The Jones Act

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, Jun 16, 2010.

  1. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Since a poster brought this up in another thread, here is an op-ed on the subject matter.

    Looking at the fact that some claim that unions were the driving force of the Jones Act (some truth there) but when you really look at the larger merchant marine industry and it's history as privately help business interests in shipping, what may look like unionism at it's best may in fact have a "hidden hand" behind it and the unionist just took advantage of a state created market as any parasite does in a symbotic relationship.

    I find it funny those who hold a somewhat anti-union bias because of their own non-union status are upset that unionist have squeezed in to suckle the same state teet as the business world started suckling first. Never mind again that even the union suckling had a hidden hand behind it!

    Funny also how many of these same people who scream and rail against unions for using gov't (and that railing is correct) are the first in line to not only rail against so-called big gov't but then turn a complete blind eye when that big gov't benefits their self interests by the use of state reach and big gov't. So much for the idea of earning one's way in a true free market!

    Before you call the President a socialist, you might look in a mirror. You might see a version of the President looking back at you!

    :wink2:
     
  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I'm not sure Obama's incompetence in handling this mess requires that much analysis. I think his failure here comes from his arrogance in thinking he could manage it through BP.
     
  3. fxdwg

    fxdwg Member

    I'm looking in the mirror. I don't see Obama. Get where I'm going?
     
  4. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    No.
     
  5. fxdwg

    fxdwg Member

    I hate political threads.
     
  6. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    ok. go away.:happy-very::peaceful:
     
  7. Lue C Fur

    Lue C Fur Evil member

    And you see this:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. over9five

    over9five Moderator Staff Member

    Fixed it for ya.
     
  9. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I am grateful:happy-very:
     
  10. tonyexpress

    tonyexpress Whac-A-Troll Patrol Staff Member

    That poster was me!:happy-very:

    Privately held business or unions...both are trying to protect themselves...Which one has more influence in this administration?? Hmmm...:peaceful:

    By the way the most interesting part of this to me (no matter who jerked his chain harder) is the fact the Obama did not waive the Jones act to let other capable countries help take care of this mess from the beginning, a damn shame if you ask me...:biting:
     
  11. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    I can't help but think that Obabma's reluctance is (as said) to protect the unions. However his suspension of the Jones act wouldn't really hurt the unions over all. It's not like this would deprive union members of income, the union's won't be doing the cleanup anyway.
     
  12. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    I wasn't gonna throw you under the bus so let the record show you did that to yourself.
    :wink2:

    Regardless, it was/is an interesting subject to consider in all of this so tip of the hat to you for even raising it in the first place.

    It's all State Capitalism
     
  13. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

    Charles Krauthammer & Dick Morris basically said Obama & his advisors were too stupid to ask the question, "what do we have to do to let the other countries help?? Doesn't say much about the people that Obama has surrounding him. Nobody has a clue. :sad-little: