Gary Anderson Blog | Trump's Embracing Unions Will Cause Economic And Oil Strife | Talkmarkets
Muckraker of the Financial System

The Fed knew about the housing bubble before it burst but lied and said they didn't: Bill HR 1424 to buy bad paper (eventually called TARP) was introduced in March 9, 2007, before there began to be bad commercial paper from private subprime RE loans, in August.

I have ... more

Trump's Embracing Unions Will Cause Economic And Oil Strife

Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:51 PM EDT

Face it, Donald Trump moved sharply to the left when he embraced unions on the first day of his occupation of the White House. Republicans are simply giddy. Union leaders clapped. Trump did not want a free trade agreement, the TPP, with nations that could have undercut US workers. Jobs and production could have been shifted to nations such as Malaysia. 

So, what are the pros and cons of Trump's new found connection with labor? After all, he had illegally operated Trump tower for two years as cocktail waitresses and waiters tried to organize Trump Hotel. People in Las Vegas were perplexed by his resistance to the powerful culinary union given his support for labor unions in the past. He finally settled with the union just before taking office.

Of course everyone knows that unions were busted by globalization and by trade deals that the new POTUS has characterized as being bad for workers in the USA. Donald Trump opposes those deals. Prior to winning the election, articles abounded regarding how Trump would treat unions, with more articles reporting that he would hurt unions and fewer articles stating that he would be good for them. 

At first he was for lower wages and then later for higher wages. Lower wages would make the US more competitive globally, but if POTUS does not care about exporting, he would obviously want to get a lot more money into the hands of the US workforce fast. Unions would be a tool for making that happen. There will be strife in the nation. You can count on it. I am not saying all strife is bad. We will have to see how it will play out. But this won't be the only strife. 



The Washington Times appears to have read the tea leaves correctly early, back in May of 2016, as it ran an article pointing out Trump's strength with union workers in the very states that made a difference in the election. Democrats were fearing Trump's union support back then. Of course, Nevada went against POTUS because the culinary union members remembered his contentious battle to unionize the Trump Hotel on the strip. Overall, big union leaders supported Trump but for a reason that could prove to push most Americans to oppose unions. 

1 2 3
View single page >> |
Disclaimer: This and other personal blog posts are not reviewed, monitored or endorsed by TalkMarkets. The content is solely the view of the author and TalkMarkets is not responsible for the content of this post in any way. Our curated content which is handpicked by our editorial team may be viewed here.


Leave a comment to automatically be entered into our contest to win a free Echo Show.
Joe Black 3 years ago Member's comment

I'm greatly concerned that #Trump is in the white house. I'm willing to give the man a chance, but for now, I'm worried.

Gary Anderson 3 years ago Author's comment

He is attacking native Americans. I don't see that going down well. As far as making products here, unions will be crucial to wage increases, as products will likely cost more. So, yes, unsettling changes are in store. Some people will be helped and some will be crushed.