First Reagan started fucking Social Security by raiding it to cover tax cuts for the rich.
Then successive Republicans followed the same practice of borrowing money from the Social Security Trust Fund so they could put money in the pockets of the undeserving rich in the form of tax cuts, tax rebates and write-offs.
Now they want to fuck the hard working American People by raising the age at which we can collect Social Security or get Medicare. Never mind the fact that people over fifty are among the under-employed and unemployed with no health insurance at a time when we are starting to desperately need health care for a wide variety of age related health issues including cancer, heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, high cholesterol and hypertension.
It is almost as though the Republicans have Death Panels establishing plans to euthanize the elderly working class people.
I about choked on my coffee this morning while reading the paper, when I saw the following story:
BTW: We could save a shit load of money by ending Faith Based Initiatives and closing a bunch of overseas military bases.
John Commins, for HealthLeaders Media,
March 29, 2011
Raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 in 2014 would generate about $7.6 billion in net savings to the federal government, but it would add $5.6 billion in out-of-pocket costs for 65- and 66-year-olds, and $4.5 billion in employer retiree healthcare costs, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study.
The study – Raising the Age of Medicare Eligibility: A Fresh Look Following Implementation of Health Reform – examines the potential changes suggested in several deficit reduction plans.
The study also estimates that raising the Medicare eligibility age would raise premiums by 3% for those who remain on Medicare and for those who get coverage through health reform’s new insurance exchanges. The study assumes both full implementation of the Affordable Care Act and the higher eligibility age in 2014.
Among the estimated five million affected 65- and 66-year-olds, about three in four would pay an average of $2,400 more for their healthcare in 2014 than they would have paid if covered under Medicare, the study said. Nearly one in four are expected to have lower out-of-pocket spending, mainly due to the ACA’s coverage expansions through Medicaid and the premium tax credits available to low- and middle-income Americans.
“Raising Medicare’s age of eligibility would obviously reduce Medicare spending, but would also shift costs onto seniors and employers, and increase costs elsewhere on the federal ledger,” said Kaiser Family Foundation Vice President Tricia Neuman. “This analysis drives home the tough policy choices that lie ahead when Washington gets serious about reducing the federal deficit.”
How come tough choices on balancing the budget all ways seem to involve suffering on the part of the working class. For once I’d like to see some serious sacrifice on the part of the rich.
I’m sick and tired of Class War being a one sided fucking affair.
Class War! Not just for the rich anymore…
It is important to remember that the Religious Right is not only anti-choice, but misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic and racist.
It is religious in the same way the KKK’s cross burnings are religious.
But even more insidious is how it not only pays no taxes but is subsidized by American Tax payers including atheists like me who would never give a dime to fund any sort of religious institution or charity.
Consider the following articles:
By Carol Roye
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The religious right’s righteous condemnation of abortion began with anti-integration, anti-taxation efforts in the 1970s, says Carol Roye. Along the way it turned into the current assault on the needs of women and children.
(WOMENSENEWS)–The torrent of moral rhetoric that accompanies the current spate of anti-abortion bills would make you think that conservative Christians have never looked on abortion as anything short of evil.
In 1971 (two years before the Supreme Court constitutionally protected a woman’s right to abortion in Roe v. Wade) the Southern Baptist Convention–which wound up becoming synonymous with the religious right and its anti-choice movement–issued a resolution that might surprise you.
It called for legalizing abortion in cases of “rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.”
The group was responding to grim statistics. Every year several hundred women (many of them already mothers) died from botched abortions and thousands more were seriously injured attempting to end their unwanted pregnancies. The Southern Baptists were taking a moral stand in order to protect women and their families.
Abortion wasn’t a concern for the Christian right until the mid-1970s.
Jerry Falwell, the founder of the Moral Majority, did not preach a sermon on abortion until 1978.
The bedrock issue for evangelical Christians had always been simple–preserving the separation between church and state. Since colonial days, Baptists in America had insisted on this, believing that the Kingdom of God and the world of government each function better when kept apart. That’s a far cry from today, when religious activists are doing all they can to control public health policy.
