« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Union Bosses Unleash On Herman Cain For Targeting Unions’ Sacred Cows

By: LaborUnionReport (Diary)  |  October 20th, 2011 at 11:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

You know, when two of the nation’s most powerful union bosses attack an idea on the same day, it says three things: First, it means that the union bosses are following the GOP candidates very closely; second, an idea that strikes their sacred cows makes them nervous; and, third, there’s probably something to the idea that is worth looking further into.

Apparently, Herman Cain‘s plan to create “opportunity zones” as part of his “999″ plan is something that makes AFL-CIO boss Richard Trumka and Teamsters boss James P. Hoffa uneasy, both of whom seem fine keeping lower income Americans unemployed and poor, as long as it doesn’t disturb their union fiefdoms.

According to Fox News:

Taking aim at minimum wage laws, union protections, and even local building codes, Herman Cain has put the finishing touches on the last missing piece of his signature “9-9-9” plan – an elaborate proposal to create “opportunity zones” in inner-city America that the GOP presidential candidate will unveil during a major campaign appearance in Detroit on Friday morning.

[snip]

To qualify for zone status under Cain’s plan, a given jurisdiction will have to enact policies the unions consider anathema – such as the elimination of the minimum wage, the provision of school vouchers, or the declaration of a zone as a “right-to-work” area.

Leading figures in organized labor swiftly attacked the Cain proposal.

Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa told Fox News in an emailed statement: “Herman Cain’s ‘Opportunity Zones’ appear to be an opportunity for corporate America to exploit workers and turn the United States into a third-world country.” [Emphasis added.]

It probably isn’t worth mentioning to Hoffa that America’s multi-trillion dollar debt, the Obama Administration’s attacks on business (urged and coordinated with union bosses), as well as the policies promulgated by the Left for the last 80 years are driving the nation to third-world faster than a Teamster-driven truck.

Cain’s proposal also drew fire from AFL-CIO boss Richard Trumka.

 

Unfortunately for those who live in what could be ‘opportunity zones,’ union bosses seem to want to keep the unemployed and impoverished under the union yoke.

Instead of holding people in poor areas hostage to unions, perhaps it’s time to consider giving opportunities to those who otherwise have none.

_________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://theusreport.com KBDay

    Black conservatives are speaking out about ideas like Cain’s opp zones and also about the Davis Bacon Act (they want it repealed).

    I was researching federal construction contracts today and I wondered if there is a barrier for small contractors who can’t jump through all the paperwork hoops, especially on the acceptable past experience criteria. Do those contracts get pushed towards unionized employers because of Davis Bacon?

    I also (I think I have undiagnosed ADD) happened to recall those pricey muffins the pundits at Fox were ragging on a week or so ago, and I thought about your columns.

    Do you think those $16 (I can’t remember exact cost) muffins were union muffins? I thought about that because a pro organization I’m a member of sent out an apologia for the cost of an upcoming conference and although the writer is a liberal, she noted the union was the reason for the cost.

    That led me to think about right-to-work states promoting conference venues for obvious reasons.

    Sorry about these random thoughts–very long day is ending.

    Before civil rights, the unions were no friends to black people or, for that matter to anyone who didn’t want to join.

  • gator_hoo

    I honestly don’t understand why anyone would support the idea of empowerment zones. At least in the Herman Cain, reduced tax for areas, sense. Most economically depressed areas, like Detroit, are largely so because they are governed by bad policies and corrupt politicians, like Detroit. Do we really want to subsidize bad local government?

    Second of all, for a plan that is supposed to be based on not allowing loopholes for the rich and for massive corporations, empowerment zones are one heck of a loophole. Major corporations will be able to put a nominal HQ in an empowerment zone and therefore pay a lower tax rate.

    Third, by creating areas with massive tax subsidies, which is what empowerment zones ultimately are, you are creating economically depressed areas in the areas surrounding those zones. How is a business going to compete with another business nearby in an empowerment zone when that business has to pay less tax on revenue, less to employees, and charge customers less sales tax. And what about internet businesses? Good luck with that.

    Finally, huge opportunity for graft. If the current administration is any clue, you can bet that the next Dem administration would guarantee that there would not be a single empowerment zone in any red state. Related to the first point, you are going to be placing massive tax subsidies in areas like DC and Chicago and San Francisco.

    Really don’t understand the thinking on this.

    • beach91

      I do not want to subsidize the BAD decisions of the local/state government. There is a reason that these areas are in terrible condition and it has nothing to do with the federal level of taxation. It is a local issue. When Cain said these ‘empowerment zones’ or something like that a couple debates ago, he totally lost me! This begins the downward spiral of the supposed benefits of the 999 plan wherein there are ‘giveaways’ also known as ‘loopholes.’ No thanks.

  • http://theusreport.com KBDay

    LaborUnionReport, Here’s the link to the Bloomberg piece about those extravagant muffins:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-20/-extravagant-spending-16-muffins-found-at-justice-conferences.html

    Various prog bloggers have justified the $16 per muffin cost by pointing out the muffins subsidized free coffee and tea. My small biz experience suggests the price is still inflated.

    The reason I brought this up rests on the aforementioned questions I had about the facilities chosen.

    In other words, federal employees being federal employees, do they consciously select a hotel with unionized workers? That sounds conspiracist in nature, but I’ve come to marvel at nothing outlandish when it comes to the feds and my money (my fam PAYS income taxes).

    So the way my mind works: I just wondered if that’s actually a plus for non-unionized facilities in states like Florida. For instance, here in Jax, our hotels and even fine eateries are far less expensive than those I’ve visited in places like New York.

    On another note, those empowerment zones may work in some communities but not in others, one reason they should not be undertaken on the federal level. I find several of our GOP candidates who claim conservatism but rely on the big fat federal hand for their economic models.