The Patriot Games of Barack Obama
By Repair Man Jack Posted in Economy — Comments (38) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Promoted by Dan McLaughlin
Senator Barack Obama means it when he says he stands for change. He wants to change the definition of patriotism. He means to redefine what a “Patriotic Corporation” is. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) describes a piece of legislation that he and Senator Obama have brought to us from the economic twilight zone:
I've talked to Barack a lot about his Patriot Corporation Act, which is not trade per se, but it's certainly part of the economic package around globalization. The Patriot Corporation Act has not gotten the attention that I would hope it would. But, basically it says that if you play by the rules, if you pay decent wages, health benefits, pension; do your production here; don't resist unionization on neutral card check, then you will be designated a "Patriot Corporation" and you will get tax advantages and some [preference] on government contracts.
The man refuses to wear the American flag on his lapel, while holding a seat in the US Senate. That, right there should provide ample evidence that he has no business telling anyone how to define patriotism. Idiocy is not only afoot; but mounted on a lightning steed. The Patriot Employer Act of 2007 could become a crowbar by which the Federal Government can not only redefine what a “good” American Corporation is, but also define how effectively the Federal Government can interfere in the business marketplace.
Read on...
Senator Durbin serves as another Jacobin willing to play the pigeon, and help Senator Obama increase the movement of modern America towards a more totalitarian democracy. He also co-sponsored this Neo-Socialist bilge and offered a predictable and risible defense of this indefensible garbage legislation.
Senator Durbin describes the proposed legislation below.
The Patriot Employers legislation would provide a tax credit equal to 1% of taxable income to employers that:
Invest in American jobs, by maintaining or increasing the number of full-time workers in America relative to the number of full-time workers outside of America AND by maintaining corporate headquarters in America if the company has ever been headquartered in America.
Pay decent wages, by paying each worker an hourly wage that would ensure that a full-time worker would earn enough to keep a family of three out of poverty (at least $ 7.80 per hour).
Prepare workers for retirement, by providing either a defined benefit plan OR a defined contribution plan that fully matches at least 5% of worker contributions for every employee.
Provide health insurance, by paying at least 60% of each worker’s health care premiums.
Support the troops, by paying the difference between regular salary and military salary for all National Guard and Reserve employees who are called for active duty AND by continuing their health insurance coverage for the Guard member and his or her family.
All of this sounds relatively benign until the assumptions upon which this rests are examined. A 1% tax break, in and of itself, will not lower the operating costs of any major corporation enough to justify the termination of outsourcing. Outsourcers already take on high level of risk to outsource in the first place.
Nike, for example, risks losing operational control over its supply chain to manufacture Nikes throughout South East Asia. They also have a 15 month production cycle they have to synchronize with a 3-6 month demand cycle that is also seasonal. I wish the operations researcher in charge of optimizing that retail inventory system and thereby managing Nike’s supply chain risk all the luck in the world.
To keep from losing its footwear in the Pacific, Nike had to go into the business of solving non-trivial mathematical scheduling problems and furthermore, set up and monitor an entire shipping network. Nike is now either contracting for, or paying full time salaries to, an additional building full computer programmers and professional mathematicians just to keep track their shoes. Leona Helmsley and Ivana Trump may empathize. Outsourcing is never free.
The point to all of this is simply that Obama’s bill isn’t designed to actually make a corporation comply out of direct economic self-interest. The savings offered by a 1% tax break will not justify Nike insourcing its entire Pacific Rim manufacturing operation. Very few multinational giants will look at this incentive and jump aboard for the sake of the cash infusion alone.
The bill has a much less benign purpose than even that proported by the economic nationalists who seek to subsidize outmoded domestic jobs that would otherwise fall to marketplace attrition. This bill serves as a data marker to help keep a little list; just like the Gilbert and Sullivan character Ko-Ko, in Mikado. Once Senator Obama has his Santa Claus lists of which corporations are naughty, and which ones are nice, the patriot games involving more punitive follow-on legislation can commence.
Cross-Posted At: THE MINORITY REPORT
Wearing a flag on your lapel just shows you're willing to express pride in your country, which has nothing to do with patriotism.
And wherever men are fighting against barbarism, tyranny, and massacre, for freedom, law, and honour, let them remember that the fame of their deeds, even though they may be exterminated, may perhaps be celebrated as long as the world rolls round. ~ Winston Churchill
If it were only refusing to wear a lapel pin, then it would be no big deal. The problem is the whole attitude behind the action. Look at it this way. Chest pains can be an indicator of a heart attack or just indigestion. By themselves, chest pains can be no big deal, but with other indicators they can be a matter of life or death.
Please can someone reassure this foreigner that this loony bill doesn't have a hope of passing house and senate?
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
I know you can't mean Obama since he's a native born citizen. You know he's running for President,right? A little ol' document called the Constitution dictates that only natural born citizens ca be elected President.
Go ahead and loosen up your panties now...
"Do not yield. Do not flinch. Stand up. Stand up with our President and fight. We're Americans. We're Americans, and we'll never surrender. They will."-John McCain
McCain/Rudy 08-kill the terrorists and punch the hippies.
"The man refuses to wear the American flag on his lapel, while holding a seat in the US Senate. That, right there should provide ample evidence that he has no business telling anyone how to define patriotism."
This, right here provides ample evidence that you have no business telling anyone how to define patriotism. Patriotism isn't defined by trinkets. How embarrassing for you.
instead. Thanks for setting me straight Herr Commandant.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
just trinkets right? Apparently you can't tell the difference between parade beads and potent symbols.
_________________
Thou art the Great Cat, the avenger of the Gods, and the judge of words...-Inscription on the Royal Tombs at Thebes
there is abundant cause for suspicion at a proposal like this, given the sponsors of this bill.
That said, I must confess to some sympathy for this idea behind it. It seems to me legitimate to require corporate America to demonstrate its loyalty to the country. The whole trend of globalization is toward the attenuation of national loyalty; even toward making a virtue out of that attenuation.
But of course the prosperity of American Capitalism is dependent upon the structure of law and ordered liberty we have achieved here. Globalization presupposes a strong and well-ordered America, which in turn depends on the virtue and patriotism of her citizens.
Is it truly a heresy on the Right to say that favoring patriotic firms is a valid policy goal?
_____________
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
A business's job is to earn money for it's shareholders. The shareholders, as citizens can be as patriotic as they want.
A lot of the criteria for patriotism in this bill has nothing to do with patriotism. Or at least it is not about patriotism toward the US, it is more patriotism toward the Democratic party.
should be the ones to hold a business enterprise accountable. I've refused to buy from corporations that insult the US in advertisements or who get too into backing the side of social issues I disagree with. If you believe XYZ Inc. is run by commie pukes, buy from PDQ instead and tell all your buddies to do likewise.
One way to be a conservative activst on this is to visit an organization known as grassfire.com. One Million Dads is another group engaged in similar consumer activism.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Those are good options, for sure; and they have worked in the past.
I will say, however, that in my reading, there is nothing in the American political tradition which forbids We the People (operating, of course, through our elected representatives) from insuring the loyalty of even our most powerful corporate citizens. Especially in defense industries, there are plenty of restrictions on the free enterprise of these firms. The free enterprise system is a fine system, but in the hierarchy of values, I do not place it above patriotism.
_____________
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
Companies are not Citizens, not even Corporate Citizens. Their purpose is economic and the government should be staying out of that. Furthermore if the convernment was to start a little list of which US Citizens it deemed patriotic, I don't think you'd be too keen either. It definitely sounds like socialism, arguable national socialism......
And on a technical note, does this fall within 'regulation of interstate commerce' - I'm not so sure.
Corporations are citizens. The law treats a corporation as a distinct "entity" for the purposes of legal agreements, taxation and liability. The problem is not that the government considers corporations citizens but rather that the government thinks it has the right to have so much control over a corporate citizen or an individual citizen.
The problem is government control. The fact is that governments can't and shouldn't keep companies from going overseas in the name of patriotism.
The people should keep their companies patriotic from the bottom-up.
According to polls on realclearpolitics, McCain leads Obama by a close margin in Ohio and only trails by 1 point in Pennsylvania. This is while Obama can do no wrong according to the mainstream media. When his true record comes out later, I do think McCain has a good shot at this thing.
Go Dawgs, Sic em' Woof Woof
I feel a politician elected to important national office has an obligation to adopt the symbology of the nation. To me, it's a part of the job description. Could you imagine a military officer who refused to salute the flag or hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance?
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Yes, this more a truth of political sociology. Nations cannot exist as united entities without common symbols, common traditions, and a common language.
