Fetterman

[McDad]

They’ve closed about half of them in the US.

Nucor is eating their lunch. Nucor isn’t unionized.

So, again, is Fetterman acting in the concerns of his constituents? Isn't he basically saying, "Attention union steel workers of Pennsylvania, I will block the sale of US Steel in order for you to remain on the Titanic as is slowly sinks below the waves".

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Excellent. Perhaps they should be. So, it Fetterman correct to use the immense power a Senator holds to block the sale? Or, should he simply be a voice to coalesce the concerns of his constituents without the threat of wielding his power?

I never said that he should block the sale. I agreed that he’s pandering to his voting base.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

So, again, is Fetterman acting in the concerns of his constituents? Isn't he basically saying, "Attention union steel workers of Pennsylvania, I will block the sale of US Steel in order for you to remain on the Titanic as is slowly sinks below the waves".

He’s telling the union workers and union labors what they need to hear to give him votes. But I don’t see him going another 6 years.

 

[davethevol]

He’s telling the union workers and union labors what they need to hear to give him votes. But I don’t see him going another 6 years.

I’m not convinced that’s what he’s doing. He might be, but he hasn’t been pandering to his base lately and has been all over the place politically. I think he just doesn’t give a crap lately and is coming more from his actual heart and not from the place of someone who wants to continue a career in politics.

 

[McDad]

I never said that he should block the sale. I agreed that he’s pandering to his voting base.

Thanks for the clarification. And I believe you answered a question not asked of you so you might have hit the convo in the blind.

Sticking with the discussion of caterign to his constituents...is pandering to his voters = to catering to them?

 

[McDad]

He’s telling the union workers and union labors what they need to hear to give him votes. But I don’t see him going another 6 years.

It seems to me, based on your reply, he is catering to himself and NOT the voters.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I’m not convinced that’s what he’s doing. He might be, but he hasn’t been pandering to his base lately and has been all over the place politically. I think he just doesn’t give a crap lately and is coming more from his actual heart and not from the place of someone who wants to continue a career in politics.

Maybe he just wants to be on the front page for something other than his wardrobe. I look forward to seeing him match wits with the leadership of a huge Japanese conglomerate.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Thanks for the clarification. And I believe you answered a question not asked of you so you might have hit the convo in the blind.

Sticking with the discussion of caterign to his constituents...is pandering to his voters = to catering to them?

Quit similar. The difference might be that catering means he’s able to accomplish what he’s suggesting while pandering means all he can do is flap his gums about it.

 

[davethevol]

Maybe he just wants to be on the front page for something other than his wardrobe. I look forward to seeing him match wits with the leadership of a huge Japanese conglomerate.

Maybe. I think he’s mentally unstable and potentially unfit for office.

 

[McDad]

Quit similar. The difference might be that catering means he’s able to accomplish what he’s suggesting while pandering means all he can do is flap his gums about it.

Naturally, I disagree. In an ideal relationship, the person with power would legitimately cater to those in their charge by doing what is needed even if it is counter to what is wanted. In Feterman's case, he could easily be sympathetic to the concerns of his voters while simultaneously telling them the truth about the global economy, other states with more favorable employment culture, and the outdated notion of stability in a union job is numbered because of those factors.

 

[Orangeburst]

lets face it..a good day for Fetterman is when he gets the correct shoe on the correct foot in the mornings.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Naturally, I disagree. In an ideal relationship, the person with power would legitimately cater to those in their charge by doing what is needed even if it is counter to what is wanted. In Feterman's case, he could easily be sympathetic to the concerns of his voters while simultaneously telling them the truth about the global economy, other states with more favorable employment culture, and the outdated notion of stability in a union job is numbered because of those factors.

It would best to adjust the Social Security formula by reducing/delaying payouts (or freezing the COLA) or increasing the tax rate (I call it a tax - the SSA doesn’t) for what is needed to reverse the trend of the declining trust fund balance. But those in power won’t do that because the recipients don’t want smaller benefits and the contributors don’t want to pay more. Same difference. Senators #1 priority is their constituents wants.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Maybe. I think he’s mentally unstable and potentially unfit for office.

Neither is POTUS.

 

[Gandalf]

Who had John Fetterman being the most common sense senator in 2023 on their bingo card? The voice of reason in the Democratic Party. Pro Israel, willing to discuss the border, and now taking on foreign ownership of critical infrastructure.

You wait, NOW the Dems will say his injury has made him incapable of doing his job.

US Steel is a private company. He wants to block the sale of a private company and some of yall support his decision?

In most corporate situations, no. But lets not be silly here, this is not most situations. While a shell of what it once was compared to the vast steel companies in China It is the 2nd largest steel producer in the USA. We CANNOT continue to allow strategic industries to be owned by foreigners.

I dont care if its allies like Japan, Israel, UK or foes like Russia and China, whoever. Our core industries and strategic supplies (like farmland and food) cannot be subject to another nation's interests.

