COMMENTS:
WOW, just when you think you have heard it all. If you consider this law was written during the worst economic period in US history and was viable it makes no sence to kill it now. Good job GWB.
by ABC on Mon Sep 12, 05 4:00pm
[+]
I would imagine alot of the rebuilding my be done by volunteers. So I really doubt it will effect anything.
The latest attack on the workers of the USA.
No doubt some conservative will justify this, it will be interesting to see how.
Also the free market has a way of taking care of itself. If your not paying me enough I will go elsewhere to look for employment. That would eventually force the employers to pay a higher wage.
everygirl: If that is the case ... why did he suspend the law? You argue that it will be ineffective, not that it is beneficial.
Remember Cathexis, Bush can do no wrong in everygirls eyes...
Everygirl:
I hope you will remember that after the US economy implodes--thanks to China and American corporations-- and the only job you, or anyone you know, can get pays 50 cents an hour, with no benefits.
Here is one example of how the people of the US are being scammed:
Lurking within the records of most cities and states in America there lies a scandal. A tax scandal. A jobs scandal. A corporate and political scandal.
It's the Great American Jobs Scam: an intentionally constructed system that enables corporations to exact huge taxpayer subsidies by promising quality jobs - and then lets them fail to deliver. The other benefit often promised - higher tax revenues - often proves false or exaggerated as well.
Take for example: New York City, which must hold the record for job blackmail, though it is hardly alone. One study of 80 companies that had received "retention" subsidies from the Big Apple found that at least 39 had later announced major layoffs, or they had entered into large-scale mergers or put themselves up for sale - events that usually trigger mass layoffs. A detailed analysis of 10 subsidized companies found they had a total loss of more than 3,000 jobs.
Bank of America, for example, received two "job retention" subsidies from New York City, in 1993 and in 2004. The 1993 subsidy was given to induce the bank to move employees into the World Trade Center following the 1993 bombing. In exchange for at least $18 million in benefits, the bank promised to retain at least 1,700 jobs in Tower One for 15 years. Instead, it laid off at least 800 people in 1997 after merging with Security Pacific National Bank. This was such a severe drop in employment that the city canceled the subsidy in 1998, but didn't require Bank of America to refund any past subsidies.
After it was displaced by the attacks of September 11, 2001, Bank of America won a new subsidy in 2004 for the consolidation of several offices into a new headquarters building in midtown Manhattan. The deal is supposed to retain 2,995 jobs and create as many new jobs over 25 years. The state and city offered a total package of $82.6 million. The Bank also got $650 million in triple-tax-exempt "Liberty Bonds," special low-interest loans enacted for New York City following the September 11 attacks. But shortly after the deal closed, Bank of America merged with Fleet Bank (which had also received an NYC job-retention subsidy). The new entity announced it would cut a total of 17,000 jobs nationwide. The overall job impact on New York City was unknown as of late 2004.
Scams like this cost taxpayers an estimated $50 billion a year in total spending by states and cities. The bottom of the iceberg - in every sense of the word - is the tax breaks. Those granted by states - income, sales, and excise taxes - are the least visible, least accountable, and most corrosive means by which states fund job creation. Those granted locally - in particular, property tax abatements and diversions - are especially harmful to schools.
Everygirl and those who believe that what they are being told is the truth, should really try and find out for themselves.
This man Bush, this liar and cheat, has no ethics and not conscience. There is no limit to the depths he will sink. I truly hate this man and hope that he is run out of office before he destroys this nation. He is short-sighted, greedy, selfish and a complete and utter whore to the corporate elite that lead him around like a lap dog. Bush is a criminal and should be imprisoned for the rest of his natural born days.
Cathexis, thanks for this ballot. We all need to know this.
Trouble is, I think I'm going to gag....
by mojo on Mon Sep 12, 05 4:56pm
[+]
Strange that if Bush was interested in controlling reconstruction costs, he didn't cap corporate profits or allow competitive bidding of contracts ...
Odd that huh, Cathexis?
Mister Bush, the Champion of Big Business. Three cheers!
(crickets chirping)
It should be completely repealed.
oh yeah, people lost everything they had, let's pay them less!
Spoken like a true Bush.
by LCD on Mon Sep 12, 05 7:25pm
[+]
But as Mom Bush said, poverty "works well for them."
He'll be hoist by his own petard soon enough if he continues on like this.
The question is: How long will the people stand for it now they know just how naked the Emperor really is.
How much more can people take?
It really isn't that easy.
I don't know the answer but here is how I approach it.
Will it help to rebuild?
Will it be more cost effective?
Will it be just as good quality?
If yes, then yes it is merited.
But the issue is really about the supply. How many union workers are going to go there?
Is there enough to do the job that needs to be done?
And isn't it possible that non-union labor is treated fairly ever?
If a company can only employ so many people at $20.00 per hour they wouldn't be able to afford additional bodies. If they can employ additional bodies for labor at $15.00/hr instead they could take on additional people. At least the people would have a job that way, which they wouldn't at all if the company couldn't afford to employ them at all. Maybe some of you should try thinking about more angles of an issue other than, how can I bash GWB.
And just think how many people they could hire if they only paid 50 cents an hour with no benefits, like they do in China?
No, Cranky we still have minimum wage. Quit being unreasonable.
ceejjj: Do you really believe that Corporations will be charging less for reconstruction work?
Or will they be pocketing that difference?
Did you read my comments. I said they could afford to take on additional workers, which is where the money would go in my opinion. They will need additional workers to rebuild the city. Also for your information Cathexis, my father-in-law works for a large construction company and they are offering volunteering to go down there to run heavy equipment to help out. Damn, cut the whiny all companies are evil rhetoric, especially when most companies are really stepping up to the plate on this one.
ceejjj: Yes, I read it. However, I do not agree.
I do not, for a moment, believe that wages are a constraint for hiring in that area. There is plenty of work for everyone and there would be no shortage of workers.
The major argument that is being put forth is that people shouldn't be getting rich by overcharging for labor.
Note that there is no law on what the contractors can charge so ... I guess it's okay if the contractors get rich just so long as the labor doesn't get uppity and think it deserves to be paid a living wage.
ceejjj: When laws are jiggered so that one group is constrained while another is not, I do not view that as "whiny."
When laws are jiggered so that one group is constrained while a privileged group is not, I call that "evil."
I never said all companies are evil. Your father-in-law's is a good example -- they aren't looking to profit at others' expense.
However, if you believe for an instant that the major construction organizations (who received the fat no-bid contracts) will not enjoy banner profit years, I will wager a fat check that says you are incorrect.
See ballot #83155 for Bush's flip-flop.
|
