(Hillary) Clinton: America's middle class has become invisible (AP)

[Eugene]

Clinton: America's middle class has become invisible

By Holly Ramer, Associated Press Writer | March 11, 2007

NASHUA, N.H. --Democratic frontrunner Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday promised
to bring America's "invisible" middle class out of the shadows, saying the Bush
administration has for too long ignored working families.

Four years after John Edwards built his campaign around the theme of "two Americas"
-- one for the wealthy and one for the poor -- Clinton sought to draw a line between
two kinds of Americans -- the visible and invisible.

The latter group includes single-parents who can't afford health insurance, small
business owners worried about energy costs, and college students struggling to pay
their tuition, she said at a New Hampshire Democratic Party fundraiser.

"You are invisible to the oil companies earning record profits while you pay more
at the gas pump. You are invisible to the companies who outsource your job, or lay
you off or end the promise of your pension," she said. "For six long years, President
Bush and the Washington Republicans have looked right through you."

-snip-

Full article: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2007/03/11/clinton_americas_middle_class_has_become_invisible

[HughBeaumont]

1. "You are invisible to the companies who outsource your job,"

Hillary needs two lunches. One for each face.

[OhioChick]

2. You got that right.

"Outsourcing will continue." Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton stands up for Tatas, outsourcing

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/538674.cms

Senators form 'Friends of India'

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/593175.cms

[HughBeaumont]

8. Don't you just love how she says this stuff when she think's no one's listening?

This may have worked 15 years ago, but unfortunately, there's this little thing called the INTERNET that she needs to be mindful of. Kind of now allows us access to Indian papers we wouldn't have had in years past.

[OhioChick]

10. Yes, Thank God for the "Internets"

Weasel Award March 4, 2005: Sen. Hillary R. Clinton

The Information Technology Professionals Association of America (ITPAA), an advocacy group based in Wilmington, Delaware representing professionals in the high-tech field has handed out its first Weasel Award of 2005 to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D - NY). The organization, representing over 1,200 IT professionals nationwide, presents this award to business and political leaders that it believes betrays the trust of the American people.

Scott Kirwin, founder of the organization, states, "We are tired of Democrats pretending they care about the problems facing average Americans. Senator Clinton's actions prove they clearly do not."

http://www.itpaa.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1485

[Colobo]

3. Hehehehehe!

[LongTomH]

5. Hugh, this deserves its own thread!

I doubt if many of Sen Clinton's supporters have seen this.

[Forkboy]

6. Bet they have.

[HughBeaumont]

7. They've seen it, they just choose not to address it.

I mean, really. You're a politician. What are you going to say? "I'm going to put an end to job offshoring altogether?" In all honesty, they could, but they can't. That would involve stepping on the toes of their quarterly-profit minded donors in Big Business, Pharma, Oil and Tech. That would be admitting wholesale that Yes, Virginia, corporations run this country, not our government.

Sure, you say, "she at least acknowledges the issue." So does Sherrod Brown, who's written a great book about the subject called The Myths of Free Trade. And Byron Dorgan, Dennis Kucinich, John Kerry . . . hell, even wingnuts like Tom Tancredo acknowledge it. The difference between all of them and DLC Free-Trade mavens like Hillary, however, is that they don't support mass job offshoring and correctly see it as only benefitting the rich while underpaying and exploiting the working and poor classes of all nations involved.

I'd like a logical explanation from Hillary how destroying one nation's working class to lift another helps working classes from both countries involved. Does she take in account unemployment and closed plants and businesses means less tax money going into the local and state communities, less income going into the economy, more secondary businesses such as bars, local stores, etc, closing because of all the lost revenue they once had when people are gainfully employed? Does she take into account the cost of retraining and the greater cost to the overall economy of likely underemployment (i.e. going from $25 to $13 dollars an hour)? Does she take into account the toll on the physical and mental health of the worker and the stress placed on families and relationships due to displacement? These are only some of the many reasons why offshoring and layoffs are unnecessary and economically detrimental.

Damn it, OFFSHORING ONLY BENEFITS THE RICH, NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE POOR. We aren't creating better jobs for the displaced workers as a result of it. Rah-rah all day about lower prices on goods, but how does that matter when you can't buy anything and wages aren't keeping up with the cost of living and inflation?

