The GOP Is Clueless To The Dems’ Sinister Immigration Agenda — And It Has Nothing To Do With Elections

The GOP has been very good at diagnosing the problems we will face from the illegal migrant invasion following the end of Title 42. Americans will pay more taxes while seeing cartel activity, gang violence, and other crime skyrocket. Housing and healthcare will become scarcer and more expensive, and the labor market will worsen as a larger labor supply suppresses American wages.

Republicans have mostly attacked the Democrats’ plan to create a “permanent majority” or accused them of enabling crime. Ultimately, this short-sighted approach focuses on the short-term electoral game. As usual, the Democrats and their handlers hide their true intentions, and the GOP is none the wiser.

The final Democrat goal is to turn America into a communist state in which Washington and its mega-corporate partners control every aspect of life. But Americans increasingly realize they are better off controlling their own affairs. So what is Uncle Sam to do?

Enter a pair of 60s radicals from Columbia University. Professors Richard Cloward and Frances Piven taught at the Ivy League university during Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty and Great Society. In 1966, they argued that Johnson’s welfare program was not going far enough because most welfare was the purview of state and local authorities. In order to get everyone on the federal teat, a crisis had to be created to give the feds the excuse to step in. Their proposal was to have massive numbers of poor people overwhelm local and state governments that they would beg Uncle Sam for help.

This general idea is the long-term strategy behind mass immigration.

If the Democrats cannot get Americans to accept a neo-communist, technocratic, oligarchic state run by billionaires and their political marionettes, they will import those who will. And the masses of impoverished foreigners, who are already accustomed to socialism and heavy-handed government, are the perfect trojan horse.

AOC may be dumb, but the people behind her aren’t. They want to overwhelm their own cities – and then everywhere else. They know that if NYC and Chicago can’t handle migrants, then the rural counties these cities are shipping migrants to definitely won’t – let alone the 750 million people who want to come here. The only entity left to pick up the tab is the federal government (in practice, this means you), which will use demographic chaos, poverty, and declining standards of living as a pretext to “save” the day. Coincidentally, Eric Adams has called for just that.

So what do you do when people can’t afford to live as a result of both low wages and high taxes to pay for all these illegals (among other things)? Enact universal basic income, preferably with a trackable CBDC that will control what you can buy, and when and whether you can buy it at all. Can’t afford healthcare because the system is strained and clogged up? Roll out Medicare for all, which of course gets to prioritize certain patients over others according to federal whims. No doubt diversity and inclusion will be criteria. Local and state police can’t handle the out of control crime anymore as a result of illegal immigration and soft-on-crime DAs? Create a national police force.

COVID-19 was a good try from the feds. They got tons of people to wear masks, take experimental shots, and hate their neighbors, but it didn’t result in the economic collapse and massive run to the welfare rolls that they had hoped for. So now, they’ve hit upon an all-too-commonly seen plan in history: when your own people hate you, bring in dependent outsiders.

Oh, and one more thing. When the millions of military-aged male migrants don’t get what they want from the Dems (who basically promised them the world), the Dems will blame you (Americans) and turn their newly imported constituency against you to save themselves.

And you won’t be able to defend yourself. All that violence that is happening thanks to cartels, sex/drug trafficking, and gang violence – all the product of letting in massive numbers of military-aged males? That’s your fault too, which means: get ready to surrender your guns. Uncle Sam doesn’t like competition.

AUTHOR

MICHELE GAMA SOSA

Michele Gama Sosa is an opinion editor for the Daily Caller and a historian by training.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Now is the Senate’s Turn to Act on H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act

Biden Stops Bike Ride to Pat Himself on the Back and Insult Americans

More Than 200 Bodies Recovered, 600 Still Missing In Alleged Starvation Cult

RELATED VIDEO: Invasion U.S.A.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Federal Employees Say Forcing Them Back Into The Office Endangers The Planet

This is where your hard earned taxpayer dollars go – to these sloths. They should all be fired. Clearly, they are not needed. The U.S. government is the nation’s largest employer. It’s obscene.

Federal Employees Say Forcing Them Back Into The Office Endangers The Planet

The largest union of federal employees is arguing against a return to the office because it would be harmful for the environment, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.

By: John Hugh DeMastri, Daily Caller, February 22, 2023

President Joe Biden has been under increasing pressure from Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky and Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C., to send federal employees back to the office, the Post reported. In response, representatives from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) told the Post that a return to the office would have negative environmental impacts.

“We all know that personal automobiles are responsible for a tremendous amount of pollution through the burning of fossil fuels,” Jacque Simon, public policy director at the AFGE, told the Post. “So every car trip not taken has an environmental benefit.”

This sentiment was echoed by AFGE Local 1236 President Bethany Dreyfus, who represents employees at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Hawaii, California, Nevada and Arizona, according to the Post. The calls to return to the office have “unsettled” EPA employees in that region who tout the environmental and work-life balance benefits of remote work.

“So many of us work on reducing emissions in our daily jobs at the EPA,” Dreyfus told the Post. “So to be able to do that not only through our work, but how we get to work, is really important.”

The U.S. federal government owns or leases roughly one-third of properties in D.C., and accounted for approximately one-fourth of the city’s pre-pandemic jobs, ABC News reported. D.C. is the U.S. city with the highest work-from-home rate, putting pressure on businesses, who are seeing less foot traffic, and city officials are concerned that tax revenue may take a permanent hit.

“We need decisive action by the White House to either get most federal workers back to the office, most of the time, or to realign their vast property holdings for use by the local government, by nonprofits, by businesses and by any user willing to revitalize it,” Bowser said in her inaugural address Jan. 2, ABC News reported.

Keep reading…..

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Claimed He Created 1 Million Jobs. Actual Number, 10,500

Come on, man. What’s a little rounding error between friends?


What’s a little rounding error between a corrupt hack and the country he’s running into the ground?

“In the second quarter of this year, we created more jobs than in any quarter under any of my predecessors in the nearly 40 years before the pandemic,” Mr. Biden said on July 8.

“The economy created more than 1.1 million jobs in the second quarter, or around 375k jobs per month,” the White House said in a statement on July 22.

A million or ten thousand. Come on, man. Who’s keeping track?

The Philadelphia Fed’s new assessment shows that employment numbers in 29 states and the District of Columbia were significantly lower than the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported for the March-through-June period.

The BLS, a division of the Department of Labor, estimated net job growth of 1,047,000 jobs in the second quarter. The Philadelphia Fed now says its data shows that 10,500 net jobs were created in that period.

Another reminder that anything from BLS or anything under the control of administration political appointees cannot be trusted. The Biden administration is actually worse than the Obama administration in this regard. Everything is corruptly politicized and appointees will flat-out tell the most outrageous lies.

Not that this comes as a surprise even to the media. How many times has this happened already?

