Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

    From What Does Granting Amnesty Have to Do With Funding Our Troops in Iraq?

    Well if you like this part
    In one afternoon, the Appropriations Committee approved amnesty for 1.35 million illegal alien agricultural workers, and made available an additional 650,000 skilled and unskilled foreign guest workers over the next three years. That’s 2 million new, or newly legalized, foreign workers entering our labor force over the next three years – even as our economy has been losing jobs.
    you'll LOVE this part
    Just to be extra sure that the agriculture industry will get their workers as cheaply as possible, Sen. Feinstein threw in a provision that freezes wages for these farm workers at 2007 levels.
    All of this is being included in an emergency supplemental appropriations bill to fund our servicemen and women fighting in Iraq.

    Keep fighting for the little guy Dems! Bravely fighting for the little guy by handing his jobs to illegal aliens and artificially suppressing their wages.

    Do you think this threatens MY job? Hardly. But if you're fresh out of college or better still fresh out of high school, it will have an impact on you. The closer you get to minimum wage, the more harm this does, since it creates this many more competitors for your job market. And of course if you're fresh out of high school or college and wearing a US Military uniform sweating your rucksack off in Iraq, it affects you as well.

  • #2
    Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

    Originally posted by leejo View Post
    Keep fighting for the little guy Dems! Bravely fighting for the little guy by handing his jobs to illegal aliens and artificially suppressing their wages.

    Do you think this threatens MY job? Hardly. But if you're fresh out of college or better still fresh out of high school, it will have an impact on you. The closer you get to minimum wage, the more harm this does, since it creates this many more competitors for your job market. And of course if you're fresh out of high school or college and wearing a US Military uniform sweating your rucksack off in Iraq, it affects you as well.
    If you just got out of collage and some orange picker is taking your job? Sorry, but your a dumb ass.

    I don't know what this has to do with dems. This is a bunch of senators looking out for their golf buddies in agriculture. That's our new government they piggyback whatever they want were ever they want. I think the Bush administration pioneered this innovation. No one reads those damn things anyway.

    I think the title to this thread is misleading. Funding is not being held up. The troops are getting their money. And the senate appropriation committee has Reps also. This is just a little banana in the tailpipe action.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

      Originally posted by Hambergler View Post
      If you just got out of collage and some orange picker is taking your job? Sorry, but your a dumb ass.

      I don't know what this has to do with dems. This is a bunch of senators looking out for their golf buddies in agriculture. That's our new government they piggyback whatever they want were ever they want. I think the Bush administration pioneered this innovation. No one reads those damn things anyway.

      I think the title to this thread is misleading. Funding is not being held up. The troops are getting their money. And the senate appropriation committee has Reps also. This is just a little banana in the tailpipe action.
      When an illegal alien picks oranges and earns artificially suppressed wages, the people who would otherwise have been doing that job are seeking other jobs. Say tossing burgers at McDonalds. So now it's harder to get a job tossing burgers at McDonalds and the former burger-flippers are out there competing for Best Buy warehouse jobs. And the Best Buy warehouse workers are now competing for Hospital warehouse jobs.

      There is trickle down but there are also bubble up effects.

      The troops may be getting their money. They're also feeling the support loud and clear.

      The thing that chaps my hiney about this the most is that this is the same group of Democrat senators and congressmen who are going about the business of tearing down Nafta. Clearly they don't give a rat's ass about the mexican workers, and they don't really care about the US workers either. NAFTA fails to place entire industries and groups of workers in debt to individual politicians. That's the big gripe with NAFTA it appears.

      Sen Fienstein et al are simply attempting to increase their base of power on the backs of these low wage earners. I'd hope that folks would recognize this move for what it is and open their eyes.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

        Also, I think your idea of the job markets seems a little sheltered. For example, after the IT meltdown in Austin, TX, I wound up working for $8.50/hr. in a light store. One morning my manager came in and announced that he'd taken an online IQ test the night before, and scored borderline-retarded.

        I went in the back and beat my head against a wall for a few minutes.

        I know that some other TGers have similar stories from that time.

        So I guess what I'm saying is that I wouldn't judge someone's intelligence or potential by the job they have. And if you've been making high 5-figures and suddenly find yourself making very low 5 figures, you NEED that very low 5-figure job, even if you are a dumbass. A certain postal clerk moved on to the Nobel, for example. Maybe the next Steinbeck is out there picking oranges.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

          Originally posted by leejo View Post
          Sen Fienstein et al are simply attempting to increase their base of power on the backs of these low wage earners. I'd hope that folks would recognize this move for what it is and open their eyes.
          Well, absolutely. I'd like others to see that the Republican senate shoved a lot of similar bills through while attached to troop funding bills on the grounds that being opposed to that bill meant being "opposed to supporting the troops." The thread title seems to apply similar pressures that do not fairly describe the situation for any party involved, but does deliberately cast the Democratic party in a worse light than the situation merits.

