I cannot argue with any of this. But absent ridding ourselves of the plutocrats (not going to happen) then we need to fight with all our might to limit the ability of them to govern our lives.
"auto parts makers" or "baby sitters" or "nurses" or "doctors" weren't striking. I would have said McWorkers, but it's not just McDonald's. And for the record, I was (literally) a burger flipper at McDonald's while in college. For about three days `til a better summer job opened up. Man, one shift and your hand just reeks of onions, LOL.
The level of eavesdropping on comm of citizens basically sets up for another "Watergate", but for whichever party is doing it (because they are really both the same). Obamagate...? Nixon got caught because he did it the old-fashioned way. But what if you could do it to a level he never dreamed of - and claim it would harm National Security if it was revealed? Unheard of? What about LoveInt where those with access spied on ex-spouses? There seemed to be no punishment for it, so why not do it for political reasons - even money if you get paid for it? Oddly enough, while Nixon's impeachement may have been an embarrassment for the country, outside the country in dictatorships and fledgling democracies, it was seen as an example of the Greatness of America - where NO ONE - even the highest position in the Land - was above the law. Where is that Greatness now?
I agree up to a point. I don't think the government can do anything to "create" jobs. But we as a society have decided that it is in our best interest to have an educated population. There is no reason why anyone who graduates from high school can't walk right into one of those jobs. Half of my house when it got added on to was built by the local high school building trades department. (not every one in that class deserved an A, I can tell you that), but they walked out with some experience. To be fair, anyone starting out at McDonalds, if like you say, they show up on time, never miss a day, and are willing to fill in when needed, should soon progress to shift manager, and then, go to "Hamburger University" (it's a real school run by McDonalds) and become a district manager.
on the other hand, if there was ever a group of workers who need a union, it is the fast food workers. Profit margins are very slim in the fast food business. The price of MCD goes up and down based on investors opinion if they even have the pricing power to break the 99 cent barrier. But a strike would just about kill them. So, the workers have a lot of clout. I can tell you, if the union ever got ahold of MCD, within a few years, about the only job you could get there would be "Robotic Technician."
otherwise, I want everybody to make more money. Not sure why OP starts off a thread calling people "burger flippers" like they are some sub human group who doesn't deserve a chance to use their power to make more money. I want business owners who take risks to make more money, I want hedge fund traders to make more money, but I also want "burger flippers" to make more money. I want everybody to make more money. I see no difference between the liberal who doesn't understand what a trader does and thinks they don't deserve more money (if they do the job right) and the OP who apparently doesn't understand what a fast food worker does and believes they don't deserve more money (if they do the job right.) Let the market decide, right? Then why are you so scared if the workers strike to get more? Isn't striking part of the market? Can't strike if you have no power. If you have power, use it to make more money.
In this case the restaurant business owner should be able to immediately fire anyone not showing up to work ("striking") and replace them with a new hire. There should be no state laws not allowing you replace 'strikers' who are trying to organize a union to undermine your business. You do realize that most fast food restaurants have an endless stream of job applications coming in, eh? This is the power, eh? Supply & demand of labor. If there wasn't an endless supply of people lining up to take these low paying restaurant jobs then the workers would have more 'power' in demanding higher wages, but the reality is that the opposite is true - these workers are easily replaceable and there are 10 people at the door wanting to replace a worker who quits.
how do you know that? Do you have any facts to back that up? If there a ten workers waiting for a job, then I will whole heartedly agree with you that the market has spoken. But I suspect you are just guessing.
Before the recession in a few markets fast food restaurants had issues attracting staff and had to raise wages. Since the recession it is a totally different story, most fast food restaurants have an over-supply of job seekers. This is evidenced in the many articles and media coverage of the industry. A similar situation also applies to retail. So it gets back to the proper answer - let the free market operate. A business owner should be able to fire any striking worker immediately and replace them without interference from state laws. This will show where the 'power' resides. If the fast food workers think they have the 'power' then they are free to walk off the job and find out the reality.
I'm not really disagreeing with you, I know the number of applicants at walmart compared to the available jobs is just staggering. My local walmart had 420 jobs and they got 3800 applicants. I guess my problem was the knee jerk reaction that somehow, the workers had no business trying to raise their prices. If MCD raises a big mac ten cents there is no outrage, but if a worker tries to raise his price it is a communist takeover met with derision because he is only a "burger flipper."