Shoppers threaded metal barricades outside the Walmart store on Hesperian Boulevard Thanksgiving night as disgruntled workers and union supporters staged one in a series of nationwide actions aimed at winning union recognition for Walmart workers.
The demonstrators numbered a few dozen at best.
Shoppers seem largely unaware of the protest and most interested in finding shopping carts to wheel into the store.
The picketers, many wearing lime green shirts, handed out leaflets describing OUR Walmart -- an informal organization formed by current workers who want to form a union.
OUR Walmart is backed by the United Food & Commercial Workers Union, which represents workers at grocery chains like Safeway.
As Walmart gets into the grocery business with a new smaller store, the UFCW is worried that its non-union workforce will undercut the unionized chains.
Hence the organizing effort.
Dominic Ware, who works at the Walmart on Hesperian Boulevard, is a local organizer of the OUR Walmart movement. He was working Thursday night, rounding up shopping carts for customers, but he stepped away from his duties to join the picket line outside the store.
The 25-year-old Oakland resident told Patch that the main issue workers have is with irregular hours and shift changes that make it difficult for them to plan their time or budgets. Ware, who took part in the national organizing meeting that planned the Black Friday actions, spoke with Patch on video (see the attached clip).
But most of those on the picket line were members of the UFCW. Among them was John Roe, a San Lorenzo native who now lives in Dublin and works for Safeway.
Roe said he is supporting the Walmart workers because the company pays them so little, they qualify for food stamps and other services at taxpayer expense. (See video of Roe above.)
This San Leandro store has emerged as one of the focal points of this nationwide battle between labor and management.
The store on Hesperian Boulevard is infamous as the site of a shooting on Black Friday 2011 that briefly put San Leandro in the national spotlight.
More recently it has experiened at least two small demonstrations by current workers, UFCW organizers and community supporters.
Read more Patch coverage of the Walmart union struggle in San Leandro.
"...we were promised abundance for all, "By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul/ "But though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy..."
Prices do indeed drop when supply increases. But the market is always adjusting to new conditions. This is still not an argument for protectionism on labor for restricting the supply of a good hurts all consumers. The world will be the most prosperous and wealthy when everyone is contributing by producing for the economy is the trade of each man's production.
“Does the minimum wage hurt workers. Of Course, because it INCREASES unemployment” And how is that so? Simply because Albert asserts it echoing the propaganda of the corporations. Explain to us how higher wages lead to unemployment. I'm all ears.
You repeatedly use the "simply asserts without explanation" statement without good cause. You would do well to read and respond more charitably. I only sometimes get a little snippy when people are unduly rood or impertinent. If you review my post, you will find I gave two videos that explained the position. I echo the 'propaganda' of the Classical Economists (not corporations) because I think it is the most sensible and true. It is important that you represent your opponents faithfully (as will I). you echo 'Marxist propaganda' presumably for the what you believe are the same reasons. Now we can discuss which propaganda best describes reality rather than assuming it.
I would argue differently Fred. Restricting labor raises wages and prices but at the expense of the consumer. restricting flow of labor amounts to a protectionist policy on labor which is to say it is anti-free trade . Also, immigration and emigration are basic human rights that no one has a right to restrict. Lastly, it is the price system (and wages are prices) that give signals as to where and when innovation is needed. A free market will always aim at making the best arrangement of resources possible including the determination of how much innovation and investment is needed at any particular time.
As far as economic opinions and philosophy, there are too many. Case in point, Milton Friedman philosophy failed in Chile, South America. Again base on opinion from Nobel Peace Prize winner Amartya Sen. Great to read about economic philosophy when it sounds great in theory until you apply it to the real world.
Even if "corporations" received the other 39% (which they don't), you'd still be wrong.
Let's be more clear about terms otherwise we confuse matters. 1. How much money do Corp's receive for every dollar earned? If that amount is negative then they are paying and not receiving and it is not called welfare. I am not in favor of any monies paid to corporations like subsidies to Solyndra for example. Are you? I regard tax breaks as keeping money that was already yours. 2. I agree that as taxpayers we are being used, but the entity directly responsible for taxation is the state. Yet I suppose you support statism against liberty. This is the ultimate issue worth discussing. 3. I was interested in your Harley Davidson example but it needs to be restated so I can understand your point in it. 4. I agree there are too many philosophies. There is no avoiding it. It is the nature of the quest for understanding. However if you reject theory and philosophy, you have nothing to offer. The task is to discover the theory that explains what happens in the real world. A true explanation always exists and we seek to find it. While Economic Theory is not perfected, even as Physics or Biology etc are not and probably can never be, this does not stop man from applying what is known and seeking to understand more. Can you tell me your political and economic principles? regards
I will go further, let's remove the IRS in total. This will also remove all personal income taxes as well. even if we do this there will be a lot of taxes left to pay but it is a start.
