Your donut example is describing a boycott, not a strike. If it were a strike, who exactly is making the donuts and coffee? Boycotts are fun too, but the dream of a strike would go slightly differently.

If we stick with the donuts example, you’d show up at your donut shop at 4am again, where you normally have, say, 10 employees. Since they’re on strike, they don’t come in to help out. By 6am you have roughly a quarter of the day’s donuts made, and customers are starting to stream in.

Since you’re alone, you have to stop making donuts to help customers, which means that while you’re already running behind, now you start to slip even further behind schedule to accommodate the morning rush. By 7 am, you’ve sold almost all of the donuts you’ve already prepared, but you can’t make more because you’re busy making coffee and helping customers.

At 7:30 you run out of donuts entirely - right before the morning rush. Customers keep coming in and asking to buy donuts, but you have to let them know that because you’re stubborn and don’t want to compensate your workers fairly, they’re on strike today. This brings grumbles from your customers as they realize that they’ll need to disrupt their morning routine to find an alternative.

By 8am you’ve given up on the day and hang up the “closed” sign, further driving loyal customers into the arms of your competitors. Maybe some of those people will be back first thing tomorrow, but maybe some of them decide that another option is just as good, and certainly more reliable.

You lose out on most of a day of business and potentially take a hit to your reputation as a business. The short term impact is measurable and notable, but it’s the threat of the long term impact that looms over you as you reconsider negotiations.

Otherwise I agree with you completely - negotiate with all stakeholders in good faith and be willing to make sacrifices. Everyone wants to make money here, and everyone deserves enough money to live off of.