General Discussion

BumRushDaShow

(167,755 posts)

80. Well it seems to be directed at the CEOs of companies

Fri May 6, 2022, 12:20 PM

May 2022

that receive federal subsidies that would -

1.) Ban the owner/leadership (I'm assuming) of the company being subsidized from owning any (am guessing "additional" ) stock in their company
2.) Ban the recipient (owner/leadership) from sending the jobs overseas if they receive these subsidies
3.) Require that some kind of "stake" in the company being subsidized be provided to the federal government (sortof like what was done with GM for their bailout back in 2010)
4.) Ban the recipient from eliminating any bargaining agreements in place and from interfering in attempts for workers to organize

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

88 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Senate Democrats join with Republicans to vote down Bernie Sanders' effort to stop outsourcing [View all] Tickle May 2022 OP

Wut ColinC May 2022 #1

ok it's not just me nt Tickle May 2022 #2

Well of course they did questionseverything May 2022 #3

Links? pnwmom May 2022 #4

here (I am really tiring of these no link posts, it seems an epidemic) Celerity May 2022 #5

Thanks, Celerity! pnwmom May 2022 #7

Thanks! I was just going to post that list Rhiannon12866 May 2022 #11

I need to see more info. Maybe there was a poison pill in it. Celerity May 2022 #12

That's what I'm wondering, too. The fact that that article had such a strange sentence in it pnwmom May 2022 #15

What did you find strange about it? I thought you meant it was strange so many Dems voted No on Celerity May 2022 #17

"Every single Democrat" voted against Bernie's bill EXCEPT Bernie pnwmom May 2022 #18

Well, I guess the could have said 'only (insert names) voted for it' Celerity May 2022 #19

+1 betsuni May 2022 #21

To be clear, it wasn't a bill. It was a nonbinding motion to instruct the House on how to resolve lapucelle May 2022 #27

Thank you. betsuni May 2022 #29

Thank you! Information. I was curious when discussion would appear. Hortensis May 2022 #54

+1 betsuni May 2022 #55

Wow, thanks, that is some attempt to mislead and misrepresent the situation. I think it is prudent JohnSJ May 2022 #57

So, this isn't much of anything then mcar May 2022 #60

Inaccurate "bombshell" headlines generate clicks, lapucelle May 2022 #83

Yep mcar May 2022 #84

Thank you for linking a pertinent article and not spamming the Nixie May 2022 #61

No kidding. Every, single reader saw the sentence as totally normal. jaxexpat May 2022 #20

Sanders introduced a non-binding motion concerning instructions to conferees in the House. lapucelle May 2022 #24

+1 betsuni May 2022 #26

To be clearer, nearly 90% of the democrats in the senate bottomofthehill May 2022 #40

My bad, there were 5 democrats who did not vote so more like bottomofthehill May 2022 #41

12 % of the Dem Senatorial caucus voted for the motion (6 out of 50) Celerity May 2022 #49

Both answers can be right bottomofthehill May 2022 #53

No one ever said 'every single one' then boom, the end. Did you read the actual sentence? Celerity May 2022 #62

Wading through all this superfluous wording, are you objecting Nixie May 2022 #63

I wouldn't quibble over an acceptable use of the conjunction "but". lapucelle May 2022 #87

Yes, great catch, lapucelle! That pretty much nails it down Nixie May 2022 #88

(6/50)*100 JohnSJ May 2022 #58

Indeed they did. The job is to reconcile the two bills so they can put something on Biden's desk. lapucelle May 2022 #64

I can't link when Tickle May 2022 #10

Why not? It's the same old cut and paste of the URL. Celerity May 2022 #13

I don't know how to Tickle May 2022 #14

Here Celerity May 2022 #16

Just cause it seems easy for you , doesn't mean it is for all of us questionseverything May 2022 #45

Joe Manchin joins with Tom Cotton to reroute $8 billion in climate funds to weapons systems Celerity May 2022 #6

I'm working but Tickle May 2022 #8

I copied the link so google Tickle May 2022 #9

90% of Democrats voted against strengthening Unions and for outsourcing jobs. Lancero May 2022 #22

Our majority is so thin Tickle May 2022 #23

Yeah, well, it wasn't just one Democrat voting against Unions. Lancero May 2022 #25

I fear the party is losing the working class and this is not helping. We need Emile May 2022 #28

We lost the working class a long time ago. progressoid May 2022 #32

Why? betsuni May 2022 #34

You may be right. Probably started about the time we passed NAFTA. Emile May 2022 #35

Why? betsuni May 2022 #36

Why? Emile May 2022 #37

Manufacturing began leaving the U.S. and unions unpopular decades before the nineties. betsuni May 2022 #38

Why? Emile May 2022 #39

Republicans. The Southern Strategy. White people voting against their own economic interests. betsuni May 2022 #42

What exactly did they do to send our jobs away? Emile May 2022 #46

Corporations sent the jobs away, union membership was at its height in the fifties. betsuni May 2022 #48

So you agree with Bernie regulating business. Emile May 2022 #50

Democrats regulate business. betsuni May 2022 #51

I know! Emile May 2022 #52

Bad trade agreements...the TPP for example would have allowed countries who use Demsrule86 May 2022 #67

That is partially true of course...but NAFTA was devestating for Mid West...the 90's were Demsrule86 May 2022 #65

+1 Spot On! Emile May 2022 #69

A theory of the case: The Democrats' Working Class Voter Problem Celerity May 2022 #43

Here is a good analysis of that analysis BumRushDaShow May 2022 #75

+1 progressoid May 2022 #86

Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, . . . Strelnikov_ May 2022 #44

That's why Senator Patty Murray introduced the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act of 2021. lapucelle May 2022 #66

So when will the Senate vote on this? I'm sure Bernie supports Emile May 2022 #68

It's in committee. lapucelle May 2022 #70

How long has it been stuck in committee? Emile May 2022 #71

If you look at the .gov link I provided, lapucelle May 2022 #74

Sorry, I'll check on it. Emile May 2022 #77

The link you provided doesn't say why it's being Emile May 2022 #79

Discussion in committee is the step that comes after a bill is introduced lapucelle May 2022 #82

This message was self-deleted by its author Celerity May 2022 #31

+1 progressoid May 2022 #33

😤 Duppers May 2022 #30

I had to go look up what this is all about but here is what happened BumRushDaShow May 2022 #47

Right. This is a PROBLEM-SOLVING bill related to innovation Hortensis May 2022 #56

It's been a long time coming BumRushDaShow May 2022 #59

Sure has. A lot of manufacturing was already moving back, or in the works, Hortensis May 2022 #73

Thank you for the clarification and addition info. nt 2 Meow Momma May 2022 #72

You are welcome! BumRushDaShow May 2022 #78

So basically he wants a ban on insider trading for Emile May 2022 #76

Well it seems to be directed at the CEOs of companies BumRushDaShow May 2022 #80

I don't want my tax dollars going to subsidies for outsourcing. Emile May 2022 #81

Well in the transcript I posted BumRushDaShow May 2022 #85