Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:04 PM Nov 2016

This is what the Dems need to be doing - Sanders: use defense contracts as leverage for Carrier jobs

You see, we can fight for social justice AND fight for the blue collar working class.. If we had done that, a recount wouldn't be necessary

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders turned up the pressure on President-elect Donald Trump on Saturday about his pledge to try to stop an Indiana air conditioner manufacturer from moving 1,400 jobs to Mexico.

Both Sanders, who challenged Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, and Trump seized on an announcement earlier this year by United Technologies Corp's Carrier division that it would shift production to Mexico as an example of how trade deals hurt U.S. workers.

Sanders on Saturday warned "it is not good enough to save some of these jobs" and said Trump should use as leverage United Technologies' defense contracts, Export-Import Bank financing, and tax breaks.

"I call on Mr. Trump to make it clear to the CEO of United Technologies that if his firm wants to receive another defense contract from the taxpayers of this country, it must not move these plants to Mexico," the senator from Vermont said in a statement.


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-sanders-idUSKBN13L0YU
32 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This is what the Dems need to be doing - Sanders: use defense contracts as leverage for Carrier jobs (Original Post) realmirage Nov 2016 OP
Bernie is giving me a headache with this. ( I expect to get raked over the coals for saying this but JHan Nov 2016 #1
Not going to happen GP6971 Nov 2016 #2
Your knee jerk reaction against any plan that could put Sanders strategy into action realmirage Nov 2016 #5
By no means knee jerk GP6971 Nov 2016 #7
Are there no ways at all? THINK realmirage Nov 2016 #8
Of course there are ways GP6971 Nov 2016 #15
The OP was about Sanders pushing Trump to realmirage Nov 2016 #16
So Bernie is trolling? JHan Nov 2016 #17
I understood the purpose of the OP GP6971 Nov 2016 #25
Speaking of F-35 tammywammy Nov 2016 #28
That's true GP6971 Nov 2016 #29
The 2 responses in this thread are good examples of what's wrong with the mindset realmirage Nov 2016 #3
you could have engaged me under my post... it's still there.. JHan Nov 2016 #18
I'm missing the part about social justice? I'm pretty sure this would require new legislation not bettyellen Nov 2016 #4
The social justice aspect was the DNCs entire message, what's lacking realmirage Nov 2016 #6
"Entire message" -I hope you're not serious? bettyellen Nov 2016 #9
It was the majority of it. realmirage Nov 2016 #10
"A tad".... as well as programs to bring new jobs for clean energy and infracstructure.... bettyellen Nov 2016 #23
Bernie's solutions would not have solved the problem you cite, which are problems.. but JHan Nov 2016 #31
The hatred of Bernie here means your important OP is DOA Arazi Nov 2016 #11
I'm trying to help people want to figure out how to win elections realmirage Nov 2016 #12
It's becoming more evident that party purity is more important Arazi Nov 2016 #13
I regularly get challenged for my take on Bernie's positions.. JHan Nov 2016 #21
here we go again DemonGoddess Nov 2016 #14
If you don't lie to people you don't win.. If you don't offer false promises.. you don't win.. JHan Nov 2016 #19
apparently DemonGoddess Nov 2016 #20
Wrong. This is a form of corruption and protectionism. DanTex Nov 2016 #22
People will lap it up though... JHan Nov 2016 #24
Yeah it's an empty gesture- - PR stunt giving voters false hope . bettyellen Nov 2016 #26
And do we know if there are other marybourg Nov 2016 #27
United Technologies is the only US-based maker of elevators and escalators jmowreader Nov 2016 #30
This just sounds scary, murky, and possibly illegal. SaschaHM Nov 2016 #32

JHan

(10,173 posts)
1. Bernie is giving me a headache with this. ( I expect to get raked over the coals for saying this but
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:14 PM
Nov 2016

What Bernie proposes is sexy sounding, it will resonate, and it will be disastrous.

We keep addressing the symptoms rather than the causes. If this ever would become law, expect more business flight.

GP6971

(32,888 posts)
2. Not going to happen
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:17 PM
Nov 2016

That would be discrimination as they are different business units. Also, it isn't illegal for a company to move operations off shore. I'm not saying I like it and I think it's wrong, but UT would have every right to sue the US government.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
5. Your knee jerk reaction against any plan that could put Sanders strategy into action
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:36 PM
Nov 2016

I think is a symbol of why the Democratic Party is sinking fast.

GP6971

(32,888 posts)
7. By no means knee jerk
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:39 PM
Nov 2016

I deal with Federal Procurement and countless laws and regulations would have to be changed. It's just reality.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
8. Are there no ways at all? THINK
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:41 PM
Nov 2016

I guess you know government better than Bernie Sanders? I guess he's just making up fantasies and there are NO ways to do it? I wonder, if we actually took a second to ponder it, it would probably require caring just a little about the rust belt, which just handed us a giant defeat...

GP6971

(32,888 posts)
15. Of course there are ways
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:55 PM
Nov 2016

but it would require legislation which the repugs wouldn't even consider seeing that;

proposed legislation is from the democratic side. Automatic NO
repugs don't want to damage their relationship with the MIC. Too lucrative to give up

And finally jobs. Why is the trouble plagued F35 program still going strong? Because Lockheed Martin spread out their work and subcontractor's work in multiple states (I think about 35-40) resulting in representatives voting to keep the project to protect the jobs.

