WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (9600)	1/31/2004 1:16:03 PM
From: stockman_scott	of 10965

Help Wanted for the Economy ________________________________ Letter to the Editor The Washington Post Saturday, January 31, 2004 washingtonpost.com I was amazed at your paper's defense of and praise for the Bush administration's "jobless recovery" [editorial, Jan. 27]. According to the editorial, losing good-paying tech and service jobs to countries such as China and India results in less expensive goods and higher stock dividends. So the Americans who received the bulk of the $1.3 trillion tax cut in 2001 and the $320 billion tax cut in 2003 -- which did not result in the promised job creation -- will now reap higher dividends from Americans' loss of their jobs. Hooray for the investor class! Your paper then says that the consumer savings and higher dividends will be plowed back into the economy to create new jobs. Fine in theory, but the more likely scenario is that this combination of revenue will increase demand for less expensive goods produced by low-wage foreign labor. This will create a downward cycle, also known as the giant sucking sound of middle-class jobs being flushed away. Even if new jobs are created domestically, there is no guarantee that the skills of displaced workers will be compatible with the new job opportunities. The editorial further contends that a jobless recovery indicates higher productivity that promise higher wages for U.S. workers; that will not happen if lower-wage workers abroad can achieve that productivity. Finally, your editors ask whether Democrats intend to oppose this sunny view of "offshoring." Answer: yes. The "temporary pain of structural unemployment," as your editorial calls it, is actually the devastation of American families with home mortgages, dental braces to buy, college tuitions to pay and a desire for modest family vacations. Companies should not continue to get tax breaks while sending U.S. jobs overseas. Democrats will not worship at the altar of globalization while the middle class is being destroyed. We still believe in the American dream. The number of unemployed workers is not just a statistic; they are our friends and neighbors. They are Americans, and we owe them better. -- Albert R. Wynn Washington The writer is a Democratic representative from Maryland.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next