Is Venezuela funding UNITE?
May 8th, 2006 at 1:40 pm by David FarrarMatt McCarten admitted a few weeks ago that UNITE was seeking overseas funding for its work.
Trevor Loudon connects some dots with a UNITE organiser being in Venezuela, and asks whether the Venezuelan Government or unions are funding UNITE?
It would be useful for someone to ask UNITE to reveal the sources of their overseas funding.
May 8th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Why would it be useful?
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
so what- if they are -many groups parties and other organisations get help from overseas sources to exist, Unite is doing great work unting young workers who were been taken advantage of due to their youth -Unite is showing young people they do have rights -good stuff no body should be allowed to use their those money or power to abuse the weak and naive.
Vote:Venuezula if you know anything about their current politics you will know they are rapidly spending their oil income not on the rich cats but are ploughing it back into free good education, health and such amenities for their citizens Plus assuring livable good wages are paid for the average citizen -they also are also giving money to help their poorer neighbours so allow them to free them sleves from the interfeering power of the IMF and World Bank
May 8th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
Gauleiter Trevor Loudon uncovers more reds under the bed!!! Bahahahahahaha!!
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Because if they are receiving funding from socialist despots then they might not be treated so favourably by the media. They will no longer be portrayed as the “friend of the worker” but as a pathetic collection of socialist weasels.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:33 pm
Chavez isn’t a despot – but that’s not for want of trying . . .
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
Yep, and Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela has just said that if Opposition parties boycott his elections later in the year, he will have a referendum in which he will ask the people if he should stay president for the next 25 years. Now what sort of leader tries to retain unopposed power for 25 years, and what has become of the countries they have led?
You are going to end up on the wrong side of history again, Paulinem.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
Tell me if they received money from the US say via the CIA would that then be Okay !!! It is common knowledge the CIA has funded all sorts of despots including assisting Sudam to get into and remain in power
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
Kimble, And the moral of the story is don,t be dumb enough to not put up any opposistion at ther next election.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
I can personally guarantee the CIA has never given a cent to Sudam.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
if Opposition parties boycott his elections later in the year, he will have a referendum in which he will ask the people if he should stay president for the next 25 years. Now what sort of leader tries to retain unopposed power for 25 years . . ?
I think you’ve missed the point.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Oh yeah Chriss and how can you personally guarantee that Sudam never received support from the CIA-you have inside knowledge that what the rest of the world widely knows about is not true – stop living in a dream world Sudam was the CIA answer to Iran after the Shar was sent packing -they also ( CIA) interfered into the politics of Chille Indonesia etc etc all replaced legitimate leaders with their own despots
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
Lol Paulinem is the spelling “Shar”
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Of course Unite should reveal their sources of funding for all the reasons given in the post. And if they are a democratic organisation all the more need to front up.
Funny DPF calling for this though as he is such a supporter of anonymous donations to political parties.
That aside, I would also like to see the same applied to the Maxim Institute, Investigate, Ex. Bretheren and a whole pleathor of other shaodwy organisations that seem to crop up from time to time (left and right) and gain unquestioning media coverage.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Kimble that sounds like a CIA story re Chavez. It is widely known that Washington are in a fizz over Chevaz economic policies -they are upset he is taking away their power over many South American countries – I mean they can train and pay for all the terrorist ( oops sorry freedom fighters
thy like in the Camp of America in Georgia -but if the South American people like their president or Govt of the moment then the terroist loose their power to disrupt the Govt of the day -also Washington is terrified the people first policies may spead globaly -including the US itself -where there is a fast growing anti Bush etc movement against the Bushes rich first policies which is causing massive unemplyment and economic ruin in the US.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
Sometimes you have to wonder what world (or worlds) some people inhabit…
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 5:24 pm
“which is causing massive unemplyment and economic ruin in the US.”
Paulinem, reality called and left you another message, “Please get back in touch – URGENTLY. We have found a plot that we think may have once belonged to you, and we have a clue that needs a good home.”
Check back in a decade and see who has the ruined economy. Either way you will probably end up blaming the Americans.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 5:36 pm
“which is causing massive unemplyment and economic ruin in the US.”
Actually pauline the US unemployment rate for April was unchanged from March at 4.7%. The rate of job growth in April slowed – US employers added “only” 138,000 new jobs, instead of the expected 200,000. Meanwhile annual wages rose at the fastest rate in more than 4 and a half years.
My apologies that this doesn’t fit your view of the US. Try reading something other than Michael Moore.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
the story of sadam is widely available, the problem is it is a little too complex to fit in a 5 second soundbite so instead we have people running around with “the CIA owned sadam” or whatever will be convincing to the “sheeple”.