Book after book after documentary after testimonial after TV interview provides more than enough real life examples of how this predatory and zero-sum practice is killing the livelihoods of everyday people, dismantling their hard work through no choice of their own. The Government and Corporate America does absolutely NOTHING to research, quell or cure this issue except brush off concerns and stunningly blame the WORKERS for their bad fortune.

"You simply HAVE to go back to school!" Uh, OK. Sounds like a plan. Oh wait, there are people who HAVE Master's degrees who are being fired from their jobs as a cost cutting move that you're going to be competing against. Oh, and there's this other thing - it's not as simple as taking a few college courses at the local juco . . . retraining takes TIME and Money. LOTS of time and LOTS of money. People can't exactly put their lives on hold for 4 to 6 years. There is only NOW and the bills in front of them from companies who want their money.

So do you tell the degreed individuals it's THEIR fault for doing everything they were told to do in life; picked out the career they love doing, worked and sacrificed dollars and free time only to find out they're being fired for not being cheap enough?? Strangely enough, many free-trade supporting politicians very much think it IS indeed the worker's fault; that THEY indeed made the mess they're in, degreed or otherwise.

Playing the eternal game of employment musical chairs seriously takes the bolts out of a strong infrastructure. The economy is painfully inadequate if it cannot accommodate anybody except the heavily degreed and privileged. These are the proverbial elephant-in-the-room sides of the issue Hillary (and really, everyone else who sides with free trade) takes no stand or has no opinion on.

[OhioChick]

9. Well Said. n/t

[raccoon]

30. Right on, Hugh! And not only what you said,

"retraining takes TIME and Money. LOTS of time and LOTS of money. People can't exactly put their lives on hold for 4 to 6 years. There is only NOW and the bills in front of them from companies who want their money."

But after a person hits 40, or especially, after they hit 50, even if they go after yet another degree or certificate, it's highly questionable whether that degree will help them obtain employment.

[HughBeaumont]

34. Creeping Age Discrimination:

ANOTHER wonderful facet of the modern Dumberican corporate environment.

You know, because a person isn't worth a plug nickel unless they're about 20-28.

:sarcasm:

This affects me because I'm going to be 40 in 2 years.

[pampango]

31. Sounds like a justification to build a Great Wall around the

country. Keep those cheap imports goods and services, as well as immigrants, from the Third World out of our motherland. "American jobs for American workers at American companies producing goods and services for American consumers." Does that about sum it up?

Unless and until the Third World can pay their workers $20 an hour plus benefits, there will be no trade with them? Guess we know what their future looks like. More of the kind of poverty that makes the suffering in our country look like a picnic. Do I condone the decline of our middle class? Of course, not, but how much of that is the fault of the Third World and how much is our own domestic problems of income inequality, no universal health care and other issues that we can, or should be able to directly control?

Has Mexico been screwed by NAFTA? Yes. It was screwed before and after NAFTA. But India and China has benefited greatly from trade (note no mention of "free trade" which doesn't exist anywhere and never has). We can help our workers without condemning these poor countries to a return to a Mao era sharing of abject hunger and poverty.

[OhioChick]

32. Sigh....

Why is it that I see you on every outsourcing/free trade article thread, but yet hear no words of sympathy ever offered to the "American" worker?

Hmmm...Makes one wonder.

[pampango]

35. Not sure what it makes you wonder about.

My nationality. Well, born in Alabama, but moved to the MidWest when I was one and lived here ever since, except for a few years in the Peace Corps back in the 1970's.

Do I care about American workers? Of course. Perhaps the difference is that I care about workers everywhere. Since I see little written here about the plight of people in the Third World, I tend to write about it in what may seem to be an unbalanced way. I apologize if I seem to be uncaring about the plight of the American worker. That is not the case. (I assume that those who post on these threads are equally careless in not posting their concerns for the plight of workers in poor countries.)

