Wednesday, February 25, 2009
here's the second one this year. Like everyone knows we're shooting for one a semester- so come out and let's learn from each other and let's build some student power on this campus! The only way we'll win is by supporting one another's issues, by being knowledgeable, and staying undivided against adversity.
so between this, and the party (personal relationships build movements), Buffalo Student Grassroots Activists should have a pretty big base for change! ;)
Monday, February 23, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Subject: Press Release – Students Raise Awareness at University at Buffalo to Defend Worker Rights
PRESS RELEASE FOR: Wednesday, February 18, 2009
CONTACT: Joanna Boron: (716) 903-7532; email@example.com
Rachel Goebel: (845) 728-4160
Wednesday: Students Raise Awareness at UB to Defend Worker Rights in Honduras
Call On University to Cut Ties with Russell Athletic Company
Accused of Severe Worker Rights Abuses; Universities of Miami, Houston, Georgetown, Rutgers, Wisconsin, Duke and Washington Have Severed Ties Already; More Colleges to Follow Suit
Buffalo, NY – University at Buffalo students will hang an Informational Clothesline display, rising awareness of this issue and UB’s involvement and calling on the school to cut ties with the apparel manufacturer that owns the Honduras factory which the students and workers say committed a series of labor rights violations.
The workers were fired from the factory, Jerzees de Honduras, after attempting to form a union; Russell later closed the factory altogether. The factory is owned by the Russell Corporation, a major licensee producing Minnesota logo apparel. The students are part of the Minnesota Public Interest Research Group, an affiliate of the nationwide United Students Against Sweatshops.
Seven major licensing schools including the University of Miami, University of Houston, Georgetown University, Rutgers University, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Duke University and the University of Washington, have all already terminated their apparel contract with Russell over the violations, and other colleges are considering similar moves.
Russell Corporation violated worker rights by firing over 140 workers for organizing a union, making statements that attributed the plant’s closure to unionization, and the closure decision itself, which was found to be driven by anti-union retaliation.
Closing a factory due, partially or wholly, to the formation of a union is a violation of the University at Buffalo’s codes of conduct for apparel production.
In response to these violations, a number of U.S. labor rights advocacy organizations have filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, an agency of the Organization of Americas States (OAS), to take proactive measures to assure these worker leaders’ safety.
WHO: University at Buffalo Students Against Sweatshops
WHAT: Clothesline Against Labor Rights Violations, National Week of Action
(definite photo opportunity)
WHEN: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 at noon
WHERE: UB North Campus Student Union; Lee Loop Entrance
Monday, February 16, 2009
So, Joanna's turning 22 and thinks it's rly important to celebrate accordingly. With a party supporting our extremely labor friendly president. It's gonna be at her and k8's apt on February 28 at 8 or 9. we're gonna take some video footage for SEIU's (a really awesome union) website- with the vids from tons of other similair parties.
I'll have a real flyer soon but until then check the fb event!
The Economy: A Values Issue
The discussion of the 2004 presidential election is just the most recent reminder of a curiosity in American politics: "values" issues are always social issues but never economic ones. Yet how the disadvantaged among us are treated is clearly a reflection of who we are as a people. How workers are treated on the job—their safety, their working conditions, their remuneration—also speaks volumes about our values as a nation. How we care for the elderly and the disabled, our response to child poverty, and our compassion for the less fortunate are measures of our society's values, and they are social problems that can be addressed by economic policy.
Of course, economists contend that economics is a science. "Tell me what you want to do and I will tell you the best way to do it" is the economist's usual stance. (Or, as one economist remarked, his role is to say, "Tell me what you want and I'll tell you why you can't have it.") Clearly, this framework leaves no room for values. The underlying assumption is that unfettered markets, free and unrestricted by government or private institutions such as unions, produce the best outcomes, except in a few very specific situations: externalities (such as pollution imposed on society but not reflected in producers' costs), monopolies, and other "market failure" cases from Econ 101.Some economists, such as Martin Feldstein (leader of the premier economic research organization, the National Bureau of Economic Research) have contended that inequality is not a proper concern for economists, who should be focused only on determining how to maximize the output of goods and services.