List of steel producers - Wikipedia LOOK at this list for a moment and then reconsider if we should have this happen

I am all about free markets and capitalism but its not a national suicide pact so global elites can remove our means of production. NATIONALISM (not the fascist kind but rather the let me take care of my own country first kind) has to come first.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Fetterman looks like a guy that belongs in a metal band.

 

[Vol8188]

Who had John Fetterman being the most common sense senator in 2023 on their bingo card? The voice of reason in the Democratic Party. Pro Israel, willing to discuss the border, and now taking on foreign ownership of critical infrastructure.

You’re cheering for a man telling others they can’t sell their property?

 

[McDad]

You wait, NOW the Dems will say his injury has made him incapable of doing his job.



In most corporate situations, no. But lets not be silly here, this is not most situations. While a shell of what it once was compared to the vast steel companies in China It is the 2nd largest steel producer in the USA. We CANNOT continue to allow strategic industries to be owned by foreigners.

I dont care if its allies like Japan, Israel, UK or foes like Russia and China, whoever. Our core industries and strategic supplies (like farmland and food) cannot be subject to another nation's interests.

List of steel producers - Wikipedia LOOK at this list for a moment and then reconsider if we should have this happen

I am all about free markets and capitalism but its not a national suicide pact so global elites can remove our means of production. NATIONALISM (not the fascist kind but rather the let me take care of my own country first kind) has to come first.

Then the laws declaring which business is under a fascist model should be written so companies, shareholders, etc can know exactly where they stand. If it is indeed vital to our national interests, then by all means nationalize (or psuedo-nationalize) it.

 

[davethevol]

Fetterman looks like a guy that belongs in a metal band.

Old Man’s Child?

 

[Gandalf]

Then the laws declaring which business is under a fascist model should be written so companies, shareholders, etc can know exactly where they stand. If it is indeed vital to our national interests, then by all means nationalize (or psuedo-nationalize) it.

I totally agree that it should be transparent. The comment about fascist is adding HITLER to a conversation without any call for it. Nationalism /= Fascism. Most other countries, whether democracies are not, are not so stupid as we are to sell the very land out from our own children's feet.

And it is not a situation where big brother needs to come in and control their business.

HOWEVER, it is a simple rule not to have a foreign company or company with a majority foreign parent can own majority stake in a company deemed "strategic" NOR can such a company own over 500 acres of land. Think of it like a property being on the historic register.

 

[McDad]

I totally agree that it should be transparent. The comment about fascist is adding HITLER to a conversation without any call for it. Nationalism /= Fascism. Most other countries, whether democracies are not, are not so stupid as we are to sell the very land out from our own children's feet.

And it is not a situation where big brother needs to come in and control their business.

HOWEVER, it is a simple rule not to have a foreign company or company with a majority foreign parent can own majority stake in a company deemed "strategic" NOR can such a company own over 500 acres of land. Think of it like a property being on the historic register.

1. Fascism existed before Hitler ever took power. I cannot help that ypu connect the two when unnecessary.
2. Economic fascism is a variety of socialism — individual rights may be routinely suppressed in the name of “social justice,” “national greatness” or some other utopian ideal.
3. Either private citizens control what they built through their own risk, work, and sacrifice or they don't. If it is so vital to national interests, the government should make an offer and outbid others.
4. Your justifications don't fly with me. But I am a capitalists who cherishes liberty above any other ideal.

 

[hog88]

1. Fascism existed before Hitler ever took power. I cannot help that ypu connect the two when unnecessary.
2. Economic fascism is a variety of socialism — individual rights may be routinely suppressed in the name of “social justice,” “national greatness” or some other utopian ideal.
3. Either private citizens control what they built through their own risk, work, and sacrifice or they don't. If it is so vital to national interests, the government should make an offer and outbid others.
4. Your justifications don't fly with me. But I am a capitalists who cherishes liberty above any other ideal.

It’s way too late in the game to start nationalizing or protecting vital manufacturing from foreign ownership. Should have learned our lesson with WWII

 

[McDad]

It’s way too late in the game to start nationalizing or protecting vital manufacturing from foreign ownership. Should have learned our lesson with WWII

Even with precedent, it shouldn't be supported on principle.

 

[hog88]

Even with precedent, it shouldn't be supported on principle.

I think there needs to be some protections for national security reasons. Not exactly sure what that would entail but

 

[Velo Vol]

gonna be interesting to see how Team Biden plays this.

his FTC absolutely hates mergers/acquisitions; they claim to love union workers; Biden has the same "made in America" rhetoric as Trump

stay tuned

There's going to be multiple economic nationalists in the senate against this. Not sure why Fetterman is being singled out.

 

[McDad]

I think there needs to be some protections for national security reasons. Not exactly sure what that would entail but

I agree that manufacturing is vitally important in war. And since wars come randomly and abruptly preparedness is essential.
I can only think of a few viable options...Subsidies, purchase the business, create a plan to build a plant from scratch when needed.
What I don't like is the business runs as a business for a hundred years and now it's deemed too important for its future to be decided by owners.