Kerry and Dean: Do they support an International Minimum Wage?

Gephardt does, Kucinich does, I believe that Moseley-Braun does, and I'm sure Sharpton would. I think Clark could adopt the position, Graham and Edwards are starting to look hopeless on the issue, and I'm sure Lieberman would be against it.

So what about Kerry and Dean? They both support NAFTA, the World Trade Organization, and claim to support labor guarentees along with the corporate trade agreements. Will they support a basic labor guarentee, like a minimum wage? That will help ensure a level playing field.

Will they officially call for an international minimum wage, like Gephardt and Kucinich have done?

I think us economic liberals should choose Kerry, now he did support that, but I think if you are pro labor like me, I think Kerry is the better guy, he has a 90% lifetime record from the AFL-CIO which is good.

Some labor unions were for drilling in ANWR for example. So knowing what it is labor unions are using as criteria for their rating is probably important. I have no idea either way, just thought I'd add that tidbit as food for thought.

Its ok really, but I think Kerry is more pro worker than Dean. I think Kerry also is superior on environmental issues although I may be wrong. I used the AFL-CIO's rating, and they are probably one of the most loyal democratic unions there is.

Unions are only as socially conscious and environmentally aware as their members. The reason I believe unions are possibly the most important organization in a democratic capitalist system is that they represent the workers directly, in a democratic way. Corporations represent their shareholders and management, and we absolutely *must* have unions that support the employees and workers.

I'd love to see "community unions" that are unions of residents and community members to promote their interests in saving the environment. Protecting and preserving our environment is a number one priority in my opinion. More corporate globalization will make it worse.

You and I most likely disagree about this, but I don't give a damn about "anti-war" - I've marched against every war in my adult life, most of them under the Clinton administration, so I just don't buy the anti-war rhetoric from any of them, including my ultimate dream candidate, Kucinich. He's a politican, I don't mind :)

If Kucinich drops out, I'll almost certainly vote for Gephardt, who despite his many flaws, is the best hope for the Democratic party and America to stop what the corporations are doing to the middle working class in America, and people all over the world.

I also think it's extremely important to have a President who is outside of the international elite social and family circles that Bush and John Forbes-Kerry are a part of. That is half the reason that Clinton was so popular.

I want Kucinich to win, and I want Bush out. I'll probably hold my nose for any Democratic candidate, including Lieberman, but I hope I don't have to.

I dont mind Gephardt really. Gephardt isnt evil, I know hes pretty good when it comes down to it. Well, I think Kucinich is still the best of them all, and I think people are overestimating Dean really. Well if you marched against Clinton's wars, I'd assume you have little love for Clark. Dean IMO is overrated, take no offense Dean supporters, but he wasnt really that against the war, despite being retired as governor, he didnt speak at one anti war rally, Kucinich did, he has a neat plan on civil unions but Kucinich suprasses him with that, and on hes a fighter why so is Mr. Kucinich. These people WCTV are mostly liberals like me and you but ironically adopted the tactics of the hated DLC and thats why they support Dean, you wont see them saying that, no offense guys but we need 180's not 90's in degrees that is.

WASHINGTON - When Richard Gephardt announced his "leadership team" of Iowa supporters a month ago he said, "I don't take one bit of support for granted," and touted what he called "a great team of folks behind me."

But in politics, a month can be painfully long, and if Gephardt looks behind him now he'll find that his leadership team is fading in a state deemed crucial to his presidential hopes.
...
What makes the Gephardt situation unusual, Winebrenner said, is precisely the fact that Gephardt has invested so much in the state since his victory in the caucuses during his first presidential run in 1988.

"Gephardt has certainly been around Iowa long enough," Winebrenner said. "He should have a halfway decent list."
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/News/F2EEF4C27FFFAB5286256D760031C382?OpenDocument&Headline=Team+touted+by+Gephardt+fades+in+Iowa

minimum wage was enacted? What I'm getting at is how would the international minimum wage impact outsourcing? Perhaps someone has read something about this and can enlighten me.