To understand how outlawing abortion became such a central cause, a brief history of the period can be cribbed from the book “With God On Our Side” by William Martin.
First Mobilized in the 1970s
The Christian right first mobilized in the 1970s in response to a tax issue tied to white Southern Christian groups’ antipathy to school desegregation.
After school integration became federal law, white Christian academies were formed in the South, in part to circumvent the law, enabling white parents to send their children to all-white religious schools.
During the Carter administration the IRS said these academies should be denied tax-exempt status because they did not conform to the law on school integration.
To fight back, some fundamentalist and evangelical groups came together.
This represented a joining of quite different sects. Fundamentalists believe that the Bible is the literal, true word of God. Evangelicals, on the other hand, have shades of gray in their belief system, allowing for a more nuanced approach to some scientific issues, such as climate change and evolution.
But in fighting for tax-exempt status for their all-white religious schools, important factions of the groups united to form the religious right.
They became very adept at raising money to advocate for their cause, and they became powerful. The IRS ultimately relented and allowed them to keep their tax exemption.
Lately cutting aid to students, especially in the form of Pell Grants has become a big deal.
One would think that since conservative Christian groups are among the most vocal advocates of these cuts they would not be lining up at the trough to feed like greedy little piglets, but this is not the case.
From the Lynchburg News and Advance: http://www2.newsadvance.com/news/2011/mar/27/liberty-tops-state-federal-aid-its-students-ar-929147/
Online enrollment spurs big increase in assistance
By Liz Barry
Published: March 27, 2011
Liberty University students received approximately $445 million in federal financial aid money last fiscal year, according to U.S. Department of Education data, making LU the top recipient in Virginia.
Last year, Liberty enrolled about 52,000 online students, plus another 12,000 through its residential programs.
“It has ballooned,” said Ritz of Liberty’s financial aid volume. “In some categories, I’ve seen us rank no. 3 nationally, or in the top ten. It’s because of our size and the growth.”
In the span of a year, Liberty’s experienced about a 56 percent spike in federal student aid, from $284 million in 2008-2009 to $445 million in 2009-2010, according to Department of Education data compiled by The News & Advance. (LU calculates the total aid at $432 million and $277 million, still a 56 percent increase.)
Contributing to the rise were the faltering economy, the federal stimulus program and the government’s expansion of the Pell grant program, Ritz said. Last year, Liberty received upwards of $55 million in Pell money, ranking 28th in the nation and no. 1 in Virginia. The Pell program serves the country’s neediest students.
In some financial aid programs, Liberty was a top ten recipient nationwide.
For example, LU was the eighth highest recipient of Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) money last year, topping more than 4,000 other colleges and universities.
One of two major federal loan programs, FFEL allowed students to borrow government-backed money from banks and other lenders. Liberty was the lone Evangelical Christian school on a top-ten list dominated by for-profit institutions. Other top recipients were the University of Phoenix and Kaplan University.
For Ritz — a financial aid veteran who got his start at a small Bible college — Liberty’s use of federal financial aid does not run counter to the university’s conservative values. Liberty does not receive the federal money directly, Ritz said, but through students, who use it to pay for tuition, room and board and other expenses.
Why are tax payers dollars being used to fund church based education? what ever happened to the wall of separation articulated by the founding fathers?
Something similar is happening with the right wing attempts to discredit and defund Planned Parenthood, which does far more than provide abortion services and is often the only low cost medical provider offering health care services to women that include such matters as cancer screening.
At the same time the right wing is pushing for funding of “Abortion alternative” aka Crisis Pregnancy Centers, which offer little or no qualified health care and which function to disseminate right wing religious propaganda and misinformation.
Repeated studies have shown that Sex Education that provides honest wide ranging sex education and frank discussion cuts down on unplanned pregnancies, STDs and lessens sexual ignorance regarding not only heterosexual issues but LGBT/T issues.
The right wing has argued that legitimate Sex Education infringes on the rights of “religious people” and should not be funded.