I also wonder if you are saying CIA does it “bad” when Chavez does it “good” as opposed to when CIA does it “good” when chavez does it “bad”.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Yes, well, you could quote facts and figures chris, but my response was much more pithy.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
Chris, kimble et al – please don’t discourage Paulinem – her comic material is priceless – Pauline have you got any “saviour of the people” material you can offer on Turkmenbashi, Pol Pot, or Aleksander Lukashenko?
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 6:04 pm
JohnMac, Winston Peters! You forgot Winston Peters. Oh, hello Cadmus.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
Hello Kimble- The right Hon and myself fully support Paulinem in her stance against those wicked rich dudes in the US. Poodle poodle love love. Evil Brash/Hide etc etc etc.
Two questions – Paulinem – are the young workers that Unite is helping weak or naive? or both?
Vote:Who the fuck is Sudam?
May 8th, 2006 at 6:58 pm
It’s all getting very confusing: Saddam, Sudan, Sudam, Sue’dem, Sooden, Sodden, Sodom – I’m sure one of them is on the CIA’s payroll.
Vote:Unite getting funding from petrodollars is a bit of a gag. I suspect the unknown foreign parties with most interest in Unite are the unions in the evil ol’ USofA itself where imagining a union collective contract at McD’s is like believing in UFOs over arizona…
May 8th, 2006 at 7:00 pm
Alas poor Cadmus, we barely knew thee!
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
I think most of you have lost the point. Chavez is not the posterboy for democracy by any stretch of the imagination, nor is he a leader who has enriched the citizens of his own nation.
He is already building up a huge civilian militia and is more interested in attacking the US (which I know you lefties just love) than looking after the poor who voted for him in the first place.
If this does not upset the left, then why do we hear screams of corruption and bribery when unfounded rumours that the Nats get supported by the US or the Exclusive Bretheren?
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:10 pm
Clint – that’s amazing news – please write more… When will the Venezuelan citizens’ militias be establishing their beach head in Texas?
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:11 pm
for goc and jm.
http://www.vandruff.com/art_converse.html#g
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
Unemployment in US not a issue – have you never head the saying lies lies and damm statistics – you see facts re statistics depend on where the information started from – this is a old political trick -its like for years past NZ Govts said oh we are getting uneployment down its all wonderfull re Statistics – in the NZ labour force survery if you work a hour a week you are considered to be fully empolyed -yeah right – stats never took into consideration those on education courses often usesless courses becasue it better than sitting around on the dole doing nothing aand so the bullshit story went on of how unemployment was going down and down.
So in reality what is really happening to US unemplyment compared to what US Govt Statistics tell you -take a true situation recently in Chicargo -a new Walmart opened advertised for staff ( low paid staff mostly ) needed 500 employees -over 25,000 locals applied ( yes 25,000 no this is not a typo ) -so yeah it all wonderfull as they say lies lies and damm statistics
Bye the way re personal attacks on myself and the typo mistakes I have made -its patheticly borish and a sure sign you have lost the debate when you stopp debating the message and start to attack the messenger -be grown up stop the personal attacking and debate the message I am giving – show you really have got something worth while to say
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:56 pm
If it is so easy to manipulate employment statistics, why was there ever high unemployment?
Statistics have flaws, obviously, but it is laughable how many people think they can prove the statistics wrong by quoting one anecdote.
Do you think it is possible that 25,000 people applied for a job in the new Walmart because Walmart is being forced to provide health insurance for all its staff? Could it be that Walmart is actually a good place to work? If you dont think it is even possible, then you have already closed yourself off from one possibility and your opinion about what the situation “really means” is next to useless.
People stopped debating your message, Paulinem, because your message was too wrongheaded to debate. You think that Chavez is a glorious leader and an economic genius who is bringing prosperity to his people, and instantly suspect a story that says he has made overtures about retaining unopposed power for 25 years is a CIA trick. Such uncritical love and defence for anything is bizarre.
But then you try to tell everyone that the US “really” has massive unemployment and is not just on the brink of economic collapse but has collapsed already! When shown figures saying that what you have said, and therefore have been told, is not true, you insist that it is because the statistics are wrong!
Essentially you have told everyone that you are right, and it is everyone else who is living in a fantasy world.
Do you understand now? Perhaps further illustration will be helpful.
I say, “Chavez has been raping puppies since he was 14 years old.”
You say, “but there is no evidence that he has done so.”
