My God..I'm In Tears

[Greylyn58]

I tuned in to listen to Randi Rhodes and she's not there today and Tom Hartman is filling in for her.

He just played a voice mail message that a reporter received. It was from an anonymous caller and I'm sitting here crying because I know how this woman feels. I lost my job over a year ago.

The woman told how she had lost her job over a year ago and how her husbands had also been outsourced. They have three children and were 2 months from being kicked out of their home.

She goes on to plead with this reporter to tell America what was happening. She couldn't understand how no one was talking about the loss of so many jobs overseas and elsewhere. She said she felt he was an honest guy and always told the truth in his news stories. She said she always felt the middle class was very strong, but not anymore.

It was very powerful. I'm heartsick right now.

:cry:

[fertilizeonarbusto]

1. Welcome to America 2004

Fearless prediction: the right-wing surge has peaked. Very soon almost no one will be able to afford RW policies. remember, in the 20's everyone was very conservative and pro-business and laissez-faire until the crash.

[The Zanti Regent]

44. But my idiot relatives tell me they have JESUS!

I have several idiot relatives in the same position. Can't get work, TANF exhausted, begging for food and shelter from churches. Yet they voted for Bush because he's Gawd's man. They tell me they are suffering for Jesus. I ask them:

Is JESUS paying YOUR BILLS?

Is JESUS putting FOOD on YOUR TABLE?

Is JESUS providing YOU with HEAT?

Is JESUS putting a ROOF over YOUR HEAD?

Is JESUS clothing YOU?

Is JESUS providing you EMPLOYMENT?

So far the Big J is 0 for 6, yet these idiots are saying the more they suffer, the closer the rapture is.

I ask them what bullshit are they going to tell me in 20 years when there is no rapture and their life is still tanking?

"Gawd is testing me"...Will they STILL be that stupid?

[Not_Giving_Up]

2. I heard that too

I've been there, and I know how she feels. At one point, I was out of work for over 6 months. My mother in law (repuke to the bone) kept telling me she didn't know why I couldn't find a job, the economy was on the upswing. I just couldn't find the upswing she was talking about.

[leftofthedial]

3. Murka, post coup

The coming depression will sweep these criminals out of power, but they'll have hoarded most of the nation's wealth by then.

[arcane1]

6. all according to plan

:grr:

[Swamp Rat]

4. Yep. That was REALLY upsetting.

Thom Hartmann rules!

[tx_dem41]

5. What's the answer to outsourcing?

I am open to solutions on this problem, but I also acknowledge that many of the solutions are going to have unintended consequences. So, lets hear some solutions.

[rman]

11. solution: massive protests

but for that to happen many people need to know about the problem, and the media aren't bing very cooperative.
in absense of an independant press, we have to be the press.

[tx_dem41]

14. That's not really a solution though....

To protest successfully, you need to offer a solution and a means to that solution. Its those two things I am asking about.

[AG78]

19. I don't know

that there is one.

Outsourcing is happening for a number of reasons. Lower wages, reduction of company healthcare, etc. All in the name of more profits.

The corporations basically write legislation. They "police" themselves.

In a world like that, where do you go? You need a politician, with a heart of gold, that can get to a position where he/she can actually make a difference.

What's a solution? Cut CEO pay. Think about humans before profits. Increase wages to a point where you can live in "the land of the free, and home of the brave" again. Make sure there's healthcare that can take care of everyone. No more human rights for corporatons.

What's a means to that solution? Storming the bastille?

Outside of that, I really don't know. CEO's and shareholders have to make money, right(for as long as we're in capitalism anyway)? If they're forced to stay here, and increase wages, etc, etc, they could go out of business because of the other corporations that either move offshore or are already based in another country.

There are solutions. In a way, easy solutions. The means to those solutions are vastly more complex and difficult. That's where we all get into trouble. That's also where wars start.

[tx_dem41]

22. Thanks for responding....

The two problems I have with many of your solutions (all are well-intended) are that I get nervous with the Government getting involved in mandating wages outside of the minimum wage, and I don't think making American economy insular is ultimately what is best for the American people. I would love for some of these ideas to take hold (especially CEO pay), but I'm not sure I want laws to make it that way.

