Sharing - The NEW Mandate

President Obama's talk with the Chamber of Commerce last week (well, I call it a talk, but it really was a lecture - can't take the college professor away from his roots) included some disingenuous (that's a fancy word for BS) language:
President Obama urged American businesses on Monday to “get in the game” by letting loose trillions of dollars being held in reserves, saying that they can help create a “virtuous cycle” of more sales, higher demand and greater profits that will put people back to work and turn around the sluggish economy.
“If there is a reason you don’t believe that this is the time to get off the sidelines — to hire and invest — I want to know about it. I want to fix it,” Mr. Obama said in a speech to business leaders at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Why, whatever reason could they have for not wanting to risk all the cash they have?  Fear of having it confiscated?  Fear of losing it to new regulations?  Fear of another wild swing of the economy taking them back OUT of the gam?

/end sarc

I know this ia a foreign concept for Obama, but the American business world ISN'T in the field of making everyone in government happy - they want to make money for their investors - who, after all, lent them the money to do just that.

Here's an example of how Obama and the business world differ:
help lay the foundation for you to grow and innovate,” by eliminating “barriers that make it harder for you to compete - from the tax code to the regulatory system,” and by completing more trade deals.
In return, the President said he wants businesses to hire more Americans. “Many of your own economists and salespeople are now forecasting a healthy increase in demand. So I want to encourage you to get in the game,” he said. “And as you hire, you know that more Americans working means more sales, greater demand and higher profits for your companies. We can create a virtuous cycle.”
Virtuous cycle? American businesses are doing quite nicely as it is. Their profits are soaring. And one reason they’re doing so well is they’re holding down costs, especially payrolls. So why would they ever agree to add more workers now?
From the standpoint of the nation as a whole more Americans working may mean even higher profits overall. But publicly-traded companies aren’t in the business of spending money to help other companies. To the contrary, they’re competing with one another to show high quarterly earnings in order to boost their share prices. They’ll “get in the game” and begin to hire large numbers of Americans only when it helps their own bottom lines.
What else might the Chamber and its members be worried about - how about MANDATORY profit-sharing?  Link found at American Thinker.

BTW, here's information about a Dept of Labor program that refers workers whose complaints about their employer haven't been resolved (hint:  maybe because they have no case?) to an American Bar Association number.  The cases, we are told, will be handled not out of the goodness of the lawyer's heart (HEE!  HEE!), but on a contingency basis.


The federal government is setting itself up to not only chase the ambulance, but pluck out the body and turn it over to the lawyers - for free.

Don't fret, it's not just for workers - it's the same type of program that already exists for homeowners in foreclosure, veterans, and part-time construction workers (i.e., those whose citizenship status is "NO").

You can't make up this stuff.



Popular posts from this blog


But...The Founding Fathers Were Young, So...