That's just not right. Corporations raiding the public coffers has gone on for far too long. Especially with the help of the Government. Shameful. And especially when they're already making record profits. Thank you as always Professor Reich for your clear and concise explanation of the facts. Appreciate you!! ❤️🇺🇸💙
You DO realize that the large majority -- "Majority rules!" -- of "Our" elected representatives don't actually work for Us, right? They instead serve the Very Wealthy that shower them with "campaign contributions", PAC money, and lobbyist largess. So it's not surprising at all that "Our" government throw megabillions of Our tax dollars at corporations that really don't _need_ financial support.
The goal should be good government and quality policy. Neither of the partners in the global crime syndicate you call major parties offers that. To achieve it we must remove big dark money in the barriers to accessing the ballot. No the party is offering such. As a matter fact, neither party is offering true representation of the people or the filling is out of office.
It's an impossible conundrum: To clean up Our political System, We need to take (BIG) money out of the equation. But the ONLY people that have the Power and Authority to do that are the very people that benefit most from the graft built into the System: "Our" elected representatives in government, who, most of them, rely on the BIG money thrown at them by the Very Wealthy and corporations to finance their campaigns (and lavish lifestyles).
Yes, Daniel. It is also important that Trump's tariffs would amount to a tax on consumers--for the benefit of COs. What's more, The reason Trump wants impose tariffs is so that he would lower the income tax on the wealthy.
Yeah, kinda the problem in a nutshell. My Rep in Missouri 2nd district Ann Wagner is a shill for the financial institutions. The public is too unaware, distracted, or having a dislike of Democrats, to vote her out. And then Repubs killed the anti-gerrymandering law we had in place through ballot trickery and re-did the 2nd district to include red rural areas. So she is difficult to dislodge. Power begets more power.
It was Reaganomics that started the massive loss of manufacturing jobs in this Country! Saint Ronnie decided that it was not worth assisting the beleaguered Northeast and Midwest! REPUBLICANS with their BS trickle-down policies are responsible for the sorry state of our manufacturing base!😬 I wish these willfully ignorant people would learn how to read and think!💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
And then Missouri does a terrible job in assisting people to get help on that safety net. Many who need help don't get it. The state agencies that adminster programs get underfunded by the supermajority Republican legislature. The MO Supreme Court tells the state to fix it. And so on.
Imports from China were doubling every 2 years in 1985 at 4 billion per year. By 1992 it slowed down to doubling every 5 years at 26 billion per year, and slowed way down in 2007 at 290 billion per year. Since 2015 imports have been unstable at about 500 Billion per year. Trade with China has been controlled by the Chinese government. In 1978 many restrictions were lifted. It looks like textiles were a big portion of the early exports from China.
Nixon and Carter both increased relations with China to counter Russia.
The fundamental, indisputable reason why jobs were outsorced to China and other countries was low wages, feeble workplace protections, few environmental regulations. To scapegoat China for what our businesses did with full knowledge of what was involved is simply dishonest. This is why the US has so many billionaires now.
Steve, any idea why your district dislikes Democrats. The answer to that question, might answer the question, why, though Republicans are a minority and the party operates and governs contrary to the economic interests of their constituents they are none the less dominant in those states and districts.
"Kansas" book should be required reading for a high school civics course, and one on how not to do business. It describes how mega corporations slyly sway political will to corporate interests and away from public interests, what Dr. Reich has been preaching for years. Book came out around 1993, after the bitterness of "Reaganomics" had taken full sway on the American middle class. A similar result had occurred in Great Britain of the 1980's under Thatcher, resulting in the ruin of their industrial economy.
Read the charter of any major corporation to see that they are not in the service of any government or benefit of any citizens, but of the shareholder group and the corporate bottom line. This is the reason that the law needs to be laid down as to the strict disposition of taxpayer funding for the common good.
The more suburban St Louis county areas tend to lean slightly to Dems or toss up.. Rural heavily to Repubs. I don't know that I have any special insight as to why people, some in the district, dislike Dems apart from the right-wing media barrage that is across this country.
Generally, most of the Trumpers in rural or small town MO have no idea whatsover how they are voting against their economic interests. They live in a closed political space. Thier Repub rep writes up in their local paper how great things are going as long as the Republicans are in charge.
Next up: Next legislative session the Repubs finally succeed in putting on the ballot a measure that would gut the ballot initiative process we've had for 100 years. They will "improve the process" by making it almost impossible to pass anything.
They will load the measure up with deceptive language and ballot candy
-" Only US citizens may vote" and the voters will pass it, like they passed the ballot measure to restore gerrymandering.
We almost got Wagner out of office 3 election cycles ago, but her matgin of victory has since increased.
Get this. One year her biggest campaign donor was the marketing outfit that does her campaigns. The circle of corruption closed.
Having come of age in a small southern town and a large city (Philadelphia)
I have my own observation and opinion.
The further one gets from a cosmopolitan center, the more crecdulous and non thinking the population, bigotry rises as you move away.
It is axiomatic that rural areas that hardly see a black person are more bigoted than those who live in metropolitan areas and are exposed to them daily.
In small towns and rural communities, there is not much chance for social interaction,other than the church, the grange, the VFW and American Legion.
And there it is birds of a feather that flock together, and reinforce each others views, opinions and beliefs.
When I lived then, there was no internet, only TV, and the local paper, and of course Church. Peoples opinions and beliefs were those of the press and pulpit, reinforced at the Grange and VFW. The TV was news and entertainment. And News was news,not agitprop as it is today with talk show hosts telling people what to think and how to act.
There were no commercial breaks for Huntley Brinkley or Dan Rather, there was a divide between the news division and the entertainment division,now they are folded into infotainment. Bye bye Fairness Doctrine, gratis Ronald Reagan.
The pulpit and the press, and by that I mean especially Murdoch, are telling people what to think and believe.
The Pulpit has a pecuniary and social self interest in perpetuating the regnant paradigm, an enlightened congregation threatens a loss of revenue and social status
Folk who live in metropolitan areas have a wide variety of venues and opportunities for socialization, entertainment, diversion and acquaintances a well.
In the city your next door neighbor is not necessarily a white family, who goes to the same church, with whom you enjoin at the bowling alley, fishing trips or your wife at a coffee klatch.
Cops socialize at cop bars, military socialize at NCO and Officer clubs, or at bars basically backed up to the perimeter fence., there are even lumber jack bars, and or course truck stops,in NY and California never far from a gay bar., I doubt there are any in Jackson , Mississippi though.
All with OUR (WtP) consent. Never forget that we are the weak link in this chain. People like you to do nothing but point out problems that are blatantly obvious. Got any solutions?
Pointing out these problems is a real service. And these problems are not 'blatantly obvious' to most people. Your comment is gratuitously insulting. If you read Reich's comments to the end, he does offer solutions. Before we can exercise the political will to insure that CHIPS continues to create jobs for Americans and foster innovation, we need to understand what is happening.
Richard, yes, pointing out these problems IS A REAL SERVICE! But, can you tell me how to exercise this political will? Don't the elected in Washington hold the power to exercise the will?
