You know the internal support for unions in general is waning when they have to go out and gather up enough homeless people to form a picket line. If the union members don’t care enough to picket, or can’t afford to picket for themselves, it cheapens the cause. What’s the cause you ask? The carpenter’s union wants more money.
They’re hired feet, or, as the union calls them, temporary workers, paid $8 an hour to picket. Many were recruited from homeless shelters or transitional houses. Several have recently been released from prison. Others are between jobs.
For the rest of the hilarious story see Outsourcing the Picket Line.
Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions (R) released a list today of 20 loopholes in the current immigration bill. Watch how little attention this gets in the MSM. But first, check out Session’s press release where he lists the 20 loopholes.
Then get on the phone or email your representatives. Never mind that you may have already done that. Do it again.
Continue reading 20 Loopholes In Immigration Bill
The name of the bill sounds good, but it is exactly the opposite of its namesake. H.R. 800 is designed for the purpose of helping labor unions (the democrats’ largest contributing block) to organize. As if labor unions don’t already have a right to organize. They do and have had that right for decades.
The reality is that union membership is dwindling because workers are, more and more, voting NO to unionizing their workplace. The synergy between Big Labor and the Democratic party is showing its ugly head, and it is the workers, employers, and consumers that will pay the price if this bill actually becomes law. The bill would eliminate voting by private ballot. Put another way, democrats really don’t want a democratic process when it comes to voting about whether or not to start a union in their workplace. They don’t want a confidential ballot. They fear a confidential ballot. The mis-named bill is actually an Employee No Choice Act, but you won’t find this interpretation in the MSM. The left is claiming that the White House is against workers’ rights, when actually it is workers’ rights that they wish to protect.
Big Labor is expecting to get a return on their investment (campaign contributions) that finance the democrats’ elections. In private industry it would be called an investment, but in politics it is more accurately referred to as a quid pro quo. Substitute the word ‘unions’ for ‘workers’ and you see just who the democrat lawmakers choose to represent.
The political left are on the wrong side of outsourcing. Why? Because they ignore insourcing. To listen to a Democrat speak of outsourcing, it is always about how high paying jobs are going overseas and this is wrong. That, like the missing explosives ‘under our watch’ is simply not true. It’s spin.
If you imagine our economy as a superhighway, you can find these Democrats on the exit ramp, demagoging the economic function of outsourcing. All they see is jobs that ‘go overseas’. They refuse to see what’s going on at the on-ramps. So, as per their playbook, they make sure you only see what they’re losing and none of what they’re gaining.
This is a simple concept. Outsourcing is not an exclusive function of employers in America. Businesses do it where they can to cut costs, which means they can be more competitive and solvent to their investors (more increasingly you and I), and their customers in offering more bang for the buck. Fact is, countries around the world also ‘outsource’ where they feel they can benefit. And, not surprisingly, many of them outsource to the good ole U.S. of A. In the final analysis, more jobs are created as a result of ‘outsourcing’ than are lost. But the left, standing on the off-ramp is oblivious to this phenomenon. Studies show that over the past 15 years, foreign corporations have moved jobs to the United States at a faster rate than jobs have left. “Jobs insourced to the United States increased from 4.9 million in 1991 to 6.4 million in 2001.” There’s been an 82 percent increase in insourced jobs compared to a 23 percent increase in outsourced jobs.
Source Bruce Bartlett, a senior fellow at the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis. In their ‘perfect’ world, the Democrat party would like to eliminate outsourcing to appease the unions. It’s purely a political calculation for them, not an economic one. They claim outsourcing will increase unemployment here in the U.S. If that was true, then how can they explain our current unemployment rate, which the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics put at 5.4 percent in September 2005, is one of the lowest in the world and in our history. (This article originally published in October 2005, it is 4.4 percent as of October 2006, and is now the lowest in history.) France’s unemployment rate is 9.4 percent, Germany’s 9.9 percent and Italy’s 8.6 percent. Our Canadian neighbor’s is 6.6 percent. Quoting Walter Williams here “The next time you hear a politician whining about our “awful” job climate, ask him which European country we should look to for guidance in job creation. The fact of business is that our country is the world’s leader not only in job creation but in terms of where the world wants to invest its money.” Outsourcing is not a dirty word. And the party stuck on the off-ramp does not have the answer. Only spin.