creating progressive institutions: consumers' unions

[unblock]

once upon a time in america, unions formed the backbone of the left. many people felt that the union was part of their identity, part of their social circle, part of their family. and this paid great political dividends for the left, and in turn, for workers.

today's union is moribund, if not already dead, in america. europe's unions do fine, but that's them, and this is us.

today more people identify themselves as "consumers" rather than "workers". after all, many of us fancy ourselves owners or entrepreneurs or small businessmen or even just shareholders rather than "mere" "workers".

but, we ALL consume. and, boy, are we good at it!

except, of course, that our power is completely divided as individual consumers, providing the best opportunity for businesses to take full advantage. not only can they charge more because the have the stronger negotiating position, but they can even further segregate consumers, and charge more to those consumers that they figure can pay more. how else do you explain crazy pricing strategies like airlines charging more if your round trip doesn't include a saturday night?


what institutions can we create to take advantage of this strong identity yet weak bargaining position?

collective purchasing

just as unions once used collective bargaining as their primary raison d'etre, consumers' unions can use collective purchasing as their main draw.

we can create non-profit organizations that use the clout of many consumers negotiating as one to achieve price discounts from businesses. these savings would be passed on to members, with a cut retained to pay for operations and to build up reserves.

these reserves could then be used to produce advertising and membership newsletters which would include issues of importance to all consumers, but also with a healthy dose of progressive, consumer-oriented politics.

eventually, we could build a strong grass-roots backbone for progressive politics from a base of consumers eager to vote in their own interest as consumers, for such things as consumer's rights, quality guarantees, product liability, environmental protection, full disclosure, truth in advertising, and so on.

i think this is our strongest shot at replacing what the unions once represented for the left politically.

thoughts?

[unkachuck]

1. I like your idea of....

....'collective purchasing' at the output end of the system....but for better jobs, security and ultimately a bigger chunk of the pie, we still need to focus on 'collectivism' at the 'input' end....

....'today more people identify themseleves as "consumers" rather than "workers"'....because the 'right' has done an excellent job of convincing people that their interests and their employers' are one in the same....we need to do a better job of explaining how, in reality, they're in an adversarial relationship....

....as soon as you begin think, 'us' against 'them', Unions will logically follow....

....and yes, we did what you described in your first sentence....we'd go to church on Sunday and once a month, after church, we'd go to the Union meeting....there's more democracy in a good Union meeting, than what passes for elections these days....

[unblock]

2. i haven't given up entirely on unions in this country

but you are correct in that the right has become very adept at attacking unions on many fronts. i suspect progressive consumerism would be a more promising inroad into american consciousness. unions might well return to favor after, or alongside, that.

[unblock]

3. kick

[hnsez]

4. consumers reports pwns joo

I bought a new car with their new car report and saved tons compared to the deal the stupid credit union was going to give me

[unblock]

5. "pwns joo"??

[MsTryska]

8. it's leetspeak for "owns you".

nt

[unblock]

9. oh. THAT thing.

:eyes:

[MsTryska]

10. *lol* nt

nt

[Lone_Wolf]

6. A couple things...

Using purchasing power to drive down prices from suppliers sounds an awful lot like what Walmart does. The effect of which is either: driving down wages of American workers or the moving of jobs to cheap labor countries like China. We'd have to prevent this from happening.

Your idea has merit and I do like the attempt of trying to incorporate progressive measures into this. But I think the idea needs to be deveoped a little further to avoid the above caveats.

[unblock]

7. this is nothing like what wal-mart does

fine, it's similar in the sense that both are involved in retail transactions.

but they couldn't be more different, and that's the key point.

wal-mart squeezes suppliers for their own profit without (much) regard for quality, ethics, or other impacts of their actions. they don't care if slave labor is being used, if the jobs they create aren't in this country or if they pay sub-poverty wages. they don't care about the community they serve, indeed, they hope to drive others out of business.

then, once they own huge market share, they quietly raise prices, something many are not even aware that they are doing.

contrast this to a purchasing group that is not-for-profit and is specifically dedicated to serving the interests of consumers, who of course are also workers and residents in that community. the purchasing group has a mission to seek quality as well as low price, has a mission to conduct its business in a way that minimizes environmental damage, has a mission to enrich the community, has a mission to preserve fair competition among suppliers, etc.

doesn't sound much like wal-mart to me.