Posts
While on the subject of retail, living wages and ethical consumption, the Wal-Mart model doesn't have to be the one chosen by U.S. corporations.
Costco manages to compete with Wal-Mart while paying a living wage, offering health insurance and allowing employees to have a life of quality.
It's refreshing to hear an American CEO offer the following sentiments about valuing people over profits. In a recent interview, CEO Jim Sinegal expressed his belief in compensating the people who have built the $42 billion business into what it is today.
"They're entitled to buy homes and live in reasonably nice neighborhoods and send their children to school," he said.
If you live in an area where you have a choice of shopping at Costco or Wal-Mart, I think you know what you need to do. See if you have a warehouse near you.
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Sweat-free shopping
This holiday season, I decided to take a seasonal job to pay some bills and help supplement my income while launching my first book. Many Americans use seasonal employment as a means to close the gap between the incomes from their five or six/day a week gig and the growing cost of living in many parts of the U.S.
I was rehired by a large retailer that most outside the Northeast would know. Their retail store is tourist destination for folks visiting my home state during the summer and fall. Founded by a “real” Mainer, the company has changed dramatically since their founding in the early 1900’s. What has disturbed me while answering calls from catalog customers is the number of items that the company now offers that are made in countries such as Thailand, China, Madagascar, El Salvador and other countries notorious for sweatshops and the labor abuses that go along with that. While one of the perks of seasonal employment usually is the discount that goes along with having the extra income, I’m finding it difficult to find any products that I want to buy, as every item I look up appears to be made in a third world country. While I'm sure there are reasons why this is so, I'm concerned that the primary one is profit. Not only is their merchandise made elsewhere, they aren't exactly paying top-shelf wages either.
I’ve heard many rationales for why Americans shop at retailers like Wal-Mart and others who continue to ignore calls to stop importing sweatshop-made merchandize. Some people either tune the reality out, or are too narcissistic to care. In speaking to a seasonal co-worker the other night about this very issue, his response was, “I don’t worry about that.” While his lack of concern was troubling, I believe many Americans are caring people. If presented with a way to buy well-made products at comparable prices and support the workers producing their merchandise, I think most Americans will opt to do the right thing.
I’m going to challenge my readers to carefully choose where you buy those items that aren’t necessities. For instance, your Christmas gifts this year—how about refraining from purchasing any items that are not made in the U.S.—it might take some effort, but it also might be more in keeping with the true spirit of the holiday.
If you are interested in being a better consumer, you can check out the No Sweat! site that gives consumers information about ways to avoid supporting exploitation of other humans.
Additionally, there is a great retailer that I’ve been using of late. With some great blue jeans, as well as quality mock and regular t-shirts, I’ve found a U.S. company that still pays living wages to their employees. Not only are their products union-made, they are less expensive than sweatshop-made products that I’ve made comparisons to.
Here’s an opportunity to start making a real difference by being a wiser and more humane consumer. Studies show that if Americans made a commitment to buy just one union-made garment during 2005, that would be $9 billion of merchandise—that creates an amazing amount of jobs by one relatively easy act! The choice is yours—do you buy products that provide quality lives for others, or do you act in your own self-interest, knowing others are suffering as a result?
I was rehired by a large retailer that most outside the Northeast would know. Their retail store is tourist destination for folks visiting my home state during the summer and fall. Founded by a “real” Mainer, the company has changed dramatically since their founding in the early 1900’s. What has disturbed me while answering calls from catalog customers is the number of items that the company now offers that are made in countries such as Thailand, China, Madagascar, El Salvador and other countries notorious for sweatshops and the labor abuses that go along with that. While one of the perks of seasonal employment usually is the discount that goes along with having the extra income, I’m finding it difficult to find any products that I want to buy, as every item I look up appears to be made in a third world country. While I'm sure there are reasons why this is so, I'm concerned that the primary one is profit. Not only is their merchandise made elsewhere, they aren't exactly paying top-shelf wages either.
I’ve heard many rationales for why Americans shop at retailers like Wal-Mart and others who continue to ignore calls to stop importing sweatshop-made merchandize. Some people either tune the reality out, or are too narcissistic to care. In speaking to a seasonal co-worker the other night about this very issue, his response was, “I don’t worry about that.” While his lack of concern was troubling, I believe many Americans are caring people. If presented with a way to buy well-made products at comparable prices and support the workers producing their merchandise, I think most Americans will opt to do the right thing.
I’m going to challenge my readers to carefully choose where you buy those items that aren’t necessities. For instance, your Christmas gifts this year—how about refraining from purchasing any items that are not made in the U.S.—it might take some effort, but it also might be more in keeping with the true spirit of the holiday.
If you are interested in being a better consumer, you can check out the No Sweat! site that gives consumers information about ways to avoid supporting exploitation of other humans.
Additionally, there is a great retailer that I’ve been using of late. With some great blue jeans, as well as quality mock and regular t-shirts, I’ve found a U.S. company that still pays living wages to their employees. Not only are their products union-made, they are less expensive than sweatshop-made products that I’ve made comparisons to.
