ImTheCaptain
I disagree with you
only if you think loss of manufacturing jobs is a "penalty"
And you're fine with this, the dishonesty?
All politicians are FOS and lie to promote their agenda. When Bernie Sanders talks about Corporation X that makes billions of dollars and gets hundreds of millions in tax "rebates", it either shows (a) he has no idea what he is talking about, or (b) he is lying.
But his acolytes soak it up, because it is what they want to hear.
All politicians are FOS and lie to promote their agenda. When Bernie Sanders talks about Corporation X that makes billions of dollars and gets hundreds of millions in tax "rebates", it either shows (a) he has no idea what he is talking about, or (b) he is lying.
But his acolytes soak it up, because it is what they want to hear.
"Labor movement"? As in people who want or need jobs?The Economic Policy Institute is affiliated with the labor movement.
Here is a more comprehensive survey of leading US economists.
http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_0dfr9yjnDcLh17m
"Labor movement"? As in people who want or need jobs?
Jobs created vs jobs lost seems pretty black and white, can you tell me how that could be biased?
More than 845,000 U.S. workers in the manufacturing sector have been certified for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) since NAFTA because they lost their jobs due to imports from Canada and Mexico or the relocation of factories to those countries. The TAA program is quite narrow, covering only a subset of jobs lost at manufacturing facilities, and is difficult to qualify for. Thus, the NAFTA TAA numbers significantly undercount NAFTA job loss.
NAFTA contributed to downward pressure on U.S. wages and growing income inequality. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, two out of every three displaced manufacturing workers who were rehired in 2012 experienced wage reductions, most of more than 20 percent. As increasing numbers of workers displaced from manufacturing jobs joined the glut of workers competing for non-offshorable, low-skill jobs in sectors such as hospitality and food service, real wages have also fallen in these sectors since NAFTA. The resulting downward pressure on wages has fueled recent growth in income inequality.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/nafta-at-20-one-million-u_b_4550207.htmlThe desperate migration of those displaced from Mexico's rural economy pushed down wages in Mexico's border maquiladora factory zone and contributed to a doubling of Mexican immigration to the United States following NAFTA's implementation.
More advocacy propaganda.
I don't know where you live, but I live in the NC Triad, and there has definitely been a tremendous loss in manufacturing jobs here in the last 25 years. Do you believe there has been a equivalent job gain in this area in that same time frame, and are the jobs gained accessible to the people who lost their jobs?No, labor movement as in unions who have a vested interest in providing a slanted view that supports their constituents many of which were in specific industries that might have been losers due to NAFTA, such as textiles.
Jobs lost and jobs created is pretty black and white, and the prevailing consensus among economists is that NAFTA didn't have a significant impact on overall employment levels.
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/34486.pdf
I don't know where you live, but I live in the NC Triad, and there has definitely been a tremendous loss in manufacturing jobs here in the last 25 years. Do you believe there has been a equivalent job gain in this area in that same time frame, and are the jobs gained accessible to the people who lost their jobs?
Jobs lost and jobs created is pretty black and white,
What? Not true at all. The fastest growing job sectors are those -such as retail - where average hours per week and hourly wages are well below average and most do not have employer-provided benefits. Yet they still register as 1 job, same as a manufacturing job.
where were all of you when PA lost all its steel jobs