Biden’s bogus boast of 1 million ‘construction jobs’ – Four Pinocchios – Washington Post

AP FACT CHECK: Biden’s fuzzy math on 1 million new auto jobs

Biden will still keep on lying anyway.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Open Borders): Only the ‘far right’ care about immigration

India: Muslim kills his daughter for constantly talking on the phone

Spain: Muslim migrant takes a hammer to a Nativity display

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Soros-Funded Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to Empower Workers in Latin America

The Biden administration is giving a nonprofit partially funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) $12 million to strengthen labor rights and empower workers in three Latin American countries. The U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the Solidarity Center, a Washington D.C.-based group closely allied with OSF as well as the country’s largest union conglomerate, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). The Solidarity Center’s mission is to help workers across the globe fight discrimination, exploitation and systems that entrench poverty. It claims to accomplish this by empowering workers to raise their voice for dignity on the job, justice in their communities and greater equality in the global economy.

The group will use the $12 million to “strengthen democratic, independent workers’ organizations in Brazil, Colombia and Peru,” according to the Department of Labor (DOL) announcement issued this week. The project will bolster unions and advocate for the full and free exercise of collective bargaining rights and freedom of association, the agency writes, adding that the focus will be on underserved communities and advancing gender and racial equity. Specifically, the American taxpayer dollars will support activities that improve respect for the rights of Brazil’s Afro-Brazilian, migrant, women and LGBTQI+ workers in the digital platform economy and the manufacturing sector. In Colombia, the focus will be on increasing the capacity of women, migrants, and indigenous people to organize and advocate for workers’ rights. In Peru, the goal is to improve access to mechanisms for labor rights compliance in the mining and agriculture sectors, particularly for indigenous and migrant workers.

The Solidarity Center, which claims to be the largest U.S.-based international worker rights organization, also operates in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Most of its funding comes from Uncle Sam, but private groups like OSF also contribute generously. In 2020, the Solidarity Center received nearly $39 million in federal awards, according to its latest annual report. In 2019, the center got over $36 million from the U.S. government. Additionally, the group gets millions annually in “other revenues” that are not broken down. However, records obtained by Judicial Watch show that the OSF has given a lot of money to the Solidarity Center in the last few years. In 2020, the latest available reporting period, OSF gave the Solidarity Center $980,000. In 2019 the center received $785,000 from OSF and in 2018 it got $400,000 from the Soros nonprofit that has dedicated billions of dollars to leftist causes around the world. Soros’s global foundation explains that the grants are for economic equity and justice, access to justice for migrant workers in the U.S., to improve labor rights in Mexico and Central America, and the empowerment of vulnerable workers in the domestic and agricultural sectors in the Middle East.

The U.S. government has long funded Soros groups as well as those with close ties to them like the Solidarity Center. Judicial Watch has reported on it for years and obtained records that show the disturbing reality of American taxpayers financing Soros’s leftwing plots abroad. This includes uncovering documents showing State Department funding of Soros nonprofits in Albania to attack traditional, pro-American groups and policies; U.S. government funding of Soros’s radical globalist agenda in Guatemala , Colombia, Romania and Macedonia. The cash usually flows through the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Details of the financial and staffing nexus between OSF and the U.S. government are available in a Judicial Watch investigative report. Domestically Soros groups have pushed a radical agenda that includes promoting an open border with Mexico, fomenting racial disharmony by funding anti-capitalist black separationist organizations, financing the Black Lives Matter movement and other groups involved in the Ferguson Missouri riots, weakening the integrity of the nation’s electoral systems, opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts and eroding 2nd Amendment protections.

RELATED ARTICLE: Another Biden Family Corruption Cover-up Is Unraveling

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Court Orders New York City To Reinstate Unvaccinated Employees, Give Backpay

The New York State Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that New York City cannot fire employees for not getting vaccinated against COVID-19, dealing a blow to Democratic Mayor Eric Adams’ pandemic policy.

The court ordered the city to reinstate all fired employees and grant them backpay, citing the fact that being vaccinated against COVID-19 does not stop an individual from catching or spreading the virus, and thus being vaccinated does not grant enough community-wide benefit to warrant a mandate. The health commissioner “acted beyond his authority” by issuing an indefinite vaccine mandate rather than a temporary one, according to the court.

Adams said earlier this year his administration would not bring back workers who had been fired due to being unvaccinated. Roughly 1,400 workers were ultimately let go, including a number of firefighters and police officers. Adams came under fire for not allowing an exception to the mandate for those workers after he granted one to celebrities who were competing in sports or putting on performances in the city.

“States of emergency are meant to be temporary,” the court said in its ruling. “The question presented is whether the health commissioner has the authority to enact a permanent condition of employment during a state of emergency.”

The court ultimately found that the commissioner did not have that right.

Many COVID-19 vaccine mandates were put in place based on the rationale that the vaccines could drastically reduce the chances of a person becoming infected or transmitting the virus if they were infected, so getting vaccinated was not only a benefit to the individual getting the shots, but everyone around them.

However, as more data emerged to indicate that the vaccines are only marginally effective at stopping spread, particularly against newer variants of the virus, that rationale became less convincing. The New York Supreme Court pointed this out in its decision, saying “being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19… the Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves.”

AUTHOR

DYLAN HOUSMAN

Healthcare reporter. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: Vaccine Mandate Protests Explode Across New York City, With Some Chanting ‘F*ck Joe Biden’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Major Rail Union Rejects Biden-Backed Deal, Reigniting Strike Fears

One of the largest rail unions in the country rejected a Biden administration-brokered deal with railways Monday over concerns regarding working conditions, forcing both sides back to the bargaining table and raising the specter of a potentially devestating strike next month.

The vote drew record turnout, with nearly 12,000 members of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (BMWED) casting a ballot, rejecting the deal with 56% opposed, according to a BMWED press release. The Biden-sponsored deal includes a 24% raise over the next five years, $5,000 in annual bonuses and attendance policy exemptions for medical purposes, but BMWED President Tony Cardwell said that workers were still concerned about working conditions and sick leave, the Associated Press reported Monday.

“The majority of the BMWED membership rejected the tentative national agreement and we recognize and understand that result,” said Cardwell in the BMWED press release. “BMWED members are concerned with the direction of their employers and the mismanagement and greed in which they have consistently implemented, and are united in their resolve to improve their working conditions across the entire Class I rail network.”

“We are disappointed that members of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (BMWED) have declined to ratify the recent tentative agreement (‘TA’) between the BMWED and the nation’s freight railroads,” the National Railway Labor Conference (NRLC) said in a Monday statement. The NRLC went on to discuss the benefits of the deal, including travel reimbursements of up to 50% for those employees in traveling roles.

While four of the dozen rail unions have thus far ratified, if the members of any union fail to agree to the terms, all 12 unions will go on strike, the AP reported. By rejecting the deal, the BMWED will return to negotiations with railways, entering a “status quo” period where unions cannot strike until Nov. 19, five days after Congress reconvenes, the BWMED stated.

A strike could have disastrous consequences for the U.S. economy, which relies on railways to ship key products such as oil, coal and chemicals used in fertilizers, leading to disruptions that could cause $2 billion in economic damages per day, according to the Association of American Railroads, who represent railway management. Nearly 40% of all long-distance trade in the U.S. occurs on rail, and replacing them with trucks would require a fleet of nearly half a million trucks, a logistical impossibility, according to the American Trucking Association.