I say, “that is because he is the love child of Hitler and Stalin and the evil forces that currently run the East Howick Ladies Bowling Club (members only Fridays and Monday afternoons) have been able to use their awesome powers to keep any record of the puppy rapage out of the media.”
You sound like either a naive kid or a hippy who is beyond the help of mortal beings. Either way, rest assured you are not saying anything new. The same things you are saying, were said about Russia, Zimbabwe, Cuba, China, Cambodia (thanks Mr Locke) at various points in time. Just remember, this is important as it should keep you humble later in life, you are a fan of Hugo Chavez.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 7:57 pm
Yes – official statistics for things like the unemployment rate in the USA are complex and difficult to get right. That doesn’t mean that there’s some vast capitalist conspiracy behind every statistic, nor does it mean you can be any more convincing with an anecdote selected to support your argument.
Vote:I just thought the typo was a funny – any personal attack will have to wait till after the Chavez militia storms Houston (where the unemployment rate is 5.1% – not counting the venezuelans illegally there looking for a better life).
May 8th, 2006 at 9:16 pm
mj – My gosh you are sounding less repulsive than normal today. nuff said.
Paulinem – The right Hon and myself believe that spelling eras are the result of a unsafe and possibly dangerous mind.
This is completley remenisent of the evil Brash/Hide error should they ever get to power which is now unlikely as the people have spoken and Helen Clark is planning a referendum to put herself in power for the next 25 years.
The CIA are planning on blocking this move as they are now all Exclusive Brethren and wish the evil Brash/Hide cabal in power. Poodle,poodle love love etc etc.
In conclusion – Read before you post – makes you look slightly less of an idiot.
ps- Is Chicargo styley freight?
pps – Brash/Hide evil bad naughty poodle poodle love love
ppps – borish????????? I’m flattered.
Better go to bed now – school tomorrow.
kthxbye
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 9:27 pm
Is anyone able to provide a credible link to the allegation that Chavez wants to remain President, unopposed, for 25 years? Just wondering…
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 9:38 pm
No, but I have a reliable source that confirms he has raped puppies. (Hattip: Ian Wishart)
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
paulinem wrote:
so what- if they are -many groups parties and other organisations get help from overseas sources to exist
Well, the ‘so what?’ is that it’s a little rich coming from the left, who are rather fond of peddling ugly economic xenophobia and muttering about imaginary “American bagmen” funding thew National Party.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 9:56 pm
Okay, I’ve done a bit of googling, but have been able to find any credible report backing up the claim that Hugo Chavez is seeking to put up a referendum that would allow him to rule unopposed for the next 25 years.
Just to be clear, I’m not coming out and calling you a liar, I’d just like to see some evidence because there’s a lot of blatantly false anti-Chavez hysteria and propaganda going around.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 10:15 pm
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-chavez07.html
Is the AP ok with you Tane? It isnt the New York Times, but then again, neither is the New York Times.
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 10:20 pm
Tane – I couldn’t sleep as the right Hon is snoring so I will redip my oar (so to speak of coarse)
Tell me Tane how do these two statements stack up against each other? -
‘I’m not coming out and calling you a liar’ and
‘there’s a lot of blatantly false anti-Chavez hysteria and propaganda going around’
Now I know you may be under the influence of the evil Brash/Hide cabal now that the Exclusive Brethren have taken over the Greens (who did you think your new coleader with a dick was going to be?Thats why Hide is learning to dance. Greens = Dance) but really those naughty CIA types have been spreading all this ‘blatantly false anti-Chavez hysteria and propaganda going around’ and some people such as yourself don’t believe it.
Could you please inform the right Hon and myself as to how you know this ‘hysteria and propaganda’ is ‘blatantly false’???.
The right Hon says you can’t know that it is blantantly false as you are trying to confirm it by using evil rich US search engines. I must admit I to am confused by your use of the evil capitalists computer networks to further your cause. Explain please how you balance this up with your own moral compass.
ps – Do you know what a Sadum is?
pps – do you know if sending packages chicargo is quicker than say FedEx?
ppps – Brash/Hide evil poodle poodle etc etc
Vote:May 8th, 2006 at 10:35 pm
I think its a bit hysterical to want to know where their money comes from. To use the democratic organisation is over simplifying it abit. Sure it would be interesting to know so we could gab about it and allude to things over a beer but it does not change anything about their organisation and the democracy of it.
Vote:Gosh this is a werid conversation.
May 9th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
Well, having hung out with some of the Unite people, I have to say that if they are getting funding, it sure isn’t very much.
