Home | About | Donate

Democrats’ ‘Better Deal’ Platform Isn’t Anything Working People Haven’t Been Sold Already


#1

Democrats’ ‘Better Deal’ Platform Isn’t Anything Working People Haven’t Been Sold Already

Kevin Gosztola

Over the past eight months, the Democratic Party has floundered and sputtered around while trying to develop an agenda that can convince citizens they are a clear alternative to President Donald Trump. What Democrats have mostly done is unleash volleys of accusations as if this somehow beats back the danger of Trump. But now, Senator Chuck Schumer has announced the Democrats have “A Better Deal” for citizens that they plan to unveil.


#2

I find it remarkable that Schumer considers tax breaks for businesses as a “tool for workers”, and can say that with a straight face.

While reading this I wondered what the performance record of the past versions of this idea has been, especially because “unfilled jobs” is probably a subjective notion for employers, and because today’s employers seem more interested in getting their remaining employees to work harder and longer hours than in filling all their on-paper job positions. Employers certainly have less incentive to train and hire new people than unemployed or underemployed workers have to get training.

Anyhow, I came across another article that links to a book by Gordon Lafer that tracks the miserable performance of these job-training tax breaks dating back to at least 1982:

“Job training has long been promoted as a central policy response to poverty and unemployment. Both Democrats and Republicans have trumpeted training as the answer to everything from welfare to NAFTA. The Job Training Charade provides a comprehensive critique showing that training has been a near-total failure. Even more dramatically, the book shows how politicians have ignored repeated reports of the program’s failure, and have kept funding a policy they know cannot work.”


#3

Establish Dems in this forum often crow that if you don’t vote for The Lesser of Two Evils, you end up with Republicans.

To which I reply: If I do vote LOTEs, I might end up with Democrats.

So I vote for neither evil and work toward ending the chokehold known as the duopoly.


#4

Then you help no one but you can enjoy the complacency of your fantasy. When do progressives face the fact that virtually none of us ever want to vote for Democrats? Do you see Trump up there and what he is doing? Did you choose to not vote for the duopoly like you say? Then you helped Trump gain the office. Was Hillary unpopular and a paramount example of ‘more of the same’ politics? Yes she was! Trump however is far far worse of a disaster. Far worse!.

You need to work to break the stranglehold of the no term limits oligarchy we call the duopoly… some call it Congress! But stop with the fantasy righteousness because not voting against the Republicans is what the Republicans ask of the left. Just stay home or vote for some fringe group etc. To Repubs the only important thing is that you don’t vote for Dems. Maybe you should return the favor?


#5

Spoken like the establishment dems I cited in my comment above. Bravo. Keep voting for the LOTEs–it’s obviously working very well. And by very well, I mean at suppressing voter turn out.

In the meantime, I’ll look for candidates who earn my vote. Or not vote.

And we already have term limits. They’re known as voting the bums out of office.


#6

Okay you are just going on without saying much except telling people not to vote. Do you see Trump up there? Do you absolve yourself of having any part in it? I am an independent and fought damn hard for Bernie.

We do not have term limits.

I guess details aren’t important to you. In other words it is all the same right? Well it isn’t! Term limits are laws not attitudes.


#7

Absolve myself? I wear sending you democrats a message as a badge of honor.

Not that you or they will learn anything from it. Witness, the Better Deal of repackaged “Staying the Course!”

You know who felt the ugly sting of term limits? The 60+ Dems who were voted out of the House in 2010. Yep, their terms were limited.


#8

What an excellent analysis and conclusion.


#9

Great link, dahlia. been reading that source frequently of late.

And truly, I’m convinced that the Ds would prefer to lose as centrist corporate lapdogs, than win as liberals.


#10

We the People, must go with NIMA, National Improved Medicare for All - to shake the corporate coup in progress! ALL IN NO ONE OUT = PROGRESSIVE! TO HAPPEN, We the People must coalesce around NIMA. Eliminate the corporate “it” shills in the Dems (In the other duopoly party, that would mean the entire repub nightmare)! lol

The Dem “it” corporate hogs at the trough are numerous: Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein, etc. This leaves Raul Grijalva from here in Arizona, Tulsi Gabbard, Bernie Sanders, Keith Ellison, Nina Turner, etc. A third party split right now, would mean CORPORATE FASCISM WITH WORSE THAN TRUMP - Try senator cruz for starters! = mass emigration from here, even if we have to walk and swim OUTA HERE - and punch a damn hole in the border wall to ask for refugee status in Mexico!!


#11

Kevin is great, isn’t he? And, the Democratic Party isn’t, is it?
Many Progressive groups wanted a 21st Century New Deal 2.0, if you would. It was actually called something like that and presented to the Dims pretty much like that. Alas, they were put down.
At Sanders events during the primaries, small and large in Portland ( 27-30K strong crowds ), this was talked about with some regularity.
Sanders won the state 57-43%, yet there was former Gov. Roberts ( she was seen on Rachel Maddow pluggin’ away sometimes ) the night of the primary, saying on TV, it doesn’t matter that Bernie won.
Now, she and Hillary don’t matter!
That’s how it works.


#12

Democrats didn’t endorse Alan Grayson from Florida in the Senate race and they didn’t support Bernie. People who would have won if the Democratic Party hadn’t made choices contrary to the will of progressives. Democrats are as afraid of progress as are Republicans. We need a progressive party with vision not a Republican and Democratic party that supports the status quo. Status quo must go.


#13

The Democrats Double Down on a “Double Raw Deal” for the Amerikan people! Look out folks, here comes another democratic shitlog, and they want you to chew on this one the same way you’ve chewed on all of the rest of them! Let’s hear a big YUM! One of these days the fools will learn. Hope it’s before it’s too late!


#14

You’re right, SkepticTank, an Ethical person, when confronted with Evil, in any form, decides : “I can’t.”


#15

And if they have the time and energy, they work to replace evil instead of concluding–out of sheer lack of imagination or pure cowardice–that evil is the best we can do.

A message to establishment Dem posters here: When, over the course of eight months, you tell us it was the Russians, Bernie Bros, and Comey who cost you the election, and then Chuck Schumer suddenly changes course and admits that Hillary and the Dem leadership need to own the fact that their base no longer knows what they stand for…

You might have the good grace to acknowledge his point.

Why do I offer this message? To make clear that people like me haven’t abandoned your party in droves out of spite or sexism…but precisely because your party stands for next to nothing outside of corporate servitude. If my choices are the Republican headlong rush into oligarchy, or the Democratic slow crawl into oligarchy, I’ll continue choosing none of the above. Pragmatism does not require me to play nice with corporate lapdogs.


#16

Thank you for reading.