It is important to examine whether unfettered markets are the appropriate means of organizing our economy, both in terms of the values we seek to see reflected in our society and for achieving our economic goals. One's view of the proper role of individuals, institutions, and government in the economy is determined, in large part, by one's assessment of the merits of unfettered markets. The U.S. economic policy debate is in fact dominated by the assumption that unfettered markets work best, a view that's applied to our domestic economy and to that of other countries through international financial institutions that the United States controls.
Yet there is plenty of room for applying values to the economy: an economy can be structured in many different ways and still achieve the same amount of efficiency, i.e., produce the same outputs with the same inputs. This was the conclusion of a book that Rebecca Blank edited for the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) a decade ago. Major European countries, for example, have a set of policies that are far different from ours: a strong social insurance system, government provision of health care, higher taxes, and far less inequality. Yet these countries have seen faster productivity growth—the gain in economic efficiency—than the United States for most of the last four decades. At first, this trend was mainly a process of "catching up" to the United States, the technological leader. However, many of these countries have now surpassed the United States in productivity.
It seems impolite in America to mention this, but we live in a class society. There are various groups differentiated by their income and power, and the positions of these groups are strongly maintained over time. It's not that there isn't any upward and downward mobility; it's just that there's not enough of it to make having a favorable, or unfavorable, class position seem like a temporary arrangement.
There has been a dramatic upward shift in income over the last few decades, coupled with a growing gap between those at the very top and those at the bottom of the income scale. In fact, inequality has grown far more in the United States over the last three decades than at any time in the last century, and far more than in any other advanced country.
Using some data from NBER researchers Thomas Pikkety and Emanuel Saez, it is possible to illustrate how large both the income redistribution and the scale of inequality in America have become:
- The top 1% of families earned 9.3% of all income in 1980. By 2000, this income share had increased to 19.6%. Correspondingly, the income share of the bottom 90% declined from 66% to 53.9%. There were small gains (1.9 percentage points) in the income shares of the remaining group, the 90th to 99th percentiles.
- From 1980 to 2000, the incomes of the upper 1% increased 179%, while those of the bottom 90% increased by only 8%.
- In 1970, the ratio of top executive earnings to that of the average worker was 38.6 to 1. This ratio increased to 101.1 by 1980, to 222 by 1990, and to 1,046 in 1999.
Even if income were distributed according to merit or to the value of one's skills, we would still need to care for society's most disadvantaged and guarantee them a decent standard of living. Moreover, children do not start off with the same amount of resources—monetary assets, or family "social capital"—and a child's economic outcome depends at least as much on background as on effort or character.
The social class you belong to really matters—it determines your health, how long you live, where you live, your exposure to crime, your success in school, and the likely success of your children. A task force of the American Political Science Association has recently concluded that inequality in income and resources translates into inequalities in participation and effectiveness in our democracy.
This inequality and how it is addressed in the United States is a clear example of the intersection of economics and values issues. Economic policy is just as much of a "values issue" as any of those that are more frequently discussed. Moreover, the teachings of the various faiths have much to say on economic matters. I daresay that there's no reason to believe that "free markets" provide us with the type of society our faiths guide us to have in terms of the lives of the poor, the treatment of workers, and the solidarity of our communities.
This essay appeared in different form as "Dismal Scientists" in The American Prospect Online, May 27, 2004. The article draws on Is the Market Moral? by Rebecca Blank and William McGurn, published by the Brookings Institution and the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. For additional information on the link between values and the economy, see Viewpoints on www.epinet.org to read a speech by Lawrence Mishel entitled Unfettered markets, income inequality, and religious values given at the Pew/Brookings Institution Forum on Religion and Public Life on May 19, 2004.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Monday, February 2, 2009
AND UB STUDENTS AGAINST SWEATSHOPS
ACTIVIST MOVIE NIGHTS
February 2nd --At The River I Stand-A short documentary depicting Martin Luther King Jr.'s final campaignfor civil rights- the two months leading to Dr. King's death in 1968,coinciding with the 65-day strike of 1300 Memphis sanitation workers-where Dr. King tackled not only the injustices of race oppression,but also the injustices of socioeconomic class division.
February 2, March 16, April 6
330 Student Union