I think the point Pauline is making is that governments do have a tendency to interfere with the interenal affairs other countries – mostly secretly, or at least without making a big fuss about it. Now, if you’re going to put up a song and dance about Venezuela, then you should equally put up a fuss about interferance from America, Europe etc.
The main point being is that if we were as intelligent as we claimed to be then we wouldn’t be judging actions based on who made them, what part of the political spectrum they’re on, and what other actions they have made. I mean, what does Chavez making this 25 year claim have to do with his aleged funding of UNITE? As if proving that Chavez is a ‘despot’ means UNITE are somehow implicated? Huh? Stick to the argument.
It’s not that I really care much, but it’s really not very interesting to read, when you’re scanning through looking for actual, you know, ‘ideas’.
Also: what is “are the young workers that Unite is helping weak or naive? or both?” suppossed to mean? I think the point is that they are weak, and that’s why Unite is making attempts to organise them into a union. And given that they’ve been quite successful in getting themselves wage increases and better working conditions, I think that those without Unite they’d be much weaker/more naive.
Try to think before you post.
If you can.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
Thanks for the link. Though I must say it’s not entirely clear in the article whether he’s asking his people to elect him for a 25 year term, or whether he wants to get rid of term limits so that he can stand for election over the next 25 years.
Thanks for your abuse, GhostofCadmus. If you would be a little less hysterical, you would realise that I was not accusing any poster of “blatantly false anti-Chavez hysteria and propaganda”. I was simply saying that as there is a lot of this going around, I am very cautious of accepting allegations against Chavez until I have seen some credible evidence. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
PS Cadmus, having actually READ the link your mate Kimble has posted, it’s quite obvious that it says nothing like you have claimed. In fact, it specifically points out that Chavez was not saying he was going to try and pass some specific legislation for him to stay in for the next 25 years. It’s no doubt that he’s like to, but that’s a hell of a long way to passing a law having it become a reality.
I mean, did you expect us not to read it?
Also, some people really need to stop coming up with pathetic ‘straw man’ arguements where you put words into peoples mouths. I don;t think anyone ever claims about any Chavex story being a ‘CIA trick’. I think the point is that the 25 year story as you have claimed it to be is simply NOT TRUE, or at least strongly misleading (and I think you know it). Obviously the CIA aren’t really needed with people like yourself just making up whatever they want. Hysteia and Propaganda? More like just your garden variety lazy rhetoric from bloggers who’s primary interest in trying to feel clever about themselves.
And what’s with this crap about hassling people over their spelling? Although, I guess your point is that if Paulinem mis-types some words then obviously Chavez is a terrible despot who will bring misery to his people, not to mention members of UNITE.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
Turnaround is fair play, bilgepump. The Right have had to put up with the (baseless) accusations that National party policy is written in the US by the Republican party for ages. And here we have a Left organisation actively seeking funds from a country which is slowly slipping into a socialist quagmire.
You say that ideas are important and that we may have lost sight of UNITE’s ideas. I reckon the fact that UNITE is seeking funds from Venezuela gives us a vital insight into their ideas. UNITE will be seeking funds from organisations with whom they share an ideology. What goes on in Venezuela can be attributed to the ideology that UNITE and Venezuela share.
I am not saying that the Venezuelan government will be dictating what UNITE says and does. I dont think anyone has made that argument. But by seeking funds from there, UNITE have revealed a kinship with the new Venezuelan socialist movement and its ideology.
This isnt about a foreign entity controlling a domestic one. It is about the domestic entity revealing its true colours.
The whole Paulinem tangent was simply a response to her moonbattery and had nothing to do with the original argument.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
kimble,you’r spending way to much time over at lgf
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:20 pm
If George W Bush was to try and change the law on term limits, if he was to even speculate about doing so, what would your reaction be?
“I don;t think anyone ever claims about any Chavex story being a ‘CIA trick’.” – bilgepump
“Kimble that sounds like a CIA story re Chavez.” – Paulinem
Quotes from the article,
“I am going to ask you, all the people, if you agree with Chavez being president until 2031,” he said.”
“I would call a national referendum [if Opposition parties boycott the elections] to have the people decide if I can continue here indefinitely or if I have to go after six years,” he said.”
HIGHLIGHTS
“until 2031″
“continue here indefinitely”
I dont know how you could get the idea that the story is simply NOT TRUE, bulgepimp. The author of the article concedes the possibility of confusion over Chavez’s rhetoric. But this is a long way from “specifically point[ing] out that Chavez was not saying he was going to try and pass some specific legislation for him to stay in for the next 25 years.”
