You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘ACORN’ category.

The now famous high stepping Wal*Mart video  mentions that point….

Now, the meme of bashing Wal*mart  and fast foods has gotten a little blaze and to be honest, when I first saw the flash mob at Walmart on the national sites, as a person with little time, I passed.

But on Delaware Liberal, I opened it in another tab, and was listening to it as background and all of a sudden…..  it stopped for a half second and then…

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

The answer in my head was … “no, i didn’t…”

The second answer was… “of course I did.” which made me more intrigued by my original answer.  Why on earth did I think it was bad for these people to interrupt business as usual to demonstrate for something affecting I think, one person?

As this “wow moment” started to dawn on me, I realized I’d been brainwashed’… Over time.  it had really happened.  My gut, had been  over-ruling my head….  it’s a business. They should call the police. They should fire everyone involved…   Demonstrations are really ineffective blowing off of steam…

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

How many others out there would say “no” … How many others out there really don’t know it is their right to form a union?  That anyone can form a union?  It is legally protected.

Oh, they can threaten to fire you if you join… And they can fire you….

But if they do… you can sue… and even better, under current law, you can sue them and win.  Win big!

You can make them pay you for all back wages you lost.  So finacially it is just like you were working but having the entire time off.

You can make them pay all your damages, including late fees on bills you couldn’t pay because the illegally fired you. You can make them pay interest on all loans you took out to live on, even if they came from family.  If you Dad gives you a loan at 1000% interest, they have to pay that… and to your Mom, your brothers, your sisters, your aunts, and uncles…  Your whole family and friends can get rich off them because they fired you for forming a union!

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

The business may respond to the legal judgment ,  “Screw you , we are closing”.  But if they close they will still have to pay you for all the damage they cause you because they fired you for forming a union… You still win! And win BIG!

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

How is it that our newspapers don’t remind us of this.  How is it that Unions are painted to be the bad guys, because they make a business lose money?  Why isn’t the business painted as the bad guy, for stealing potential earnings out of each and every employee working for them…

Some may think forcing a union on a business is unfair.  Racist states often use this argument.  Why should White owned businesses pay more for black people’s labor?   That is why ALEC (in Delaware associated with Patty Blevins) was invented:  to protect White Businesses’ interests.   And still unfortunately, in some states, there were enough white people still agreeing that black people as well as to  those whites who associate with them, should be paid inferior wages,so much so that with ALEC’s help, enough votes were mustered to pass state anti-union laws..

But historically there were laws that once said: slavery was legal. Despite bad law, morally it was still everyone’s right to be free….

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

It is your right to form a union.  Existing law is crystal clear.   Why was this decided?  What is the moral argument behind it?

Simple.  You have to eat.  Bottom line.  If someone says  I have to pay you $6.00 an hour because I’m not making enough money, and you can’t get money anywhere else, you work for $6.00 and hour.  If he counters that he can only pay $5.00 an hour, and you can’t make money anywhere else, you will  do his bidding for $5.00 an hour.  Why not $4 then?  Why not $3 then?  Why not $2 then?  Why not $1 then?  Why not .25 cents then?

You have to eat.

There is no bargaining chip in your favor…  Your employer if legally allowed, would pay the lowest rate possible to still have employees. When there are more employees than positions,  wages could drop very low…. because you have to eat.

America went through the Great Depression primarily because of this… Even business leaders realized from that experience that by making their employees so poor, no one was buying the products they were making…

And so they agreed: “If we make our employers have disposable income, they can buy our products and we can again make money”.  So the legal basis was almost unanimously approved  by both businesses and labor, to make the right to strike just that.  a basic human right protected by the full force of the law…   Simply because paying workers higher wages is good for increasing overall demand. and that is what drives economies forward.

“Hold It! Did You Know? It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

Basically, a union is the answer to this counter argument:   “why should you, the investors, get all the money off our labor, and we get none?” Admittedly both of us should get something decent from our arrangement….

And there you go.  America did do very well… that is, until our media became influenced by investors (who now own them btw) and started painting unions as a scourage…  Missing from all press coverage, was the simple fact that one has to act scouragingly when bargaining with fellow scourages…  Sort of like not realizing that your hero prize fighter has to hurt people.  It’s necessary to stay in the ring…

So I encourage all reading this to now begin talking up unions in your workplace… Because if you get fired for any reason afterwards, you can blame it on the legal right to form a union….  it is like a wonderful vacation in which you still will get paid, probably even more than if you’d put up with the bosses crap the whole damn time….!

Now… you know!   It Is Your Right To Form A Union!”

Yeah.

It really is your “right.” and it is protected by law.  Now, go get them tigers!

Advertisements

When we had a surplus, the GOP’s answer was to cut taxes. When the surplus became a deficit (in large part because of the Bush tax cuts), the Republicans answer was to cut taxes. During times of peace they argued for cutting taxes. When we were involved in two wars, costing billions of dollars a month, then-House Republican leader Tom DeLay said, “Nothing is more important in the face of war than cutting taxes.”

Tax cuts define the Republican Party…. Yes, they do…

The Republicans are fighting against a tax cut for the middle class. And the President is supporting it?

