Cattleman, do you have a source for your previous post? I believe capitalism can only survive if workers are paid enough to be able to afford the products they are making. However, in the current political climate here large corporations have shown their willingness to punish those who benefit from favorable labor conditions. I would be interested in the research, where and when it was conducted. Thanks.

Ummm!

That's a bit difficult Queen. Apart from the actual pay rates its all my research. Its not documented because a lot of it comes from direct observation.

But I'm sure there's a ton of material out there. if you'd like more academic sources to back it up I could dig something up for you I guess, but a lot of it is old hat to me. I've been retired for quite a while now and don't do that sort of stuff any more.

The problem of minimum wage in the US is one of supply and demand. There are more people who need the low wage jobs than jobs available. When they raise the minimum wage they will cut the position into two or three and hire two or three people at 15 or 20 hours a week to circumvent providing benefits.

So, they are a total bunch of bastards then. But that's easy to fix. Make a surcharge to the minimum wage rate for casual and part-time workers - ours is 24%.

A "supply and demand" created by the corporatists and not by the market place.

supply and demand is a complete fiction. people in NY are not paid 20% more because there are fewer of them. they are paid more because they demand more, and their cost of living is higher.

Of course it'll never happen. The corporatists own the governments. They own you.

bow to the new emporer!!!!

Thanks Cattleman. Just wondering. I would like your experiences and opinions to be true but alas I think the recent facts don't bear it out

Which "facts" are those Queen?
I'm just a bit puzzled.

I think I was saying the same thing, Chaos. I am not going to boycott my McDonald's oatmeal and Diet Coke on weekends, because McDonald's really treats their employees the same way everyone else does. McDonald's employs some of the unemployable. One of my Wellness Group members worked there on the maintenance crew. She would never be able to work behind the counter as she had low cognitive function, but working there gave her a reason to get up in the morning.

Speaking of the state paying for stuff.... Friend Stacey works at a hopping summer restaurant. They can make over $2000 a week during the season. The are laid off in October and collect unemployment during the winter while they are playing in Florida and come back in April.

A few decent labor laws could get rid of many of those practices.
But, what is really required is a much stronger union movement with real poilitical cloat.

Maybe, sooner or later, people with remember what unions were created for.

Lots of people need jobs and there aren't enough jobs available, that's true. I suspect it will always be true no matter what the minimum wage is.

Again, that's one of those myths that have been so deeply inculcated that its accepted as a kind of truism, but its patently false.

How do I know that? For two simple reasons:
1. We have managed to create a situation where essentially everyone who wanted a job could get a job in the past. If it could be done before why can't it be done now?
2. The shortage isn't a shortage of useful work that could be done, its a shortage of paid employment. See above.

Technology moved the curve, cm. There used to be factory jobs so the average working man could make a decent living. Camden had RCA and Campbell's soup for example.

Now, educated, intelligent people for the most part can get jobs. However there is a growing subset who are neither educated nor intelligent.

In the hospital I interview the new drug, addicted mothers. Just about every baby daddy I interview works in landscaping. Is it because they really work in landscaping or it's code for drug dealing I really don't know, but there cannot be that many landscapers in the area making a living wage.

Exactly the same argument was put in the 50s and the 60s and the 70s and the 80s and the 90s and the 2000s Kathy. I'm sorry, I did a lot of work on this (mostly back in the 70s and 80s) and even the strongest proponents of the "technological unemployment" thesis couldn't come up with any firm empirical correlation between technological change and unemployment rates, basically because there isn't one. Technological change reduces employment in some areas and expands it in others.

But its also why I added 2. Are you really saying that our world is so perfect that there's no useful work that could be done?

Because if you aren't then we are really talking about money, not technological change or alterations in the ratio between different sectors in the workforce or any of the other profound sounding excuses thought up by lap-dog economists.

The REAL bottom line is "we don't have full employment because we don't want to pay for it".

I am talking employment rates per strata. There's meaningful work out there. The Baby Daddy's can't do it. Most of the long-term McDonald's employees can't do it either. There is educatable work and trainable work. Some people will never be able to do educatable work.

Lockheed isnt' waiting for Baby Daddy's landscaping skills. Money plays in all of this. Profound sounding excuses as to why some people will be dependent on jobs that don't pay well? Not everyone is smart. Not profound. They can do some things but people are never going to pay them much for it. The functionalists think that this is how it should be.

