uggabugga





Monday, May 21, 2007

Cokie and Steven Roberts on trade policy:

You're gonna love this: (excerpts, emp add)
Labor taking the wrong view on trade

In today's dynamic global economy, change has to be embraced, not rejected. That's why Democratic leaders cannot afford to listen to the labor movement as the country approaches a major debate over trade policy.

... Democratic leaders have to stand up to their old friends in the labor movement and tell them the truth: trade is vital to American prosperity and security, and you don't get a veto here.

As ardent free traders, we have long been skeptical of including labor and environmental rules in trade deals. They smacked too much of protectionism, and seemed to have one aim: Raising costs for foreign firms and making their products less competitive in the world market.

Freer trade is good for American businesses, American workers and American consumers.

... all the fear mongering about globalization destroying the American economy - heard frequently from Democratic candidates last fall - is wrong. In fact, the opposite is true.

[a] point that labor leaders never mention: their members, like all American consumers, can buy more goods more cheaply, from sweaters to softballs, when they are made abroad.

... do trade deals "sell out American workers"? Absolutely not. But there are losers as well as winners, and any free trader must also support better education, smarter midcareer training and more generous benefits for workers who do lose their jobs to international competition.

However, those losers, and their labor bosses, should not be allowed to dictate trade policy.
How about that (now discredited) line about getting a better education and midcareer training? That'll solve the problem for sure.

On just a purely political level, the Roberts' advice is poison for Democrats. Diss the labor faction? You've gotta be kidding.



6 comments

Boy, that's a full one: anyone who works for a living and whose job is threatened is a "loser" who should not be even listened to because they are a "loser".

Why is it that we can't even listen to them? Not even listen! Are we that afraid we might hear something we don't wnat to hear, that weak that we can't even take listening?

And this: As ardent free traders, we have long been skeptical of including labor and environmental rules in trade deals. They smacked too much of protectionism.

Not including labor and environmental rules in pacts about trade is protectionism, protectionism for businesses. Not "smacks of" protectionism, but absolutely IS protectionism. But of course, just as IOKIYAR, protectionism is okay if it's for the right people.

By Anonymous QrazyQat, at 5/21/2007 3:56 PM  

Astonishing. Thank you for sharing that. They've obviously never lost a job to outsourcing. They've also forgot what got gains for them like vacation, sick time, the 40-hour week, employer-sponsored benefits: Organized labor!

Just unbelievable. They are on my permanent shitlist. THIS IS THE LIBERAL MEDIA!?!?!?!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5/22/2007 9:02 AM  

Roberts will learn Labor's real power once we've unionized the hair stylists. Get some scissors near her eardrum and maybe she'll listen.

By Blogger Jeremy, at 5/22/2007 12:17 PM  

Just how much fucking Kewl-Aid does one have to drink to spew shit like that? Gas is $3.69 and rising quickly for the usual holiday price gouging.
Yeah, let's allow ourselves more anal rape for record profits, THAT'S totally good for the economy.
Liberal Media, my pale, skinny ass.

By Blogger Undeniable Liberal, at 5/22/2007 5:42 PM  

Diss the labor faction? You've gotta be kidding.

Why not? They've been doing it for years. And NuLabour here in Britain has done it 10 years running, and shows no sign of slowing down.

Labour will have power again when it exercises it by pouring out onto the streets, pitchforks and torches in hand, through the gates, over the walls, and down their throats.

Until then, forget it.

By Anonymous Mike, at 5/23/2007 11:40 AM  

Whom does Cokie's brother represent these days? His name's Wade, isn't it? Wade Boggs, or was that their daddy the Majority Leader in the Sixties?

By Blogger johnieb, at 5/25/2007 7:09 PM  

Post a Comment