Oh look, slavery!
No, no, no, you see TECHNICALLY this isn’t slavery, you’re just forced to either work or starve. You can choose!
I interpreted >proposed house bill as “you will have to have permanent residence to qualify for unemployment” and was completely unsurprised. Im really hoping it means a bill that has been proposed to the House part of the legislative branch
We were literally better off with Trump wtf I hate this country so much how was he less bad
It’s honestly baffling. I knew he was gonna suck but I did think he was gonna be marginally better than Trump. My worry was that whoever followed would be an even worse backlash, like DeSantis. Turns out he’s worse in the moment and in the future!
Oh we’re still going to get the backlash. Chuds have gained no ground on the culture war and they are ready as ever to punish their enemies. We’ll have book burnings within the decade.
Trump could give a fuck about passing anything so long as he could shitpost on Twitter. He bit the hand that fed him in McConnell and the dark money that ran his 2016 campaign.
Biden meanwhile is slavishly beholden to the folk who dark moneyed his win and other centrists in 2020. Biden is an egoless conduit for the donor class and the DNC establishment.
Biden in one year has nominated more TV talking heads and former lobbyists to positions of power than Trump did in two. Only thing Biden hasn’t done is outright familial nepotism.
Only thing Biden hasn’t done is outright familial nepotism.
And honestly as far as corruption styles go, familial nepotism is pretty low on my priority list. At least that only helps a handful of minor ghouls who got their position by being related to someone evil, rather than by being as personally evil as possible themselves. I’d much rather Ivanka Trump than someone from fucking Raytheon or Lockheed
And with someone as incompetent and stupid as Trump, his family tends to be just as moronic and incompetent
What do they mean exactly by “requiring workers to take lower paying jobs?” Is that them saying that unemployment benefits only extend to a certain income level and they’re accidentally saying the quiet part loud by admitting it’s meant to incentivize people taking lower paying work rather than just increasing wages?
Sounds to me like an industrial plant can lay off their entire workforce, put up new job listings at a 30% pay cut, and the state will force you to accept these terms.
We had something similar introduced recently in Australia. It basically means you have to search for work and take any job you are offered or your unemployment will be stopped.
I’ve noticed that a lot of things get tested in the US-allied countries first or around the same time. It might be good to keep an eye on the politics in other 5 eyes countries to get an idea of what direction policies are going.
Use an alternate name on your resume and put in your experience that you helped organize workplace or tenants unions lol
If you get an interview anyway make it very clear that you’re all about workers rights and will immediately try to unionize without saying it.
Maybe you can claim you’re a liberation theologist to your unemployment worker.
I mean the fed said the other week that they don’t want higher wage expectations to be a long-term thing in the economy. All this labor progress we’ve seen happening has happened only because it was allowed to happen. It was happening under the pretense that it is temporary and wages will not continue to go up very much. The general ‘they’ were fine with that idea. Because what has actually changed in labor politics since the pandemic? Are people more organized than before? Not really. We get hopeful and want to chock it up to a sudden rise in militancy and finding our footing, but I don’t think that’s the case. They want wages to rise at the rate of current inflation, not catch up on decades of stale wages. In other words they want min wage to go from $7.50 or whatever to $8.50, not from $7.50 to $15. They will pay $15 or $16 or $18 temporarily, but they won’t tolerate it for long. Because that is cutting into their profits even if you consider increased buying power (and therefore consumption) of the poor. The increased buying power is a bad thing to them because it means a feedback loop of people demanding to be paid more because the cost of goods is higher and that raises the cost of goods which causes more demand for higher pay to match the cost of living.
They know consumption is the engine of the economy but they don’t want consumption to grow too fast because it adds to the cost of doing business. We can all disagree with this idea or how it works, but it’s how capitalists right now are thinking. They’re going to act on how they think. So yes, they’re going to beat wages flat again even if it means bringing on a recession or whatever. This is even the view of your benevolent wonky “government intervention is good actually” liberals. At the end of the day they realize that paying people more on their terms will weaken capitalism’s hold on the country. Even if they don’t express it in those terms or can’t articulate the feeling at all. That’s what is happening.
I’m not trying to be doomer and shit on the recent labor victories. It’s just that we have to realize that we’re still not quite at a level of organization we need to be to counter this. And there is no reform to change it because this is the reform. Now it’s militant labor action or it’s nothing because they’re just going to beat everyone back again and things will go back to an acceptable level of liberalism.
