Do we have to rely on corporations?

by: Lucy Edwards

Sat Jul 31, 2010 at 06:59:22 AM EDT

Since I had been sharing info on local food on Facebook just before that, I started to think about agriculture, and what if's.

On Murdoch And Google, Or, Hey, Rupert, Where's My Check?

by: fake consultant

Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 23:08:54 PM EST

In a November 6th interview, Sky News Australia's David Speers spent about 35 minutes with the CEO of NewsCorp, Rupert Murdoch; the conversation covering topics as diverse as software piracy, world economics, the role of Fox News (and Fox NewsPinion©) in American politics, a strange defense of Glenn Beck, and, not very long afterwards, an even stranger defense of immigration.

We have heard a lot about the...how can I put this politely...challenges Murdoch seems to face associating factual reality with his reality, and we could have lots of fun going through his factual misstatements-but instead, I want to take on one specific issue today:

Rupert Murdoch says he hates it when people steal his content from the Internet to draw readers to their sites...which is funny, if you think about it, because he has no problem at all stealing my content (and lots of yours, as well) for his sites.

Walmart Shutters First Shop that Successfully Unionized

by: wuwm

Thu Oct 23, 2008 at 16:32:32 PM EDT

Answer: The execs get fat contracts while the workers get shafted.

A week after Wall Street bankers collected taxpayer-funded golden parachutes, Walmart announced that it was shutting down its first shop in North America that had successfully unionized.

Brian White at Blogging Stocks reports on the shuttered store in Gatineau, Quebec:

"The retailer would rather see the operation shut down entirely instead of having employees with any kind of power. ... Was the global retailer trying to get a message out to any other Wal-Mart location in North America -- "unionize and we will shut your doors?" If so, that's no way to run a business, right? Is Wal-Mart so afraid of unions in its stores that it would rather shut them down (or pieces of them) instead of continuing to operate?"

Minimum Wages vs. Livable Wages

by: Rep. Jim Splaine

Thu May 03, 2007 at 20:15:07 PM EDT

In past years this has been a partisan debate:  most Democrats FOR increasing the minimum wage, most Republicans AGAINST.  That's not a biased assessment.  It's a fact.  This year in both the House and Senate, it was much the same but more Republicans supported it than in the past.  I guess they do watch television and read the newspapers and Blogs.

However, I'm only "sort of delighted" because it's not enough.  Putting the minimum wage up from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 by this September, then to $7.25 a year later, hardly keeps up with current inflation.  But it IS good to have passed the increase, and it will help many New Hampshire working men and women.  Congress is still working on a similar minimum wage increase nationwide, but it being bogged down by business interests who see their all-mighty profit being taken from the golden parachutes of corporate CEOs and the pockets of speculative stockholders. 

Even with the increase in the minimum wage, New Hampshire will still be below the rates set for our neighboring states.  It ain't cheap to live in New England (price of gas, food, housing, and heating is higher than most of the nation).

And even with the increase, which will push some of the slightly higher above-minimum wages up a bit, the prevailing wages will still be below the "livable wage."  A recent study by UNH's Office of Economic Initiatives and the North Country Council determined a livable wage for a single person in the state is $10.42 an hour, and about $2.00 more per hour in the Seacoast where I live.  A livable wage for a family of four with two wage earners would be $11.69 for each. 

The "livable wage" is determined, by the way, as the level which is just about enough to pay for basic needs such as housing (rent in most cases), essential utilities, transportation, some child care, some health care, and a small amount for personal expenses.  In other words, just about surviving until you get to old age, then you die. 

Here's my solution:  New Hampshire is in a constant process of growth.  We encourage, welcome, and regularly try to seduce businesses to move here and give us their jobs.  Let's be selective in that business search and encourage corporations and businesses to locate here which want to invest in their employees and see people as assets, not just cost factors.  Let's get those businesses that will pay people liable wages, instead of just locating here to suck out every dollar they can for their corporate board of directors, CEOs, and stockholders, most of whom don't live here (that's the nature of most corporations).

Those corporate chain coffee shops, department stores, supermarkets, movie theaters, fast-food restaurants, hotels, and car distributors should be asked to pledge that they will pay a livable wage.  Then their own employees will actually be able to afford to buy what they sell.  That's good for business, AND our people.