A tax cut? Republicans against? The President for?
Is the world turned upside down?

Even twenty-seven Senate Republicans thought their own party’s stance was unconscionable, and voted against the Republican version of the middle-class tax cut, which deleted tax on millionaires and replaced it, with a federal pay freeze and draconian spending cuts.

The research firm Macroeconomic Advisers projects that the Obama middle-class tax cut will create 1.3 million new jobs by the end of next year and 800,000 more in 2013. Former Sen. John McCain’s economic adviser Mark Zandi of Moody’s Analytics says the payroll-tax cut has prevented us from slipping back into a recession. If an extension of the cut does not pass, he told MSNBC, “at the very minimum, we’ll likely go into recession.”

Voters are coming to the conclusion that the GOP cares more about protecting tax breaks for millionaires than the benefits that millions of middle-class retirees depend on.

Rush Limbaugh: “i hope he fails.”
Mitch McConnell: “the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” And the single best way to defeat Obama is to sabotage the economy.

Republicans want to kill Obama’s middle-class tax cut, his American Jobs Act, his extension of unemployment benefits and everything else he’s advocating to revive the economy, and they want millionaires to pay no taxes….

Perhaps they are against extending the middle class tax cut, because they know it is a good bill, and it will improve the economy enough so we won’t then vote for them in 2012?


Right click to open full image… Pictograph Courtesy of Viral..

So, can someone tell me again, why we shouldn’t tax the rich, and instead, balance the budget on the backs of everyone else?…….

I seem to be missing that little detail where that all makes sense……

When economic times are bad, society needs unions to be strong. It’s when economic times are good, the right to work philosophy can gain a toehold.

Times are bad now; we need unions.

When it comes to economic activity, there are two polarities and most of us fit somewhere between the two..

When it comes to money, there are spenders, and holders…..

Spenders are people who spend money… They buy things. They could be wealthy, and buy companies. They could be poor and buy Four Roses. But either way, they buy. and those they buy from, are guaranteed another day of working…..

Holders are hoarders. They accumulate wealth. They use their cash to buy intangibles… like promises, forecasted future values, or potential earnings….. This sucks money out of the economy….

What has essentially happened since 2006, is that within America, too much money has left the spenders and shifted over to the hoarders…

In the second quarter, American companies reported $1.7 trillion of corporate profits. Were all of that mandated to be spent in employment, at $50,000 per job, it would have created 34 million jobs. Currently there are 14 million out of work…

Which means: there is enough money in the system to hire all the unemployed for a full year ($700 Billion) and still have $1 Trillion left over in corporate profits…

AND THE OTHER NINE MONTHS OF THE YEAR ARE CORPORATE GRAVY!!!!!!

Obviously something needs to be done.

More money needs to be shifted to the spenders.

The most effective method is to stop working for those who do not pay enough.

Just stop working.

STOCKHOLDER SCREAMING AT CEO:
WHY ARE MY STOCKS LOSING VALUE THIS QUARTER!!!

CEO’S RESPONSE: Uh, duh… we are in the middle of a strike. Don’t you read the fuckin’ papers?

STOCKHOLDER’S RANT: LISTEN PIECE OF SHIT, MOTHER-FUCKIN’ CEO. YOU COST ME NEGATIVE 70% THIS QUARTER; NEGATIVE 70%!!!! ALL BECAUSE YOU’RE SHUT DOWN!!! HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO GET BACK TO WORK?

CEO’S RESPONSE: Taken as a whole, their demands required to have some stability in their lives so they can raise their families, would take a full 1% out of our profit. That is too steep a cost, If we wait, we can remove unions completely from our establishment and then hire everyone for $1 dollar a day.

STOCKHOLDER’S RESPONSE: YOU MOTHER FUCKER!!! YOU COST ME 70% FOR A MEASLY 1% SAVINGS? I WANT MY 69% BACK !!! Stock holder pulls out his automatic rifle (guaranteed him by the 2nd amendment and empties entire clip into the body of the CEO. He then pulls out four more clips and empties all four into the prostrate body. Then from the floor, hundreds of stockholders also come up front, all surprisingly carrying automatic weapons to do the same…. The EPA then gets called in because the amount of lead in the corpse now poses an environmental risk.

Now more then ever, we need labor unions….. Now more than ever, we need work stoppages…. Now more than ever, we need less corporate profits…. Now more than ever, we need more money in the hand of spenders, and less and less in the hands of hoarders….. (I think a measly $700 billion should do it. They can keep their other $4 Trillion this year as profit)..

(Disclaimer: the cartoon sketch above was made to illustrate a point. It in no way condones or implies violence is the appropriate method to deal with one’s differences. Of course those with IQ’s under 20 will disagree: there is nothing that can be done for their inadequacy)..

In today’s political world, the embattled progressives are ironically in the same position American forces found themselves in Afghanistan around the time Obama was sworn in………

Things do not seem to be going well at all….

They did not get the Bush tax cuts off the books. Those tax cuts are still sending jobs overseas. They did not get single payer health care; insurers still limit health care. And now, many of the federal programs supporting the economies in their districts, are about to be eradicated….