Fair enough question. While I am a US citizen, I live in Canada. Here I would contact my constituency office- I have done this before. Someone from our MP's office will reply. To have a greater impact, I would want to find others who feel the same way as I do about an issue so that we can speak as a group. My hope is that there are politically active members of this substack who can provide more helpful information targeted to the US and to your particular location. The organization I work through in Canada to have some impact on US politics is Democrats Abroad. I just got an email today from DA warning that Trump wants to close us down or make it more difficult for Americans abroad to vote in US elections. Good luck with this.
To Hudson— players are not umpires, so they don’t get to call strikes, much less decide how many strikes are needed to be called “out”. Can you comment without slamming other posters? If the answer is NO, why participate at all? Richard’s comment was spot on : your negativity was uncalled for. You should apologize.
Just go to Wikipedia, if nowhere else, and inform yourself of the solutions Dr. Reich has provided as Secretary of Labor and elsewhere.
And besides, as the, Dalai Lama - recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, and the, ousted by Chinese Communists, Tibetan head-of-state pointed out ignorance causes a lot of problems in this world, and the only antidote for ignorance is knowledge, which requires investigation and experimentation.
It's up to you to provide a credible source. I'm not your research assistant. You can't afford me. Dr. Riech has a vested interest. I do not. I just want good governance and quality policy. That should be the goal. Not "my tribe wins"
If it is up to Stephen to provide a credible source, the it is up to you to provide solutions. Do you have any? If so then what are they and how does one go about enacting the solution.
Every problem has a solution. Does it not? Then how does one solve the problem.Like ending the fraudulent practice of buy backs.
It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, not so easy when one is the hot seat.
More importantly, tax corporate profit. At a 40% tax rate, it would end the national debt in five years eve dedicated. Also, given corporate taxes are passed on to the consumer, all of a sudden mom and Pop would compete. There's 3% nonsense is a terrible policy. More usually on the proletariat.
That won't do it. Have you read the party platform? Obviously not. My bad. The only way that's going to happen is tens of millions of us take to the street. #PeacefulCivilDisobedience #GeneralStrike #OccupyEverything #NoCompromise
Oh, for fuck sake. The “Doctor” (said condescendingly) doesn’t need to enlighten me. He can sit in his easy chair and play solitaire on his iPad. He does so out of a benevolent desire to “Help”. (Stands and applauds!)
Let me give you a small microcosm example of Grants.
I know a lady. She’s a CPA and Attorney. She gets a small grant every year of approximately 50 grand. Yep, small potatoes in the scheme of this topic.
Her Grant money is earmarked to help young women. (Insert anything that might help a young, disadvantaged woman.)
Sounds noble? Sure. This woman takes an administrative fee for her services. I’m reasonably sure that no one is monitoring where the funds go and to whom they benefit.
She’s what I call, a “user of the system”. She knows how to apply for a Grant.
There is, in my humble opinion, no oversight. Our government thinks up these excellent ideas, hands out the money, and then pats themselves on the back for being good public servants.
I call it “Bullshit”. But I’m just one small cog in the Government’s Rube Goldberg contraption for doling out dollars.
As far as I can see, there really is only ONE workable solution to correct Congress' willful misbehavior: violent revolution. Violent because 1) WtP have ZERO say as to who will represent Us in Congress. _WE_ don't decide which candidates will be on the final ballot; they are identified, vetted, approved, and endorsed by the Powers That Be in the two major political Parties. [Because "EVERYBODY knows that only Republicans and Democrats candidates stand a **decent** chance of winning to office -- Indies account for less than 1% of elected officials -- and very few people are willing to "waste their vote" by voting for someone that most likely will NOT win.] (And guess what the quid pro quo arrangement is between Party and wannabe candidate to get that endorsement.) And 2) the two Parties literally hold the keys to the kingdom, nearly all the Power (excepting the Very Wealthy that hold even more Power) and that means they control the Military and nearly all Law Enforcement agencies. Which they WILL employ to suppress any relatively peaceful Change Movement that starts to gain traction. Literally, they will yield their hold on Power only "over their dead bodies". (And the bodies of tens of millions of WtP.)
Violent revolution is never the answer. Violence is only justifiable to counter blatant aggression. Peaceful revolution is done if the masses understand the concept. I don't see what it is hard about it. #GeneralStrike #PeacefulCivilDisobedience #OccupyEverything #ListOfDemand #NoCompromise.
100 million people in the streets for seven days in this country and the proletariat could have anything they desire. You obviously don't understand any of this. Take that Putin fellation bullshit elsewhere. I shall not stand for it.
The closest the USA has ever come to an actual General Strike was the Occupy Wall Street movement: tens of millions of Americans doing rallies and assorted activist actions for several months. What did that accomplish? Some lip service "concessions" that were undone within a month or two.
The problem with the General Strike approach is that it DOES require 100+ million protestors -- which most (by a large margin) do NOT want to lose any paycheck hours. (And for many of them, NOT showing up for work in order to go protest at a rally -- or simply staying home from work -- is a quick way to become unemployed.)
Similarly, while many Americans are angry enough to want a revolution to occur, they are NOT willing themselves to take up arms or risk life and limb -- or even the comforts of home to participate in said revolution. Most Americans are too comfortable and/or lazy to put in that kind of effort. It's MUCH easier -- and more comfortable to just grouse and complain about how Bad things are and The People's need for Change We Can Believe In.
Yes,I appreciate getting this info, but do you lobby to do something? Who can, how can this be changed? All the good info in the world riles me and twists my stomach, but telling me the answer is to "vote" doesn't get at the greed on both sides of the aisle.... and even passing it along to my representatives in Washington, only leads to a "thank you for sharing your opinions with my office" letter or email. Arrrrgggghhh.
Hey Captain, you may be right, but I prefer to put my hope in representatives who have shown a preference toward service. I get it that they do have to raise enormous amounts of money to get elected, but we could change that and work more on picking nominees who have a "good" character. That is if we had the will.
And when the average person who is in need gets a nickel from the government, they are bums, moochers, scammers and scoundrels. But the corporate heads are clever investors
Capt, there are a few progressives that work for their constituencies, but precious few. What if we made it so if a person is elected to congress, they are housed in guarded dorms, bussed to the chambers, with no access to lobbyists. All information would be unfiltered by mainstream media. It would be provided by demonstrably reputable sources (such as Robert Reich, propublica, etc) also, they would be fed and clothed, and their paychecks would be held until the end of their term. no access to money accounts. they would be there to deliberate and serve. oh never mind.
True, but President Biden JOINED A UNION'S PICKET LINE!!! NO president has done that! Vice President Harris appears to be even MORE PROGRESSive that her former boss.
I'd say things are looking up now that the Treasonous supreme court coronated King Biden I.
Which is political theater. Biden is on his way out. He doesn't have to work on getting reelected. It costs him NOTHING to "stand up for hard working Americans". If there's any political fallout for appearing to side with striking union members, those remaining in the race can disavow any connection to the deed.... or embrace it loudly if they so choose. [One of the things that SCOTUS has made crystal clear is that elected representatives have a ZERO obligation to fulfill campaign promises.]