When asked by the Daily Caller News Foundation about what the BMWED’s management would consider to be a fair deal, Communications Director Clark Ballew said “The union’s management is the BMWED rank and file members and they rejected the tentative agreement.”

The American Association of Railroads referred the DCNF to the NRLC’s statement. Neither the White House nor the Department of Labor immediately responded to the DCNF’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED VIDEO: ESPN’s Stephen A Smith Calls Out Progressives for “Extreme Agenda”

RELATED ARTICLE: The Impending Railroad Strike Could Grind The Entire Economy To A Halt, Experts Warn

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

New GOP bills attack the raging border crisis while Biden sits on his hands

While President Joe Biden continues to ignore and even encourage the raging crisis on the southern border, some principled lawmakers in Washington continue to valiantly fight what has been an uphill battle. Four Republicans from four different states have recently introduced legislation to attack different aspects of the crisis. These are the true “root causes” Vice President Kamala Harris is supposed to be addressing, and FAIR wholeheartedly supports each bill. We will explore them here.

Most recently, on September 27, Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) and Representative Troy Nehls (R-Texas-22) jointly introduced S. 4964 / H.R. 9013, the Justice for Angel Families Act, in their respective chambers. The bill would accomplish two important objectives: extend eligibility for crime-victim grants to the families of those killed by illegal aliens, and re-establish the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) office at the Department of Homeland Security. First created by a Trump Executive Order in April 2017, the VOICE office was converted into the “Victims Engagement and Services Line” in June 2021 by the Biden administration and lost its focus on immigration-related crime. This bill would give the office a mandate to “provide proactive, timely, and professional services to victims of crimes committed by aliens who are inadmissible…deportable…or otherwise unlawfully present in the United States, and to the family members of such victims.” Upon introducing the bill, Senator Marshall said, “Congressman Nehls and I are introducing this legislation to restore our angel families’ dignity and build on the support they received through the VOICE Office, which was disgracefully dismantled by the Biden Administration.”

On September 22, Representative Kat Cammack (R-Fla.-03) introduced H.R. 8952, the Justified Action for Securing Our Nation (JASON) Act. The idea and name for the bill came from a heroic Border Patrol agent whom the Congresswoman met on one of several trips to the southern border. It amends Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to extend to the Secretary of Homeland Security the power to suspend immigration for up to 60 days, with Congressional notification, and prescribe specific conditions under which such a suspension may be imposed. Under current law, the President already enjoys the power to suspend immigration indefinitely, but given this administration’s penchant for open borders and lax enforcement, we have little confidence Biden would wield it. Upon releasing the bill, Congresswoman Cammack said, “This bill holds the Secretary [of Homeland Security] accountable by providing him with the authority to shut down the border to protect our national security and deliver relief to the hundreds of CBP agents who are doing their best to hold the line in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.”

On the same day, Representative Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.-05) introduced H.R. 8951, the Ending Catch and Release Act, which would require illegal aliens to be detained or expelled pending the outcome of their claim in immigration court. With this legislation, no longer would we see millions set free to disappear into American society – many without a court date at all. In FY2019, nearly half of asylum-seekers released failed to even show up for their hearing – likely because they know their claim is bogus – and this rate will soar given the expansion of catch-and-release under Biden. Congressman Biggs and the 13 original co-sponsors of his legislation understand the danger of these policies and FAIR commends them for acting to stop it. As Biggs said upon release of his bill, “we must maintain operational control of the southern border and this legislation gets us closer to that.”

FAIR urges swift passage of each of the commonsense measures above as part of an all-encompassing approach to securing the border, fortifying our interior enforcement, and making American communities safe to live, work, and play.

AUTHOR

Will Riley

Will Riley joined the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in 2022. As the government relations manager, he plays a key role in advancing FAIR’s vision of a more secure and sustainable legal immigration system – and ending the scourge of illegal immigration.

Before joining FAIR, Will worked on Capitol Hill for a prominent House Republican, with immigration as one issue in his legislative portfolio. Prior to working on the Hill, Will was an Immigration Services Officer for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency responsible for administering the nation’s legal immigration system. In that role he interviewed hundreds of intending immigrants, decided whether to grant or deny lawful permanent residence (green cards) or U.S. citizenship, and investigated numerous fraud and national security concerns. Will has also served the government as a court reporter for Social Security disability hearings.

Will has private-sector experience as an investments assistant for a boutique wealth management firm in Texas, and as a business owner himself. He attended the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. While there, he interned for the Embassy of Australia in Washington and the US Commerce Department in Sydney, Australia.

Will lives in suburban Maryland with his wife and daughter.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Kamala Harris Suggests Hurricane and Disaster Relief Should Be Based on Race

DHS Secretary can’t say where 47 illegal aliens on the terror watch list are.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Heavily-Armed Black Rights Groups March in Texas Demanding Biden ‘Close The Border’

Indiana Sees Push for Illegal Alien Drivers’ Licenses in 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This FAIR column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

WARNING: Collapse of Energy, Food & Transportation Systems Prompt Calls for Government Nationalization of Industries

Echoes 1930s push for Great Reset style reforms!


The modus operandi of the Great Reset (a.k.a. Build Back Better) is to intentionally collapse the current system with policies designed to create a crisis, havoc, and shortages. … Once the inevitable societal chaos ensues, a huge coordinated push to promote nationalization or government takeover of the impacted industries ensues. It is always claimed that the “free market” failed, and now only government can come in and clean up the mess. The advocates of nationalization usually bill it as a “temporary” nationalization of the industries, much like “15 days to slow the spread” or “2 weeks to flatten the curve” were billed as temporary measures.

Stuart Chase, a key advisor to former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, envisioned an early version of the Great Reset in the 1930s and 1940s, complete with calls for government “control of energy sources—hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, natural gas.; The control of transportation—railway, highway, airway, waterway; and the control of agricultural production.” Chase loved the idea of managing all aspects of society. He asked at the end of his 1932 book, A New Deal, “Why should the Soviets have all the fun remaking the world?” Chase’s lust for Soviet ideology could be updated to 2022 by replacing the “Soviets” for “China”.

Here is Chase’s 2022 proposed updated motto: “Why should China have all the fun remaking the world?”

Climate Depot Special Report

The continuing fallout from COVID lockdown policies — from the economic collapse to the supply chain issues, to energy, transportation, and food shortages — is reigniting calls and prompting the nationalization of industries in Europe, the U.SCanada, and Australia.

The modus operandi of the Great Reset (AKA Build Back Better) is to intentionally collapse the current system with policies designed to create a crisis, havoc, and shortages. And the world has descended into chaos since the COVID lockdowns of March of 2020.