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Again kimble speaks shit. When did anyone actually say that Unite is seeking funds from Venezuala? When did anyone ever say Venezuala was slipping into a socialist quagmire? Chavez won the election, their economy is one of the fastest growing in the region (and now its stable), his govt is funding services in venezuala that didn;t exist before, his govt is funding healthcare for the poor throughout sth america, his govt is subsidising heating oil for poor in the US, etc etc the list goes on. Now correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that a lot better than using all the oil profits for your own personal benefit… sorry, Kimble, I realised you’d prefer that wouldn’t you?
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:53 pm
I don’t see the big deal about term limits myself. NZ’s Prime Minister is Head of State in all but name, and there is no limit on our Prime Ministerial term.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
LOL – you’re right, she did type that. Big apologies. I was wrong. Well, anyway, I don’t think it’s the CIA either. Just stuff taken out of context, mainly by bloggers/commentators.
Fair enough point about the kinda stupid rhetoric about US creating National policy. Though there’s no doubt they excerpt trade pressure to get us to do what they want us to. I think the question was whether National would cave or not, and there was some doubt in that regard.
Anyway, you’re taking those AP quotes way out of context. The important fact that you’re leaving out is that Chavez is saying that he wants to have a referendum to get rid of the electoral law that says the president can only apply for democratic election 2 times (similar to the American law). So that it would then be possible for him to run democratically for president potentially for the next 25 years. He’s not saying there’ll be no elections, and that he’ll be some kind of permanent dictator, which is what you guys are implying.
And FFS it’s not like he’s even arbitarily deciding to change the laws – he’s holding a referendum. What’s wrong with that? I mean, if Bush decided to hold a referendum saying that he’s like the people to decide if they want to change the term limit, then so what?
Now, as far as the Unite/Venezuela thing goes, I don’t quite understand what you mean by true colours? I mean, UNITE can hardly claim to have been hiding its agenda. What true colours are you talking about? That they want to improve conditions for youth workers? I mean, unless they’re buying guns with the venezuela money (assuming it exists) I don’t get what you’re saying.
PS sorry for my unneccasily grumpy sounding post earlier. I needed food. I’ve had some good socialist baked beans, so better now.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
And to quote you, the thing that stared it all:
“Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela has just said that if Opposition parties boycott his elections later in the year, he will have a referendum in which he will ask the people if he should stay president for the next 25 years.”
Now, that’s fine. Although it does imply a dictatorship rather than simply continued democratic elections without the term limit, which is equally likely.
But then when you go on say:
“Now what sort of leader tries to retain unopposed power for 25 years, and what has become of the countries they have led?”
You’re just being intentionally misleading. Hence, ‘not true’ i.e. ‘crap’. What other way can you look at it? I mean, if Chavez used the words: ‘no elections until 2031′ then you’d be right. But he says nothing near that.
Perhaps there is some confusion the issue of what you feel he was implying or not, but either way, the above quote is not true given the facts that we know. It is, frankly, assuming guilt without any facts. I feel it’s the better option to assume that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of bullshit arguements like ‘UNITE have revealed a kinship with the new Venezuelan socialist movement and its ideology’ i.e. supports a socialist dictator who is putting himself unnoppsed in power for 25 years.
Which sucks, don’t you think?
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
This got boring since Paulinem stopped posting. I laughed so hard a little bit of wee escaped.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
PS Kimble in answer to your question:
‘If George W Bush was to try and change the law on term limits, if he was to even speculate about doing so, what would your reaction be?’
If he did it by referendum it would be exactly what I said: ‘so what?’.
As I said in my original post: ‘The main point being is that if we were as intelligent as we claimed to be then we wouldn’t be judging actions based on who made them, [and] what part of the political spectrum they’re on…’
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 5:17 pm
Seems Bilgey old boy that UNITE is holding sway over young,naive and weak fast food workers.
It also seems Bilgey old boy that some from the left believe that the CIA is responsible for the reportage of the AP.
These are undeniable facts.
The right Hon and myself believe that you should not speak (or write) unless you know what you are talking about. You Bilgey have let the right Hon and myself down in this regard. WE are very disappointed in your behaviour over this issue.
I note that Tane has not explained himself in regard to using the machinery of the evil capitalist right to search for confirmation that the evil capitalist CIA is responsible for misaligning the completely blatantly innocent Chavez. The right Hon and myself are very disappointed with Tane as well.
This has not been a good day for the left.
Brash/Hide evil cabal poodle poodle love love etc
Is Sudam in cohoots with chicargo?
Will the Venezuelain Milita really invade Texas?
Is Jono over the age of consent?