Here’s an opportunity to start making a real difference by being a wiser and more humane consumer. Studies show that if Americans made a commitment to buy just one union-made garment during 2005, that would be $9 billion of merchandise—that creates an amazing amount of jobs by one relatively easy act! The choice is yours—do you buy products that provide quality lives for others, or do you act in your own self-interest, knowing others are suffering as a result?
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Turkey Day
Thanksgiving, as much as any truly American celebration, is wrapped tightly in the mythology of God, flag and our superior goodness as a people.
The more I learn about the mythical Pilgrims, the less I am to want to laud the day with the significance that many do. The idea that this special group of God-fearing English settlers got together to share their bounty with the local savages that they were helping to socialize might be comforting for some, but seems rather condescending and downright racist to me.
Here is just a bit of background to ponder while settling down for that turkey and gravy:
Despite the propagation of the Thanksgiving story in books and encyclopedias, some historians believe a good deal of Pilgrim lore is just plain false. It's generally agreed that sometime in early October, not late November, fifty or so Pilgrims held a three-day harvest bash. Beyond that, there is little evidence to authenticate the stories. Writers and painters have tended to moralize and romanticize the story, embellishing it with colorful anecdotes and side stepping the grimmer details.
According to William B. Newell, a-Penobscot Indian and former chairman of the anthropology department at the University of Connecticut, the first official Thanksgiving Day Commemorated the massacre of 700 Indian men, women and children during one of their religious ceremonies. The Indians were celebrating their annual green corn dance--Thanksgiving Day to them--in a meeting house when they were attacked by English and Dutch settlers. The Indians were ordered from the building, and shot down as they came forth. Those who were left inside died in the building, which was set on fire. Another such "thanksgiving" day was proclaimed by Gov. Kieft in February 1644.
Whether they were celebrating Indian deaths or truly giving thanks for a good harvest, the Pilgrims consumed a good deal of home brew. Each Pilgrim drank at least a half gallon of ale a day. According to one account, when Chief Massasoit of the Wampanoag tribe first visited the Plymouth colony, he was given a pot of brandy. It is said to have "made him sweat all the time after."
We know the first Thanksgiving took place in 1621, but the year the feast went national is anyone's guess. Some scholars say Thanksgiving became a formal holiday in 1863 when President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed it in response to a campaign by a magazine editor named Sara Joseph Hale, the author of "Mary Had A Little Lamb." Others say it was President George Washington who proclaimed it a holiday in 1789.
(This information was reprinted from The Vegetarian Times, 1982)
What does all this mean? I for one am going to eat my turkey, celebrate the opportunity to see my son (home from college) and other family members--Americans don't take enough time to get together with one another--as well as enjoy a day when most business shuts down. I'll also keep in mind that the mythology that I was taught in school was a lie and give thanks that I'm aware that much of what passes for the truth is worthy of skeptical consideration.
The older I get, the more difficult I find it to just go along with many of the "holidays" that we celebrate. What I've been doing is finding new ways to imbue these days with some sense of reality, while not totally shunning participation in the activities. I enjoy the festive nature of many of these celebrations, but often despise the superficial meaning that many try to maintain in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Having said all of this, I still take the time to wish you all a Happy Thanksgiving, whatever that means to you and yours.
The more I learn about the mythical Pilgrims, the less I am to want to laud the day with the significance that many do. The idea that this special group of God-fearing English settlers got together to share their bounty with the local savages that they were helping to socialize might be comforting for some, but seems rather condescending and downright racist to me.
Here is just a bit of background to ponder while settling down for that turkey and gravy:
Despite the propagation of the Thanksgiving story in books and encyclopedias, some historians believe a good deal of Pilgrim lore is just plain false. It's generally agreed that sometime in early October, not late November, fifty or so Pilgrims held a three-day harvest bash. Beyond that, there is little evidence to authenticate the stories. Writers and painters have tended to moralize and romanticize the story, embellishing it with colorful anecdotes and side stepping the grimmer details.
According to William B. Newell, a-Penobscot Indian and former chairman of the anthropology department at the University of Connecticut, the first official Thanksgiving Day Commemorated the massacre of 700 Indian men, women and children during one of their religious ceremonies. The Indians were celebrating their annual green corn dance--Thanksgiving Day to them--in a meeting house when they were attacked by English and Dutch settlers. The Indians were ordered from the building, and shot down as they came forth. Those who were left inside died in the building, which was set on fire. Another such "thanksgiving" day was proclaimed by Gov. Kieft in February 1644.
Whether they were celebrating Indian deaths or truly giving thanks for a good harvest, the Pilgrims consumed a good deal of home brew. Each Pilgrim drank at least a half gallon of ale a day. According to one account, when Chief Massasoit of the Wampanoag tribe first visited the Plymouth colony, he was given a pot of brandy. It is said to have "made him sweat all the time after."