[kostya]

23. tx dem, you seem to be holding back here, you're the one

who asked the question, but you aren't offering any ideas yourself. What's on your mind? I'll offer up one idea, which is for our leaders to re-create the same enthusiasm and drive that we exhibited in our race to the moon and apply it to creating a world-class education system in this country. It's so broke (in both senses of the word) that it's laughable. Granted, this sort of thing would have a 20 year lag period, but ya gotta start somewhere. More than any other issue, I think this is where the U.S. is really blowing it big-time! - K

[tx_dem41]

24. Fair enough...

I think your proposed solution is excellent. To compete in a world economy (which we HAVE TO compete in), we have to continually offer a better product that offers what no other product does and is cost-effective. To do that requires an educated workforce. I think it is also vital that the consumers of all products express dissatisfaction with a product that is unsatisfactory. For example, if one does have a bad experience with a off-shore tech staff, write the company and tell them about it, and don't buy the product again.

[pandorasox]

29. Except that the people in power

WANT to reduce the American public to chicken farmers, dung collectors and prostitutes living outside the gated communities.

[dpibel]

38. Quality v. cost-effective

You emphasize the quality aspect, which is not much of an issue any more. We used to chuckle about Japanese cars and cameras and electronics, but we haven't for years. The quality from overseas for most consumer products is as good as American or is enough cheaper to make up for any qualitative differential.

I submit that the cost part of cost-effective is what drives the market. WalMart didn't become the biggest biz in the country by offering best quality; it got there by offering cheapest. It doesn't offer cheapest through efficiency, it offers it by buying from slave-labor producers.

Essentially, what you are advocating is that the USofA acquiesce in joining the race to the bottom.

I don't necessarily agree that this is the necessary implication of a global economy. The question is how to define the bottom. If you accept the current model in which global capital calls all the shots, and the rest of us take the crumbs they let fall from the table, then we are well and truly hosed.

The alternative (which does not involve your feared guvmint control of things like providing a nation's people with enough pay to have the necessities plus a bit more) is for people to demand more control over their lives (including what they sell their labor for). It might involve the rich getting only filthy rich instead of obscenely rich.

But that all goes in a direction I suspect you fear even more than guvmint wage control.

[Geek_Girl]

40. What we need our Politicians

That will stand up for the Middle Class and not offer tax incentives to companies for off shoring our jobs.

[tx_dem41]

41. I defnintely agree with that...

When I say I am against government control, it does work both ways. I agree, NO tax breaks/incentives for off shoring jobs.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

26. One thing the government can do

Companies love to get federal contracts, and all sorts of companies receive them, given the large number of offices that the feds have to maintain, the large numbers of vehicles and uniforms they have to buy, the large number of employee cafeterias and military mess halls they have to stock, just to mention a few.

How about an executive order stating that preference in federal contracts will be given to companies that do 100% of their manufacturing and clerical work in the U.S? If there are no such companies making a given item, then companies will receive preference on the basis of the percentage of their manufacturing and clerical work that IS based in the U.S

Under this reckoning, a foreign company that employs a lot of U.S. workers may do better than a U.S.-owned company that sends all its manufacturing and/or clerical/call center work to Asia. The reason is that a company whose board of directors sits in Delaware but whose manufacturing workers are all in China and whose clerical workers are all in India is an American company in name only. A foreign company that has large U.S. operations that hire locals is actually contributing more to the U.S. economy than one that happens to be owned by Americans but whose operations have all been outsourced.

Any company that has less than 50% of its work done in the U.S. will be ineligible to bid for federal contracts UNLESS it is the only supplier for a given item.

This could be a carrot-and-stick approach.

[tx_dem41]

27. I agree with the spirit of your solution, but what if the far better

product or more cost effective product is eliminated by this process? Doesn't that hurt the consumers of the product (or taxpayers in this sense)? Plus, it often can reward inferior workmanship (in some cases).

[Lydia Leftcoast]

28. There would still be a choice of products, but

only a certain set of companies would be allowed to bid. Getting a "more inferior" product may mean different things in different areas. It may mean only that the product doesn't have all the optional bells and whistles. It may mean that the product doesn't look as good. Also, it's not necessarily true that American-made products are shoddier than foreign products. Look at your neighborhood Dollar Store and see the downright tacky products sold there.

You'd have to make obvious exceptions for cases in which the American-made product endangered the health or safety of users, but I think that such cases would be few and far between.

[tx_dem41]

42. I didn't mean to imply that our products were....

shoddier than foreign products. I just meant to point out that actions such as tarrifs or even wage controls can have unintended consequences. Given your example of Dollar Store, such measures would surely result in an increase of the price of those products and would thus hit the poorer classes unequally.