[ChromeFoundry]

37. I'll tell you what I wonder...

I too see you call out everyone on these posts as a racist, xenophobe, etc... did you ever stop and think that maybe the people on here are pissed off at corporate America and the sell-out of the people of this nation, and hold a passion for speaking their mind on the rape of the middle class? Do I want to see people starve in other nations? - Hell no! Do I want to see people in other nations live in poverty? - Hell no. But I also feel it is my right and duty to speak my mind when I see the poverty of this nation growing exponentially, as the middle class withers away to nothing, as the upper 1% holds more and more of the wealth. This rape of the middle class can be blamed on the corporations that have grown by the labors of the people of this great country, and the politicians bought and paid for from these profits... the middle class has been betrayed by them by importing cheap labor to replace the stakeholders of the growth of that company; betrayed by the companies that move manufacturing jobs off-shore to earn bigger profits when they import the good back here; betrayed by the companies that reduce their taxable profits by hiding it off-shore, but still gaining the perks of being an "American Company". There is no such thing as "a job an American won't do". There are women that are forced to sell their bodies in order to put food on the table for their children... so don't go saying that a man won't pick potatoes in America for a living.

Your argument does not make sense to me because I feel the only way to grow a nation is to make it less reliant upon the foreign market and world of instabilities. Self reliance and internal independence is what make a country strong. Too many people try to blur the lines between country and company these days. If a corporation wants to open up a market to serve that market.. fine, I'm all for it. But to open a market to serve greed is immoral. When the resources (labor) of these foreign lands, serving the corporate greed here, become more expensive... these corporations will move on like a virus to consume another "cost efficient" market.

I've seen your posts on these threads in the past. You rarely backup any of your smack with any factual data to back up your claims. But you are quick to point the racist finger and praise the gutting of the middle class. yeah, I'd guess I would have to wonder about your motives on these topics as well.

[pampango]

38. Maybe I am just not sophisticated enough to see through,

what seems to be complaining about jobs disappearing to India and China and immigrants coming from Mexico to take jobs, and be able to understand that the real target of the anger is the corporations. How would you feel if your brother-in-law complained about only your nonwhite neighbors, then claimed that whatever the problem was was really their fault? You might suspect that their skin color might have something to do with his comments, even if he was not overtly, or perhaps even consciously, being racist.

I do not agree with you with regards to national self reliance and internal independence. Actually, you are right it would be relatively good for the US. We have a rich population by world standards and plenty of natural resources compared to most countries. We could exist probably better than any other country without interacting with other nations. From the perspective of what is good for America and its people, I would reluctantly agree that you are right.

Of course, if a company were to only be able to serve the market that it is located in, then few would choose to locate in the Third World, where by definition, there is little money and a very small market to sell goods and services into. This "internal market only" strategy is essentially a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" idea that I have not seen work anywhere.

So for the sake of Americans, you are probably on the right track. Perhaps I have seen too much of the world to accept that approach myself.

More power to you.

[ChromeFoundry]

39. My post targeted corporate America only

no where did I mention the color of skin, or fault foreign nationals for the failures of the US to retain economic growth in is majority populous. I blamed the greed of the capitalistic mindset. I feel the benefits to exploited nations will yield short-term growth, and will end up leaving these small nations devastated.

Here is a very unsophisticated scenario:
Your idea seems to state that it is OK to have me build you a nice fancy oak entertainment center for $50.00. So you can turn around and resell it for $500.00. Then you preach that I now have 50 bucks that I would not have had if it was not for you, and if I keep my loyalty to you, I can earn another $50... You praise my talents and tell me I'll make $60 if I turn these things faster... After say the 10th piece of furniture, you tell everyone that I have no talent, though it has made you a handsome profit; and also there is this other guy that will do it for $20... oh, and of course the product is now going to $540.. you know, inflation and all...

Now in your mind, you say it's wrong for me to hate this "other guy", because that is what it means when I say you are a shit for screwing me over like this. I don't quite understand your logic here. All I hear you say is that it's great that this "other guy" has a job now. Does that validate how you have treated me for being loyal in my duties to you? Does it validate you calling me untalented? Or does it state the obvious about who is a greedy son of a bitch?

If I'm off on the logic to the point you were trying to make, I invite the correction. Because all i see in this scenario is the exploitation of this "other guy" and me losing my job as you get richer... And you know what else? - It really pisses me off when people come on here and throw the race card in defense of this greed.

[pampango]

40. Sorry, didn't make it clear in my post that the fictitious brother-in-law

didn't mention the color of neighbor's skin either. It just so happened that the ones he complained about were the nonwhite ones.