We know the first Thanksgiving took place in 1621, but the year the feast went national is anyone's guess. Some scholars say Thanksgiving became a formal holiday in 1863 when President Abraham Lincoln proclaimed it in response to a campaign by a magazine editor named Sara Joseph Hale, the author of "Mary Had A Little Lamb." Others say it was President George Washington who proclaimed it a holiday in 1789.
(This information was reprinted from The Vegetarian Times, 1982)
What does all this mean? I for one am going to eat my turkey, celebrate the opportunity to see my son (home from college) and other family members--Americans don't take enough time to get together with one another--as well as enjoy a day when most business shuts down. I'll also keep in mind that the mythology that I was taught in school was a lie and give thanks that I'm aware that much of what passes for the truth is worthy of skeptical consideration.
The older I get, the more difficult I find it to just go along with many of the "holidays" that we celebrate. What I've been doing is finding new ways to imbue these days with some sense of reality, while not totally shunning participation in the activities. I enjoy the festive nature of many of these celebrations, but often despise the superficial meaning that many try to maintain in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Having said all of this, I still take the time to wish you all a Happy Thanksgiving, whatever that means to you and yours.
Signature stamp
Imagine that your son or daughter was recently killed during one of the many battles in Iraq. While overwhelmed with grief and a flood of memories from their life, you receive a letter from the U.S. Military. In opening the letter and reading the condolences, when you arrive at
the signature of Sec. of Defense Rumsfield, you are shocked to see that he didn't have the decency to sign his own letter! Preposterous? Read on!
Two colonels in the Pentagon, under the cover of anonymity (in the Bush Admin., you comment anonymously if you want to keep your job and honor the truth) stated that Sec of Def Rummy has relinquished the time consuming task of signing KIA letters to a machine in order to maintain his tight schedule (including his regular squash game).
Sue Niederer, whose son Seth was also killed in Iraq, sums it up: “My son wasn’t a person to these people, he was just an entity to play their war game. But where are their children? Not one of them knows how any of us feel, and they obviously aren’t interested in finding out. None of them cares. And Rumsfeld depersonalizing his signature – it’s a slap in the face, don’t you think?”
This administration continues to outdo itself in its insensitivity to people asked to make the supreme sacrifice. Despite the rhetoric and propaganda, it's fairly obvious that those in charge care little if any for the young men and women paying dearly for whatever our reason is for being in Iraq. When you can't even sign the letter to parents notifying them of their child's death, you aren't much of a leader at all.
the signature of Sec. of Defense Rumsfield, you are shocked to see that he didn't have the decency to sign his own letter! Preposterous? Read on!
Two colonels in the Pentagon, under the cover of anonymity (in the Bush Admin., you comment anonymously if you want to keep your job and honor the truth) stated that Sec of Def Rummy has relinquished the time consuming task of signing KIA letters to a machine in order to maintain his tight schedule (including his regular squash game).
Sue Niederer, whose son Seth was also killed in Iraq, sums it up: “My son wasn’t a person to these people, he was just an entity to play their war game. But where are their children? Not one of them knows how any of us feel, and they obviously aren’t interested in finding out. None of them cares. And Rumsfeld depersonalizing his signature – it’s a slap in the face, don’t you think?”
This administration continues to outdo itself in its insensitivity to people asked to make the supreme sacrifice. Despite the rhetoric and propaganda, it's fairly obvious that those in charge care little if any for the young men and women paying dearly for whatever our reason is for being in Iraq. When you can't even sign the letter to parents notifying them of their child's death, you aren't much of a leader at all.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Run Howard, run
With the Democratic Party failing to provide much of any opposition to the Bush administration, Progressives, Liberals and other folks committed to systemic change have little to be optimistic about in the short term. Short of creating a viable third party, it looks like we are in for right-wing ideology and demagoguary for at least the next four years and possibly longer.
The DLC, which has been as responsible for the party's shift rightward as any culprit, needs to be unseated if Democrats are going to be Democrats again. Once again being the party of the working-class, rather than the ruling class.
There is a movement afloat to draft Howard Dean as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. I think Dean is one guy who could set the party back on its moorings. Not only that, I believe he could attract the kind of support among the grass-roots that the party has been lacking. Driving Votes is another "draft" Dean site, with a petition to sign encouraging the good doctor to take up the mantle of party housecleaning and reform.
If the Democratic Party has any hopes for mid-year success in 2006, let alone the Presidency in 2008, it needs to find someone to chair the Party that understands how to attract new blood--that man is Howard Dean!
The DLC, which has been as responsible for the party's shift rightward as any culprit, needs to be unseated if Democrats are going to be Democrats again. Once again being the party of the working-class, rather than the ruling class.
There is a movement afloat to draft Howard Dean as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. I think Dean is one guy who could set the party back on its moorings. Not only that, I believe he could attract the kind of support among the grass-roots that the party has been lacking. Driving Votes is another "draft" Dean site, with a petition to sign encouraging the good doctor to take up the mantle of party housecleaning and reform.
If the Democratic Party has any hopes for mid-year success in 2006, let alone the Presidency in 2008, it needs to find someone to chair the Party that understands how to attract new blood--that man is Howard Dean!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)