“If only” Obama had stood tough!.. “If only” Democrats were better negotiators and didn’t give up everything at the drop of the hat… “If only” the Democrats worked harder last December to get the Bush tax cuts not reinstated. “If only” Democrats hadn’t lost the House last election, things would be different. “If only” Obama hadn’t sold us out! “If only” Obama had a spine. “If only” Democrats hadn’t caved and given Republicans 100% of what they want…“If only” the media would educate the public. “If only” truth was allowed on the airwaves….

The Progressives should not base their future strategy on “what-ifs” and “if only’s” as Progressives (especially here in Delaware) are prone to do. Such an approach is not “reality-based.”

It is instead, “hope-based”, which is to say in reality … “illusion-based”…

The illusion persists that Obama can “make” Republicans do what Progressive want. It equals the illusion that the US, can “make” the government of Karzai, do what everything we want…

In both cases, both progressives and the US, can’t force the issue. Instead, what they have to do, is out-argue, snuggle-up, and win the battle of the minds; they have to convince the respective populations that if they follow their way, the population will be better off.

With this bill, we now have a “reality” to assist with that convincing…

The core of all the arguing, is the hypothesis that America needs to tax it’s wealthy a little more.

When American’s go to the polls in 2012, they will have begun to feel the effects on the economy of what happens when one cuts $100 billion a year. Just like the balanced budget deficit bill of 1937 pushed America back into depression, so will this bill.

Progressives need to be out there saying, “We told you this would happen; see? We were right all along; all you have to do is tax the wealthy and this all goes away…..”

Unfortunately (or rather fortunately), there will not be a World War III to pull us out of this next upcoming depression… We will just have to spend Federal Dollars as if there was one. Which means, we have to return to the top marginal tax rates of 1941 – 1945…

So yes, there are no new revenues in this bill. Had there been, the reality would be that the House would have allowed a default.

But the argument can now begin… anew,… starting tomorrow! That increases in taxes cause an increase in jobs….. Had another default issue been allowed to occur again before the election, that argument would have been held hostage once again…

Now, it can’t… It can’t…. The argument of “good taxation” will get out there. This future election will be all about job creation…..

The Tea Party and Progressives both make the same error. They feel that holding another side hostage to get their way, is acceptable. That is not how America works. Often we fail, to remember that America is the one who put the Republicans into the position they did. Likewise, it was the Americans who put Democrats in the same position, two years earlier.

This argument needs to be played out over the course of an election cycle. The Americans themselves need to weigh in on this argument. Each side must argue their case.

It comes down to Clinton’s way… versus Bush’s…..

Start changing minds.

They seed oaks and feed squirrels.

I certainly don’t want to steal Nancy’s thunder… and I don’t know if she’ll publish this, but I’m about to go underground again and I thought this must be aired so all know that all is not well…..

You can see her words here… It is pulled from a comment section of this blog, and it gives her account of her ride down to Washington DC.

But I wanted to point out the involvement of one Jennifer Hill, the new face in town, and a very pretty face I might add. I encourage more people to use this performance as a model when dealing with this human being who WAS ELECTED TO REPRESENT OUR INTERESTS… without further ado…..

“Sorry, I am in a better head space today. Yesterday I was on the ACORN bus to the DC health care rally.

We went to chat with Sen. Kaufman’s aide first. Ted is fully on board with an affordable, universal access plan for the health and security of the American people. Carper..not so much.

Traveling down the hall, I strode right up to newest DEM Sen. Spector and took his hand in greeting. ” Hi there DEM Senator! Nancy Willling from Delaware here”. He gave me a huge grin in response.

And later, after meeting with Tom Carper’s staffers….(Carper ducked in the door to lecture us..his secretary interrupting after a few minutes..”your next appointment is here”

Carper “I’ll be right there” and continues to blab when Jennifer Hill, SEIU spokesperson, interrupted Carper and boy, then he jumped down her throat saying please don’t interrupt me.

She shot right back saying that since he was evidently going to leave without hearing a single direct word from any of the two dozen Delawareans crammed into his conference room that she wanted to be sure that we were able to say a few words to him directly.

And he did let her get a few sentences in.

After that meeting concluded (and the presentation from the DE coalition was submitted) we gathered in the atrium hallway in front of his office doors. An organizer from Health Care For America Now was telling us some good future actions would be to keep the pressure on Carper and that Jay Rockefeller had just presented A REALLY GOOD bill to focus on and promote.

Right then, Jay himself, on crutches with a knee brace and an entourage of interns squeezed around our crowd and we all hailed him with cheers!!!!

So, while the interview with Carper was VERY disappointing, the rally was great and the coalition intends to move ahead.

(of note: Carper’s staffers were polite but firm that the bill had to be bipartisan and when Jennifer said that we only would need 51 they fell out. A sore point. They said nooooooooooooo that most of the items under consideration would not be appropriate under the reconciliation rules.

Once again, Jennifer didn’t hesitate to say that the most important piece was the financial piece which certainly did fit under reconciliation rules. The staffers were none too pleased.”