Your example using the entertainment center is a pretty good one. (Thanks for keeping it unsophisticated.) I will assume that the guy that I, the greedy capitalist ;) , hire to replace you lives in a Third World country and is either unemployed or doesn't make as much at his previous job (otherwise why would he want to work for me?). The extra income he receives from me, and spends locally for food, furniture, TV, clothes, whatever, should strengthen the economy where he lives. This should cause a ripple effect of hiring and increased incomes in these other sectors.

The real problem comes, as you can imagine when I, the greedy capitalist, dump this Third World guy, whom I'm paying $40 to now, and move to another Third World country to start the cycle over. The important question is whether the economy of the "now dumped" guy has gotten strong enough to have created the jobs such that my guy can get a new job. (Kind of like our economy coming out of the Depression due to WWII military spending, then surviving the transition to a civilian economy when the military factories were converted to cars and refrigerators.) My guess is that you would feel that that would never happen; all benefits were transitory and disappeared when I dumped him. It you are right, then all benefits to the Third World of trade with the West are illusory.

"Now in your mind, you say it's wrong for me to hate this "other guy"" It is wrong for you to hate my Third World guy, in the example, if you have figured out that it is not his "fault" but mine, the greedy capitalist. You should hate me. I have no right to call you untalented and should be castigated for ignoring your loyalty over the years. My point was not to defend the greedy capitalist (who was underpaying you to begin with), but to point out some "good", along with all the "bad", that might come out of his greed.

As for playing the "race card", what I have done is point out that it is legitimate to point out when something has a disproportionate effect on minorities, even if that is not its overt intent. The criminal justice system, the public education system, and military recruiting are all examples which are not racist in design, but in effect, they disproportionately effect minorities. Would I be playing the "race card" to point out that the criminal justice system disproportionately effects Blacks and Hispanics? Or that the public education system underserves them? Or that the military overrecruits them?

[HughBeaumont]

33. Please point out xenophonbia. Please point out where I'm BLAMING nations.

It's the corporations and greed that are 100% to blame for this. PLEASE stop playing the xenophobia card from the bottom of the deck. That assumes that the American middle-class is all white and male and nothing can be further from the truth.

Also, WHY must people ALWAYS view this as a black and white issue - "You're either FOR free trade or FOR Protectionism. It's just that SIMPLE!"? First, American companies have to concede that outsourcing indeed represents a problem for the displaced worker. Offshoring has clear winners and losers that need to be defined not based on hypothetics and theory (which is how everyone is doing it now), but reality.

Next, the US government needs to begin to measure the magnitude of the problem. Currently, no one really knows how many jobs have actually been offshored because corporations either refuse to report it, period, or announce proposed offshoring at a later date after the cuts happen, which means either more or less jobs will be leaving.

US visa policies should also be reviewed with an eye toward protecting America’s labor market. Too many corporations exercise loopholes to get around the current Visa restrictions, particularly regarding L-1s. Visa abuse is rampant within many corporations in the race for cheaper labor here and abroad.

Meanwhile, the US should put more effort into helping and retraining workers displaced by offshoring. Our country has an atrocious record when it comes to redeployment of US workers at a comparable salary and skill set. We don't give near enough help that is needed for the cruelly downsized, and this especially holds true for blue collar workers. The worker has to completely fend for his or herself once fired, and this usually means developing a skill set for which they aren't fit or able to afford training for. Unemployment insurance is painfully inadequate. We spend billions on pork, corporate welfare and oil wars, yet we defecate on the very people and resources that makes the nation work.

Asking the worker to figure out for themselves what the "next big thing" will be and get training for it is so patently absurd, as is the "re-training" canard. The average person doesn't know what's going to happen a YEAR, let alone five to TEN years, down the road. Progress does NOT have to be akin to bloodletting.

What I'm saying is that there should be far less emphasis by business leaders to adopt the destructive and short-term way of thought. Just because it's "good business" doesn't make it "right". You can't just willy-nilly send jobs wherever the hell you want without some kind of PLAN in place for the worker who gets the short straw.

[raccoon]

29. "Hillary has been at the forefront in defending free trade and outsourcing."

Thanks for the link.

[matt007]

4. Stop the talk ....do something Hill

I hope "IF" we get a Dem. in the white house she or whoever will show more gaul on our endangered middle class than they have shown in the congress so far on Iraq.

Parts of the US become more like a developing country every day. No social provisions, No healthcare...........Sick

[glitch]

11. The Bush Admin isn't ignoring us, they are attacking us. Bit different.

Ignoring us would be a relief.

[IndianaGreen]

12. Few ever mention the working poor and the poor

How about NAFTA and welfare reform, Hillary? Two of the biggest economic blunders of the Clinton Administration!

[fooj]

14. Yes. Nafta.

You beat me to it! :hi:

[elizm]

13. Where are all of the Hillary defenders on this thread????

Could it be that there is NOTHING to defend here? So odd, they are usually the first ones to jump in on the attack.

[mtnsnake]

15. Defend what? The article posted in the OP is pro-Hillary. Wake up. nt

[elizm]

16. Wake up and read all of the responses to th OP..

Some have raised many questions...to which none of the Hillary defenders have responded. I was just wondering where you all were....I see you are here now.

[mtnsnake]

23. Next time read the OP instead of assuming it was anti-Hillary

Not every thread is anti-Hillary, but thanks for jumping to the wrong conclusion. It was good for a laugh!

[elizm]

25. I did not assume anything about the OP...

...The FACT remains that you seem unable to defend the hypocrisy of Hillary's statement on the invisible middle class...considering her position on outsourcing American jobs.

[mtnsnake]

28. Why is it so important to you that the "Hillary defenders" rush in and go at it?

Sounds to me by your initial post in this thread that you were real disappointed that the Hillary people weren't jumping into this thread and attacking like rabid animals or something.

And why should they? The article posted by the OP was a good one, and I guess any negative responses in the posts that followed just didn't piss anyone off too much.

[Tellurian]

17. Again, part of the problem with the Liberals, Progressives and the Left..

They fail to comprehend what they're reading and are content to pat each other on the back in congratulatory unison..

same BS... day in and day out.

[elizm]

18. Comprehension problems...

I notice you have YET to address any of the real issues in this thread. You only jump on the one that has NOTHING to do with the issue....Just the one on which you feel you can launch a personal attack.

Scott Kirwin, founder of the organization, states, "We are tired of Democrats pretending they care about the problems facing average Americans. Senator Clinton's actions prove they clearly do not."

http://www.itpaa.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article...

How about NAFTA and welfare reform, Hillary? Two of the biggest economic blunders of the Clinton Administration!

[durtee librul]

19. The items mentioned in the

thread were not forgotten by me and excuse my sarcasm here for a minute - -

HELLO HILLARY....did it take campaigning and getting out to the real world and listening to the little people of the world to wake you up?

Again, she will never get my vote. She panders and sways and gives new meaning to the phrase flip flop. I've said from the beginning she is NOT my candidate. I don't trust her. Sorry to all the Hil supporters out there. I mean you no personal offense, she just doesn't 'do' it for me.

[Tellurian]

21. Am I supposed to be impressed with your leaders?

How bout you do a little reading, elizm. So you know what you're talking about, rather than attacking good Democrats here!


They gave Sen John Kerry the Weasel Award in July 04'

And they don't support democratic values..



http://www.itpaa.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=11

And when you click on the icon..: ABOUT US..it's blank!

I've never heard of Scott Kirwin. And it's not allowed to post sites here denigrating Democrats.
It's against DU Rules..

[mtnsnake]

24. Those problems would belong to the one who didn't realize the OP was pro-Hillary

...and that wasn't Tellurian.

[elizm]

27. Pro-Hillary?

Not sure what the poster's reason was for posting the article, as there was no opinion attached to it. But the post certainly brought a number of responses about the hypocrisy of the statement...NONE of which you have addressed up until now. What....no way to defend????

[MGKrebs]

26. Pavlov vindicated.

Yet again.

[AtomicKitten]

20. The GOP has worked hard to annihilate the middle class.

The Democrats have their work cut out for them. I like hearing the Democratic candidates make this a bullet point in their campaign. It is real and relevant, and it will touch a nerve in an otherwise numb nation.

[Tellurian]

22. Democrats have been out of Power for the last 14 yrs..

They've been in power for a whole 2 mos and they're already bitching and moaning..

The Middle Class has been targeted for the last 15 years. Only until Bush stole the WH were the Republicans able to complete their pnac plan to kill the American dream.

[IChing]

36. "Invisible" is that the new term for "the silent majority"? n/t