I also fear that corporations could still take advantage of workers, they did it in the UK even after the UK passed anti child labor legislation way back in the 1800's.

First of all, the race to the bottom would end. There would be a bottom. There would be no more laying off $10 an hour workers to exploit people and only pay them 50 cents an hour, under totalitarian regimes and unfair conditions. It would immediatly remove any profit motive a corporation might have to exploit people.

Then we can start the process of bringing the living standards up around the world. I fully support international trade and globalization. I want it to happen under democratic governments that are responsible to the people they govern.

It would be even better if we made sure that corporations stay inside their countries, and stay out of other people's countries. One thing at a time. Let's get a minimum wage.

Edited...

Not just a living wage, but also child labor, 8 hour days, environmental protection, all of the things that we have here that corporations are racing to leave behind. It has to be done in order to truly make a middle class, just like it had to be done here. Notice our middle class is shrinking without labor protection?

can impose an international minumum wage on other countries?

It will take some political will and energy, but it's perfectly doable.

Because they like us? International trade agreements are made because both sides get something they want. What do we give other countries in exchange for putting in a minimum wage which, if equalized against the US min wage, could be ten to twenty times more than they are paying now? I just don't have any idea what would make another country to want to do that, do you?

By the way, welcome to DU.

It will take some political will and energy, but it's perfectly doable.

And there ARE no 'corporate trade agreements.'

Just what would be considered a minimum wage in the respective countries.

If it's the latter, I doubt it would have much impact, since the foreign labor would still be cheap the standard of living is so low in some countries.

"But we’ve got to make sure that we get children out of poverty, we’ve got to have better jobs for our people. That’s why I talk about an international variable minimum wage, so that we can begin to bring up standards around the whole world, so that we can have good jobs in this country."

CDF Forum 4/9/03

http://www.childrensdefense.org/conference_2003/forum_transcript.pdf

It's SO fucking easy to call for things that will NEVER pass.

Bless Kucinich's heart, I assume it's in the right place. But truth to tell, I'm beginning to have doubts either about his grasp of the fundamental realities of life (and Congress) or, barring that, reality itself.

Here are Dean positions on:

Economic Growth and Job Creation (speech)
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=7343

Labor
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_labor

No, he's not calling for an International Minimum Wage. As delightful an idea as that is, it's pie-in-the-sky, and the two candidates who are proposing it KNOW that. The technical term for it is pandering. If the idea starts to resonate with voters, you can watch for Kerry to announce his own pie-in-the-sky pandering support of this idiocy.

Eloriel

A lot of us are sick and tired of corporate globalization and the excuses the Republicans, and many many Democrats, have for it. Meanwhile, their campaign donations pour in.

If 10% of the energy and political will the Democrats put into NAFTA and GATT were put into an international minimum wage, even if we have to wait for certain countries, we could be well on the way.

I'm still rather confused how certain Democrats who identify with Democratic leaning groups - like feminists, the LGBT community - can be so against some kinds of exploitation and so blase about others. I wonder what they would say if I said that men making more money than women is just an inevitable part of the economy, or anti-discrimination laws protecting gay and lesbian people is "SO fucking easy to call for" because it will "NEVER pass."

They would be disgusted and horrifed, and question my loyalties and solidarity, for good reason.

I think we have to try to pass what is right not what we think can pass, maybe thats idealist but you know, would it be right to put off Civil Rights in the past just because, "it will never pass", maybe I am an idealist but idealism I think works historically.

We will compromise from a strong position, not a defensive position. If the Republicans and pro-corporate Democrats won't support the international minimum wage, let's hear them defend allowing corporations to pay less. I want to hear their spin and denials, and count the campaign contributions.

Some of us and certain candidates, like Kucinich and Gephardt, are On Record. Let's get the other candidates, like Kerry and Dean, On Record. If they support an international minimum wage, let them say it. If they are against a minimum wage, let them say it, and we can compare their excuses to the excuses the Republicans make.

