strange, that idea is being bandied about in the collegiate circles.... so, who's first? that's how the professor starts out the discussion, as I recalled...
The labor Dept is not responsible for increasing employment. Its responsibility is more like to protect labor I think ( maybe wrong ) The White House, Congress and Fed are responsible for national economic decisions and hence responsible for employment.
Slavery also provided room,board and medical. During Slavery there was no homelessness. Probably very little black on black crime. Little drunkeness or drug use.
The cost of daily staples untill the last year has dropped greatly. Color TV's for $100, $7 shirts, $200 computers....They say the poor save $1500 a year on clothing because of Walmart imports So , untill now, The domestic buying power of the doller has exceed $18 per hour wage. Of course now is the tricky part , My guess is that spending will decrease untill raw materials get back to normal prices
So do the Favilias / Pavilias of Brazil, So did the Ghettos during WWII in Poland, So did the camps (internment, concentration and pow) during war time, both overseas and in the US internment camps, So did other similar institutions that ground people into dust, whether temporary due to war or more permanent due to racism and injustice.... care to volunteer to sample what those conditions were like, since you painted such a polyana picture of them? Holocost War Memorial in Wash, DC as well as in downtown NYC near the NYMEX, as well as in other cities around the world....
Slavery also provided room, board and medical. Slavery means you can not leave. Lets say the democrats mandate you to either government / company medical. Force a company to pay a minimum wage to ensure room and board payments(cost of living wages). You the subject has only one choice , you decide what company you wish to take care of your benefits as forced to you by the government. Slavery does not always mean oppression....you could say communism was pure slavery. I would say the democrats promote wage slavery
again I ask: care to volunteer to sample what those conditions were like, since you painted such a polyana picture of them? very poor choice of words... very lame justification.... very provacative conclusions, which could have been made and respected with a more intelligent use of different words and thoughts. try coming near survivors and just mention any of those terms you so easily threw about and see if you don't provoke a violent and serious clash of words, actions, terms and otherwise.... care to be around holocost survivors? care to be around some US Marine Veterans of Foreign Wars? care to be around some Vietnam POW survivors? and mention those terms in some positive light? ever see what Beetle Bailey looked like after Sarge finished trashing him? (comic strip character)
anyone see her pathetic cameo role on CNBC yesterday? of all the twisted things, she was praising the (dying American public) consumers as being resilient in the face of job losses, lowered economic outlook, recessionary times and suggesting that: "they are still holding on". Then she did the head nod with her hair bouncing in agreement.... What a Labor Secretary. Is it any wonder, why in the face of such disbelief of the facts of the economic downturn that we have NO collective policies that benefit anyone other than the company's firing their staffs? hey, let's give even more tax breaks to the company's offshoring jobs... wonder if she'll have something positive to say about that too?
is she MIA? where is she to take a swans' bow for all the 8 years of presiding over all these losses? where is she to lambast and down play all the negative news, since it can't be viewed as political or partisian? where is she?, now that her husband barely won reelection to the Senate? where in the world is Elaine Chow? Labor Secretary
Oh please. As if any politician's word can be taken. What about Carla Hill? Remember her? 1992, screaming and shouting about how many manufacturing jobs would be created out of the NAFTA treaty. She was right, she only lied about where those jobs would be created. They sure as hell weren't in America. The smart money knew NAFTA was about making the rich richer, no different than the bailout making the bankers richer.