CM, the facts I refer to are the unemployment rate is not falling proportionate to the economic recovery, the income gap continues to widen, high paying jobs continue to disappear, the job growth that we see is primarily in lower paying service jobs, there is an increase in part time workers who would prefer to be full time workers.

I would love to see a resurgence in labor unions however the atmosphere and the disinformation swirling in the US does not make it seem likely to occur to soon ( although the discontent is what originally got people moving, it shocks me daily how stupid people seem to be in acting against their own interests on some talking head's say so)

There's your problem Queen. The US isn't the world. A lot of those particular problems arise directly out of the last 30 odd years of public policy in the US, among them the stagnation of the minimum wage. Effectively what has happened is that income has been transferred from the poorer and middle sectors of the economy to a tiny percentage at the top. This means that money flow in the economy has been stifled. The money isn't going where its needed and that's why the people that would be employed if it were aren't being employed. There's noting inevitable about it it. Its what you country has chosen to do.

Yes, there is "educatable work and trainable work" Kath and there's plenty of it to go around in both sectors.

I'll give you just one example, but there are plenty more if you want them.

Rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have created a "greenhouse" effect causing global temperatures to rise. This is not a good thing. Even if we only talk strictly in economic terms (usually something I'm against) the potential costs are ENORMOUS.

There are many things that we could do to try and ease the problem, but possibly one of the most obvious and direct come down to one simple adage "plant more trees"!

And I mean LOTS of trees - millions of acres. There's lots of marginally arable land available in countries like Australia which could be used for this purpose. It would not only be significant in terms of CO2 retention, but ultimately quite profitable.

That kind of level of reafforestation (and just plain forestation) would require lots of workers from EVERY sector, from ecological planners to tree planters.

Of course, it would also cost money .....

Yes, CM. I am referring to the US, their policies, their corporations, and their labor market, refrring back to the OP and commentary on McDonald's. I understand that many other countries have more labor friendly policies and strong economies. I envy some German compsnies like VW and BMW that really understand sustainable capitalism.

That's the thing Queen. Your facts aren't inevitable, they are contingent, so they don't actually undermine anything I said. That's why I was puzzled.

There's the rub. The greedies have absolutely no recognition of the benefits of long term investments. They're all about grabbing it all now and the hell with everyone else.

Don't think for a moment that it's all peachy in Germany, even at VW and BMW.
The Labour Courts also change with the political climate. Since Mommy Merkel's coalition with the Free-democrats there's a tendency to more US-like labour policies. Hopefully, that has an end now when she has to work with the Social Democrats in a great coalition in future.

I was going to post on aspects of just what components of final prices are wages when I read this in the Guardian.
Fair trade activists urge EU to set up regulator to stop abuses of low pay and poor working conditions in Africa and India
Lucy Lamble in Kollam, India

Sunday 24 November 2013

The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... rofits-pay

----

It is one of America's and Europe's favourite nuts, popular as a snack and rather good in curries. But the cashew is at the centre of a simmering global row amid accusations that western retailers are skimming off fat profits, leaving farmers and processors with a pittance for their crop.

Campaigners are objecting to a warped economic model in which a supermarket earns just over £1 from a bag of cashews sold for £2.50 while the factory worker who sits all day cracking shells with a pernicious toxic residue makes 3p.

Now the EU is showing signs of taking up the case against the industry. Next month, the commissioner for internal markets, Michel Barnier, is to make an announcement on unfair trading practices, amid mounting pressure for proper regulation.

"Farmers and workers across the world are suffering every day because of unfair trading practices by supermarkets," said Liz May, head of policy at the fair trade organisation Traidcraft. "It's time the EU took action and set up a regulator with the power to stop abuses by retailers that result in extremely low pay and appalling working conditions."

The cashew nut, which is really a seed, is a $4bn (£2.5bn) global business that provides jobs for millions, particularly in Africa and India. While half of the world's crop is grown in Africa, more than 60% of the cashews consumed are processed in India. Half of the world's crop is grown in Africa.

With its premium price tag, the cashew should be an opportunity for developing economies; instead it points up the kind of jarring it is beset by supply chain anomalies that are seen in industries such as coffee, clothing and sugar.

More than a quarter (27%) of India's processed cashews are sent to Europe, and the majority of these are sold through supermarkets, often having had value added in the west through roasting and salting. Germany, France and the UK account for about 50% of salty snack consumption.

Both brokers and processors bemoan the fact that retailers are driving the market. One producer said: "Twenty years ago, Europe was a booming market and quality was a primary concern, but today it is only about the price … The value of relationships is not appreciated."