[leesa]

45. They are mandating your wages right now through outsourcing

Your wages will inevitably go down. The whole point of outsourcing and crashing the economy is to bring workers wages and benefits down.

[tx_dem41]

46. Would you say the same thing about "globalization" in general?

Can a "Fortress America" survive in a global market?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

48. Obviously no nation can produce EVERYTHING it needs

For example, except for a few small plantations in Hawaii, all the coffee consumed in the U.S. comes from Third World countries in Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. As consumers, we can improve conditions in those countries by seeking out fair trade brands of coffee instead of just reaching for whatever is on the supermarket shelf.

However, when it comes to products that are not bound by considerations of climate and topography, outsourcing jobs and products that could be produced in one's own country leads to a hollowing out of the country's industrial base and by extension, a hollowing out of its middle class.

Now if Canada and the U.S. want to have a free trade agreement, there's no problem. Only we can produce citrus fruits, and Canada makes better winter clothes than we do, but the standards of living are close enough that neither country is going to destroy the other's industries. This would be especially true if such a free trade agreement operated like the EU and allowed citizens of either country to move back and forth freely and take jobs in the other country without worrying about work permits.

Mexico would do well in a free trade agreement with the Central American nations, and the Caribbean nations could be another bloc.

NAFTA has destroyed jobs in this country and created jobs in Mexico--but there's a catch, even from Mexico's point of view. The jobs are mostly from foreign conglomerates, and they are there strictly for the financial advantages provided by cheap labor. Since these conglomerates have no loyalty to Mexico, they can and do move out when they find another cheaper country, say China or Vietnam, leaving Mexico with nothing but empty assembly plants and a polluted environment.

It would be slower but more effective in the long run for Mexico either to develop its own industries or to insist that foreign investors transfer their technology and train Mexicans for management and engineering positions. (This is what Taiwan did.)

[tx_dem41]

49. You would need a separate, parallel policy to go with your

"Fortress Northern North America". Seal off the borders to eliminate the import of cheap labor and thus emperil this delicate balance you are constructing (and relying on).

[SmokingJacket]

33. Health care via government, not employers.

*IF* and only if they keep jobs here.

[tx_dem41]

43. That's an intriguing measure.

My fear would be that companies would do the math and drop the employer-subsidized healthcare insurance, thus meaning more people with no insurance.

That said, I am for single-payer (i.e. Government) insurance.

[CrispyQ]

30. Revoke corporate personhood.

snip...

When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.

Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.

The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:

* Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.

* Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.

* Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.

* Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.

* Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.

* Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.


For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight controlled the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.

more...

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/history_corporations_us.html

===========================
Thom has written some really good books about culture & how ours got to where it is. Also some good ones on democracy & corporate personhood. I highly recommend these titles:

The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight

We The People: A Call to Take Back America

What Would Jefferson Do?

Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights

[TexasChick]

31. There is a site on the Internet (I'll have to go find it) that lists all

companies that outsource American jobs and companies that keep American jobs here. It's not really a Dem vs. Repuke thing, it just lists all companies that either outsource or don't outsource. When you get a piece of mail like credit card offers, catalog stuff, etc. you should look on that site to see if that company outsources. If so, write a real pretty letter like the one below and use their return address envelope to send it back to them, explaining why you will no longer do business with them:

I do not do business with companies who outsource American jobs overseas for corporate greed and profit. I am aiming to boycott your products until you stop outsourcing American jobs. I do not do business with economic traitors to America.




Of course, you can tweek the letter to your needs. I just did a rough draft. Stick that puppy in the return envelope and send it back to them for free! Keep doing this and let these asshats know that you will not stop until they stop. Also, let them know that you are spreading the word around to fellow Americans to follow suit.

For the companies like, YahooSBC, AOL, Earthlink, who I know outsource jobs, don't ever go to them. Find a local merchant to do computer business with, if possible. Microsoft is a definite no-no. There are many other types of companies who outsource. Just follow the same procedure with them.

These companies that outsource for corporate greed need to be brought down. I do not know how they expect to do this for a while though. They better not think that these people they are paying pennies on the dollar are going to be able to afford to buy their products and with Americans with no jobs, we sure as hell ain't either. But, I think writing these letters and using their return address envelopes and just good old fashion boycotting is the best bet so far. Just my 2 cents.


DISCLAIMER: This is only my opinion. If someone does business with the above companies and likes them, I meant no harm.

[barb162]

34. Lou Dobbs' web site lists these companies

[hyphenate]

35. The solutions are simple

Invest more money into education in the United States. By doing that, you increase the base grade level here in our own country, and make competition more profitable for the people here in our country.

