Regressive hypocrisy on job losses

Regressives were in an uproar over the new EPA carbon policy because yes, it would eliminate coal 80,000 jobs in the next 15 years. They could give a shit about how the coal emissions were accelerating climate change, which would probably eliminate exponentially more jobs. But on a more immediate note, they could give a shit about the jobs we've lost due to our trade deficit from February to April, about 700,000. Yes, that 700,000 in 3 months compared to 80,000 over 3 years and nary a peep. And why are they completely silent on the trade deficit job losses?


Because high trade deficits arise from shipping our jobs overseas, as well as buying more overseas products. Walmart buys most of its products from China while GE and Boeing have move their production plants off shore. Also minimum wage employers like the high trade deficit because it keeps labor wages down; lower trade deficits means a tighter, more competitive labor market. Hence business is motivated to keep trade deficits high because they really don't give a shit about US jobs either. All this bluster about the loss of coal jobs is so much of their usual obfuscation, since they do love pollution.