Wednesday, September 4, 2013

INCOME INEQUALITY

I just read that the economic inequality gap in the USA is now worse than China and ninety-one other countries. I don't doubt it.

I think The Wobblies (Industrial Workers of the World) had the right idea of one big worldwide union. A fantasy perhaps, but if we could organize all the workers in the world into one big union and then demand one worldwide minimum living wage and if any corporation doing business in any part of the world didn't pay that wage the whole worldwide union goes out on strike until they do.

Now that would certainly lift everyone's boat, eradicate almost all poverty and eliminate moving businesses around the globe looking for the lowest paid most exploited workers, etc.

14 comments:

JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lally said...

So, almost all the economic news is good and has been for a while with most indicators rising and most better than they were before the crash and the Great Recession. Have you noticed the stalker and other parrots of rightwing propaganda pointing this out? Me neither.

JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

That would give a lot of power to a single corporation.Just by denying a certain wage, one could maneuver the world's economy into shutting down.I think acknowledging that we provide guaranteed income for many and are de facto moving toward guaranteed income for all might freshen the discussion. The Jamestown ethic,"If you don't work, you don't eat" is appealing, but doesn't fit our post agricultural. post-industrial economy in which we are beginning to manufacture items in fax-like machines. Bill L

Lally said...

Yeah Bill, the dilemma isn't corporations ruining the economy worldwide, that's already happened. The dilemma is the economic inequality that comes with corporate power ruling the world (not to mention the destruction of the planet or at least much that lives on it). The corporation's job is to make as much profit while paying as little as possible to create that profit, whether it be in the materials the labor the knowledge etc. Governments to some extent have been struggling to contain that corporate power for over a century now, and had some success in the West at least in the mid-20th century because of the threat of state "communism" in the East. But once that counter balance was removed, it was full speed ahead with the help of Reagan and Bush et. al. on the right and Clinton and Obama in the middle but still too lenient toward corporate power whether for political or other reasons. As always, any change will only come from enough noise and organization from below to demand restrictions on that corporate power. etc.

JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Robert G. Zuckerman said...

If anyone has reliable accurate information on Starbucks' gun policy, please share it here. It's so hard to know what to believe in the media.

Starbucks has always touted its practice of fair trade and mindfulness but if it is true that it is allowong guns in its stores - whether carried openly or concealed- when has the legal right to prohibit this, then all the fair trade and mindfulness is for naught.

Until there is a definitive prohibition of guns by/from Starbucks, i will not set foot in any of its stores nor will i purchase any of its products.

JIm said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.