See: Yahoo Finance: ‘Firewood is the new gold’ – prices & theft jump in Europe as Russia’s gas cutoff boosts wood demand ahead of winter – 1000% increase in EU energy prices

NYT: ‘Crippling’ energy bills force Europe’s factories to go dark

The Great Food Reset has arrived: Expect ‘real’ food shortages, Biden declares

WHY IT IS FINALLY TIME TO NATIONALIZE AMERICA’S FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY TO END OUR SPIRALING ENERGY WAR

California car ban: ‘This is the planned rationing of vehicles’ – ‘They have energy shortages, food shortages, now they want vehicle shortages’ – Calif. borrows Cuban & East German policies

Once the inevitable societal chaos ensues, a huge coordinated push to promote nationalization or government takeover of the impacted industries ensues. It is always claimed that the “free market” failed, and now only government can come in and clean up the mess. The advocates of nationalization usually bill it as a “temporary” nationalization of the industries, much like “15 days to slow the spread” or “2 weeks to flatten the curve” were billed as temporary measures. See: Salon mag in 2022 noted “the long American history of taking over industries during a time of national crisis” and claimed that “temporary nationalization helped get America through the crisis” of World War II. 

Stuart Chase, a key advisor to former President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, envisioned an early version of the Great Reset in the 1930s and 1940s, complete with calls for government “control of energy sources—hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, natural gas.; The control of transportation—railway, highway, airway, waterway; and the control of agricultural production.”

Chase loved the idea of managing all aspects of society. He asked at the end of his 1932 book, A New Deal, “Why should the Soviets have all the fun remaking the world?” Chase’s lust for Soviet ideology could be updated to 2022 by replacing the “Soviets” for “China”.

Here is Chase’s 2022 proposed updated motto:

“Why should China have all the fun remaking the world?”

That updated motto could describe any number of current Chinese social credit style policies emanating from the World Economic Forum, Canada’s PM Justin Trudeau, or from Australia, New Zealand, or U.S. COVID lockdown policies, particularly from blue states and cities.

Chase’s depression-era political vision now appears to be coming to fruition in 2022. Chase, a socialist economist, wrote the 1932 book A New Deal , which was the inspiration for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal. Chase was a member of FDR’s “kitchen cabinet.” He promoted the “managerial revolution,” which he referred to as “System X” in his 1942 book, When the War Ends: The Road We Are Traveling 1914–1942.

 

Chase’s vision of the world sounded an awful lot like the WEF’s Great Reset. In his 1942 book When the War Ends, Chase outlined the key components of transforming “Free Enterprise into ‘X’”:

A strong, centralized government.

An executive arm growing at the expense of the legislative and judicial arms. . . .

The control of banking, credit and security exchanges by the government. . . .

The abandonment of gold in favor of managed currencies. . . .

The control of energy sources—hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, natural gas.

The control of transportation—railway, highway, airway, waterway.

The control of agricultural production. . . .

Not much “taking over” of property or industries in the old socialistic sense. The formula appears to be control without ownership . . .

The state control of communications and propaganda.

Chase loved the idea of managing all aspects of society. As he asked at the end of A New Deal, “Why should the Soviets have all the fun remaking the world?”

Source: The Great Reset: Global Elites & The Permanent Lockdown – By Marc Morano

Fast forward to 2022, and the Great Reset is happening here and now. This is not circa 1990 when we were talking about a shadowy secretive vision of a New World Order. This is 2022 now, and we are seeing a ‘new normal’ being imposed upon the world.

  1. Our current energy system is being intentionally collapsed ;
  2. Our transportation system is being intentionally collapsed; (and our freedom of movement is being stripped away)
  3. Our First Amendment free speech rights are being collapsed by government & corporate collusion;
  4. Our high-yield agricultural system is being intentionally collapsed to create man-made food shortages and chaos; and
  5. The ability to eat meat is being banned to compel us to eat ‘lab-grown’ fake meat and eat insects. Artificially caused food shortages will create demand for insect eating.  And our betters are using our children as hand-picked little ministers of propaganda to promote insect eating and ‘pester’ adults to comply with the agenda. (See:The Great Food Reset has arrived: Expect ‘real’ food shortages, Biden declares – Meanwhile, Bill Gates & China buy up U.S. farmland &Great Reset By Marc Morano – Chapter 12 Excerpt: ‘COVID Lockdowns Morph to Climate Lockdowns’

And, right on cue, the implementation of nationalization and the calls for it grow. Here is a small sampling of how chaos is being used to impose nationalize key industries since COVID lockdowns crushed societies:

The Hill OPED: ‘Why we must nationalize Big Oil’

 

Germany nationalizes energy giant Uniper as Russia squeezes gas supplies

 

Green party calls for nationalization of UK’s big five energy firms as ‘solution to failed experiment with a market-based energy system’

The American Prospect: Nationalize the U.S. Fossil Fuel Industry to Save the Planet: “Turning the biggest oil companies over to public ownership would serve several goals at once, including climate resilience.”

 

WHY IT IS FINALLY TIME TO NATIONALIZE AMERICA’S FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY TO END OUR SPIRALING ENERGY WAR
Canada: Should We Nationalize the Oil Sands?

AP: Canada effectively nationalizing private payrolls amid virus

Australia’s Devastating Fires Make an Urgent Case for Nationalizing Fossil Fuels

The following is an excerpt from Chapter 12 of The Great Reset: Global Elites and the Permanent Lockdown – By Marc Morano

Page 36:

 

“Executive Arm Growing”

Socialist economist Stuart Chase’s 1932 book A New Deal was the inspiration for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal. Chase was a member of FDR’s “kitchen cabinet.”3 He promoted the “managerial revolution,” which he referred to as “System X” in his 1942 book, When the War Ends: The Road We Are Traveling 1914–1942.

Chase’s vision of the world sounds an awful lot like the WEF’s Great Reset. In When the War Ends, Chase outlined the key components of transforming “Free Enterprise into ‘X’”:

A strong, centralized government.

An executive arm growing at the expense of the legislative and judicial arms. . . .

The control of banking, credit and security exchanges by the government. . . .

The abandonment of gold in favor of managed currencies. . . .

The control of energy sources—hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, natural gas.

The control of transportation—railway, highway, airway, waterway.

The control of agricultural production. . . .

Not much “taking over” of property or industries in the old socialistic sense. The formula appears to be control without ownership . . .

The state control of communications and propaganda.

Chase loved the idea of managing all aspects of society. As he asked at the end of A New Deal, “Why should the Soviets have all the fun remaking the world?”

©Marc Morano – Climate Depot. All rights reserved.

McDonald’s CEO Warns Chicago Mayor Lightfoot that Soaring Crime is Leaving its Corporate Staff Too Terrified to Return to HQ

Mayor Lori Lightfoot has allowed criminals to take over the once great city of Chicago. As such, we are now seeing a corporate exodus out of the Windy City. How long before McDonald’s follows Boeing, Citadel, the Chicago Bears and others out of Chicago? Not very long at this rate. The city of Muddy Waters, John Belushi, John Hughes, and Michael Jordan is dying before our eyes. Little to no media coverage on Lightfoot’s willful incompetence. Shameful.

