The recent housing bubble/financial rescue will prove to be a watershed moment that should eventually strengthen organized labor in this country.

Think about this.............

Wouldn't shareholders do better if large companies would fire their over paid executives and hire a smart management firm in India for pennies on the dollar? The internet and a satellite feed is all that's needed. And, if you think India and China aren't capable of having top notch managers now or in the future...... then you're either arrogant, a racist or not paying attention to what's going on. We're no longer who we still think we are. We're a nation of debtors. We're still the leader of the free world, but the game has changed. Our government is nearly bankrupt. China and Middle East sovereign wealth funds are holding our notes. We're dependent on their generosity. The time for hubris is over.

Teddy Roosevelt was a great Republican who fought his party and instituted anti-trust legislation to break up monopolies when business leaders had too much influence. As a matter of record, I voted for Reagan , H. Ross Perot, Bush Sr. once and G.W. twice. That said, I'm still undecided this time around.

I believe the recent socialization of the financial sector may prove to be a watershed moment in our history.

If I were a labor organizer I'd quit giving money to politicians and start running television ads geared to point out the following:

Corporate executives are organized to protect their own self interests. They work under a contract that is awarded by a compensation committee, that is made up of people just like them. People who think that they too are worth 275 times the average employees salary. Think about that. The average CEO makes 275 times more than the average worker. It didn't used to be that way. Years ago, it was 35 times...... a number that more closely resembles that of Europe and Japan.

The difference today is there are far fewer manufacturing jobs - jobs that pay a decent wage to average Americans. This has resulted in fewer young families being able to afford to purchase their first home without the aid of risky financing. Democrats don't want to admit that lending standards were reduced to enable more people to buy homes, and Republicans want to blame those at the bottom for being enticed by that risky financing. We should all remember that quite a few of us benefited when those at the bottom bought in. Profits were made that enabled many others to move up a notch, or two or three. I thought the pyramid scheme was over, but it seems the government is anxious to start the whole process again. That's the effect of artificially propping up housing prices by having the government buy up the bad loans. How much of the 700 billion will taxpayers recover before real estate crashes again? An artificial bottom can't be sustained, unless incomes rise.

This all started because we make less and less of what the world needs. Today, we can boast that we lead the world in Attorneys, Medicine and Banking. We're supposed to be proud of that. Average Americans have lost their manufacturing jobs at the age of forty or fifty, and are supposed to be retrained for the jobs of the future (code for lower paying service jobs). That's not a model that can be sustained. So what are we to do? The market is telling us that people can't afford these homes without risky financing, yet the risky financing is what got us here in the first place. Our consumer society requires everyone to spend, spend, spend. Our government lectures net exporting countries that they should encourage their citizens to spend more. It is any wonder then, that we rely on the charity of the Chinese and Middle East sovereign funds to finance us. Our own citizenry doesn't have the money. In short, it's a mess. The status quo isn't working. We need good paying factory jobs. They should be prized, not devalued. Some globalization is good. Extreme globalization is only good for worldly people like Jim Rogers who is no real patriot in my eyes. His God seems to be wherever else in the world he can invest his money. He doesn't seem to care about the long term consequences to this country. And somehow, as Republicans we've been conditioned to accept that this is admirable..........capitalism at it's finest.

Executives work under an employment contract. Their pay was established by a compensation committee comprised of individuals mostly like themselves. Is that how your own pay is determined? Who is looking out for you? I used to be anti union, but now I think unions and executives deserve each other. I believe this is one time in history where our economy could actually benefit from real wage inflation at the bottom. I have sympathy for the small mom and pop shops working hard to make payroll, sacrificing much for themselves as they plow most of their earnings back into building their businesses. These are the real heroes of our economy. However, our Titans of Industry have proven that they are overpaid and under worked. They have a huge staffs that do most of the work. Their ivy league degree gives them a license to steal. I say fire them all. We can find a management company in China or India to work with a newly organized work force. Now that would be a revolution I could get excited about. If I were younger and had fewer responsibilities, I'd dive in and start it myself.

How do you feel? I'd like to hear from you.

There needs to be a 3rd (or more) party in American politics. I think the only groups capable of mounting parties (thanks to the insane amounts of money required) would be unions and religions.

I think a "Workers Party" and a "Family Party" would be excellent additions to the political process.

As well as that, i would like to see Canada's electoral model adopted. Here's a good article: http://sydney.edu.au/us-studies/medi...es_Garrett.pdf

It seems radical given where we are now, but it makes sense. I probably wouldn't admit that, if it were the French doing it.

There is already a Working Families Party in New York State and a Workers World Party.

But the problem isn't the lack of political parties, it's the media, the Democrats and the Republicans continually telling voters they cannot vote for anyone but Democrats or Republicans because there are no other parties. Ever notice how the media constantly uses phrases like "the two parties," "the two-party system," and "the two presidential candidates"?

Third parties become viable when people VOTE for them.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Yes, and unfortunately most of us don't even know they exist because they don't have enough money to spread the word.

__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I agree with you both Zephyr and Chan.

The political reform in the article i posted would go a LONG way to solving the media issue. Without corporate, union, organisation or religious donations - democracy would thrive.

Would Obama, the so called extreme-left candidate (by a couple of ill-informed people on this forum) go even some way to fixing the system we all know to be in desperate need of reform?

And because the media intentionally ignores them and actively pursues a policy of lying by saying there are only two parties.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Aggreed (except for the media blame).

__________________
No party holds the privilege of dictating to me how I shall vote. If loyalty to party is a form of patriotism, I am no patriot. If there is any valuable difference between a monarchist and an American, it lies in the theory that the American can decide for himself what is patriotic and what isn't. I claim that difference. I am the only person in the sixty millions that is privileged to dictate my patriotism.
- Mark Twain, a Biography

You also have to have a government that applies the law equally, unlike in Texas where the Republicans and Democrats are above the law and the government is engaging in organized crime.

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

Ever notice how the media constantly uses phrases like "the two parties," "the two-party system," and "the two presidential candidates"?

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."