At the same time they push for faith based Abstinence Only programs which have been shown to result in greater numbers of unplanned pregnancies and abortions and greater numbers of STDs.
Perhaps it is time for us to look into the cost savings benefits of defunding all these failed faith based programs.
At the same time perhaps all faith based programs should be held to the same Civil Rights Standards of Compliance and Non-Discrimination that secular institutions are held to.
NOW Press Release:
For Immediate Release
Contact: Lisa Bennett, 202-628-8669, ext. 123
March 29, 2011
Today the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Wal-Mart v. Dukes — the largest employment class-action suit in U.S. history. The retail giant did not ask the high court to review the actual charges that Wal-Mart routinely discriminated against its women employees. Instead, the company’s challenge seeks to halt the case, which represents more than 1.5 million women, before it even gets to trial.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld certification of the class-action suit three times, most recently in April 2010. But Wal-Mart argues that each employee should be forced to file their complaints on an individual basis because a group this large couldn’t possibly have enough in common to constitute a class.
“Just like the banks that were too big to fail, Wal-Mart’s lawyers are claiming the company is too big to sue!” exclaims NOW President Terry O’Neill. “The reason there are so many women in the suit is because Wal-Mart’s discrimination has been widespread and persistent. And now the captains of this ship want to be let off the hook because so many women were affected? Well, guess what: When you’re the biggest employer in the nation and the richest company in the world, and you get that way by paying unfair wages, you should expect to find yourself on the wrong end of a massive lawsuit one day. It comes with the territory, so Wal-Mart should stop trying to con its way out of court.”
NOW named Wal-Mart a “Merchant of Shame” in 2002 for its notorious employment practices and workplace environment. Chapter activists held educational pickets outside Wal-Mart stores nationwide, handing out fliers explaining the facts about Wal-Mart’s discriminatory ways.
Those shameful facts include: women earning nearly a quarter less, on average, than men, despite greater average seniority and higher performance ratings; women concentrated in lower-paying hourly jobs and being paid less even when they held the same jobs as men; women receiving raises at a slower rate than men, thus expanding the pay gap; women waiting longer for promotions and serving in management in proportions dramatically lower than the retailer’s competitors.
“For years, the Wal-Mart empire has been built upon miserly wages that were even more pitiful for women,” says O’Neill. “The Wal-Mart executives who have profited from these practices should have the guts to face in court the women they cheated. They know that if they succeed in breaking up this class, most of the women will be unable to proceed on their own or in smaller groups.”
O’Neill concludes: “I hope the Roberts Supreme Court will set aside its usual pro-business stance to grant these women, as a class, the day in court they so richly deserve.”
I’m amazed at how easy we make it for people to know everything about us.
It’s one thing if you Blog or are willfully public about who you are and what you think.
It is something else if you think you are being clever with aliases etc except for belonging to social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter.
It doesn’t dawn on many people that there is a record of those books you bought from Amazon or Barnes and Noble, the food you bought at the market and where you made your last cell phone call from.
From The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/business/media/26privacy.html?_r=2&ref=business
By NOAM COHEN
Published: March 26, 2011
A favorite pastime of Internet users is to share their location: services like Google Latitude can inform friends when you are nearby; another, Foursquare, has turned reporting these updates into a game.
But as a German Green party politician, Malte Spitz, recently learned, we are already continually being tracked whether we volunteer to be or not. Cellphone companies do not typically divulge how much information they collect, so Mr. Spitz went to court to find out exactly what his cellphone company, Deutsche Telekom, knew about his whereabouts.
The results were astounding. In a six-month period — from Aug 31, 2009, to Feb. 28, 2010, Deutsche Telekom had recorded and saved his longitude and latitude coordinates more than 35,000 times. It traced him from a train on the way to Erlangen at the start through to that last night, when he was home in Berlin.
Mr. Spitz has provided a rare glimpse — an unprecedented one, privacy experts say — of what is being collected as we walk around with our phones. Unlike many online services and Web sites that must send “cookies” to a user’s computer to try to link its traffic to a specific person, cellphone companies simply have to sit back and hit “record.”
“We are all walking around with little tags, and our tag has a phone number associated with it, who we called and what we do with the phone,” said Sarah E. Williams, an expert on graphic information at Columbia University’s architecture school. “We don’t even know we are giving up that data.”
Tracking a customer’s whereabouts is part and parcel of what phone companies do for a living. Every seven seconds or so, the phone company of someone with a working cellphone is determining the nearest tower, so as to most efficiently route calls. And for billing reasons, they track where the call is coming from and how long it has lasted.
Continue reading at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/business/media/26privacy.html?_r=2&ref=business
By Kari Lydersen
Mar 29, 2011
Cynthia Murray and Robert Hines Jr. thought they had seen unfair treatment and bad working conditions at the Maryland Wal-Mart store and Chicago-area Wal-Mart warehouse where they worked, respectively. But they were floored to learn recently of the conditions workers in Bangladesh and other developing countries endure in the factories that produce goods for Wal-Mart.
On the inaugural day of the national “Sweatshop, Warehouse, Walmart: A Worker Truth Tour” in Chicago on Monday, Murray and Hines listened to Kalpona Akter explain how she is facing a potential death sentence or life in prison on criminal charges filed against her and several other organizers with the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity (BCWS), which has fought to improve pay and conditions in garment factories including subcontractors for Wal-Mart.
SweatFree Communities and other groups are asking Wal-Mart to demand the Bangladeshi government drop the charges, which include inciting workers to riot, illegally strike and cause property damage. Akter was arrested and spent a month in jail in August, where she was repeatedly interrogated and allegedly tortured. “They would ask the same questions hundreds, thousands of times,” she recalled during a lunch at the Jobs with Justice headquarters before an event in Chicago Monday afternoon.
There are 3.4 million garment workers in Bangladesh employed at 4,200 factories, supplying clothing for nearly every major store in the U.S. Uprisings by garment workers are common, happening every few days in recent years, according to government statistics, and hundreds of garment workers are injured and some killed each year in such uprisings.
The government vigorously defends the industry with violence and repression. Extra-judicial killings of activists or government critics are common in Bangladesh, often known as “cross-fire” since authorities set up situations where detainees are killed supposedly in shoot-outs with their supporters. Akter said many garment worker activists and their families have been threatened with “cross-fire” killing.
From Godless Monsters and Headless Bullies: http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2011/03/cathlic-bishops-dont-want-to-give.html
by: Alvin McEwen
Tue Mar 29, 2011
Reposted with permission
Some on the right tell us that lgbt equality will trump people’s right to express their religious beliefs. In some cases maybe that’s not a bad idea, such as the following:
U.S. Catholic bishops are urging federal housing officials not to adopt proposed rules that would bar groups that receive federal funds from discriminating against gays, lesbians or transgender persons in housing programs.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development said the new rules, proposed on Jan. 24, would “ensure equal access” to programs that help the elderly, sick, and impoverished find stable housing.
Citing recent studies, HUD said gays and lesbians face discrimination in the private housing market, and one in five transgender persons reports homelessness due to bias.
“In considering the mounting evidence of violence and discrimination against LGBT persons, the department is concerned that its own programs may not be fully open to LGBT individuals and families,” HUD said in January.
Lawyers for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops say the new rules would force some religious groups to compromise their beliefs or quit HUD housing programs.
“Faith-based and other organizations should retain the freedom they have always had to make housing placements in a manner consistent with their religious beliefs, including when it concerns a cohabiting couple, be it an unmarried heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple,” said Anthony Picarello and Michael Moses, lawyers for the bishops conference.
The lawyers’ remarks came in a letter to HUD as part of a public comment period that ended Friday (March 25). A spokeswoman for HUD could not be reached immediately for comment about when the new policy would take effect.
So in other word, these Catholic bishops would let people homeless rather than give housing to someone who may be an lgbt if that person is in a relationship but can’t get married due to the anti-gay marriage laws. That doesn’t strike me as very Christian.
The irony of the situation is that Jesus – whom these bishops claim to serve – was born in a manger because his parents were turn away from the inn on the night of his birth. Apparently there was no room.