McDonald’s CEO warns Chicago Mayor Lightfoot that soaring crime in burger giant’s home city is leaving its corporate staff too terrified to return to its HQ

  • Chris Kempczinski spoke last and says the violence has been a problem when trying to convince employees to come back
  • He said: ‘Everywhere I go, I’m confronted by the same question: ‘What’s going on in Chicago? There is a general sense out there that our city is in crisis’ 
  • Crime is up 37 percent from this point in 2021, according to the city’s own data 
  • Murders and shootings are down double digits but thefts are up a shocking 64 percent
  • Previously, Kempczinski appeared to blame parents of two children who were shot and killed in a McDonald’s drive-thru in Chicago to Mayor Lori Lightfoot 
  • Kempczinski – who lives in the city with his family – pledged to not only keep the golden arches headquartered in Chicago but build a new innovation center 

By DailyMail.co.uk, Sept 16, 2022

The CEO of McDonald’s is speaking out about the crime crisis in Chicago and believes the lack of safety is keeping employees from returning to the fast food giant’s Windy City HQ in a warning to Democrat Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

Chris Kempczinski spoke last Wednesday at the Economic Club of Chicago, where he says the violence has been a problem when trying to convince employees to come back.

He said: ‘Everywhere I go, I’m confronted by the same question: ‘What’s going on in Chicago? There is a general sense out there that our city is in crisis.’

View Chicago Crime Statistics Here.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Suffers Enormous Defeat: Chicago Bears DENY Her Proposal To Stay In The City Of Chicago

Judge Overrules Despotic Democrats, ‘Vote-By-Mail Statute Is Unconstitutional’

Watchdog To Probe IRS After Hundreds Of Employees Failed To Pay Taxes

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

America Bracing For Chaos And Pain As Tens of Thousands Railroad, Port and Hospital Workers Set to Strike

Everything the Democrat regime touches turns to shit. What normal human being would vote for this horror? The midterms should be a complete rout.

Is Biden facing a winter of discontent?

US braces for crisis as rail workers plot strike costing $2 BILLION a day, 15,000 nurses walkout in Minnesota and West Coast ports could shutdown amid contracts dispute.

By Alex Hammer For Dailymail.Com, 13 September 2022

America is bracing for chaos as tens of thousands of railway, port, and hospital workers look set to strike over the winter – plunging the country into disruption

As many as 60,000 railway workers, 15,000 nurses, and 22,000 West Coast port workers are plotting mass walkouts as they seek better working conditions

Several US freight railroads said on Friday they were preparing for widespread strike and service disruptions, a deadline set by two holdout labor groups in protracted talks with railroad carriers for better benefits

The burgeoning strike would cause mass interruptions to the nation’s expansive rail system, which are used to ferry goods shipped and flown in overseas across the country, and would costs carriers roughly $2B a day

America is bracing for chaos as tens of thousands of railway, port, and hospital workers look set to strike over the winter – plunging the country into further disruption.

As many as 60,000 railway workers, 15,000 nurses, and 22,000 West Coast port workers are plotting mass walkouts as they seek better working conditions.

Several US freight railroads said they were preparing for widespread strike and service interruptions Friday, a deadline set by two holdout labor groups in protracted talks with railroad carriers about better benefits.

The burgeoning strike would cause mass interruptions to the nation’s expansive rail system, which are used to ferry goods shipped and flown in overseas across the country, and would costs carriers roughly $2 billion a day.

The holdout from workers that transport these products – who on average earn at least $64,300 a year – already disrupted the nation’s passenger rail Monday, rattling commutes and cross-country travel for thousands of Americans in preparation for the walkouts.

Compounding the crisis are burgeoning protests from tens of thousands of workers at America’s hospitals, as more than 15,000 nurses in Minnesota staged statewide walkouts over low pay and staffing shortages. Registered nurses in the state currently make an average of $84,030 each year.

Also on the edge are the country’s more than 22,000 West Coast port workers, who man the highly trafficked twin hubs of Los Angeles and Long Beach. They are also seeking better working conditions, amid staffing issues and overwork that has become commonplace during the pandemic – despite LA workers earning six-figure salaries.

Biden administration officials are racing to prevent the strike by tens of thousands of freight railroad workers that could further disrupt an already strained supply chain and cause billions of dollars in economic damage.

The stakes for the rail system, meanwhile, are high economically – while another blow to the already backed up ports spelling trouble for the country’s supply chain, which has yet to recover from backlogs sustained during the pandemic.

The widespread chaos could spark food shortages, cause a spike in gas prices as supply dwindles, and potentially ignite further inflation.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

NBC LIES, DECLARES “INFLATION FELL” After Inflation Comes In HIGH, Stock Markets Plummets

Key Inflation Indicator Remains Sky-High In Another Worrying Sign For Businesses

New Study Shows A Third of Working Families Can No Longer Afford Basic Needs

Americans Spent More on Taxes in 2021 Than on Food, Clothing and Health Care Combined

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Taxpayer Lawsuit Filed over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities. The lawsuit was filed against the superintendent of the Minneapolis Public Schools, the Minneapolis Public Schools, and the Minneapolis Board of Education for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution (Clapp v Cox et al. (No. 27-CV-22-12454))

The controversial contract was agreed to in March 2022 to end a 14-day teacher strike. The Minneapolis Federation of Teachers ratified the contract shortly after the agreement was reached. The Minneapolis Board of Education ratified it in May of this year.

The Judicial Watch lawsuit states:

Among other things, the contract provides preferences, protections, and privileges for MPS teachers of certain races and ethnicities under a section entitled “ARTICLE 15. PROTECTIONS FOR EDUCATORS OF COLOR.” There is no similar provision covering educators who are not “of color.”

Under the contract, teachers of color are exempt from Defendant MPS’s seniority-based layoffs and reassignments, which means, when layoffs or reassignments occur, the next senior teacher who is not “of color” would be laid off or reassigned. In addition, the contract mandates that Defendants reinstate teachers of color over more senior teachers who are not “of color.”

Upon information and belief, prior to the contract, teachers were laid off or reassigned in order of seniority, with the least senior teachers laid off or reassigned first, without regard to race or ethnicity. Similarly, teachers were reinstated in order of seniority, with the more senior teachers reinstated first, without regard to race or ethnicity.

Article 15’s preferences, protections, and privileges for certain public-school teachers on the basis of race and ethnicity violates Minnesota’s Equal Protection Guarantee, which states that “no member of this state shall be disenfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.” Minn. Const. art. 1, § 2. The Equal Protection Guarantee is analyzed under the same principles and mandate as the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit asks the court to enter a judgement that will declare that all actions taken to implement the racial and ethnic preference provisions of Article 15 of the contract to be illegal. They are also asking that the court declare it illegal to use any taxpayer dollars to implement these provisions of the contract, and the defendants be prohibited from taking any actions to implement these racial and ethnic provisions.

“It is incredible that in this day and age a school system would engage in blatant racial discrimination in employing teachers,” stated Judicial Watch Tom Fitton. “The courts can’t move soon enough to shut down this extreme leftist attack on the bedrock constitutional principle that no one can be denied equal treatment under law on account of race.”

Judicial Watch is being assisted in the lawsuit by Daniel N. Rosen of Rosen LLC in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

In a separate case, the city of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled a Judicial Watch federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.