Will Paulinem ever ever post to this site again and if she does will she spell check before hitting the fateful button?
These questions and many others may or may not be answered.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
you idiot
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
bulgepimp, you should not speak ill of the dead
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 7:00 pm
So my posting that US was not booming was a joke – I think the joke is on few on this list -none is so blind who do not want to see -read this article and weep you are so wrong about US
Life in the Bush Economy: Fat, Drunk and Broke
A Nation of Waitresses and Bartenders
By Paul Craig Roberts
05/08/06 — The Bureau of Labor Statistics payroll jobs report released May 5 says the economy created 131,000 private sector jobs in April. Construction added 10,000 jobs, natural resources, mining and logging added 8,000 jobs, and manufacturing added 19,000. Despite this unusual gain, the economy has 10,000 fewer manufacturing jobs than a year ago.
Most of the April job gain –72%–is in domestic services, with education and health services (primarily health care and social assistance) and waitresses and bartenders accounting for 55,000 jobs or 42% of the total job gain. Financial activities added 26,000 jobs and professional and business services added 28,000. Retail trade lost 36,000 jobs.
During 2001 and 2002 the US economy lost 2,298,000 jobs. These lost jobs were not regained until early in February 2005. From February 2005 through April 2006, the economy has gained 2,584 jobs (mainly in domestic services).
The total job gain for the 64 month period from January 2001 through April 2006 is 7,000,000 jobs less than the 9,600,000 jobs necessary to stay even with population growth during that period. The unemployment rate is low because millions of discouraged workers have dropped out of the work force and are not counted as unemployed.
In 2005 the US had a current account deficit in excess of $800 billion. That means Americans consumed $800 billion more goods and services than they produced. A significant percentage of this figure is offshore production by US companies for American markets.
The US current account deficit as a percent of Gross Domestic Product is unprecedented. As more jobs and manufacturing are moved offshore, Americans become more dependent on foreign made goods. This year the deficit could reach $1 trillion.
The US pays its current account deficit by giving up ownership of its existing assets or wealth. Foreigners don’t simply hold the $800 billion in cash. They use it to acquire US equities, real estate, bonds, and entire companies.
The federal budget is also in the red to the tune of about $400 billion. As Americans have ceased to save, the federal government is dependent on foreigners to lend it the money to operate and to wage war in the Middle East.
American consumers are heavily indebted. The growth of consumer debt is what has been fueling the economy. Social Security and Medicare are in financial trouble, as are many company pension plans. Decide for yourself–is this the economic picture of a superpower that can dictate to the world, or is it the picture of a second-rate country dependent on foreigners to finance its consumption and the operation of its government?
No-think economists make rhetorical arguments that the decline of US manufacturing employment reflects higher productivity from technological improvements and not a decline in US manufacturing per se. George Mason University economist Walter Williams recently ridiculed the claim that US manufacturing jobs are moving to China. Williams asks how the US could be losing manufacturing jobs to China when the Chinese are losing jobs faster than the US: “Since, 2000, China has lost 4.5 million manufacturing jobs, compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S.”
The 4.5 million figure comes from a Conference Board report that is misleading. The report that counts was written by Judith Banister under contract to the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and published in November 2005 (www.bls.gov/fls/chinareport.pdf). Banister’s report was peer reviewed both within the BLS and externally by persons with expert knowledge of China.
Chinese manufacturing employment has been growing strongly since the 1980s except for a short period in the late 1990s when layoffs resulted from the restructuring and privatization of inefficient state owned and collective owned factories. To equate temporary layoffs from a massive restructuring within manufacturing with US long-term manufacturing job loss indicates extreme carelessness or incompetence.
Banister concludes: “In recent decades, China has become a manufacturing powerhouse. The country’s official data showed 83 million manufacturing employees in 2002, but that figure is likely to be understated; the actual number was probably closer to 109 million. By contrast, in 2002, the Group of Seven (G7) major industrialized countries had a total of 53 million manufacturing workers.”
The G7 is the US and Europe. In contrast to China’s 109,000,000 manufacturing workers, the US has 14,000,000.
When I was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration, the US did not have a trade deficit in manufactured goods. Today the US has a $500 billion annual deficit in manufactured goods. If the US is doing as well in manufacturing as no-think economists claim, where did an annual trade deficit in manufactured goods of one-half trillion dollars come from?
If the US is the high-tech leader of the world, why does the US have a trade deficit in advanced technology products with China?