It's not going to say that we need to ignore the people in the other countries in which a lot of the outsourcing takes place--in many other countries, they need the jobs just as much as we do. However, having said that, it seems to me that having more of these other countries depending on the United States as a chief source of income is just wrong--these countries need to become more self-sufficient and create their own opportunities just as the United States did over the past few centuries.

What we need to face is this in most of the world. There are few countries which have a completely self-related system. Most of the main "powers" in the world have pretty much self-contained governments and could, though reluctantly, maintain themselves without exports or imports for a good amount of time. It is partly the reason why so many populations in undeveloped countries can not survive without outside assistance--their resources are either non-existent or are not developed to the point of self-sufficiency. If the ability to help these people, once the initial needs are met, would include far better education and chances for opportunities in areas where the resources could be developed, the countries would then be able to compete on more levels with others, as well as become more self-sustained. The old quote "Give a man a fish and he will have food for a day, teach him to fish and he will always have food" is a very wise philosophy. It's a matter of making all countries in the world more than simply "third world" countries or countries in which outside assistence is essential to survival.

Once every country has the same opportunities, they will cease to be confronted by many of the hardships they suffer as evidenced even now. They would be able to provide something for exchange with other countries, and would eventually develop more sophisticated and stable economies, making their own chances at having a self-contained country that much greater.

The United States needs to do the same. In many areas, we rely on cheap labor in these developing countries, because it is "economical" for many Westerners to have a higher profit on their products or services. But by strengthening the countries in such a fashion, businesses would have to concentrate on making a "fair" profit and would have to pay better wages to their employers, whether they were here or in another country.

Another aspect of this is through all those tax loopholes that the corporations have been getting and avoiding taxes by going outside the U.S. to form their companies. I think that higher import and export taxes, as well as penalties paid by offshore companies to the United States for not remaining U.S. corporations might help to bring the costs and the profits to a far more equitable level. Perhaps even offering companies that stay in the U.S. a tax break would be another incentive to outsourcing.

It's a very complicated area in which to discuss the benefits and the problems inherent in import, export, outsourcing and profiteering. The main downside for most of us, though, is that those who run these companies are often more interested in their own profits than they are in being fair to their employees.

[barb162]

36. Just as Congress legislates pro- business, they can legislate

pro-labor. No more tax cuts or lesser tax cuts to outsourcers, extra money in other ways for companies that keep jobs here, there's all kinds of stuff Congress andt his administration can do.

[CornField]

7. What?! You want to discuss outsourcing of job when we have no

f-in' idea what the hell is going to happen to Scott Peterson? Anna Nicole Smith could show up drunk at any given moment! OJ's former in-laws could go off the deep end and take justice into their own hands! Didn't you hear that Julia Roberts just had twins?!?

/sarcasm

[proud patriot]

8. that was very moving hearing that call

I got all choked up hearing her pain , fear and feeling
of being alone not heard .

[Sara Beverley]

9. Coverage of Scott Peterson is why the media ignores the real issues

I don't know what the media will do once Peterson's sentencing is over. Will they have to report some REAL news?

[fertilizeonarbusto]

10. God forbid

Some proper distraction will be found. If not, there's always Clenis...

[DebJ]

12. No, Peterson trial is an excuse not to cover REAL, IMPORTANT

stories that affect us all. They will just find another story like Peterson to latch onto.

[one_true_leroy]

15. done and doner...

how 'bout LASER WEILDING TERRORISTS!!!! (from outer space, maybe?)

[Digit]

32. I agree 100%...

Instead we have to listen to drivel like where to get the best deal on expensive cars.
Oh, but tonight they had a piece on a 24 hour dog spa in California. It showed dogs getting deep massages while they received aromatherapy. Others were getting "paw-di-cures", or watching a plasma screen TV, ad nauseum.
There are people out in our country without jobs you souless airheads!
They are losing their homes and don't even know where their next meal is coming from!!!
I am ready to tear out my hair!

[WildClarySage]

13. I can relate

I've been out of work for 6 months now. No social services jobs in this area. Going to go back to school if I can afford it to get a counseling degree, but we have no idea if that will give me the opportunity to really re-enter the work force or if it will simply run up more student loan debt. Thank Goddess my husband has a good job or we'd be in deep shit. As it is, I'm probably going to have to sell my car and start making deep cuts in our monthly budget because we simply are going broke.