In May 2022, Judicial Watch won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s diversity mandate for corporate boards unconstitutional.

RELATED ARTICLE: Teachers Union President Defends School District That Will Lay Off White Teachers First

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Teachers Unions Politicized U.S. Schools, Not Parents

Union leaders claim that “extremists” politicized US schools. This is blatant revisionism.


When voters were asked by Pew Research, prior to the 2020 election, what issues were most important to them, education wasn’t even among the top dozen.

But things have changed dramatically since then. Outlets ranging from The Washington Post, to ABC News, have identified education as a potentially significant factor in the 2022 midterms. Additionally, after education emerged as a defining issue in Virginia’s gubernatorial election last year — ranking as a top two or three issue — school choice became a litmus test issue for Republicans.

This is quite the swing in just two years.

Theoretically, education should not really be a political issue; but, as we have seen, it clearly has become one. Therefore, we must ask why exactly this has happened.

There are many possible answers to this question. One of them came from Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers — the second largest teachers union in the country. In a recent tweet, she blamed “extremists” who are “attacking teachers” and focusing on a culture war that is “intended to undermine teaching and learning.”

“The culture wars are intended to undermine teaching and learning,” Weingarten wrote. “Extremists are politicizing schools and attacking teachers. Attacking teachers doesn’t help kids, it undermines everything.”

If that was not clear enough, she also linked to a news article where she gets a bit more specific about the kinds of people she is talking about: “the anti-public schools crowd, the anti-union crowd, the privatizers, the haters.” In other words, she is referring to the conservatives, libertarians, liberals who believe in school choice, and even parents themselves.

But are these groups really the ones politicizing education? Or, alternatively, are they simply responding to the overtly political forces that have controlled education for a long time?

The 2020-2021 school year should be seen as critical when considering the politicization of education. Two events occurred in the months preceding that school year that led to the extreme stances that eventually launched schools into the political limelight: the Covid-19 pandemic and the police murder of George Floyd. The former was taken advantage of by teachers’ unions with backward incentives, while the latter led to a nationwide racial reckoning that some took so far as to actually begin promoting regressive racial ideologies in the name of progress.

First, when the Covid-19 pandemic began, there was understandably a lot of uncertainty. But one of the first things that was known about the virus was that kids were the least vulnerable to severe infection. We also soon found out that schools were not a hotspot of Covid transmission. Yet, many K-12 schools started the 2020-2021 school year online — largely due to cynical activism by teachers’ unions. Prior to the school year, Weingarten threatened a strike, stating that “nothing is off the table” if school districts decided to reopen, and the Chicago Teachers Union tweeted later that the push to reopen school was “rooted in sexism, racism and misogyny.” It is reasonable to point out that this is just rhetoric — not necessarily representative of what actual power the unions have to shape policy — but studies demonstrated that the strength of a district’s union, not the prevalence of Covid-19 in the community, was the best predictor of prolonged school closures.

More recently, the effects of these closures — caused by the exploitation of a crisis by public sector unions — have become clear. A study released by McKinsey & Company found that “by the end of the 2020-21 school year, students were on average five months behind in math and four months behind in reading.” The learning loss was even more severe among low-income students, as well as black and Hispanic students. Numerous studies — including the CDC’s own research — also show that the closures damaged students’ mental health, with rates of anxiety and depression rising.

Second, following our nation’s racial reckoning beginning in the summer of 2020, some schools began to include radical — regressive, even — teachings on race in their curriculum. Activist Chris Rufo has done deep reporting on this issue for City Journal, exposing example after example of racial essentialist messages surrounding race making their way into K-12 classrooms. Moreover, looking to spread this kind of instruction further, the National Education Association, which is the largest teachers union in the country, passed a resolution that explicitly endorsed the teaching of critical race theory in the classroom as a tool to understand America. And the American Federation of Teachers, which is the second largest teachers union in the country, announced a campaign to bring the writings of Ibram X. Kendi — a scholar who has written that “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” — into every single classroom.

In response to perpetual school closures driven by union power, as well as racially divisive curricula making its way into K-12 schools, a coalition of conservatives, libertarians, and liberals mobilized against such policies.

Parents showed up to school board meetings, politicians passed legislation, and heterodox news outlets reported on what was happening. So many people have left the traditional public school system recently that it is being referred to by some as an ”exodus” of sorts. This is the response that Weingarten is blaming for the politicization of schools. However, it should be noted that all of this came after both radical and unprecedented policies were implemented. So, while one may criticize aspects of the response — after all, I do not agree with every law passed or with every speech given by a parent at a school board meeting — it stretches credulity to claim that parents politicized schools when in fact it was the schools themselves, in tandem with the unions, who introduced these radical political elements.

Data show that more and more people are looking for alternatives to the traditional public school system. Earlier this year, PBS published a piece exploring the surge in homeschooling across the country.

“In 18 states that shared data through the current school year, the number of homeschooling students increased by 63% in the 2020-2021 school year, then fell by only 17% in the 2021-2022 school year,” wrote the Associated Press’ Carolyn Thompson.

The article tells the stories of multiple parents who started to homeschool their children over the past year, and they find that a common reason is that they were simply unimpressed by the quality of the instruction during school closures. Apart from homeschooling, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools reported that enrollment went up by seven percent during the pandemic.

The reason is clear: the traditional public school system has been riddled with failures for a long time, but events over the past few years made people more aware of them. And these failures do not just exist in the heads of parents, conservative ideologues or school choice activists, as Weingarten suggests. They are very real. Parents want their kids to attend school in person, and they generally don’t want their kids to be indoctrinated into a particular ideological system by strangers who work for the government. According to the American Federation of Teachers’ own poll, 60 percent of likely voters in battleground states are dissatisfied with the way traditional public schools are teaching about race and 58 percent are dissatisfied with how they are teaching about issues related to gender identity.

People vote with their feet; so, as more and more people leave the traditional public school system, it will become more and more clear that something fundamental needs to change in the way the U.S. handles education policy.

The reason something fundamental must change is that the failures we are seeing do not just happen by chance; rather, they are the natural byproduct of a government monopoly on education coupled with power in the hands of a public sector union. Therefore, any real reform to the education system must address these two things.

First, it is generally understood that monopolies are bad for consumers. They lead to higher prices, along with lower quality and quantity. Figuring out why this happens isn’t difficult: firms have no incentive to innovate, nor provide a high-quality product, when consumers have no other options. The economist Thomas Sowell was correct when he observed that education is truly an outlier when it comes to how it is treated, as traditional public schools — as opposed to a grocery store or a summer camp — do not have to convince anyone that attending them is in their best interest. People are simply forced to attend. However, moving to a model that is characterized by choice will 1) empower families to choose a school that best fits the needs of their individual children and 2) incentivize every school, including traditional public schools, to prioritize the quality of the education they are providing and to continually improve. After all, if they do not, then people will simply decide to attend elsewhere.