The only question is: should unity come primarily from top-down mandates or from bottom-up activism. For conservatives (and anti-fascists), the answer must be from the bottom-up.
to make a top-down demand upon a Senator. However, I can speak from the conservative grass roots and call him a self-entitled, grandstanding, Anti-American jerk for doing what he did w/ respect to the flag pin.
Refusing to wear it, when holding a high national office, is an offensive form of symbolic speech.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
And wherever men are fighting against barbarism, tyranny, and massacre, for freedom, law, and honour, let them remember that the fame of their deeds, even though they may be exterminated, may perhaps be celebrated as long as the world rolls round. ~ Winst
Democrats always accuse Republicans of doing "evil" things and then turn around and do it themselves. It was true of the politics of personal destruction and its true of "how dare you question my patriotism". If you want to know what Democrats will be doing next year, just listen to what they are accusing Republicans of doing.
Happily accept your overlords.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Putting aside for the moment trying to link corporate decisions to "patriotism", it doesn't even do that. Based on Durbin's little summary the following would apply:
- Company A has successfully outsourced its operations so 90% of its employees (or presumably employees of its subsidiaries) are outside the US, leaving 10% in the US at the head office. As long as company A retains that ratio of US to foreign employees it is a patriotic company and gets a 1% tax break.
- Company B has only engaged in limited outsourcing so 30% of its employees are outside the US, leaving 70% in the US. If Company B terminates 1 US employee, Company B is no longer patriotic and is not entitled to the tax break.
Sure, that makes sense to me.
If you transpose your logic into a multi-dimensional Durbin Space, it's all common sense.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Based on the context here...
Companies have to allow unions
Unions maybe get to use card-check (guaranteeing unionization)
Companies have to hire more Americans--to work in the union.
Companies have to cover all the costs so they can't really bargain them off to the union
Union gets more cash
Union donates more cash to Democrats.
Democrats can buy more flag pins for their lapels.(or not)
More democrats get elected with the extra contributions
That's what I see. looks nasty. I don't like it.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
... that Barack was against corporate welfare. Is this not a version of that?
As for the lapel pin. It isn't that he wasn't wearing it, it was that he refused to wear it.
Do any of you recall what happened to the actors who refused to wear the AIDS ribbon pin at the Oscars a few years back?
If they were deserving of the condemnation that came their way, then surely Obama deserves the same.
If you don't take pride in America, you ahve a logical way to vent sentiment. Don't participate in government!
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
corporations.
I am not opposed to Labor and Management deciding on their own the merits of organizing, but I am opposed to forcing it on all organizations.
Unions can establish a base line for benefits and pay for everyone in the company, and ensure that no one is left behind, but they have a tendency to stifle individual achievement and innovation.
Imagine if the computer and software industries were unionized - would there be an internet?
I do not think it is a coincedence that our most dynamic and innovative industry is the least organized.
Someone should ask Al Gore! You're right about the closed shop aspect of this.
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't fault people for not wearing Chinese-made flag lapels. Oh well.
Frankly I think this bill misses the point. If we're going to punish companies for abandoning our shores, I think it should be in the form of barring them from Federal contracts. IE, Halliburton and it's "So Long, Suckers!" absconding to the UAE.
Maybe we can't stop corporate executives from being cheap, greedy bastards, but at least we wouldn't have to reward their abandonment of America with our tax dollars.
was made in the US of A, baby! Soviet Union Yes!
"I believe we must adjourn this meeting to some other place." - The last recorded words of Adam Smith.
Inspired political grandstanding at that.
It pushes buttons with all of Hillary's core constituencies - hitting outsourcing/offshoring for the white middle class, and fair wages for the Hispanic community. And then it's pro-union bill as an appeal to Edwards voters who are wavering between the candidates. All he needs is something targeted at women voters in there and he has the grand slam. It has about zero chance of becoming law and was never intended to.
Utterly offtopic, I designed and built some of Nike's warehousing and logistics systems in Europe back in the mid-90s. The OP is right, fiendishly sophisticated math to make it all work.
--
Mr. Dodgy is a 'anybody but Clinton' lefty and you should take anything he says with a pinch of salt. And probably a shot of tequila. Or two.
Is is really the job of the government to define what is patriotic and what is not - surely that is a matter for individual conscience (....and the legislature should back off and go back to interviewing baseball players or whatever they do best).
is that a lapel pin should be taken as a sign of patriotism.