVEN THOUGH THE UNION OFFERED TO WORK UNDER THE OLD AGREEMENT.
THE UNION AGREED TO A CONTRACT EXTENSION AS LONG AS THE COMPANY AGREED NOT TO LOCK US OUT! THE COMPANY HAS FALSELY CLAIMED THAT WE REFUSED TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT.
=====
------
ThePaducahMoon | July 09, 2010
AT 6:30 P.M ON MONDAY JUNE 28, 2010 THE COMPANY LOCKED THE UNION OUT OF THE PLANT EVEN THOUGH THE UNION OFFERED TO WORK UNDER THE OLD AGREEMENT.
THE UNION AGREED TO A CONTRACT EXTENSION AS LONG AS THE COMPANY AGREED NOT TO LOCK US OUT! THE COMPANY HAS FALSELY CLAIMED THAT WE REFUSED TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT.
=====
Saturday, August 7, 2010
radioactive scabs and the lockout
It pleased me greatly to stand with steelworkers locked out in Metropolis, IL. today.
Steelworkers from several areas (including a good group from Granite City} we also in attendance. Director Jim Robinson, Jeff Rains, Dave Dowling and a couple score of eaststders made the trip. Other District 7 folks and leaders we there
Impressive as well was the public support shown by the local community.
Local 7-669 had the right stuff today and has earned the respect of labor.
-----article: http://www.westkentuckystar.com/Featured-News/USW-Union-Members---Supporters-Rally-in-Metropolis
USW Union Members & Supporters Rally in Metropolis
By WestKyStar Staff
METROPOLIS, IL - A community rally, organized by the United Steel Workers Local 7-669, was held Saturday afternoon in Metropolis. Organizers praised those in attendance for coming out in such huge numbers.
Hundreds of union workers, along with families and supporters from southern Illinois and western Kentucky, marched through Metropolis to Fort Massac State Park to send a message of solidarity to Honeywell and other employees in the area. Union groups from surrounding communities attended as USW leaders spoke to the large crowd gathered following the march. Illinois politicians also took to the podium at Fort Massac to encourage the striking union members and their families.
Union employees reportedly were locked out of the Honeywell plant on June 28th when their Local 7-669 would not guarantee a 24 hour notice prior to possibly going on strike.
Negotiations since June between Honeywell and the union representatives have failed to produce a resolve, but are scheduled to resume August 10th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