Second, the job of a union is to protect, and accrue benefits for, its members. This can clearly be a worthwhile goal; but, when it comes to public sector teachers’ unions, the problems arise when advocating for the interests of teachers means advocating against the interests of students. The truth is that what is best for students is not always best for teachers, and vice versa.

For example, when Covid-19 school closures were being considered, it was clearly in the interest of students to learn in an in-person environment; however, teachers’ unions advocated against opening schools because their job is to look out for the comfort and safety of members. Another example is when a teacher’s job performance is egregiously sub-par. In such a scenario, it is clearly in the interest of students for that teacher to be removed, while it is in the interest of the teacher and the union to retain the teacher’s job. This is why in New York City it takes an average of 830 days and $313,000 to fire a single incompetent teacher.

A successful educational system cannot include cornerstones that, due to their very nature, work to the detriment of children. The good news is that by enacting policies that advance school choice, the power of teachers’ unions to advocate backward policy will weaken for two reasons. First, if that policy is detrimental enough, it may encourage students to leave for a school that puts students’ needs first; this could certainly cause the unions to begin to tread a bit lighter in their advocacy. Second, most charter schools and private schools are not unionized, which means that more students will be learning in schools that are not unionized after there is school choice if unionized schools fail to provide the education consumers want.

Steven Levitt, who co-authored the bestselling book, Freakonomics, explained the current problem with schools aptly. He wrote that “the problem (…) is not too many incentives but too few.” Right now, the schools and the teachers can really just “do whatever they want” in the classroom, regardless of what is best for students, because political forces are protecting the government’s education monopoly and the power of the unions to influence policy. In other words, because there is no competition, there can be no accountability.

This is clearly correct. And so the only solution is greater educational freedom. More people recognize this than ever before, but the work is only just getting started.

AUTHOR

Jack Elbaum

Jack Elbaum was a Hazlitt Writing Fellow at FEE and is a junior at George Washington University. His writing has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, The New York Post, and the Washington Examiner. You can contact him at jackelbaum16@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @Jack_Elbaum.

RELATED ARTICLE: Parent Sues School Over Transgender Brainwashing

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

“It’s In-Your-Face Capitalism.” Low-Paid ‘Virtual Cashiers’ Provoke Outrage among Labor Activists

Virtual cashiers may be coming to a restaurant near you.


A new start-up called Percy is based on a simple yet revolutionary idea: virtual cashiers. Essentially, a video calling device is set up at the cash register of your local restaurant or shop. When you want to buy something, you are connected with someone in a remote location, sometimes thousands of miles away, and they take your order. That way, if a store is having trouble finding local workers, or if staff members call in sick, stores can simply outsource the cashier job, often at a fraction of the cost.

Sounds brilliant, right?

The founders of Percy certainly think so. CEO Matthew Corrin and his co-founders Angela Argo and Ali Aqueel have been working on this project for months after initially trying it out at their Canadian restaurant company Freshii.

“The pandemic created this mass exodus of workers in the restaurant industry,” said Argo in a recent interview. “It made us start thinking about what roles in a restaurant can be done without a human being physically present. How can a restaurant owner capitalize on the virtual world?”

“The demand for fast-food workers far outweighs supply right now,” Argo continued. “You can look on Indeed.ca and you’ll see for yourself that everyone is offering more than minimum wage for restaurant workers — and they still can’t get staff.”

Percy’s track record so far is making a good case that Argo is on to something. The company already has more than a dozen clients in North America, including several fast-food chains.

“We’re growing quickly,” said Argo. “We tried [Percy] out at a few Freshii locations, and the response from restaurant owners, again and again, was: ‘this is a lifesaver.’”

But while restaurant owners may be celebrating, not everyone is thrilled about this new idea. Labor activists in particular have taken issue with the low wages being offered to workers in developing countries. The company currently employs about 100 workers in Nicaragua, Pakistan, and Bolivia, and a recent investigation revealed that some of the Nicaraguan workers are paid as little as $3.75 USD an hour. By comparison, an Ontario worker is guaranteed a minimum wage of $15 CAD an hour (~$11.43 USD).

“This … moves entirely in the wrong direction,” said Ontario labor minister Monte McNaughton in April. “I expect better from a Toronto-based company and know customers will vote with their feet.”

“They can keep their outsourcing jobs pilot project away from our province,” said British Columbia’s labor minister Harry Bains in a tweet.

Retail analyst and author Bruce Winder also had harsh words for the company.

“It’s in-your-face capitalism,” said Winder. “It reminds the customer, while they’re ordering food, that the company is taking away a live person and replacing them with a video of someone earning much less money.”

The concerns raised by labor activists are unsurprising, but the activists miss a key piece of the puzzle. Yes, the workers in developing countries are getting paid low wages by our standards, but think about it from their perspective.

If you’re a poor person living in a Third World country, a job that pays $3.75 USD an hour is an opportunity. Sure, it’s not the best, but it’s probably far better than the alternatives, which could range from sifting through trash to prostitution.

The point is, by choosing this job, these employees are demonstrating that, in their opinion, this job is better than any other alternative available to them. By coming into these countries, Percy is expanding these workers’ options, giving them opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have. In short, Percy is helping them, not hurting them.

Now, some may want to ban this kind of outsourcing out of compassion for these workers, but a ban would only leave them worse off. By taking away the best opportunities these workers have, a ban on this practice would force them to take other, less appealing jobs.

Another option would be setting a minimum wage for this kind of labor, but that runs into similar problems. With higher wages, fewer businesses will buy into the program, which means fewer workers will be hired. With a wage of $3.75 USD an hour, a restaurant might be induced to hire a worker. But if that wage has to be at least, say, $10 USD an hour, restaurants will very likely avoid hiring them. Thus, instead of making $3.75 an hour, many potential workers will be left sifting through trash. It’s a textbook example of making perfect the enemy of good.

Aside from helping workers in third world countries, Percy is also helping restaurants deal with their labor problems. This, in turn, helps consumers, who will get better service and lower prices thanks to these initiatives.

It’s really a win-win.

This is the magic of capitalism. When we have economic freedom, we can come up with all sorts of creative ways to help each other. We can create jobs for poor people in developing countries while solving our own labor shortage problems at the same time. They need jobs. We need workers. Everyone is better off as a result.

Once we understand this, we can start to see why government interference in the market creates problems. By getting in the way of these win-win transactions, government prohibitions take away mutually beneficial opportunities that would otherwise have been pursued. “The minimum wage law provides no jobs,” Rothbard reminds us, “it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs are the inevitable result.”

With this in mind, it becomes clear that the labor-activist paradigm is not just wrong, it’s actually backwards. They say companies like Percy are hurting poor people in Third World countries and that government rules will help these people. But in reality, these companies are being incredibly helpful, and it is government restrictions that are causing problems.

The best thing we can do for workers in poor countries is to bring them into the global economy, and the easiest way to do that is by giving them the freedom to make the best arrangements they can. Companies like Percy should be celebrated for helping these people by facilitating mutually beneficial arrangements. Instead, they are vilified as exploiters.

