26 2 mins 11 yrs

This is rather important, so important I suspect it will have long-lasting repercussions for business and civil society in America.

The federal government is trying to stop Boeing opening a $2billion plant in South Carolina for which 1000 workers have already been hired. Whatever the outcome, events already are are deeply worrying. The federal government is attempting to force Boeing to close its non-unionised plant in SC and move it to a unionised plant in Washington State. Clearly, Obama’s union paymasters are looking for a return.

It’s not as if Boeing can be regarded as an ideological enemy. It is virtually an arm of government. Its lobbying power and political leverage is enormous and yet, if I were a businessman looking to invest in America, I would see naked government aggression attempting to influence a business decision.

The prospect of Boeing’s $2billion investment being effectively confiscated and controlled by the federal government would have me thinking about going somewhere else first.

Just the Wall Street, GM and Chrysler interventions would tell me that markets are deeply manipulated and that potential rivals are so politically favoured they will not fail no matter how badly they perform. Now the federal government is declaring that if it doesn’t like my business decision it will threaten the violence of law against me.

The land of the free my arse.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. Obama’s NLRB henchmen have clearly overstepped their boundaries here.

    This move would send a chill with any corporate investor – and will make it very unlikely that there will be major investments by manufacturers in a union state like CA ever again.

    This move by a politicized National Labor Relations Board will be overturned.

    The unions and Obama are not smart enough to realize that they are their own worst enemy – they’ve just given manufacturers a major new incentive to build the next production site overseas, away from the grasping hands of Obama and his NLRB.

  2. Phantom,

    Didn’t you disagree when it was suggested that Obama was, ‘at heart’, nothing more than an ersatz communist?

  3. He’s not that.

    But he has an extremely limited understanding how a free economy works, or the damage that such moves cause.

  4. A Communist would have nationalized Boeing (and put its Board of Directors to the wall). And driven the company into the ground.

    I’ll have to read up on this, it is a very interesting story Pete. My instincts tell me that this sounds like major overeaching on the part of the NLRB. Good post.

  5. Very true! – who’s to say he may yet do just that? – or at least drive the company abroad, if not into the ground.

    Difficult to see how anyone can be that stupid and hope to get away with it.

  6. This is all part of an effort to twist rules of many decades’ standing in order to benefit unions. It includes what amounts to forced unionization– efforts to remove the requirement for secret ballots for workers in union organizing elections– which is about as undemocratic a move as one could contemplate.

  7. The day will come soon when the Chinese will be capable of building such aircraft. If it were not for the fear of theft of technology, I bet Boeing would be speaking to Beijing about opening a plant their in the next decade.

  8. “Clearly, Obama’s union paymasters are looking for a return.”

    From the article you linked to “On the eve of Labor Day, a Times analysis of Federal Election Commission data shows Obama scooped up $8.1 million from union political action committees through July 2008”

    By July 2008 he had raised about $300 million. So the guys who contributed less than 3% of his money are his paymasters. Very funny Pete.

  9. Unions don’t just give money. They give other things too.

    And July 2008 may not be the right time to take a measure. He was not even nominated until August 2008, and lots of the unions may have donated to him after July.

  10. The Unions spent around $70 Million in 2008, not all of it went to the Obama campaign but if it was going to parallel organisations like the DNC or campaigns of other democratic candidates then Obama still benefitted a lot from that spending. Not to mention their importance in Democrat get-out-the-vote campaigns.

  11. FO –

    As Phantom says, July 2008 is an absurdly early date to look at donations. You can see in the link above that unions overwhelmingly favoured Obama in the presidential race. You can see here also –


    – that in the two decades to 2010 not only have the largest donors overwhelmingly favoured the Democrats but that unions head the list. Look at how many feature in the top 20.

  12. And unions ( like corporations ) know how to play games in other ways.

    They don’t just ” contribute “. They compel others to contribute, sometimes to the campaigns of candidates that the others don’t even support.

    I know of a well off person who was muscled into donating some thousands of dollars to the campaign of a US Senator this way.

    It’s called ” bundling “- one of the more corrupt practices in US politics. Money in politics corrupts everything it touches.

  13. As Phantom says, July 2008 is an absurdly early date to look at donations.

    Then why was that the story you linked to?

  14. Hey Phantom, just curious, but how did you fall on the Supreme Court’s recent ruling regarding corporate campaign contributions?

    Personally, I thought it was a bad decision.

  15. I agree. It was a horrendous ruling.

    Corporations are not persons and money is not speech. It is shocking that people make arguments that they are.

    The right wing types who supported this are being completely used as tools by Corporate America.

  16. We’re on the same page.

    I cannot fathom how so many conservatives/Republicans could support a decision that effectively pulled what little individual power they had left right out from under their feet.

    They don’t seem to grasp that corporate america is not their ally.

    Hope you are doing all good and fine, Phantom.

  17. Hanging in there, friend. Still haven’t made it to Austin, but hope to stop by one of these years

    Saturday, off to a place that I’ve always wanted to see – Vancouver, BC.

  18. An awful lot of people who regard themselves to be conservatives don’t think for themselves at all.

    They let unethical talk show weasels like Mark Levin do their thinking for them

    On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show: Mark says that the First Amendment was defended today when the Supreme Court stood up for liberty in their decision in “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.” Mark speaks with David Bossie of Citizens United as they discuss how the Court’s decision upheld free political speech and the impact of it. The leftists don’t want us to have free speech; they want to run our lives and re-write the Constitution. Finally, the liberals are connected to tyranny, while the American people are connected to liberty. We are tired of the politicians promoting their own careers and agendas, and not putting the country first.

    Mark Levin on the Citizens United decision. Levin, the supporter of liberty. Give me a break.

  19. Phantom,
    “he has an extremely limited understanding how a free economy works, or the damage that such moves cause.”
    Maybe you’re wrong.
    Maybe he has a VERY GOOD understanding of how the economy works,

    but perhaps making it work isn’t his priority…..

  20. Rush Limbaugh is a nauseating gasbag who’s more interested in lining his bank accounts than advocating classically conservative principles.

  21. This story has been very widely criticized in business and media circle.

    It is more shocking the more one thinks about it.

    It is certain to be reversed, sooner rather than later, but this absolutely will harm Obama in independent / business circles. And it should.

Comments are closed.