I posted in the incorrect location -it's intended for "Captain Patch.
I don't believe your assertion that "the large majority" of the elected officials aren't working to benefit the people. Besides, we can still vote in this election, freely and fairly, for new representatives. Can you provide credible evidence?
We never were or intended to be a true democracy that means every single person of the electorate would vote on every single issue. We are intended to be a representative democracy within the framework of a constitutional republic. You are suffering from the illusion of choice. There is no one other than the few true progresses representing we the people. Maybe a dozen members of Congress two or three justices on the Supreme Court. No one in the Executive. Somewhere in the 90th percentile represent nothing but the donor class.
As pointed out by William F., the majority of the members in Congress are millionaires. How much empathy do you think they have for the Little People? The 9-to-5 crowd, the manual laborers, the underemployed and the unemployed? How many of those well-off legislators are agitating for lowering the salaries of the members of Congress? Or to pay a higher share of the cost for their Cadillac Medical coverage (which they get for the rest of their lives)?
Then there are the ones that are NOT millionaires -- but want to be, someday.
Not surprisingly, many/most members of Congress are wealthier when leaving office than when they first entered office. How can they do that on a House salary of $174,000/year and $193,400/year for a senator?
While it is true that We get to vote for candidates, _WE_ didn't get to choose who those candidates would be. The Party Powers That Be chose the candidates that they would endorse, and then graciously allow the Party rank and file to vote in the primaries to decide which Party-vetted and endorsed candidates would represent the Party in the General Election.
Like The Who sing in "Won't Get Fooled Again,": "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss." The faces may vary. The campaign promises may differ. But they're ALL Party stooges.
In reality corporate behavior appears to be decorrelated with profits. The evidence is that when the big banks received huge bailouts in the 2008 financial crisis the first thing they did was to give themselves huge bonuses.
I didn't get bailed out; did you?
Reich is right. Government funding needs to have lots of strings attached.
We didn't get bailed out either...BUT...we were responsible enough, not to get ourselves into trouble by doing, illegal, risky, stupid short term profit scams. Funny how almost none of the actual perpetrators suffered...
What became, as you pointed out, perceived by the public as - "the help of the government" - began with the campaign of a former actor in cowboy B-movies - the turncoat labor leader of the screen-actors guild - who became an extremist laisse-fare "voodoo-capitalist", self-serving elephant - R. Reagan. I can't forget the outrageous "joke" he told on his campaign trail about the government worker showing up saying, "I'm here to help you." The real truth of the matter is that it has always been a terrible false assertion that the greedy extremists want what's best for the populace, The real problem has been the damage done by those Reagan/Thatcher supporters - the ones who swear, not to prioritize serving the public honorably, but to making themselves and their buddies rich - no matter what harm they cause to the multitudes of honest hard-working people and to the overall society and to the economy, i.e. the real economy, which is not measured simply by how profitable the stock market is for the investor-class. The real economy involves the totality of the nation - including the environment, and those who suffered from big-tobacco, big fossil-fuel, big-pharm, big-Trumpian-real-estate deals, etc. I'm concerned that people may be mistaking "neoliberalism" for the progressive liberalism of today, which correctly asserts that real-progress is the most important product of sensible public policy - i.e. government that is FOR THE PEOPLE, not just government OF the people. We recognize that we now need more effective GOVERNMENT OF THE GREEDY.
Thank you, Lisa J. Miller, for your beneficial insights.
Stock buy backs should be illegal. They were only legalized in the 80s and look how much damage has been done since then to the middle class. Fuck the corporate class of this country, they all need to go.
Do you realize you are speaking on the topic of what you don't have knowledge of? You don't think the tech industry was a major player in the donor class? Please see all the major stakeholders are the major stakeholders, no matter the market niche or sector. They all eat at the same restaurant, they all belong to the same club they all have common interests. Sit down and be quiet.
Strong government is the backstop of efficient capitalism, Reagan be damned. But it requires a democracy, and we don't have a proper functioning democracy in America. The choice between a sane, intelligent President, and a nutcase, could be decided by a single congressional district in ruby-red Nebraska.
I do not think this Court will agree with the changes that will possibly be required to get the US on its climate change goals trajectory. Pack the court.
Why stop there? They are all liars. If Nixon could be impeached for lying, why should these high-ranking Federal officials not be? Thomas and Alito have demonstrably lied, Coney Barrett and Kavanagh have demonstrably committed perjury (if I recall, their Senate testimony was sworn). So dismissing these four individuals would not only send a message, it would mean that SCOTUS does not have to be packed.
Do you believe a mob-installed American Dick-tater is the solution? And I think it's obvious that a democracy can facilitate the best form of capitalism - just look at Denmark and similar democracies with decent policies that actually benefit the people of those advanced countries. We can vote our conscience and hope the extreme right-winger Trump-minions don't start a civil war, which would only do more harm...
You're referring to social democracy. That's what is needed here. Which is a terrible name for the practice it just means to nationalize the things that should be public so that corporations cannot exploit the taxpayer
Stephen: When a nations leader is selected by a handpicked group of people, do we have a democracy?
If the popular vote was used to elect a leader we might lay claim to a democracy.
But as Stalin said, and the Republic party has set out to do, it is not the votes that count but who counts the votes, do we still have a Democracy.
Per this definition: Capitalism is an economic system where private individuals and organizations own and control the means of production, and the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand in a free market.
Capitalism in America is apirational and also a myth, because while the first part of the sentence is true, the second part is only partly true, and becoming less true every day, as corporations merge, and big fish gobble up little fish.
Of course not. Just because I don't consent to the illusion of choice certainly doesn't mean I support the greater of the two evils. You're not worth the oxygen or effort to rebut that stupidity
Chomsky thinks they're incompatible, but I do think that a case can be made that we had something like representative democracy and something like capitalism - as envisaged by Adam Smith - between 1948 and 1980. The whole thing went off the rails in 1980, however, when the southern states starting voting their racism in the wake of Civil Rights. That was when Republicans realized they could still get elected with a platform consisting only of cutting taxes on the wealthy. That was the end of Smith, and the point in time when the American Dream turned into the American Nightmare.
True to form, the South never learns. Filled with grievance for what has been lost, they still vote for a plutocrat who couldn't care less about them.
True Michael: About 285,000 confederates died in the civil war (most from disease)
the majority of Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War did not own slaves, with estimates suggesting that only around 20-25% of Confederate soldiers actually owned slaves or had fathers who owned slaves; meaning a significant portion of Confederate deaths belonged to men without personal slave ownership.
The reason then as now was propaganda from the press and pulpit.
A 2nd great grandfather, John Neil, Enlisted in 37th Regiment (Bell's) Company G, 9th Arkansas Infantry on May 10, 1862. He died of a plague at Camp Hope (renamed Nelson and called Death by the troops) on Sep 16, 1862.
