Home | About | Donate

Revealed: The Chamber of Commerce Strategy to Kill Empathy of Its Members


Revealed: The Chamber of Commerce Strategy to Kill Empathy of Its Members

Jon Queally, staff writer

Did you know that a high percentage of powerful business executives represented by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or its more local affiliates actually support an increased minimum wage, paid sick days for employees, extended maternity and paternity leave, and other progressive policies that benefit workers and families?

If you didn't, there's a reason for that.


The Chamber of Coerce


There are some really evil people in leadership positions.


It think it is outrageous," Graves continued, "how the public and the press have been misled that businesses oppose these policies.

What a bunch of Horse Manure.

So unless it is leaked, our poor poor press has no way to find out, they are so misled.

If the support ratio is 80% - 8% it would hardly take a blood hound to find the story.

The Press is not Misled, rather the Press is Well Paid to Ignore the Truth.


Nice to see this. But, don't give the media a pass on this. They know WTF the deal is. Take a look at any staked vinyl banner on the edge of anysmalltown, USA, heralding any upcoming parade, festival, sponsored by the local CofC etc and you'll see a large Media outlet as a sponsor. Like government, plenty of journalists move in & out of the Chamber or county economic development departments for lucrative positions. This river and roots of capitalism run deep.


Maybe with such a rise in callousness, greed, war, and violence in general, that the empathy thingy-part of our brain is being phased-out--naturally....?


...there is no force in America in recent years that has "spent more time and effort to keep wages low than the U.S. Chamber of Commerce...

It really breaks my heart how hard the big Eichmanns have to work to turn the the other capitalists into little Eichmanns. Boo hoo.



sorry, meant to reply instead of "like." I think empathy comes more from the wisdom of the heart as opposed to the presumed "logical, rational" mind. it's likely that the lack of empathy from the controllers will ultimately be the catalyst that ushers in a resurgence of empathy.


i don't necessarily think the two are mutually exclusive. and "power," as is defined by this reality field we live in, is grossly skewed and perverted. true "power" has nothing to do with having dominion over anything.
from my perspective, that is.


It is both exhilarating and frightening watching the whole sick façade melt before our very eyes. Thank you Bernie, and grudgingly, thank you Donald Trump.

And thanks to CD's John Queally - again - for another excellent piece of work.

I don't know how the CoC was originally founded, but I believe many like myself thought they were concerned with the small to medium businesses in our local communities. But with the stories that have been carried here of the last decade or so it is obvious that the CoC has been co-opted (along with many other organizations) to do the bidding of mega-corporations. What is reported here should not be surprising to regular CD readers. What is shocking is the open depravity of these blood-suckers.


As I mentioned in response to the other article on this topic the conclusions drawn here are wrong and premised on a falsehood.

The reason the ALEC policies do not seem to support the words of those CEO's that were polled is that the latter is worried about PR. They join ALEC so that they can separate PR from what is in fact policy.

If they wanted higher wages for employees or sick leave or paternity leave they would offer it. No laws prevent them from offering such benefits.Ask ANY employer/Ceo "do you believe in a livable wage for your employees" ? and ALL will answer yes.

They answer those polls as progressives because they want to look like good guys to the public at large. The answers they give to such questions will then go up on their websites and people will perceive said firm as being "progressive" and one that treats its employees well. It PR and little more.

Again go to Wal Marts web site and review the stuff they have on career opportunities. What that website states does not reflect the reality.


Power corrupts; absolute power... is pretty cool. That the CoC pulls this
string is no surprise.


And again, respectfully, I disagree with that conclusion. Equating Malwart or McDognuts with the ones polled is erroneous. The reasons I say this are best described by JK Galbraith in Economics and the Public Purpose. The "Planning System" as opposed to those subject to the vagaries and coercion of "the free market."


A yearly encrypted online referendum to set a cap on personal wealth and share the cap excesses equally would fix almost everything without any taxes or other laws necessary. No politicians, no problems.


Than you answer me this.

What legislation prohibits any firm in the USA from offering said benefits today?

If 80 percent of CEOs believed workers should have paid maternity leave than 80 percent of firms should offer it,

I am not speaking of just Wal mart.

Microsoft and Apple both have seen an erosion of workers benefits with cost cutting initiated from the top and with jobs being outsourced.

Can you tell me through what process an ALEC forces those firms to make the decisions they do?

When GM closes down a factory in the USA and opens one in Mexico where wages and benefits low or non existent, when a nike gets its shoes made by child labourers in India or Apple it's iPhones in China, where exactly are these progressive policies? Now this not to say no such firms exist. Indeed there a number that DO implement such policies but these firms also tend not to join ALEC begging the question as to why a progressive CEO would join that group.


Actually, Microsoft and Apple does provide their upper level engineers with generous benefits - just not the lower level employees.

But yes, I do agree with you about the conclusions of this article. The "small business" owners I have known personally get almost apoplectic at any talk about unions or other stuff that might force them to provide better pay or benefits.


Thanks for the suggestion.


Is this the book you recommended? "The Sociopath Next Door" by Martha Stout


There is no legislation preventing any employer from offering or providing said benefits, but there is the reality of the system in which they must operate. In the no-holds-barred, winner-take-all world of concentrated wealth and power many who would operate more empathetically would probably not survive long enough to receive the gratitude of their employees.

The examples you offer are all of mega-corps. The ones polled in this report, though quite wealthy, are not in the same league. They are not part of "the planning system" and cannot control and manipulate the environment they operate in. And Yunzer your comment only confirms the point I'm trying to make, because small business owners are not part of the planning system but must somehow survive in "the free market" where self-exploitation is a way of life, and though abuse or exploitation of their employees may not necessarily be intentional, it is often a necessary fact.

Suppose you saved up a nest-egg just sufficient to open that small business you always dreamed of and to make it work you had to hire a few employees. Since the success of that endeavor probably would mean a healthy and constant dose of your own self-exploitation it's a safe bet you'd hire those people for as little cost to you as possible, not out of spite or malice or greed, but out of necessity. Or you could go tilting at windmills and become the Jesus of Nazareth of Water Street, Anytown, USA, and the next day take your place once again as an employee and not an employer. Your enlightened entrepreneurship would have the same effect as a fart in a wind storm.

But this is all beside the point of my original objection to your comment. And that is, I believe you have overly generalized a large swath of people, and consequently reached an overly cynical conclusion. Maybe I'm wrong. Daily false-flags, bait-and switches, and dis-information is foisted on us and this reported analysis is just another example. And maybe all those that were polled are so rehearsed in all their roles that they answer to maintain the PR chimera. But I don't buy it. So we agree to disagree. I'm not the enemy, and have always been an employee and not an employer. I usually agree with most of your postings and don't wish to engage in a drawn-out argument about a conclusion or a suspicion.


You mean we're being manipulated by the media? Naw, they wouldn't do that - would they? LOL