So this happened on Monday.
Given how hard Republicans have worked against the interests of women (equal pay, right to choose), gays (same sex marriage), the poor (tax cuts for the wealthy, voter ID), it’s amazing to me that they’re still able to win elections.
Then again, if they keep this up, it’s just a matter of time before more folks start to wake up and realize that no good comes from voting Republicans into office. After all, Republicans may be better than Democrats at messaging and winning elections, but they’ve proven time and time again that they’re horrible when it comes to the hard work of actually running government effectively.
When employee and employer agree on compensation, the government should stay out of the way. When it is government paying the bills however, it is the publics business. Why does President Obama shortchange the women on his staff?
Another short-sighted, thoughtless and knee-jerk response from someone who has obviously failed to even minimally understand that without laws demanding equal pay and by logical extension, raising of the minimum wage, we taxpayers foot the bill for these misogynists and slave labor small business owners and corporations in increased medical costs for everyone, food, rent, utilities and other public costs associated to help provide for our brethren on the financial margins of perpetual poverty, brought about these usurpers of human and natural resources for selfish personal profit.
Having almost no respect for the current holder of the office of the US presidency, and having tried to discover your reference to “shortchange women on his staff,” I am assuming this is an unsubstantiated belief.
Denis,
You wrote: “the government should stay out of the way. When it is government paying the bills however, it is the publics(sic) business.”
You need to learn the difference between the FEDERAL government, which creates money (electronically via key strokes and by printing it) on the one hand and state and local governments on the other hand. State and local governments cannot create their own money.
Why aren’t you telling Republicans about the “demand leakage” from FEDERAL tax policies?
“Demand Leakages: The 800lb Economist in the Room”
“…Demand leakages are unspent income. For a given currency, if any agent doesn’t spend his income, some other agent has to spend more than his income, or that much output doesn’t get sold. So if the non government sectors collectively don’t spend all of their income, it’s up to government to make sure its income is less than its spending, or that much output doesn’t get sold. This translates into what’s commonly called the ‘output gap,’ which is largely a sanitized way of saying unemployment.
And with the private sector necessarily pro cyclical, the (whopping) private sector spending gap in this economy can only be filled with by government via either a (whopping) tax cut and/or spending increase (depending on one’s politics).
…”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-mosler/demand-leakages-the-800lb_b_1646916.html
“(Federal) Taxes For Revenue Are Obsolete”
That includes federal corporate taxes, federal income taxes, and the most regressive of all, federal payroll taxes. If you stop taxing workers and employers to death, they will start to SPEND. Employers hire when they have too many CUSTOMERS.
This post does not seem to meet any reasonable standard for even a blog.
A picture? Every single Republican? That’s a lot of people.
C’mon, is there a story with this? House? Senate? What were they voting on?
It is understood that it is “your job” to spin a sensation from the mundane, but,…
Sure appears that, “independent,” is again the biggest misnomer on the blog so far today. Dependency to have others provide handouts of all the details for a story that was in plenty of headlines for those readers actually paying attention or able to pull themselves up by their own keyboards and use teh giggle machine. But it appears that it is somebody’s self-ascribed and sole mission to whine and insinuate negative intentions to the blog’s owner and the author of this piece. Out of compassion for the less fortunate but obviously personally challenged among us, here is one on several links to the story. Give a “guy,” a fish and all that rot.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/senate-republicans-filibuster-equal-pay-for-women
It just seems blog etiquette would be to include a link regarding the OP.
Glad to took the opportunity to vent. I didn’t read it though.
ig,
I believe in helping the handicapped.
“Senate Republicans Block Bill on Equal Pay”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/10/us/politics/senate-republicans-block-bill-on-equal-pay.html?_r=0
Do you need any more help?
Thanks for the link JC.
I better understand what happened now.
The bill had nothing to do with reality, women or wages. It was a political move initiated by the left and countered by the right. Politics as usual.
And that equates to equal pay for women being a non-issue and thus no basis in reality to you? Thanks for sharing.
It had to do with employees being able to discuss their wages without fear of retaliation from their employer. What do you have against free speech and a fair and open labor market? You can’t have a free market if prices can’t be openly discussed and information about the products isn’t freely shared.
independent guy: Every Senate Republican votes against equal pay for women.
Try reading the darn thing before posting your RWNJ BS.
I am not sure how an employer increases the costs to others when they hire and pay someone a wage. They surely don’t. In fact, it is the employer who is lowering the cost by paying a wage. To put it another way Notquitethinking, the employer is doing more to help workers than you and your bitching will ever do for them.
Denis,
Since you can’t figure out the laws of Supply and DEMAND, we’ll try something a little more BASIC.
Income = Spending
If you don’t pay customers, they can’t afford to BUY anything.
We’re off the gold standard. In 1933 FDR no longer permitted U.S. citizens to convert their dollars into gold. In 1971 Nixon no longer permitted foreigners to convert their dollars into gold. Since we’re off the gold standard, the difference between money and litter is TAXES.
The FEDERAL government can invest in stuff like health care, education, and infrastructure without TAXING anyone. It’s those dollars that pay wages that people use to BUY stuff. They also use it to pay their LOCAL and STATE taxes. Local and state governments are the only counter weight to the FEDERAL government controlling everything.
If hell freezes over and we get some demand-pull inflation (too many dollars chasing too few goods), than by all means you’re free to consider RAISING federal taxes. That’s their purpose, to MANAGE aggregate DEMAND. FEDERAL taxes for REVENUE are obsolete.
Right now we have cost-pull inflation, because our entire economy is based on fossil fuels. As those grow more scare, the price of everything heads north. The solution is FEDERAL investment in renewables, solar, wind, biomass, …. and storage and transmission technologies tailored to them. The FEDERAL government can simply create the money (keystrokes or printing) (and give it out in block grants to states) to solve those problems with advances in technology.
Without raising taxes, the federal government can also sponsor a federal job guarantee, for anyone who wants a job, regardless of their skills.
“…The government could serve as the “employer of last resort” under a job guarantee program modeled on the WPA (the Works Progress Administration, in existence from 1935 to 1943 after being renamed the Work Projects Administration in 1939) and the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps, 1933-1942). The program would offer a job to any American who was ready and willing to work at the federal minimum wage, plus legislated benefits. No time limits. No means testing. No minimum education or skill requirements. …”
http://ineteconomics.org/blog/institute/plan-all-detroits-out-there
John, if I hire someone for $8 an hour and you don’t offer them a higher wage, why am I the bad guy and not you?
Denis, no one would work for you $8/an hour. I doubt you could hire anyone for $80/hour.
It would be good for the economy if 1/2 the population weren’t so penalized in the workforce for their biological ability to birth. That’s why equal pay, equal parenting responsibilities, make so much sense for both genders.
JC, we see this, “commentator,” first claim to know nothing about the subject, but then immediately claim to have all the facts and then argue having absolute certainty about a position on the very same subject. Simple logic would have to ask, either one or the other position or clarify your position, please.
He totally ignored a question about his claims about Obomba’s behavior toward female staff, and then lets loose with some third-grade elementary name calling and abusive characterization of plain statements of fact. Should we take a poll on overall credibility here? Hardly worth troubling with. Nuff said.