He was buried in a mass grave with other plague casualties.
There were 1,500 casualties of the plague, most of them lads of the 10th Texas Infantry.
He owned no slaves, left a wife and three children, one of whom was an infant,to answer his masters call.It is possible he was conscripted, for an act of conscription was passed in April 1862. after the battle of Pea Ridge in March 1862.
Having been exposed to education in Louisiana I am more than familiar with the"War of Northern Aggression",and the lament of the "lost cause" that is the leifmotif of the south.
In local cemeteries the graves of Confederate veterans are marked with the confederate battle flag.
Perhaps in most wars, young men can be persuaded to lay down their lives for the Emperor (Japan), the Kaiser and Vaterland (Germany), King and Country (England and Scotland), or the slave owner (United States).
The young are useful in war perhaps because they never imagine they will die.
They seem not incompatible. But in constant tension.
I don't give racism quite the weight many here do. We've always had racism. I ascribe what we are seeing more to power shifts in economic, media , and thus political changes.
Yeah for sure. Throw in the democracy hating Supreme Court, though you could just count them as part of the political change. A case could be made that the SC is now the greatest danger we face as a democracy.
Capitalism relies on to absolute prerequisites that are equally important. A free and unfettered market which we don't have other than the farmers market at the park on Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings. As well as thoughtfully emplaced and strictly enforced consumer Protections. We have neither. We have "rape and pillage". Referred to in macro economic 101 classrooms around the world as "imperialism"
Your term "free and unfettered" is extremely misleading. "Unfettered" here means to let the greedy do whatever they want to take away the freedom to be free of their harmful business practices. NOW is the best time to wake up PLEASE
You have no idea what you're speaking of. Sit down and be quiet. That's the whole point of the consumer protections. The only reason that dynamic exists now is because there's not a free market. There's not a single free market in any sector of our economy. You have no idea what you're talking about you are an industry mouthpiece.
Why not bar any publicly traded company which gets a subsidy from the feds from buying back its stock for a period of years after receipt of the subsidy?
Excellent column. I view the entire 50 billion dollar buy back as a bribe. Not only should Intel et al have been barred from stock buy-backs, but the 50 billion dispensation should have been directly contingent on direct investment in chip building capacity (or in hiring more chips workers to produce more chips.
Robert writes “give preference to companies who commit to not engage in stock buybacks.” Preference! That’s like asking “pretty please”. How about a written guarantee signed by the CEO and CFO that there will be no stock buybacks during the time period CHIPS Act money is being received plus 18 months afterwards. And demand written, audited reports showing where the CHIPS Act money will be used and where it was actually used. It better match.
Unless government is willing to actually run a corporation, there's no way that it can make sure that money given to a corporation will NOT be directed towards Management and shareholder compensation. For example, say government gives a sum to a corporation and dictates, "You can use this money for ONLY company expansion." Or to raise worker wages. Or to hire additional workers. Etc. What the company then WILL do is to reduce the Budget allocation for those things originally and apply the government subsidy to those things. The corporation now has freed up a sum equal to what the government provided -- to be spent on whatever the CEO and Board wants to spend that money on. Which will most likely be on "performance bonuses" and/or additional share dividends.
"Where there is money involved, corporate greed WILL find a way."
I'm sorry but this is a defeatist position, effectively saying nothing can be done to impact the domination of finance/corporate capital in the US. The rise of the new labor unionization movement attests to the fact that it is possible to force corporations into more equitable distribution and to acknowledge workers' rights. Is it possible-yes, Do we have a long. arduous and difficult road to accomplish more meaningful reform- you bet.
The problem for controlling run amok corporations is CONGRESS. The members of Congress are the ONLY people that create and enact legislation that regulates what businesses can or can't do, to protect unionization and collective bargaining, to enforce OSHA standards, etc. While elected to office by We The People, the significant majority -- in a "Majority rules!" system -- rely heavily on the funding provided by LARGE "campaign contributions", PACs, and lobbyist largess. Which means that the majority of "Our" elected representatives are more concerned about placating their largest donors -- the Very Wealthy and corporations -- than they are in serving the needs of The People. And all they have to do to placate _Us_ is to keep issuing the People-friendly soundbites and _say_ that they are "taking on the Wealthy fat cats and corporate interests". As long as those corporate interest legislations keep "squeaking by", enough of them can keep up appearances by voting against such legislation -- KNOWING in advance that legislation _will_ still get passed.
It's all political theater, meant to keep The People from starting to build barricades and breaking out their 2nd Amendment arsenals.
Nope. That absolutely would not work. A company taking in a billion will then use a half a billion for stock buybacks and so forth and return the other half and they're that much - half a billion - happier.
We could tax the crap out of bonuses over $100k per year. We could have an amendment that states that corporations are not people and that for political campaigns, only people in the form of US citizens can make donations, small donations, to political campaigns. We could say that all corporations pay taxes based on their sales and not upon their fungible income. We could say the only deductions against those taxes are for wages (not bonuses) paid to US workers on US soil, or for new capital construction in the US. There needs to be strong compliance language, too, with harsh penalties. I guarantee we’d see off-shored business come streaming home, and we’d gain control of politics.
We could, except for the fact that the ONLY people that can make such laws -- "Our" elected representatives in Congress -- are on the payrolls of the very people those laws would most adversely affect. (Those being the Very Wealthy and Very Wealthy-run corporations that provide "Our" legislators with LARGE "campaign contributions", PAC money, and lobbyist largess.)
The impossible problem to accomplishing that is that the ONLY people that can make that happen are those bought politicians, the majority of which are themselves millionaires and more interested in serving the interests of the Wealthy rather than The People. (And are being rewarded quite handsomely by the Wealthy to do so.) So how do _We_ accomplish getting those changes made since it should be quite obvious that the politicians WON'T be doing it? (Keeping in mind that the six Conservative justices on SCOTUS _will_ declare any such changes, should they ever be made, to be "unconstitutional".)
It is not correct that government must run a business in order to provide fair business practices - fair to owners, managers, as well as to the populace. Besides Professor Reich, you might also pay attention to Nobel Laureate economists like Joseph J. Stiglitz, et al.
“ Taxpayer money should not be used to boost share prices and CEO pay. ”
I agree that it should be a part of all contracts, but I would say historically this has not been enough,,which has led us to the oligarchy we now find ourselves in, I would like to see .congress create multiple laws that not only state this must be part of all congressional contracts in dealing with all companies, but laws are also made to limit CEO pay, and the use of layoffs. AI is going to affect labor and we need serious regulations now to protect labor, The president of the United .states makes $400,000. + $50,000 expense account, Hospital CEOs make between 2-23 million. Is their job really that much harder than that of the US President? Why can’t laws require employees have a stake in the company? I will never understand why we don’t have a progressive tax for everyone, Companies use much more infrastructure than individuals. If they want to use the benefits from our taxes, why shouldn’t they pay their fair share? This feels like a watershed moment in the history of this country. Do we want a multiracial pluralistic democracy that has laws and regulations protecting equality and equity for the common good, or do we want an oligarchical authoritarian white supremacist country that rewards the cult of Christian determinism, racists, misogynists, homophobic, and xenophobes, and sociopaths? There will always be narcissists and sociopaths who will be drawn to cons and leadership positions which is why we need laws, regulations and social norms to protect the majority from being exploited.