          edit:
          Originally posted by leejo View Post
          Also, I think your idea of the job markets seems a little sheltered. For example, after the IT meltdown in Austin, TX, I wound up working for $8.50/hr. in a light store. One morning my manager came in and announced that he'd taken an online IQ test the night before, and scored borderline-retarded.
          And I plan on leaving college with a four-year double major and immediately turning around and going into the health care industry as a patient/critical care tech, which is basically an unlicensed position that requires nothing more than a high school diploma (and occasionally EMT certification, which is easy as hell to get). Either way, its not completely uncommon to see people work in positions well under their qualification, either out of desperation or intent (in my case, its so that the hospital I work for will pay for my nursing school, since at this point I cannot afford to pay for it under any circumstances and am already too far into the biology/sociology major to simply stop.)
          I can ADS using more than a 2x without significant stutter! This was a good patch.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

            Originally posted by Razcsak View Post
            Well, absolutely. I'd like others to see that the Republican senate shoved a lot of similar bills through while attached to troop funding bills on the grounds that being opposed to that bill meant being "opposed to supporting the troops."
            May I see a few examples?


            edit: And I plan on leaving college with a four-year double major and immediately turning around and going into the health care industry as a patient/critical care tech, which is basically an unlicensed position that requires nothing more than a high school diploma (and occasionally EMT certification, which is easy as hell to get). Either way, its not completely uncommon to see people work in positions well under their qualification, either out of desperation or intent (in my case, its so that the hospital I work for will pay for my nursing school, since at this point I cannot afford to pay for it under any circumstances and am already too far into the biology/sociology major to simply stop.)
            Exactly. A new coworker joined our firm having been laid off of his homebuilder company in CA. He is fortunate to have acquired while he was there the very esoteric skill we need, but if he didn't have that skill, he'd be out there looking for something - anything - to keep the lights on and a roof over his family's heads. Picking oranges one season might be a lot more attractive than any alternative.

            Which is not to say that I'm not happy for the Mexican immigrants who have work they apparently need desperately and that I don't wish them well. My preferred mechanism would be NAFTA so they could live in their hometowns and create and build businesses there to lift their nation from poverty.

            I read recently about a new Sony display that's being developed and manufactured in Mexico. 20 years ago this would have been impossible. "Hecho en Mexico" was synonymous for crappy. But 20 years later there is a growing pool of skilled workers. I think that this will benefit the good people of Mexico a lot more in the long run that Sen Fienstein's gambit, which from what I can see benefits some lobbyists a bit and her a lot.

            I dunno why folks' first reaction to news that Democrats are shafting the little guy is to say yeah well the Republicans do it too. Is that the best you can come up with? Maybe that can be the campaign slogan this fall. Hey little guy, we'll screw you just as much as the Republicans. Instead of keeping your taxes down we'll build an emergency family assistance center so you can stand in line to have some bored gum-chewer be rude to you for $1/4 of what you need to keep the house out of foreclosure.

            Can you tell that I've stood in that line? Do you imagine how thrilled I am to be told that the only reason why I want my taxes low is because I'm so privileged?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

              Even worse than the democrats who don't support continuing to spend a billion dollars every two weeks for pillaging and murder is the grown men who spend their time complaining about it on a video game forum.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                Originally posted by GlobalWarmin View Post
                Even worse than the democrats who don't support continuing to spend a billion dollars every two weeks for pillaging and murder
                That's right folks. Remember, support the pillaging and murdering troops, just not the war.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                  Originally posted by leejo View Post
                  May I see a few examples?
                  Not easily, since that statement was mostly based off of memory of the last few years where large amounts of bills, funding ones included, were shoved through based on fear and a far over-blown sense of patriotism. The Patriot Act springs to mind, though that's not an immediate funding bill. I'll be honest and say that I'm not particularly inclined to actually look through tax reports for that. That was my general impression, one that is only perpetuated by thread titles and headlines such as yours.

                  Can you tell that I've stood in that line? Do you imagine how thrilled I am to be told that the only reason why I want my taxes low is because I'm so privileged?
                  Yeah, well, sorry. Again. :/

                  Originally posted by leejo View Post
                  That's right folks. Remember, support the pillaging and murdering troops, just not the war.
                  Its a fair point. The "support the troops" sentiment is fairly inane. If you think the war is immoral and never should have happened, why should I support the soldiers who followed orders (and did commit some fairly heinous atrocities, in my mind) in that war? That excuse went out at about the time of Nuremberg trials. Still, its a wonderful way to appeal to the rabidly patriotic people while still being opposed to the war. Yes, I'll respect someone who joined the military to protect the country (typically, they're not someone I'll sit down with and see eye-to-eye with, for fairly obvious reasons given my decided loathing of nationalism) but I'm not going to respect a person who says that they support the troops but not the war. I'm willing to be called unpatriotic and a traitor for believing that the invasion of Iraq was wrong. No, I'm not going to be in favor of cutting funding for body armor or ammunition, but I refuse to pay lip service.
                  I can ADS using more than a 2x without significant stutter! This was a good patch.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                    In 2006, the Republicans attempted to attach a passage opening up ANWR drilling to the Defense Budget bill, for one example.