The "practical" man boasts of his contempt for economics and his ignorance of the teachings of "armchair" economists... What is called "orthodox" economics is in most countries barred from the universities and is virtually unknown to the leading statesmen, politicians, and writers. The blame for the unsatisfactory state of economic affairs can certainly not be placed upon a science which both rulers and masses despise and ignore." Ludwig von Mises, Human Action
The idea of Human Rights is independent of the notion of Nationalism. This applies world wide. The protection of rights in law is not in implemented world wide. It is the goal of Classical Liberalism however to achieve this. "Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
1. I don't believe all societies are equal, but all have equal rights and it is the purpose of the state to protect these rights, not grant them. 2. A free society has no "spoils from producers" to offer. Such "Spoils" are the result of Socialist and or Interventionist policies which the Classical Liberal seeks to abolish. Therefore if people immigrate into the society, they can only remain by entering into productive work to sustain themselves.
"The outstanding fact about the Industrial Revolution is that it opened an age of mass production for the needs of the masses. The wage earners are no longer people toiling merely for other people's well-being. They themselves are the main consumers of the products the factories turn out. Big business depends upon mass consumption. There is, in present-day America, not a single branch of big business that would not cater to the needs of the masses. The very principle of capitalist entrepreneurship is to provide for the common man. In his capacity as consumer the common man is the sovereign whose buying or abstention from buying decides the fate of entrepreneurial activities. There is in the market economy no other means of acquiring and preserving wealth than by supplying the masses in the best and cheapest way with all the goods they ask for." -Mises
The U.S. is an industrialized nation and U.S. workers are put into a position to compete with third world nation labor. Corporations are always trying to find ways to cut cost to maximize profit. Profit for all intents and purposes is the disparity in value in favor for one person over another. During the exchange, one person must therefore lose value for the other to achieve profit or ‘unfair trade’. Some corporations choose to maximize profits by cutting the cost of labor, or it could be said at the expense of labor. I will paraphrase Albert and point out by corporations ‘creating jobs’ in 3rd world nations, U.S. unemployment rates increase. The increase in unemployment figures drives down “market wages”. I will paraphrase David as he happily pointed out, ‘having a low paying job is better than being unemployed’ CONTINUED NEXT POST
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/183929-sober-realist/21758-the-wealth-gap-and-the-collapse-of-the-u-s http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/06/speedup-americans-working-harder-charts We constantly hear arguments of the ‘welfare state’ as if U.S. workers in general created their own work conditions. When U.S. citizens are not properly compensated to sustain wages to afford the cost of living in the U.S., it is the corporations who encourage and create the subsidies from government, as in We the People, to make up the difference due to insufficient compensation Which truly redefines the “takers” in the U.S. economy as the corporations who fail to provide sufficient wages to U.S. workers. Due to insufficient compensation, or “market wages” competing with 3rd world nations, the “welfare state” exists.
"The direction of all economic affairs is in the market society a task of the entrepreneurs. Theirs is the control of production. They are at the helm and steer the ship. A superficial observer would believe that they are supreme. But they are not. They are bound to obey unconditionally the captain's orders. The captain is the consumer. Neither the entrepreneurs nor the farmers nor the capitalists determine what has to be produced. The consumers do that. If a businessman does not strictly obey the orders of the public as they are conveyed to him by the structure of market prices, he suffers losses, he goes bankrupt, and is thus removed from his eminent position at the helm. Other men who did better in satisfying the demand of the consumers replace him." Mises, Human Action
This ... has been described by calling the market a democracy in which every penny gives a right to cast a ballot... However, the comparison is imperfect. In the political democracy only the votes cast for the majority candidate or the majority plan are effective in shaping the course of affairs... But on the market no vote is cast in vain. Every penny spent has the power to work upon the production processes. The publishers cater not only to the majority by publishing detective stories, but also to the minority reading lyrical poetry and philosophical tracts. The bakeries bake bread not only for healthy people, but also for the sick on special diets. It is true, ... The rich cast more votes than the poorer citizens. But this inequality is itself the outcome of a previous voting process. To be rich, in a pure market economy, is the outcome of success in filling best the demands of the consumers. A wealthy man can preserve his wealth only by continuing to serve the consumers in the most efficient way." - Mises, Human Action
In an interventionist country powerful pressure groups are intent upon securing for their members privileges at the expense of weaker groups and individuals. Then the businessmen may deem it expedient to protect themselves against discriminatory acts on the part of the executive officers and the legislature by bribery; once used to such methods, they may even try to employ them in order to secure privileges for themselves. At any rate the fact that businessmen corrupt politicians and officeholders and are blackmailed by such people does not indicate that they are supreme and rule the countries. It is those ruled--and not the rulers--who bribe and are paying tribute." - Mises, Human Action
"In nature there prevail irreconcilable conflicts of interests. The means of subsistence are scarce. Only the fittest plants and animals survive. The antagonism between an animal starving to death and another that snatches the food away from it is implacable. Social cooperation under the division of labor removes such antagonisms. It substitutes partnership and mutuality for hostility. The members of society are united in a common venture. The term competition as applied to the conditions of animal life signifies the rivalry between animals which manifests itself in their search for food. We may call this phenomenon biological competition. Biological competition must not be confused with social competition, i.e., the striving of individuals to attain the most favorable position in the system of social cooperation. As there will always be positions which men value more highly than others, people will strive for them and try to outdo rivals. Social competition is consequently present in every conceivable mode of social organization. If we want to think of a state of affairs in which there is no social competition, we must construct the image of a socialist system in which the chief in his endeavors to assign to everybody his place and task in society is not aided by any ambition on the part of his subjects... But such people would no longer be acting men." - Mises, Human Action