We need to get the "dark money" out of political contests that the poorly decided "Citizens United" supreme court decision provided the wealthy who want to keep the lawmakers they own funneling money back into their investment portfolios rather than into job producing
similar to programs to take advantage of the now profitable "green" environmental protecting industries that have come about during the Biden/Harris administration.
A political career is especially remunerative The Clinton's left office 1 million in legal debts and next to nothing in net worth, now they are worth $270 million. Chelsea Clinton and husband have a net worth of $30 million, The Obama's $70 million.
Has anyone noticed that lawyers are over represented among the political class. , 30% of House Members, and 51% of Senators, have law degrees and have practiced law.
“The first thing we do is, let’s kill all the lawyers.” It’s said by a character called Dick the Butcher in Act IV, Scene II of William Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part II,
Actually the quote is by Dick the anti intellectual In context Shakespeare represented lawyers as the most fundamental defense against the grossest manifestations of power-hungry antics wrought by the scum of humanity.
Interesting isn't it, how things, taken out of context are misconstrued, Then again lawyering has changed quite a bit in the last 400 years.
The importance of the CHIPS Act extends far beyond the employment of American workers and the country's own industrial base.
Years ago, the U.S. ceded chip development and manufacturing supermacy to a handful of Taiwanese companies. With that island an increasingly likely target of Chinese aggression, and the danger of the world's most advanced chip technology falling into Chinese hands, it's critical that the capacity to develop and produce chips at the forefront of technology also be safely located where the Chinese can't get their hands on the facilities: the U.S., or Western Europe. Should the supply of high-end chips be cut off, rationed or ransomed by the Chinese, the wotld's economy will, at least in the short term, collapse -- they're THAT important.
The plants that will be built here in association with Taiwanese chipmakers will guarantee that won't happen. And American workers will benefit in the process -- IF the cultural differences and business practices of the two traditions can be reconciled, not a minor point.
We've reached new levels of greed. Something must be done or this will end badly. If Trump were to steal the election, America will never be the same. Go Kamala!
Yes. However, is it if, or when, Trump steals the election? He is now in the process of trying to steal the election. If he does, America will not just "never be the same" - -America will be destroyed, by self-destruction.
As a country we are between a rock and a hard place. In order to stay ahead of the rest of the world the government has to provide grants to these companies. But the Greed by the executives of these companies is palpable!
From your description, I am visualizing them, along with pigs, with their faces down in a trough full of muddy shit, going after wet $100 bills and coins trying to scarf up the last slime-covered filthy penny; and enjoying every minute of it.
Definitely, Prof. Reich, our federal government should quickly put an end to all this and its other forms of the entire planet's principal economic system: socialism for the rich, aka corporate welfare. Not only are the 1% destroying our planet's ecosystems with their government-subsidized fossil fool (pun intended!) layouts, they're corroding the economic well-being of hard-working families too. Hope is just around the corner this November 5, however. In the wake of Brazil's, Australia's and the UK's much saner shifts to ecologically conscious and progressive governments, the US can follow suit by electing Kamala Devi Harris and Timothy James Walz to 2 consecutive 4-year terms. Let's get to work!
I admit I'm very uninformed about legislation and how the provisions get added and changed to satisfy the opposition. But how is it that subsidies for companies don't have limits on how these funds are used. If you get food stamps I see lots of signs that they are not to be used for hot foods, etc, so restrictions on normal people on benefits are normal. But for corporations to use them to enrich themselves and stock holders and investors is criminal. This needs much more attention from the public .
I do not understand why a prohibition against stock buybacks is not already a requirement for receiving a CHIPS grant. I'm hoping your letter reaches Gina Raimondo's desk and she takes immediate action.
That's just not right. Corporations raiding the public coffers has gone on for far too long. Especially with the help of the Government. Shameful. And especially when they're already making record profits. Thank you as always Professor Reich for your clear and concise explanation of the facts. Appreciate you!! ❤️🇺🇸💙
You DO realize that the large majority -- "Majority rules!" -- of "Our" elected representatives don't actually work for Us, right? They instead serve the Very Wealthy that shower them with "campaign contributions", PAC money, and lobbyist largess. So it's not surprising at all that "Our" government throw megabillions of Our tax dollars at corporations that really don't _need_ financial support.
@CaptainPatch. For some reason I have the image of Ezra Pound and TS Eliot fighting in the Captain's tower.
45 days out we need to be unified. ONE GOAL. Beat the damn criminal. Blue tsunami.
https://www.fieldteam6.org/all-volunteer-ops/volunteer
Well said Daniel.
The goal should be good government and quality policy. Neither of the partners in the global crime syndicate you call major parties offers that. To achieve it we must remove big dark money in the barriers to accessing the ballot. No the party is offering such. As a matter fact, neither party is offering true representation of the people or the filling is out of office.
It's an impossible conundrum: To clean up Our political System, We need to take (BIG) money out of the equation. But the ONLY people that have the Power and Authority to do that are the very people that benefit most from the graft built into the System: "Our" elected representatives in government, who, most of them, rely on the BIG money thrown at them by the Very Wealthy and corporations to finance their campaigns (and lavish lifestyles).
Thank you
How's things in Vladivostok?
I would imagine not much different than Stalingrad, Ivan Ivanovich.
My father in law’s name was (basically) Ivan Ivanovich Funny to see it here as a Russian slur. John Johnson. (He was Ukrainian.)
Yes, Daniel. It is also important that Trump's tariffs would amount to a tax on consumers--for the benefit of COs. What's more, The reason Trump wants impose tariffs is so that he would lower the income tax on the wealthy.
The faces of the people at Le Metro, like petals on a wet black bough...
Yeah, kinda the problem in a nutshell. My Rep in Missouri 2nd district Ann Wagner is a shill for the financial institutions. The public is too unaware, distracted, or having a dislike of Democrats, to vote her out. And then Repubs killed the anti-gerrymandering law we had in place through ballot trickery and re-did the 2nd district to include red rural areas. So she is difficult to dislodge. Power begets more power.
It was Reaganomics that started the massive loss of manufacturing jobs in this Country! Saint Ronnie decided that it was not worth assisting the beleaguered Northeast and Midwest! REPUBLICANS with their BS trickle-down policies are responsible for the sorry state of our manufacturing base!😬 I wish these willfully ignorant people would learn how to read and think!💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
The irony is that when jobs were lost, the safety net kicked in. I bet a vast majority receive government benefits and MAGA jeopardizes them.
Blue Missouri. Hawley is generally HATED and his seat can be flipped. https://bluemissouri.org/
And then Missouri does a terrible job in assisting people to get help on that safety net. Many who need help don't get it. The state agencies that adminster programs get underfunded by the supermajority Republican legislature. The MO Supreme Court tells the state to fix it. And so on.