And I'm stressed and scared, but I know we will continue to have a roof and food on the table. I can't imagine how much more panicked if we were both unemployed.

My sister, a moderate and her very partisan repub husband are in a similar boat. He's a corporate guy but lost his job earlier this year. No severance, no nuthin'. She's working two jobs to make ends meet and going to school full time, while raising two boys and hosting an exchange student. And my asshole BIL still believes that * is good for America. My sister, though, she knows better.

[JaneEyrez]

16. One of the several hundred things that PO'd me in the

debates was that when BU$H was asked about people losing their jobs, he kept grinding out that education answer, that it was the answer to everything... but why didn't Kerry reply that people who lost their jobs were already educated to do the jobs they had lost and it didn't guarantee them anything!

Frankly, we need our own progressive media as a counter to all this because I'm in shock at how little gets reported any more. Just one channel is all I ask and I think that we can fund it, put our own shows on, and we can be just as fair and balanced in our cause as the Faux news has been in theirs.

[tanyev]

21. Oh, yeah, community college.

Tell that to all the computer engineers with masters degrees whose jobs have already gone to India. Thanks, George.

[barb162]

39. yes I thought Kerry never really understood how bad things are

he should have immediately said just what you did and HE DIDN'T. Education is not the answer here when so many people with so many degrees get outsourced. The answer is to stop the outsourcing, cut the tax breaks of outsourcers, start implementing some fair trade policies, etc.

[AP]

17. Mediatenor.org statistics on election year news coverage: 4% on economy

Yet the economy was the voters' number one concern.

About 12% of news coverage was on sports and about 30% was on the war and terror.

That's how fascism works: scare the pants off people and they care less about suffering economically (and the whole point of fascism is to transfer economic, political and cultural power to a few very wealthy corporations, so it's a "don't look at the man behind the curtain" who's taking all your money sort of strategy).


A comprehensive study by the media research institute Media Tenor reveals how powerful media coverage can be in influencing actual voter behavior. Statistics prove that month after month voting intentions have been following the general tone of the media coverage of George Bush and John Kerry. "As the tone of coverage improved for President Bush, compared to Kerry, intentions to vote for Bush have also gone up", Roland Schatz, editor-in-chief of Media Tenor says. The approval rating for president Bush were particularly high in August, after intense coverage of the accusations of the "Swiftboat veterans for truth" against Kerry, as well as at the end of September, after Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi visited the US.


Another finding of the study is that president Bush was personally rarely held accountable by the media for the problems in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal or the attacks of September 11. In the media, defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the Pentagon and the military in general were covered in a more negative tone than President Bush. While Bush's Iraq policy was facing extensive criticism in the media, he was not held solely responsible for the situation.


In the last days before the elections the media turned away from Kerry. George Bush looked decisively better than Kerry in most of the polls that were published right before the elections. The economic report from last Friday about the economic trends in the third quarter of 2003 was mainly portrayed in a positive light by ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC. "All of the networks showed a visible bias during the whole campaign, with CBS and ABC many times leaning more towards Kerry and Fox leaning more towards Bush", Schatz says.


An ongoing trend during the campaign was the focus of the media on the horse race and the campaign rather than the hard issues. "Especially John Kerry barely made it into the headlines with his positions on policy issues", Schatz observed. Instead, he got the most coverage after his nomination of John Edwards as the candidate for vice president and his military service.

http://www.medien-tenor.com/elec110904.pdf

[medeak]

18. effing outsourcing!

spent hour and half on phone yesterday after plane reservations were screwed.. cut off twice..talked to 4 people in New Delhi and couldn't understand a word said nor they me.

Nothing compares to losing job...but I can tell you I made a complaint to corporate headquarter that the $ they think they are saving is wasted on me as not using their airline again and telling others not to (Delta) despite the wonderful service I've had all these years.

[okieinpain]

20. oh she is full of it she just got a nice tax cut from bush. that should

be more then enough to tide her over.

[readmoreoften]

25. tell her to rest assured

gay people still cannot get married. it's all gonna be okay, pookie.

[Fleurs du Mal]

37. Middle-Class Cleansing is in full swing

That was a heartwrenching message indeed. Could be many of us tomorrow and that's exactly how I'd feel.

[Deja Q]

47. This is known as 'compassionate conservativism'.

Expect more of it.

[SunDrop23]

50. I heard it too.

That's REALITY. That's the REALITY the fools in the Bush Administration are ignoring. The REAL people across the country who have been screwed and will continue to be.