                    This kind legislative hostage-holding thing happens all the time, either to get through controversial provisions that otherwise wouldn't pass, to intentionally kill legislation by forcing others to vote the toxic amendment down, or to make your opponents look bad for not "supporting the troops," "caring about children," or "looking out for the little guy."

                    It's duplicitous, wrong, and in a perfect world politicians wouldn't have the need or ability to do that sort of thing, but it's the way our vaunted Congress works. People only seem to get angry about it when it's the other side doing it, though.
                    In game handle: Steel Scion
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                      No worries, and thanks for the apology.

                      You know there are certainly exceptions to the rule, but for the most part, I think, wealth is something that one builds as the result of a very long process. We each pass through different stages in life. In your teens and early 20s, your job is to learn and enter the workforce. In your late 20s and early 30s, you begin assuming leadership positions and building some of the foundations upon which you'll rely later. Family, homeownership, some small savings. In your late 30s and early 40s, FINALLY, the money starts coming in if you're lucky and have the aptitude and have made good decisions, AND are in a career path that rewards work with money, which some career paths do not. For example, a federal employee may not become rich, but he or she will enjoy a safety net and support system that I do not have.

                      Jack Welch was speaking on tv several years ago and the interviewer asked him what one thing he'd tell young people entering the workforce. He said "success is not linear". You have your ups. You get knocked down. You learn something about yourself and the world, you apply it, and you move up again. Or you don't.

                      I was in a knocked-down phase of life at the time and so his words resonated with me big time. My experience before and since have confirmed what he said. And for me, now, it seems that financial success has as much to do with how old you are than with anything else. I just happen to be in a stage of life during which I have a lot of cash coming in, but I am also supporting 4 people who will have very expensive needs in the future.

                      In my 20s I would have agreed with what many liberal posters have written. I was going through the same things you are going through now, I faced the same challenges, and had the same sense of being on the outside of wealth looking in. But just as I knew a lot more about life when I was 25 than when I was 15, I think I know a lot more about people and business and getting things done with teams now than I knew when I was 25. And I am rewarded for that experience and knowledge.

                      The struggles in my 20s and early 30s are part of that experience and knowledge. I totally understand why a smart young man in his 20s would see the system as broken and view the struggles as a problem. But from my perch it's just part of a process that educates and tempers smart, hard-working young people and makes them the next generation's wise-but-cranky elders. To me, wealth is a process, and to me, socialism short-circuits that process.

                      Oops, I see that I've confused threads in my dotage.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                        I personally do not care if they cease operations in Iraq or not, I am not a fan of the whole premise of us being there. I think there are better efforts that are more worthy of the funding that is required for the military. That being said, this is a screwed up way of doing business. Cutting the funding IS NOT the approach to ending the US presence in Iraq. The only one that suffers is the troops on the ground, which will never be reported on in any newspaper. Resolve to end the troops there, then you can determine funding. Going about it in reverse is simply politics at its worst; both parties are guilty of it.

                        As for the snide comments about murderous troops, that is simply unfair. If you were to compare it to the same number of people in society, I am confident that the numbers would be way lower in the military. The ones who commit any crime should be strung from their balls and punished severely or even hanged. But that really is for a jury to decide, not some of us here in a gaming forum.
                        "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                          Dupe Post!:(
                          Last edited by TheBigC; 05-18-2008, 01:00 PM.
                          "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                            Originally posted by Razcsak View Post
                            (and occasionally EMT certification, which is easy as hell to get).
                            While it might be easy enough to get when you don't have anything else going on, if you want to get it in a reasonable period of time (say 6 mos) expect to be spending at least 15 hours a week in class, in addition to study time outside of class and a practical test that is pretty tough (though the written test is easy as pie). I got my EMT while completing my senior year of college, writing a thesis, applying to medical school and chairing the student council and it wasn't all that easy to balance all that. It was, however, so worth it when I got to drive the ambulance with the lights on :D

                            (That last part is a joke. The most fun I've ever had in my life is caring for patients in the back of an ambulance. Anybody with even a remote interest in being an EMT should definitely go for it -- you won't regret it)

                            And sorry to post something off topic, just wanted to clarify.

                            DaBrit

                            By Any Means
                            [/url]


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The D Sentate holds up funding troops to supply lobbyists with cheap labor

                              DaBrit: But again, for someone not employed and with any parents of means (as in, they're not getting subsistence pay only), its easy to get. You could easily get your cert while working full time, for instance. I did, and got it in about two months. Sure, my Tuesdays and Thursdays were 9-9 days, but I can deal with that for a job I like.

                              As for the snide comments about murderous troops, that is simply unfair. If you were to compare it to the same number of people in society, I am confident that the numbers would be way lower in the military.
                              You're confident that the percentage of people in the military who've killed someone who wasn't a direct combatant is far less than the percentage of civilians who've killed someone? Percentage, mind you, since comparing direct numbers is a bit...meaningless.

                              edit: Thanks Steeler, that is one good example.
                              I can ADS using more than a 2x without significant stutter! This was a good patch.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X