Steve, thank you for mentioning this. Here's why we cannot entrust our basic rights to the states.
And it was George Herbert Walker Bush who nailed it for what it truly was “ Voodoo Economics “. Until he was cowed. Too bad good man.
Imports from China were doubling every 2 years in 1985 at 4 billion per year. By 1992 it slowed down to doubling every 5 years at 26 billion per year, and slowed way down in 2007 at 290 billion per year. Since 2015 imports have been unstable at about 500 Billion per year. Trade with China has been controlled by the Chinese government. In 1978 many restrictions were lifted. It looks like textiles were a big portion of the early exports from China.
Nixon and Carter both increased relations with China to counter Russia.
The fundamental, indisputable reason why jobs were outsorced to China and other countries was low wages, feeble workplace protections, few environmental regulations. To scapegoat China for what our businesses did with full knowledge of what was involved is simply dishonest. This is why the US has so many billionaires now.
Steve, any idea why your district dislikes Democrats. The answer to that question, might answer the question, why, though Republicans are a minority and the party operates and governs contrary to the economic interests of their constituents they are none the less dominant in those states and districts.
Ref. to “What’s the matter with Kansas?”
"Kansas" book should be required reading for a high school civics course, and one on how not to do business. It describes how mega corporations slyly sway political will to corporate interests and away from public interests, what Dr. Reich has been preaching for years. Book came out around 1993, after the bitterness of "Reaganomics" had taken full sway on the American middle class. A similar result had occurred in Great Britain of the 1980's under Thatcher, resulting in the ruin of their industrial economy.
Read the charter of any major corporation to see that they are not in the service of any government or benefit of any citizens, but of the shareholder group and the corporate bottom line. This is the reason that the law needs to be laid down as to the strict disposition of taxpayer funding for the common good.
Charles Koch, if I am not wrong, makes Kansas his home.
I've read Thomas Frank's book Mssr. But I asked you, not Thomas Frank.
The more suburban St Louis county areas tend to lean slightly to Dems or toss up.. Rural heavily to Repubs. I don't know that I have any special insight as to why people, some in the district, dislike Dems apart from the right-wing media barrage that is across this country.
Generally, most of the Trumpers in rural or small town MO have no idea whatsover how they are voting against their economic interests. They live in a closed political space. Thier Repub rep writes up in their local paper how great things are going as long as the Republicans are in charge.
Next up: Next legislative session the Repubs finally succeed in putting on the ballot a measure that would gut the ballot initiative process we've had for 100 years. They will "improve the process" by making it almost impossible to pass anything.
They will load the measure up with deceptive language and ballot candy
-" Only US citizens may vote" and the voters will pass it, like they passed the ballot measure to restore gerrymandering.
We almost got Wagner out of office 3 election cycles ago, but her matgin of victory has since increased.
Get this. One year her biggest campaign donor was the marketing outfit that does her campaigns. The circle of corruption closed.
Having come of age in a small southern town and a large city (Philadelphia)
I have my own observation and opinion.
The further one gets from a cosmopolitan center, the more crecdulous and non thinking the population, bigotry rises as you move away.
It is axiomatic that rural areas that hardly see a black person are more bigoted than those who live in metropolitan areas and are exposed to them daily.
In small towns and rural communities, there is not much chance for social interaction,other than the church, the grange, the VFW and American Legion.
And there it is birds of a feather that flock together, and reinforce each others views, opinions and beliefs.
When I lived then, there was no internet, only TV, and the local paper, and of course Church. Peoples opinions and beliefs were those of the press and pulpit, reinforced at the Grange and VFW. The TV was news and entertainment. And News was news,not agitprop as it is today with talk show hosts telling people what to think and how to act.
There were no commercial breaks for Huntley Brinkley or Dan Rather, there was a divide between the news division and the entertainment division,now they are folded into infotainment. Bye bye Fairness Doctrine, gratis Ronald Reagan.
The pulpit and the press, and by that I mean especially Murdoch, are telling people what to think and believe.
The Pulpit has a pecuniary and social self interest in perpetuating the regnant paradigm, an enlightened congregation threatens a loss of revenue and social status
Folk who live in metropolitan areas have a wide variety of venues and opportunities for socialization, entertainment, diversion and acquaintances a well.
In the city your next door neighbor is not necessarily a white family, who goes to the same church, with whom you enjoin at the bowling alley, fishing trips or your wife at a coffee klatch.
Cops socialize at cop bars, military socialize at NCO and Officer clubs, or at bars basically backed up to the perimeter fence., there are even lumber jack bars, and or course truck stops,in NY and California never far from a gay bar., I doubt there are any in Jackson , Mississippi though.
Birds of a feather.....
Agree. And for me, Murdoch is probably number 1 on the list of those who have done the most to damage America.
Many rural areas are cultural deserts. Whatever culture there is is most likely owned by a religious entity or a business group.
I miss the purple state Missouri once was.
All with OUR (WtP) consent. Never forget that we are the weak link in this chain. People like you to do nothing but point out problems that are blatantly obvious. Got any solutions?
Pointing out these problems is a real service. And these problems are not 'blatantly obvious' to most people. Your comment is gratuitously insulting. If you read Reich's comments to the end, he does offer solutions. Before we can exercise the political will to insure that CHIPS continues to create jobs for Americans and foster innovation, we need to understand what is happening.
Richard, yes, pointing out these problems IS A REAL SERVICE! But, can you tell me how to exercise this political will? Don't the elected in Washington hold the power to exercise the will?
Fair enough question. While I am a US citizen, I live in Canada. Here I would contact my constituency office- I have done this before. Someone from our MP's office will reply. To have a greater impact, I would want to find others who feel the same way as I do about an issue so that we can speak as a group. My hope is that there are politically active members of this substack who can provide more helpful information targeted to the US and to your particular location. The organization I work through in Canada to have some impact on US politics is Democrats Abroad. I just got an email today from DA warning that Trump wants to close us down or make it more difficult for Americans abroad to vote in US elections. Good luck with this.
Thank you, and may tRump get toenail fungus!
I wasn't speaking towards the doctor. Strike one. Sorry this isn't baseball ....you're out
To Hudson— players are not umpires, so they don’t get to call strikes, much less decide how many strikes are needed to be called “out”. Can you comment without slamming other posters? If the answer is NO, why participate at all? Richard’s comment was spot on : your negativity was uncalled for. You should apologize.
And you are an ass.
Please maintain civility on this forum. I have been so proud of the high level of debate here.
Whoa- Dr Reich pointed out a sound solution - bar the 50 billion from being used to buy back stock.
As I said earlier many times. End the practice. It is fraudulent.
Easier said than done,Mssr BaldwinIII, How precisely does one end the practice.
Just go to Wikipedia, if nowhere else, and inform yourself of the solutions Dr. Reich has provided as Secretary of Labor and elsewhere.