E Mohanakumar, project director of Cadre India, an NGO in Tamil Nadu that supports self-help groups for women and raises awareness of health problems among factory workers, has carried out research into working conditions.

"When people are getting 1 rupee [1p] as their wage, they are using 50 paisa [0.5p] for their savings, for the marriage of their children, because here we have a big dowry system" he said. "And 10 paisa they will spend for their food. So there are malnourished children and that means the next generation is in danger. Quality of life means spending for health, especially good food."

Shelling the nuts is labour intensive and is done by hand. They produce a caustic liquid which burns the skin. Many factories provide some form of protection – if the workers are on site – such as alkaline potash to counteract the acid; alternatively, some women bandage their hands.

In some factories, rubber gloves are available, but in many instances workers have to pay for them and not everyone can afford it.

Lalita, a young mother in a small rural community in Tamil Nadu, peels cashews from home. Her husband is not around and she has a young son. She avoids working in the local factories as she dislikes the noxious fumes released during the roasting phase [before de-shelling] used to help loosen the hard outer shell. Even at home, the heat and the smell when she is working make her want to vomit.

Lalita's earnings are half those of the factory workers. To feed herself and her son (a breakfast of tea and rice at noon and in the evening some snacks or tea and occasionally fruit) she takes in tailoring and plastic mat weaving but it does not pay as well.

Whether they work at home or in a factory, labourers' pay is low and their health can be at risk but it is their only realistic option for earning a living.

On this, workers and processors speak as one: they want the work and the business is critical to their welfare. They just want small improvements to their conditions and terms of trade.

"In Kanyakumari district, this is the only factory," said Lalita. "Because of this industry, people have made their lives here, they've invested their money for the education and health of their children.

"They want improvements for their family. So, when they study, their children will go for other work – not to the cashew factory, even if it has helped them to survive."

She added: "What we need is for the Europeans to buy more from us. Then only better things will happen around here."

Unprofitable growth

Vimila Ramil, a cashew farmer in India with just 0.4 hectares (1 acre)

Ramil limps round her plot, pointing out the rainwater tank used to tend her saplings. The biggest chore in this flat, exposed land is keeping the young plants watered. She is not married and, having cared for her mother, she lives with her brother and sister-in-law.

She says cashews are the only viable crop. "Because of the quality of the sand, we cannot cultivate anything else so we will continue to grow only cashew. In December 2011, we had the Thane cyclone. During that time everything fell fallen and all the trees were damaged. So last year there was a great loss; this year it is better. Although we can fry and eat [cashew], because of our difficult situation at home, we sell it."

Baskir Bhaskar, a farmer with four hectares

Baskir Bhaskar seems to have his mobile constantly glued to his ear. He grows cashew but also has paddy fields. Though cashew is a low-maintenance crop, it is still at nature's mercy, along with the farmers who depend on it.

"This year, because we did not get good rain, the yield was not good," said Bhaskar. "We expected around 50 bags but only got 40. If I sell these 40 bags, I will get around two lakhs [about £2,000]. Out of the two lakhs – we have already spent one for cultivating."

Like so many people in the industry, Bhaskar has different aspirations for his child: "He will not come into agriculture. He is a commerce graduate so he will do accounting. My son has decided to go and work in the bank."

Patrick Obeng-Nketiah, Catholic monk in central Ghana

"Cashew has become one of the main cash crops in the Brong Ahafo region. As a community we need to have something to feed ourselves, to be independent, and cashew is a good business. [But] picking the cashew is a lot of work," said Obeng-Nketiah. " We hire young people from the local area to do the picking. We pay them per kilo picked – for every 10 kilos they collect, we give them the value of one kilo."

Yaw Gbogbolo, 56, farmer in Ghana

"During the harvest season, children from the local village come to pick the nuts on the weekends," said Gbogbolo, a native of the village of Samsam in the Greater Accra region, who began growing cashew in 2004 under a government programme to promote production of the crop. "The adults aren't interested in doing it – the money is not attractive enough for them."

CM, I don't think we were disagreeing, we were just not talking about the same thing.

And, Jab, I'm sorry to hear that.I thought maybe when the banks crashed a few years ago people would have seen the flaws in the "take the money and run" school of capitalism but apparently the outcomes were too favorable to the rich and it's going to take another economic meltdown of epic proportions before we see any real reform. I don't see it coming via government, at least not in the US any time soon.