There was a time when American economists were empirical and paid attention to facts. Today American economists are merely the handmaidens of offshore producers. Apparently, they follow President Bush’s lead and do not read newspapers–thus, their ignorance of countless stories of US manufacturers moving entire plants and many thousands of US engineering jobs to China.
Chinese firms, including state owned firms, have numerous reasons, tax and otherwise, to understate their employment. Banister’s report gives the details.
Banister points out that the excess supply of labor in China is about five to six times the size of the total US work force. As a result, there is no shortage of workers in China, nor will there be in the foreseeable future.
The huge excess supply of labor means extremely low Chinese wages. The average Chinese wage is $0.57 per hour, a mere 3% of the average US manufacturing worker’s wage. With first world technology, capital, and business knowhow crowding into China, virtually free Chinese labor is as productive as US labor. This should make it obvious to anyone who claims to be an economist that offshore production of goods and services is an example of capital seeking absolute advantage in lowest factor cost, not a case of free trade based on comparative advantage.
American economists have failed their country as badly as have the Republican and Democratic parties. The sad fact is that there is no leader in sight capable of reversing the rapid decline of the United States of America.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 7:14 pm
Bilgey , Bilgey, Bilgey Why make a bad day worse?
In the immortal words of that tower of intellectual probity Paulinem -
‘its patheticly borish and a sure sign you have lost the debate when you stopp debating the message and start to attack the messenger -be grown up stop the personal attacking and debate the message I am giving ‘
Of course ‘Borish’ should have two o’s, Stopp only one p, grown etc etc etc, but lets not get hung up on spelling we might think that Chavez’s milita will never invade Texas(not in 25 years anyway).
The right Hon and I would just like to use this moment to reconsider our support of the left in light of these attacks from the lower pumps.This behaviour smacks of the evil Brash/Hide cabal in cohoots with the CIA and the Greens.
poodle poodle love love etc
DISCLAIMER – I am not Cadmus. Cadmus is banned from this site. Cadmus would be very naughty to be commenting here. To repeat I am not Cadmus I am
THEGHOSTOFCADMUS
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
Or you could have just posted the link.
And you didnt say America was not booming, Paulinem, you said it was in economic ruin.
Paul Craig Roberts? A Reaganite and National Review editor? If even HE thinks the US is in the shit…! Oh wait, this is the same Paul Craig Roberts who wrote the article “Impeach Bush Now” despite there never really being a justifiable reason TO impeach the current President.
That article contains this cute synopsis of Lefty moonbat talking points,
“Bush has got away with lies and an illegal war of aggression, with outing CIA agents, with war crimes against Iraqi civilians, with the horrors of the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo torture centers, and now with the destruction of New Orleans.”
You would have been better off quoting Krugman, not much though.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 7:40 pm
Why did Cadmus get banned?
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
He annoyed me
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 8:23 pm
“…despite there never really being a justifiable reason TO impeach the current President.”
Yeh right.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
Further to previous, the sooner the Deciderer is impeached, the better. Hard to understand why anyone believes otherwise, it’s so obvious.
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 10:04 pm
Well, if that is the best you can do reid i guess i will have to concede that there really isnt a justifiable reason to impeach the current President.
HA! See what I did there?
Vote:May 9th, 2006 at 10:13 pm
Laughably you have linked to an ONLINE OPINION POLL reid!! So basicly one of your arguments amounts to either a lot of people WANT him impeached, or a few people REALLY REALLY want him impeached! Either way it is utterly meaningless because it doesnt mean he has actually done anything impeachable! Pathetic!
reid – “Impeach him because I says so dammit!”
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 6:51 am
Yes Kimble, it’s a mix of real reasons and humour (I also linked to a montage of signs), just to illustrate the general scene within the US. That wasn’t my best shot by any stretch, it was 20 mins of scanning around for a few appropriate links. So imagine what I’d find if I really tried. If you bother to read any of them you’ll find there are several substantial issues any one of which could serve as the vehicle.
The Deciderer will be impeached after the mid-terms if the Dems get in which they will, baring a major terrorist incident, not because of Democrat bias but because he and Cheney, Rumsfield, Rice, Rove, Libby, Bolton, Wolfowitz and the rest of the cabal are the worst administration ever inflicted on the great American republic.
That’s been clear since the early days of his administration to those with eyes to see. The American people have been slowly realising that, and now he’s at 31% approval and falling. The only thing that can save him is a major terrorist incident.
Worst. President. Ever.