And besides, as the, Dalai Lama - recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, and the, ousted by Chinese Communists, Tibetan head-of-state pointed out ignorance causes a lot of problems in this world, and the only antidote for ignorance is knowledge, which requires investigation and experimentation.
It's up to you to provide a credible source. I'm not your research assistant. You can't afford me. Dr. Riech has a vested interest. I do not. I just want good governance and quality policy. That should be the goal. Not "my tribe wins"
If it is up to Stephen to provide a credible source, the it is up to you to provide solutions. Do you have any? If so then what are they and how does one go about enacting the solution.
Every problem has a solution. Does it not? Then how does one solve the problem.Like ending the fraudulent practice of buy backs.
It is so easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, not so easy when one is the hot seat.
End Citizens United and tax the rich, at 1970's levels. Will require democratic president, democratic senate and house and a lot of public pressure.
More importantly, tax corporate profit. At a 40% tax rate, it would end the national debt in five years eve dedicated. Also, given corporate taxes are passed on to the consumer, all of a sudden mom and Pop would compete. There's 3% nonsense is a terrible policy. More usually on the proletariat.
That won't do it. Have you read the party platform? Obviously not. My bad. The only way that's going to happen is tens of millions of us take to the street. #PeacefulCivilDisobedience #GeneralStrike #OccupyEverything #NoCompromise
Oh, for fuck sake. The “Doctor” (said condescendingly) doesn’t need to enlighten me. He can sit in his easy chair and play solitaire on his iPad. He does so out of a benevolent desire to “Help”. (Stands and applauds!)
Let me give you a small microcosm example of Grants.
I know a lady. She’s a CPA and Attorney. She gets a small grant every year of approximately 50 grand. Yep, small potatoes in the scheme of this topic.
Her Grant money is earmarked to help young women. (Insert anything that might help a young, disadvantaged woman.)
Sounds noble? Sure. This woman takes an administrative fee for her services. I’m reasonably sure that no one is monitoring where the funds go and to whom they benefit.
She’s what I call, a “user of the system”. She knows how to apply for a Grant.
There is, in my humble opinion, no oversight. Our government thinks up these excellent ideas, hands out the money, and then pats themselves on the back for being good public servants.
I call it “Bullshit”. But I’m just one small cog in the Government’s Rube Goldberg contraption for doling out dollars.
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
The condescension is deserved. Your rant, nothing but Anecdotal nebulous gibberish.
These legislative treasury rates have nothing to do with grants
As far as I can see, there really is only ONE workable solution to correct Congress' willful misbehavior: violent revolution. Violent because 1) WtP have ZERO say as to who will represent Us in Congress. _WE_ don't decide which candidates will be on the final ballot; they are identified, vetted, approved, and endorsed by the Powers That Be in the two major political Parties. [Because "EVERYBODY knows that only Republicans and Democrats candidates stand a **decent** chance of winning to office -- Indies account for less than 1% of elected officials -- and very few people are willing to "waste their vote" by voting for someone that most likely will NOT win.] (And guess what the quid pro quo arrangement is between Party and wannabe candidate to get that endorsement.) And 2) the two Parties literally hold the keys to the kingdom, nearly all the Power (excepting the Very Wealthy that hold even more Power) and that means they control the Military and nearly all Law Enforcement agencies. Which they WILL employ to suppress any relatively peaceful Change Movement that starts to gain traction. Literally, they will yield their hold on Power only "over their dead bodies". (And the bodies of tens of millions of WtP.)
Violent revolution is never the answer. Violence is only justifiable to counter blatant aggression. Peaceful revolution is done if the masses understand the concept. I don't see what it is hard about it. #GeneralStrike #PeacefulCivilDisobedience #OccupyEverything #ListOfDemand #NoCompromise.
100 million people in the streets for seven days in this country and the proletariat could have anything they desire. You obviously don't understand any of this. Take that Putin fellation bullshit elsewhere. I shall not stand for it.
The closest the USA has ever come to an actual General Strike was the Occupy Wall Street movement: tens of millions of Americans doing rallies and assorted activist actions for several months. What did that accomplish? Some lip service "concessions" that were undone within a month or two.
The problem with the General Strike approach is that it DOES require 100+ million protestors -- which most (by a large margin) do NOT want to lose any paycheck hours. (And for many of them, NOT showing up for work in order to go protest at a rally -- or simply staying home from work -- is a quick way to become unemployed.)
Similarly, while many Americans are angry enough to want a revolution to occur, they are NOT willing themselves to take up arms or risk life and limb -- or even the comforts of home to participate in said revolution. Most Americans are too comfortable and/or lazy to put in that kind of effort. It's MUCH easier -- and more comfortable to just grouse and complain about how Bad things are and The People's need for Change We Can Believe In.
Not at all blatantly obvious to all Hudson.
As regards solution, mister mouth. What are yours.
They are listed two posts above you. Completely oblivious much?
Yes,I appreciate getting this info, but do you lobby to do something? Who can, how can this be changed? All the good info in the world riles me and twists my stomach, but telling me the answer is to "vote" doesn't get at the greed on both sides of the aisle.... and even passing it along to my representatives in Washington, only leads to a "thank you for sharing your opinions with my office" letter or email. Arrrrgggghhh.
Typo?
"...How do do this? My humble comment.."
Typo?
"....its its board to buy back a further $7.24 billion .."
And keep shipping jobs overseas!😡😡 If a company receives Federal money, stock buyback should be illegal or t2he company loses the money! VOTE BLUE
¿y que?
Hey Captain, you may be right, but I prefer to put my hope in representatives who have shown a preference toward service. I get it that they do have to raise enormous amounts of money to get elected, but we could change that and work more on picking nominees who have a "good" character. That is if we had the will.
We will not see things improve until we cancel Citizens United and the anonymous PACS. Big money controls everything.
And when the average person who is in need gets a nickel from the government, they are bums, moochers, scammers and scoundrels. But the corporate heads are clever investors
Capt, there are a few progressives that work for their constituencies, but precious few. What if we made it so if a person is elected to congress, they are housed in guarded dorms, bussed to the chambers, with no access to lobbyists. All information would be unfiltered by mainstream media. It would be provided by demonstrably reputable sources (such as Robert Reich, propublica, etc) also, they would be fed and clothed, and their paychecks would be held until the end of their term. no access to money accounts. they would be there to deliberate and serve. oh never mind.
True, but President Biden JOINED A UNION'S PICKET LINE!!! NO president has done that! Vice President Harris appears to be even MORE PROGRESSive that her former boss.
I'd say things are looking up now that the Treasonous supreme court coronated King Biden I.
Which is political theater. Biden is on his way out. He doesn't have to work on getting reelected. It costs him NOTHING to "stand up for hard working Americans". If there's any political fallout for appearing to side with striking union members, those remaining in the race can disavow any connection to the deed.... or embrace it loudly if they so choose. [One of the things that SCOTUS has made crystal clear is that elected representatives have a ZERO obligation to fulfill campaign promises.]
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/supreme-court-calls-lying-by-politicians-an-expression-of-their-religion
I posted in the incorrect location -it's intended for "Captain Patch.