Two key things are needed....pass new legislation and severely restrict lobbying.

And no I don't know the POLITCAL aspects of government contracting better than BS. But I do know the nuts and bolts of working with government contracts.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
16. The OP was about Sanders pushing Trump to
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:58 PM
Nov 2016

make good on his promise, so the push would be coming from Trump's base. And in the meantime the Democrats would look like they give a shit by supporting this strategy publicly. This is how we begin to win back the image of the party of the working class.

tammywammy

(26,582 posts)
28. Speaking of F-35
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 10:21 PM
Nov 2016

United Technologies owns Pratt & Whitney. Pratt & Whitney makes the engine for the F-35.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
3. The 2 responses in this thread are good examples of what's wrong with the mindset
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:25 PM
Nov 2016

of the Democratic Party. The knee jerk reactions against any attempt to fight for the working class is what earns us that "elitist" label we hate so much

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
4. I'm missing the part about social justice? I'm pretty sure this would require new legislation not
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:35 PM
Nov 2016

An order from the president. Is this his big critique of Trump this week? Wow.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
6. The social justice aspect was the DNCs entire message, what's lacking
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:38 PM
Nov 2016

is a will to fight for the working class in the rust belt as well, which just flipped red and kicked what little ass we had left in government.

By the way in another interview just today Sanders stood up for social justice and blue collar jobs in the same breath. It's in the Sanders section. That's what the Democratic Party needs to get back to.

 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
10. It was the majority of it.
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:43 PM
Nov 2016

There was a little talk about raising the minimum wage a tad, and sort of reforming wall street a tad... but that doesn't solve the immediate problems of the vanishing working class in the rust belt. Or didn't we just hear them speak loud and clear to us on Nov 8?

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
23. "A tad".... as well as programs to bring new jobs for clean energy and infracstructure....
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 09:15 PM
Nov 2016

But just a tad, not big jumbo lies like Donald. Have heard she should have lied before too. hmmmmmm.

JHan

(10,173 posts)
31. Bernie's solutions would not have solved the problem you cite, which are problems.. but
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 10:37 PM
Nov 2016

I don't believe any politician should lie to people or give them false hope.

That is cruel.

That is inhumane.

Arazi

(6,894 posts)
13. It's becoming more evident that party purity is more important
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:54 PM
Nov 2016

than winning elections.

Fall in line or be purged

JHan

(10,173 posts)
21. I regularly get challenged for my take on Bernie's positions..
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 09:06 PM
Nov 2016

I have never attacked the man personally though. These days , if you don't fall in line with everything he says you're deemed to be "the problem", "the reason we lost" or some other thing..while the person accusing you never really addresses the points you raised.

DemonGoddess

(5,112 posts)
14. here we go again
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 08:55 PM
Nov 2016


He talks big, but you know, he really doesn't SEE or know how to implement any of this. Or have you forgotten the NYDN interview?

JHan

(10,173 posts)
19. If you don't lie to people you don't win.. If you don't offer false promises.. you don't win..
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 09:02 PM
Nov 2016

Or something like that..

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
22. Wrong. This is a form of corruption and protectionism.
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 09:08 PM
Nov 2016

It is inappropriate for the president to threaten an individual company with retribution like this. We are supposed to be a nation of laws. Building air conditioners has nothing to do with national security, defense contracts should have nothing to do with their decision.

We're talking about 1400 jobs here, a drop in the bucket. Direct intervention like this is never going to be a solution to the loss of industrial jobs, which is due to automation and not trade. It makes for good optics, but doesn't solve anything. It's unfortunate that Bernie is giving in to Trumpism on this.

marybourg

(13,174 posts)
27. And do we know if there are other
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 10:03 PM
Nov 2016

heating plant or air conditioning manufacturers that are building units in the U.S. who are capable of supplying the types of units needed for government installations?

There is no current law that would allow us to exclude Carrier from bidding on gov't contracts on the basis of manufacturing in Mexico. And we cannot pass a law that would exclude only Carrier. And if we excluded all those manufacturing abroad to some degree, do we know that there actually is a U.S.-only HVAC equipment manufacturer? I suspect there isn't. Or are gov't installations going to do without heating and air conditioning plants.

Macho talk gets votes, apparently, but it doesn't keep the lights on.

jmowreader

(51,406 posts)
30. United Technologies is the only US-based maker of elevators and escalators
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 10:34 PM
Nov 2016

If the feds construct a building that's more than one story high, Buy American rules dictate shopping at United Technologies' Otis Division.

SaschaHM

(2,897 posts)
32. This just sounds scary, murky, and possibly illegal.
Sun Nov 27, 2016, 11:04 PM
Nov 2016

I don't think the laws, as they exist, allow the president to basically threaten a company with the loss of federal benefits for doing something legal and I don't think the republicans are going to make it so. This makes the president look like a mafia don leveraging benefits worth millions/billions for a political favor and I'm sure there are safeguards/checks and balances to prevent just this. What's next, Trump calling on corporations expecting legally guaranteed tax breaks to pad his job creation numbers or face the consequences? This is the type of stuff that we should be ready to impeach Trump for, not cheering him on to do.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»This is what the Dems nee...