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 9:10 am
“fast growing anti Bush etc movement against the Bushes rich first policies which is causing massive unemplyment and economic ruin in the US”
Paulinem – the US has an unemployment rate of 4.7% which is lower than during the dotcom boom of the 90′s. It has just announced a very healthy GDP quarter growth that equates to an annual growth rate of 4.8% (compared to NZ at a virtual standstill). The Dow Jones is 100 points away from it’s record high (NASDAQ as well) reflecting rising corporate profits and 200,000 new jobs are being created every MONTH. Wow – I’d love to have those ‘problems’.
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 10:24 am
“The only thing that can save him is a major terrorist incident.”
Save him from what? WHAT has he specifically done which warrants impeachment? The wire tapping doesn’t, that was legal. The hysteria over ‘lies’ which led to the Iraq invasion are little more than lefty wishful thinking.
You may not think he is a good president, but he isnt a criminal one (no matter how much you would like to believe it, and no matter how much you murder the facts to make others believe it). Poll ratings are meaningless, he cannot be reelcted and impeachment isnt something which is done to remove an unpopular president, a recall is.
You spent 20 minutes and still couldnt find ONE definitively impeachable offense. The only people who are still talking about impeachment as a realistic option are the fanatics.
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 10:46 am
Worst. President. Ever.
This really annoys me. Bush is small fry compared to the utter disaster that was Reagan. Bush may have started wars, shreded the constitution and divided the country but the chances of him destroying the entire world are pretty remote – with Reagans brain dev by mental illness and his absolute belief in the end of days that was always on the cards.
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 11:13 am
Reagan? WTFFF? Carter! Does anyone remember Jimmy Carter? FFS! Does anyone remember anything before 1980?
Vote:May 10th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Yeah Reagan was such a disaster…forced the USSR into bankruptcy, reined in the inflation of the Carter years, gave America back its pride and self belief…truly one of the great presidents…compared to Carter who was and remians an idiot do gooder to this day…
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 10:11 am
Two words: Iran/Contra.
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 10:50 am
Two more words: Jimmy Carter
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
How about: Christian fundamentalism.
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
How about: Religious Bigotry?
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
Kimble:
“Reagan? WTFFF? Carter! Does anyone remember Jimmy Carter? FFS! Does anyone remember anything before 1980?”
On the subject of FFS – dude, how old were you in 1979, assuming you were even born?
I love the way you guys pretend that you’re some kind of damned first person experts in the field of… well, ‘everything’ when the reality of anyone looking at your arguments for 2 minutes can see that your ‘intellectual prowess’ consists of simply taking every event or figure of history, figuring out whether it fits out into ‘left’ or ‘right’, and then banging on with half-assed decontextualised factiods (if not simply outright rhetoric)obviously gleaned from other blogs to make the case for whatever ‘side’ you’re on. I’m not saying it’s not common practice, but it’s still pretty fucking sad. Have some thoughts of your own for once and grow the fuck up.
To quote Bertrand Russell (from memory)
‘The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are all so certain of themselves, while the wise are so full of doubt.’
…although, maybe I’m wrong…
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Nice contribution bulge. How long did it take you to figure out the best way to stretch “God, everyone is so stupid except me!” into a one hundred word blog-comment-wank?
People like you mightn’t have any respect (as well as knowledge and understanding) of history, but to project that onto others is quite pathetic.
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 6:09 pm
Well, if you replace the word
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
25% of people use percentages to sound smarter than they really are. This increases to 100% when they use the handle ‘bilgepump’. Burned.
Vote:May 11th, 2006 at 7:14 pm
Lower pump – The right Hon and myself have put together some percentages for you just to get you back on track and away from your own very obvious problems.
Unite is lording it over weak,naive fast food workers – 100%
Some left wing ideologists believe that the CIA run AP – 100%
Chicargo is actually a city in the US just spelt wrong – 100%
Chances of you admitting you are wrong and that maybe there are some people out there that know quite alot more than you – 0%
Chances of Tane ever answering our question as to his use of evil US corporate systems and thier place in his moral makeup – 0%
Chances of Kimble being born in 1979 – 80%
Chances of Kimble being smarter than you – 110%
Chances of your attention span lasting 2 minutes – Taken your pills – 60% – not taken your pills – 23.667%
Chances that you will YET again tell everyone to –
a) grow up
b) think for themselves
c) post some bullshit quote of someone elses thinking – 100%
Chances of my three legged chicken having three legged chicks – 71.25%
Remember the influence of the Brash/Hide/Greens/CIA evil cabal is spreading its tentacles throughout our society. Your incivism can only help those tentacles spread.
I AM
THEGHOSTOFCADMUS
Vote:May 12th, 2006 at 9:33 pm
Worst. President. Ever.
Vote: