Will Dems continue to shift right on workers/trade?

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

With the groundbreaking NAFTA modification as well as tariffs left and right...with pushback from Dems all over, has the Democratic Party officially given up on the working class and ceded them to the GOP?   I wouldn't be surprised if more Dems than Republicans will support Right-to-Work by the end of the 2020's.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

[RINO Tom]

The OP is a weird guy.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

To the coal miners in West Virginia to the Steelworkers in the state of which you put your avatar, to the auto workers in Ohio...all you said just comes across as "well, we at the country club are doing fine, who cares for the tears of the working class?". Tone deaf as always.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

Tariffs hit poor and working class Americans hard.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

Tariffs hit poor and working class Americans hard.

Sure, but optics are everything. When was the last time Dems  showed they care for more than just Atlanta billionaires and Fairfield County champagne liberal housewives?

[Devout Centrist]

Tariffs hit poor and working class Americans hard.

Sure, but optics are everything. When was the last time Dems  showed they care for more than just Atlanta billionaires and Fairfield County champagne liberal housewives?

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/400836-voters-reject-missouri-right-to-work-law

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

Tariffs hit poor and working class Americans hard.

Sure, but optics are everything. When was the last time Dems  showed they care for more than just Atlanta billionaires and Fairfield County champagne liberal housewives?

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/400836-voters-reject-missouri-right-to-work-law

I'm talking about the actual party apparatus/leadership. The article you posted showed no indication of that. Besides, most of the counties that voted to knock down no-right-to-bargain in Missouri voted for DJT.

[here2view]

The OP is a weird guy.

[Sestak]

"groundbreaking"

also I don't know if you've noticed but it's the Republicans who have pushed RTW and the Democrats who have organized against it.

[Devout Centrist]

Tariffs hit poor and working class Americans hard.

Sure, but optics are everything. When was the last time Dems  showed they care for more than just Atlanta billionaires and Fairfield County champagne liberal housewives?

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/400836-voters-reject-missouri-right-to-work-law

I'm talking about the actual party apparatus/leadership. The article you posted showed no indication of that. Besides, most of the counties that voted to knock down no-right-to-bargain in Missouri voted for DJT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Arizona_teachers%27_strike
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704615504576172553210924660
http://www.workforce.com/2017/01/17/workplace-legacy-barack-obama/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/congress-starts-to-roll-back-damage-done-by-unions-under-obama
https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/obama-era-labor-regulations-now/

There were some failures, see card check, but overall President Obama led a far more union friendly Presidency.

[Mette Frederiksen Stan]

We won't have a pro-labor President until one dares to take on automation. Luddites FTW.

[Dr. Arch]

It must be exhausting to have a perspective that's so divorced from reality.

[Jeffster]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

Do you support labor unions or do you think a company should be allowed to hire scab labor and undercut their own workers? Do you support a livable minimum wage, or do you think companies should be allowed to hire workers at sub-minimum wages? Do you support forcing companies to abide by environmental regulations, or do you think companies should be able to dump chemicals and poison the air? Do you support rules regarding child labor, workplace safety, and human rights, or do you think companies should be allowed to flout those rules?

Why are some of you red avatars too stupid to see that when you open up free trade with countries that don't have those same standards as us that it will allow companies to undercut us in those areas. You are creating a race to the bottom. So it seems to me either you don't really care about those things, and are only interested in the selfish exploitation of the worlds poor for your own gain, or you are retarded. So which is it?

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

To the coal miners in West Virginia to the Steelworkers in the state of which you put your avatar, to the auto workers in Ohio...all you said just comes across as "well, we at the country club are doing fine, who cares for the tears of the working class?". Tone deaf as always.

Yes, low-skilled industrial workers in the midwest are harmed by free trade. This is bad, and I'm sympathetic to their struggle.
But they're not the only people who matter, you idiot. You hold the belief that they're the only real Americans, that we should design policies solely to benefit them, and everyone else can go to hell. That is morally disgusting.
A Democratic party that champions free trade is a Democratic party that is the champion of the working class, from farmers in California to retirees in Florida to lawyers in Maine to miners in West Virginia. Free trade does not benefit every American, but it benefits most of them. No policy will be without losers. There is no situation in which we do not trade off some harm in order to gain some benefit. But I hold the fundamental moral belief that no American is worth more than another, no matter their race, no matter their religion or occupation or gender or state of birth. The Government and the Democratic Party should champion every American's interests, not just the interests of the people you personally identify with. If they do not, they are the party of identity politics. Actual identity politics is not complaining about racism. It is saying that your group of Americans are the "Real Americans", that you are more important and that everyone else should sacrifice their prosperity to benefit you. I refuse to grant this view any legitimacy.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

Do you support labor unions or do you think a company should be allowed to hire scab labor and undercut their own workers? Do you support a livable minimum wage, or do you think companies should be allowed to hire workers at sub-minimum wages? Do you support forcing companies to abide by environmental regulations, or do you think companies should be able to dump chemicals and poison the air? Do you support rules regarding child labor, workplace safety, and human rights, or do you think companies should be allowed to flout those rules?

Why are some of you red avatars too stupid to see that when you open up free trade with countries that don't have those same standards as us that it will allow companies to undercut us in those areas. You are creating a race to the bottom. So it seems to me either you don't really care about those things, and are only interested in the selfish exploitation of the worlds poor for your own gain, or you are retarded. So which is it?

Hmm, if only there was a trade agreement with a bunch of countries where we enforced higher labor standards. Some sort of pact, maybe. Maybe with countries in the pacific. A Trans-Pacific Pact.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Free trade has historically been a left of centre position in American politics. 

Oh, and the vast majority of job losses are due to automation. Raising tariffs will not stop outsourcing.

[Jeffster]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

To the coal miners in West Virginia to the Steelworkers in the state of which you put your avatar, to the auto workers in Ohio...all you said just comes across as "well, we at the country club are doing fine, who cares for the tears of the working class?". Tone deaf as always.

Yes, low-skilled industrial workers in the midwest are harmed by free trade. This is bad, and I'm sympathetic to their struggle.
But they're not the only people who matter, you idiot. You hold the belief that they're the only real Americans, that we should design policies solely to benefit them, and everyone else can go to hell. That is morally disgusting.
A Democratic party that champions free trade is a Democratic party that is the champion of the working class, from farmers in California to retirees in Florida to lawyers in Maine to miners in West Virginia. Free trade does not benefit every American, but it benefits most of them. No policy will be without losers. There is no situation in which we do not trade off some harm in order to gain some benefit. But I hold the fundamental moral belief that no American is worth more than another, no matter their race, no matter their religion or occupation or gender or state of birth. The Government and the Democratic Party should champion every American's interests, not just the interests of the people you personally identify with. If they do not, they are the party of identity politics. Actual identity politics is not complaining about racism. It is saying that your group of Americans are the "Real Americans", that you are more important and that everyone else should sacrifice their prosperity to benefit you. I refuse to grant this view any legitimacy.

Blah Blah Blah. You just side stepped the whole point and virtue signaled about how you're the real compassionate person Blah Blah Blah. I never once said anything about "Real Americans." YOU are the person who wants to exploit the labor in the third world for your own benefit. You obviously don't care about the working conditions of a factory worker in China, or the living conditions of a poor community trapped next to a plant that dumps chemicals in India, so long as you get your cheap consumer goods and can post about how woke you are from the latest model iPhone.

We should be using our trade deals to pressure countries to improving their standards on the issues I described, so we raise them up instead of engaging in a race to the bottom. Free access to our markets is the carrot, and tariffs are the stick. If a country wants to undercut us and allow the exploitation of their people wee don't have to freely allow their goods across our borders. Let me ask you a hypothetical. Should we allow free trade from a country that uses slave labor? Would you still huff and puff with your false sense of moral superiority that you care about all the people and that those cheap slave made goods are great and that free trade with slavers is better for every citizen of our country?

I can also bet you have a cognitive dissonance on this issue and the issue of raising the minimum wage. No doubt, you probably approve of raising the minimum wage, which will only help a small fraction of our workers, but will also cost all our citizens more money with slightly higher prices. Yet that doesn't bother you, does it? But when it comes to using tariffs to prevent countries from undercutting our workers, there you'd raise a stink about higher prices and how it hurts our citizens.

[pbrower2a]

Tariffs are taxes, and bad taxes at that. They are regressive in application. They disrupt market-based calculations on production and marketing. They make doing business more costly.

The benefit goes to well-placed businesses that might have the best lobbyists -- quite possibly with business entities so inefficient that they should either do their manufacturing overseas or fold in bankruptcy. 

[Jeffster]

I'm not sure you're aware of this, given you enjoy living in denial, but free trade agreements are generally beneficial to the American public and to American workers. Protectionism might help special interests, but it hurts America and American workers as a whole. The Democrat's current free trade stance is a shift towards economic reality and economic justice.

Depressed wages, sending jobs overseas, and right-to-work laws...hmm, is that the definition of "beneficial...to American workers" nowadays?

Making up bullsh**t "side effects" isn't. Free trade agreements expose American workers to competition, yes, and there are some industries where our high labor standards mean that we can't be strongly competitive in that industry without government protection or subsidies. But it also more importantly let us export advanced goods and services across the world, generating a tremendous amount of wealth for both sides. Wishing for protectionism to bring manufacturing jobs is wishing for most Americans to abandon enjoyable high-level work for jobs that are simply worse out of misplaced nostalgia for an America that never was.

Do you support labor unions or do you think a company should be allowed to hire scab labor and undercut their own workers? Do you support a livable minimum wage, or do you think companies should be allowed to hire workers at sub-minimum wages? Do you support forcing companies to abide by environmental regulations, or do you think companies should be able to dump chemicals and poison the air? Do you support rules regarding child labor, workplace safety, and human rights, or do you think companies should be allowed to flout those rules?

Why are some of you red avatars too stupid to see that when you open up free trade with countries that don't have those same standards as us that it will allow companies to undercut us in those areas. You are creating a race to the bottom. So it seems to me either you don't really care about those things, and are only interested in the selfish exploitation of the worlds poor for your own gain, or you are retarded. So which is it?

Hmm, if only there was a trade agreement with a bunch of countries where we enforced higher labor standards. Some sort of pact, maybe. Maybe with countries in the pacific. A Trans-Pacific Pact.

TPP wouldn't have stopped the member countries from using mostly Chinese made parts and then dumping it it in the US. It was written behind closed doors without much input from labor unions and environmental groups. There was no enforcement of updated environmental regulations, and it allowed more companies to move shop to the other member countries. It was a big give away to the investor class.

[Jeffster]

Tariffs are taxes, and bad taxes at that. They are regressive in application. They disrupt market-based calculations on production and marketing. They make doing business more costly.

The benefit goes to well-placed businesses that might have the best lobbyists -- quite possibly with business entities so inefficient that they should either do their manufacturing overseas or fold in bankruptcy.  

Same could be said against raising the minimum wage, or any type of new regulation on businesses.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Please point me to any prominent Democrats who support right to work.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

Please point me to any prominent Democrats who support right to work.

We've got Dems in this very forum who support race-to-the-bottom free trade, a position unthinkable 30 years ago. Give it some time, and Dems will capitulate to neoliberal thinking on that issue.