Years later there is still no room, but this time it’s in the hearts of those who claim to serve Him. There is no room for love or basic kindness.
Is this what Christianity has become? A selfish precept in which those needing love and support take a backseat to egos? HUD is the last thing these bishops should worry about if they continue to be show such hatred and callousness in God’s name.
Even if they seem intent on destroying America as we knew it and replacing it with an oligarchy run by and for the rich Corporate Elite with everyone else turned into virtual slaves.
Who would have thought our monsters were so sensitive?
Oh I forgot the new right wing definition of being tough and manning up is about being a sociopath, able to inflict pain on others without feeling remorse while crying copious tears of anguish if anyone should actually have the audacity to expose the fact you are destroying America.
By Glenn Greenwald
Mar 27, 2011
Since the financial crisis of 2008, one of the most revealing spectacles has been the parade of financial elites who petulantly insist that they are the victims of societal hostility: political officials heap too much blame on them, public policy burdens them so unfairly, the public resents them, and — most amazingly of all — President Obama is a radical egalitarian who is unprecedentedly hostile to business interests. One particularly illustrative example was the whiny little multi-millionaire hedge fund manager (and CNBC contributor), Anthony Scaramucci, who stood up at an October, 201o, town hall meeting and demanded to know: “when are we going to stop whacking at the Wall Street pinata?”
The Weekly Standard now has a very lengthy defense of — including rare interviews with — Charles and David Koch, the libertarian billionaires who fund everything from right-wing economic policy, union-busting, and anti-climate-change advocacy to civil liberties and liberalized social policies — though far more the former goals than the latter. In this article one finds the purest and most instructive expression of billionaire self-pity that I think I’ve ever seen — one that is as self-absorbed and detached from reality as it destructive. It’s really worth examining their revealed mindset to see how those who wield the greatest financial power (and thus the greatest political power) think of themselves and those who are outside of their class.
I’m not someone who sees the Koch Brothers as some sort of unique threat. I mostly regard them as little more than a symbol of the death of democratic values in the U.S. — the way in which the possession of vast financial resources is an absolute prerequisite to making any impact on the national political process, and conversely, how those without such resources are politically inconsequential and impotent (short of their fomenting serious social unrest). Every political movement needs demons lurking behind every problem — the more hidden and omnipotent the better — and the Koch Brothers now serve the same function for the Left as George Soros long served for the Right: the bogeymen who motivate the loyalists and on whom everything bad, including political losses, can be blamed.
There’s no question in my mind that the unrestrained power over the political process and both political parties enjoyed by oligarchs is the single greatest political problem the country faces — the overarching problem — but in the scheme of corporate and oligarchical dominance, the Koch Brothers are a small part of that dynamic. Nor do I believe that they’re motivated in their political activism by personal profit: for people with a net worth of $20 billion, there are vastly more efficient ways to convert one’s wealth into greater wealth than spending money to influence public policy; I think they’re True Believers.
Continue reading at: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/03/27/koch
But wait, there is more to the story:
From Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/28/koch-weekly-standard/
By Lee Fang
Mar 28th, 2011
The Weekly Standard’s Matt Continetti, a writer who gained fame defending Sarah Palin from public scrutiny, has a new article blasting critics of Koch Industries and its billionaire owners, David and Charles Koch. Continetti traveled to Koch’s headquarters in Wichita, gained unprecedented access to the brothers, as well as their top executives, and came away with nothing but praise for the company and its peerless role in financing right-wing front groups.
In over 8,000 words of hagiography, Continetti did not find space to disclose that his fellow opinion editor at the Weekly Standard, Michael Goldfarb, is currently employed by Koch Industries to help improve the company’s political image. Or that the Weekly Standard’s reporters routinely attend Koch’s secret political strategy and fundraising meetings. Or that Continetti had received a fellowship funded by the Phillips Foundation, a nonprofit heavily reliant on Koch funds. Or that the Weekly Standard is owned by billionaire Phil Anschutz, a friend of the Koch brothers and an attendee of Koch donor events.