But guess what, all trade is exploitative, at least in a sense. The buyer is exploiting the fact that the seller wants his money, and the seller is exploiting the fact that the buyer wants his product. And there’s nothing wrong with that, we do it every day. Free-market transactions are all about this mutual “exploitation.” That’s what makes them mutually beneficial.

In this case, Percy may be “exploiting” workers who have limited options, but these workers are just as much “exploiting” the labor shortage in richer countries to their advantage. And I say, good for them.

So, does this initiative qualify as “in-your-face capitalism?” Absolutely. And that’s precisely what makes it so beautiful.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Social Justice Unionism Means Pro-Abortion Big Labor

Last week, Politico reported on a leaked draft of a Supreme Court opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade and return the question of abortion regulation to the states, ending the Court’s invention of a constitutional right to abortion. The draft opinion was greeted with predictable outrage from left-progressives, including those in organized labor.

Statements

Now, many people, especially those on the social-conservative right who are re-exploring aligning with organized labor, might not expect union bosses to be among the left-progressive leaders ready to jump on a leaked, not-finalized Supreme Court opinion, but they were. Examples include:

  • Liz Shuler, who ascended to the presidency of the AFL-CIO after the death of Richard Trumka, argued, “We must be able to control our own bodies—which has a direct impact on economic justice and the ability of working people to make a better life for themselves and their families.”
  • Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), denounced an “extremist, anti-woman majority of the Supreme Court” (that, it should be noted, is suspected to include Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a woman) for taking away “a woman’s fundamental right to an abortion.”
  • Jean Ross, president of National Nurses United, said the opinion “should be viewed as part of the broader far-right assault on gender-affirming health rights in this country, including the laws targeting trans youth and their families, attacks on LBGTQ individuals, and homophobic bans on the word ‘gay’ in education,” presumably a deceptive reference to Florida’s Parental Rights in Education legislation, frequently misnamed in “objective” press accounts.

I Told You So

These statements and other pro-abortion activities by organized labor, such as SEIU Healthcare Illinois/Indiana rallying with Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) and Planned Parenthood or the new Amazon Labor Union calling for protests in New York City, demonstrate that American labor unions are inseparable from social left-progressivism through an ideological practice known as “social justice unionism.” Back in 2021, we published a serial outlining how organized labor provided financial support to Washington State measures introducing Planned Parenthood–aligned sex education material into public school curriculums.

And what of the expressed hope of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), that union organizations could provide a counterweight to “a requirement that the workers embrace management’s latest ‘woke’ human resources fad”? Well, I was skeptical, noting that “operatives who run the labor unions endorse woke H.R. fads. And to the extent they don’t, they support going even further.”

Now, I may enter into evidence the statement of Sara Nelson, head of the flight attendants’ union AFA-CWA and rumored candidate to challenge Shuler for the leadership of the House of Labor, last seen campaigning to extend the now-enjoined traveler mask mandate when it came up for renewal in March. Nelson explicitly called on her members’ bosses to engage in woke capitalism:

We call on airline management to stand with us and for equality, anti-discrimination, and mutual respect. It is not enough that corporations espouse these principles as core to their missions—now is the time to demonstrate this commitment to their employees and passengers. This is about our safety and our freedom. We cannot work if we are not safe.

Social justice unionism means that organized labor is an additional pressure point forcing capitalists to be woke, not a point of opposition. The reaction to the Supreme Court leak should prove that beyond doubt.

AUTHOR

Michael Watson

Michael is Research Director for Capital Research Center and serves as the managing editor for InfluenceWatch. A graduate of the College of William and Mary, he previously worked for a…+ MORE BY MICHAEL WATSON

Why You Shouldn’t Celebrate the TSA for Employing 47,000 Workers

The lump of labor hypothesis—that there are only so many jobs “out there”—is a fallacy.


I recently took an airplane trip, departing from a medium-sized city. There must have been, oh, at least 100 Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employees who were officiating at the boarding process: checking our luggage, ensuring our shoes were removed, delving into our underwear, stealing our toothpaste, pushing us through those x-ray machines. There were literally hordes of them mucking about. (In 2020, the latest year for which such figures are available, the TSA employed more than 47,000 people and had an annual budget of approximately $7.7 billion.)

Why were they there? Years ago, matters were far more simple; you showed a boarding pass, and just got on the plane.

What changed? In a word, terrorists. They hijacked planes and used them in suicidal attacks during the 9-11 attacks in 2001. The TSA workers were there to ensure that no one smuggled any bombs on board, or interfered with flights in any other destructive manner.

Did these terrorists, inadvertently from their perspective of course, actually do us a favor? After all, thanks to the TSA, almost 50,000 American jobs were created. Were these folk not working for this government agency, perhaps they might all be unemployed. If so, our unemployment rate would be significantly higher than it is at present. Do we thus owe the terrorists a vote of thanks? Not, of course, for murdering innocent air travelers, but, at least, for helping out our economy?

No. Not one bit.

Rather, instead of partially hurting and partially helping us, they are actually doing damage to us in both regards. How so? This can easily be demonstrated. Suppose that there was never any such thing as terrorists, certainly not involving airplanes. There would then of course be no need for the TSA. (There is no need for them even now; this function would be better provided through private enterprise, but that is an entirely different matter.)

What, then, would all these people be doing? We cannot know for sure, but we can speculate. Presumably, they would be butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, farmers, fishermen, doctors, scientists, cooks, and bottle washers. In short, they would be producing more of these ordinary goods and services. Possibly, some of them would be breaking new ground, providing the rest of us with things we cannot now even imagine. Without terrorists in existence we could have had our cake and eaten it too: have just as much air safety as at present (or more! The TSA is hardly 100 percent efficient), plus a plethora of other wealth that these folk would be creating in other industries.

Economic logic demonstrates the truth of this claim. The economic pie is not fixed. The lump of labor hypothesis—that there are only so many jobs “out there”—is a fallacy. The people who were once TSA employees bring with them not only brains, arms, and heads with which to work, but also eyes and stomachs which lead to consumption. They supply labor and demand products. As long as we want more goods and services than we already have—that is, as long as there is still scarcity—there will be room for more employment and additional GDP.

Economic history also attests to the fact that the terrorists are hurting us twice over. When World War II ended, some 12 million soldiers left the armed forces and entered the labor force. They put down their guns and picked up their plows. One result of that was the post-war boom, with far greater productivity than before.

At one time in our history, some 98 percent of the population was needed on the nation’s farms. The present figure is more like 2 percent. From whence did all those new jobs arise? They did so from the fact that people wanted more than they already had and were willing to work to obtain additional wealth.

Yet another historical episode occurred when, due to the advent of the horseless carriage, vast unemployment took place amongst blacksmiths, whip and saddle makers, horse trainers, horseshoe manufacturers, and such. Again, a far more significant proportion of the labor force than now accounted for by the TSA shifted from these horse and buggy industries to completely different ones.

The terrorists have landed upon us a one-two punch in the gut. Danger in the air and poverty too.

AUTHOR

Walter Block

Walter Edward Block is an American economist and anarcho-capitalist theorist who holds the Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair in Economics at the J. A. Butt School of Business at Loyola University New Orleans. He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.