The Republicans have fought minimum wages from the very beginning, and always have. I'd like to see which Democrats have gone to the Republican side.

but don't know about Kerry or Dean stance, excedpt they probably both hope it doesn't come up much

And Big Business. I've had a union screw me over before on insurance.

Sorry that happened but when it comes down to it most unions are good. It is ironic yet a good thing to tell your republican that the icon of union corruption one Jimmy Hoffa was a big time republican. I am reading about it in Art Schlessinger's RFK and his times, how Goldwater took a liking to Jimmy Hoffa but didnt like the more plain dressed and less corrupt if he was, UAW head Walter Mereuth.

Just like Big Business.

I think what RFK did with Hoffa was brilliant.

which would be different in every country. Sometimes minimum wage doesn't cut it, either.

Kerry wants the minimum wage indexed to the cost of living and taken OUT of the political arena.

If Kerry goes on record and supports an international living wage, even if is variable in different countries, I could really change my mind about Mr. John Forbes-Kerry.

Since Forbes-Kerry is part of the ultra-elite, international wealthy familes, like FDR, I think he has a special responsibility to promote issues like an international living wage, and corporate loyalty. If Kerry really works on this and spends some political capital on it, I could really get behind him. Kerry is a liberal, and I like his stances on almost all social issues, except gun rights, which I like Dean a whole lot more.

If Kerry could bring himself to say Iran-Contra, BCCI, Saudi Arabia, and Bush - today, in 2003, in public, I would post an apologetic thread to John Forbes Kerry for the many unpleasant things I have said about him. Same goes for Dean.

The proposals I have read would index the minimum wage to the country's standard of living in some fashion. Not to the US standard of living.

So, if $1 an hour is a king's ransom in a poor country, it would still be beneficial to corporations to cough up the $1 instead of paying the US minimum wage.

I don't think this a serious issue at all.

I'm willing to compromise for pragmatic solutions. I don't think we can get an equal, international living wage passed right now, but I will vote for Democratic candidates who make it a priority. In our age of globalization it's top issue that affects all of us.

It's also a super-winner of an issue. The Democratic candidate that takes up an international living wage and stops outsourcing jobs to low-wage countries will win in a landslide. This is an area where the Republicans and Bush are very weak.

Although I think someone said it before Hillary.

You may very well be right on this - I was just giving a layman's take. There is no doubt that keeping jobs at home is a huge issue. An international living wage may be one of the tools to do it.

Even if it is not technically practical, all our candidate has to do is sell it as a potential job saver. That would be good enough.

its impossible to make economic changes in the whole world.

This is a non-issue. This is a laugh you off the stage issue.

we can negotiate a minimum wage as well - supposedly Kerry and Dean want to add labor and environmental protections to the trade agreements, this is a good place to start.

First, this represents mutual benefit to the countries involved. A munimum wage unwanted by the people or the states just isn't going to go anywhere. Countries like India and the entire pacific rim who have worked hard and spent money to take advantage of the cheaper labor that they can compete with are not going to accept it.

Second, it ain't working so well. Ask Bill Gates how well it's going in the pacific rim, eastern Europe etc.

"Dean's theory in a nutshell: The structure of wealth in the United States before labor unions resembled that in Third World countries today, so in order to create middle classes in the developing world, we need to bring labor unions to them."

and though prices would likely go up, "So what? ...in return for making the price of goods go up you've fixed the illegal immigration problem, you've fixed the drain of jobs problem, you've created a middle class that can buy American exports. There's a lot you get for that."

The fatal flaw of Republican and DLC doctrine is that it consistently ignores the obvious fact that in order for the US economy to continue to grow, the global economy must also grow, meaning people have to have money to buy goods both here and abroad. The New Feudalism being pushed by the Republicans/DLCers just plain old, flat out will not work. And it will breed seething hostility and an eventual revolt against the Lords of the New Feudalism to boot - sooner rather than later - I hope.

quote above from an article on Dean by Chris Suellentrop in Slate

http://slate.msn.com/id/2086258/

There's a shopowner in Mozmbique that pays his clerks 65 cents a day.

What happens next?