The article includes a deceptive claim that the Koch brothers do not lobby or fund groups to financially benefit Koch Industries. The evidence would suggest otherwise:
Continue reading at: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/28/koch-weekly-standard/
From Move On: http://pol.moveon.org/waronwomen/?rc=fb
Stop the Republican War on Women
Redefining rape. Attacking the right to choose. Belittling victims of violence. The Republicans are on a rampage attacking women’s health and rights this year. And if we don’t speak up, they’ll keep going. That’s why we need to raise a ruckus, and get the word out about the GOP war on women.
The War on Women
Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP’s War on Women
1) Republicans not only want to reduce women’s access to abortion care, they’re actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven’t yet. Shocker.
2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to “accuser.” But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain “victims.”
3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)
4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.
5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.
6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids’ preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.
7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.
8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.
9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.
10) And if that wasn’t enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can’t make this stuff up).
1. “‘Forcible Rape’ Language Remains In Bill To Restrict Abortion Funding,” The Huffington Post, February 9, 2011
“Extreme Abortion Coverage Ban Introduced,” Center for American Progress, January 20, 2011
2. “Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As ‘Accusers,'” The Huffington Post, February 4, 2011
3. “South Dakota bill would legalize killing abortion doctors,” Salon, February 15, 2011
4. “House GOP Proposes Cuts to Scores of Sacred Cows,” National Journal, February 9, 2011
5. “New GOP Bill Would Allow Hospitals To Let Women Die Instead Of Having An Abortion,” Talking Points Memo, February 4, 2011
6. “Republican Officials Cut Head Start Funding, Saying Women Should be Married and Home with Kids,” Think Progress, February 16, 2011
7. “Bye Bye, Big Bird. Hello, E. Coli,” The New Republic, Feburary 12, 2011
8. “House GOP spending cuts will devastate women, families and economy,” The Hill, February 16, 2011
9. “House passes measure stripping Planned Parenthood funding,” MSNBC, February 18,2011
“GOP Spending Plan: X-ing Out Title X Family Planning Funds,” Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2011
“Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women,” Blog for Choice, February 17, 2011
From Think Progress: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/28/ge-union-workers-cuts/
Mike Elk, a freelance labor journalist and third generation union organizer based in Washington, D.C. You can follow him for more updates on Wisconsin on twitter at @MikeElk.
March 28, 2011
Last week, the New York Times reported that, despite making $14.2 billion in profits, General Electric, the largest corporation in the United States, paid zero U.S. taxes in 2010 and actually received tax credits of $3.2 billion dollars. The article noted that GE’s tax avoidance team is comprised of “former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.”
After not paying any taxes and making huge profits, ThinkProgress has learned that General Electric is expected to ask its nearly 15,000 unionized employees in the United States to make major concessions.
This year, 14 unions representing more than 15,000 workers will negotiate a new master contract with General Electric. Among the major concessions GE has signaled that it will ask of union workers is the elimination of a defined contribution benefit pension for new employees, a move the company has already implemented for its non-union salaried employees. Likewise, GE is signaling to the union that it will ask for the elimination of current health insurance plans in favor of lower quality health saving accounts, a move the company has already implemented for non-union salaried employees as well.
In addition, General Electric may ask some workers for a wage freeze. Since the recession began in 2007, GE threatened to close plants in Schenectady, NY and Louisville, KY unless workers took wage concessions and adopted two-tier wage structure. In an interview with ThinkProgress, Mark Haller, a machinist at General Electric locomotive factory in Erie, PA, said:
The company I work for paid no federal taxes last year, but we all get these mass emails from GE asking us to call our Congressman to fund the useless, alternative GE engine for the F-35. As taxpayers, we are subsidizing the profits of this company to a huge extent and now after making the company even more profitable, they are asking us to make concessions on pensions, benefits, and perhaps even wages. You wonder why there is a jobs crisis in this country with a guy like G.E. CEO Jeff Immelt heading the President’s Jobs Commission.
Continue reading at: http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/28/ge-union-workers-cuts/