I don't believe your assertion that "the large majority" of the elected officials aren't working to benefit the people. Besides, we can still vote in this election, freely and fairly, for new representatives. Can you provide credible evidence?
I hope we remain a true democracy...
We never were or intended to be a true democracy that means every single person of the electorate would vote on every single issue. We are intended to be a representative democracy within the framework of a constitutional republic. You are suffering from the illusion of choice. There is no one other than the few true progresses representing we the people. Maybe a dozen members of Congress two or three justices on the Supreme Court. No one in the Executive. Somewhere in the 90th percentile represent nothing but the donor class.
As pointed out by William F., the majority of the members in Congress are millionaires. How much empathy do you think they have for the Little People? The 9-to-5 crowd, the manual laborers, the underemployed and the unemployed? How many of those well-off legislators are agitating for lowering the salaries of the members of Congress? Or to pay a higher share of the cost for their Cadillac Medical coverage (which they get for the rest of their lives)?
Then there are the ones that are NOT millionaires -- but want to be, someday.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/iga.2015.16
Not surprisingly, many/most members of Congress are wealthier when leaving office than when they first entered office. How can they do that on a House salary of $174,000/year and $193,400/year for a senator?
https://ballotpedia.org/Personal_Gain_Index_(U.S._Congress)
While it is true that We get to vote for candidates, _WE_ didn't get to choose who those candidates would be. The Party Powers That Be chose the candidates that they would endorse, and then graciously allow the Party rank and file to vote in the primaries to decide which Party-vetted and endorsed candidates would represent the Party in the General Election.
Like The Who sing in "Won't Get Fooled Again,": "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss." The faces may vary. The campaign promises may differ. But they're ALL Party stooges.
Majority of lawmakers in congress are millionaires: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/04/majority-of-lawmakers-millionaires/
In reality corporate behavior appears to be decorrelated with profits. The evidence is that when the big banks received huge bailouts in the 2008 financial crisis the first thing they did was to give themselves huge bonuses.
I didn't get bailed out; did you?
Reich is right. Government funding needs to have lots of strings attached.
We didn't get bailed out either...BUT...we were responsible enough, not to get ourselves into trouble by doing, illegal, risky, stupid short term profit scams. Funny how almost none of the actual perpetrators suffered...
What became, as you pointed out, perceived by the public as - "the help of the government" - began with the campaign of a former actor in cowboy B-movies - the turncoat labor leader of the screen-actors guild - who became an extremist laisse-fare "voodoo-capitalist", self-serving elephant - R. Reagan. I can't forget the outrageous "joke" he told on his campaign trail about the government worker showing up saying, "I'm here to help you." The real truth of the matter is that it has always been a terrible false assertion that the greedy extremists want what's best for the populace, The real problem has been the damage done by those Reagan/Thatcher supporters - the ones who swear, not to prioritize serving the public honorably, but to making themselves and their buddies rich - no matter what harm they cause to the multitudes of honest hard-working people and to the overall society and to the economy, i.e. the real economy, which is not measured simply by how profitable the stock market is for the investor-class. The real economy involves the totality of the nation - including the environment, and those who suffered from big-tobacco, big fossil-fuel, big-pharm, big-Trumpian-real-estate deals, etc. I'm concerned that people may be mistaking "neoliberalism" for the progressive liberalism of today, which correctly asserts that real-progress is the most important product of sensible public policy - i.e. government that is FOR THE PEOPLE, not just government OF the people. We recognize that we now need more effective GOVERNMENT OF THE GREEDY.
Thank you, Lisa J. Miller, for your beneficial insights.
There is no "progressive liberalism" in America. If you true progressives get suppressed and oppressed at every turn. By their own party
Stock buy backs should be illegal. They were only legalized in the 80s and look how much damage has been done since then to the middle class. Fuck the corporate class of this country, they all need to go.
Indeed
You realize that these companies didn't ask for this legislation?
Do you realize you are speaking on the topic of what you don't have knowledge of? You don't think the tech industry was a major player in the donor class? Please see all the major stakeholders are the major stakeholders, no matter the market niche or sector. They all eat at the same restaurant, they all belong to the same club they all have common interests. Sit down and be quiet.
Odd - the SIA annual report from 2019 doesn't mention anything about wanting subsidies for building manufacturing plants.
https://www.semiconductors.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2019-SIA-Factbook-FINAL.pdf
Strong government is the backstop of efficient capitalism, Reagan be damned. But it requires a democracy, and we don't have a proper functioning democracy in America. The choice between a sane, intelligent President, and a nutcase, could be decided by a single congressional district in ruby-red Nebraska.
The Citizens United decision has brought our country to this point.
Without that decision we won't have trump or MAGA. We would have elected officials that truly represent the people that put them there.
We need a SCOTUS to overturn that decision so we can usher in strong campaign reforms.
pack the court.
I do not think this Court will agree with the changes that will possibly be required to get the US on its climate change goals trajectory. Pack the court.
Term limits and impeach Thomas and Alito!
Why stop there? They are all liars. If Nixon could be impeached for lying, why should these high-ranking Federal officials not be? Thomas and Alito have demonstrably lied, Coney Barrett and Kavanagh have demonstrably committed perjury (if I recall, their Senate testimony was sworn). So dismissing these four individuals would not only send a message, it would mean that SCOTUS does not have to be packed.
ABSOLUTELY!
To bring about a "proper functioning democracy vote for the obvious SANE party up and down the ticket - PLEASE
There is no sane party. That is exactly the bullshit dynamic that brought us to this Third World shit hole.
We don't have our representative democracy or capitalism. Those two things are not correlated or mutually dependent.
Do you believe a mob-installed American Dick-tater is the solution? And I think it's obvious that a democracy can facilitate the best form of capitalism - just look at Denmark and similar democracies with decent policies that actually benefit the people of those advanced countries. We can vote our conscience and hope the extreme right-winger Trump-minions don't start a civil war, which would only do more harm...
You're referring to social democracy. That's what is needed here. Which is a terrible name for the practice it just means to nationalize the things that should be public so that corporations cannot exploit the taxpayer
Stephen: When a nations leader is selected by a handpicked group of people, do we have a democracy?
If the popular vote was used to elect a leader we might lay claim to a democracy.
But as Stalin said, and the Republic party has set out to do, it is not the votes that count but who counts the votes, do we still have a Democracy.
Per this definition: Capitalism is an economic system where private individuals and organizations own and control the means of production, and the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand in a free market.
Capitalism in America is apirational and also a myth, because while the first part of the sentence is true, the second part is only partly true, and becoming less true every day, as corporations merge, and big fish gobble up little fish.
Stephen Grimes: The Netherlands is another country that is way ahead of the US in many, many ways.
Did Mark just not have democracy or representative democracy. It is social democracy. Say hello Felicia ciao
Of course not. Just because I don't consent to the illusion of choice certainly doesn't mean I support the greater of the two evils. You're not worth the oxygen or effort to rebut that stupidity
Chomsky thinks they're incompatible, but I do think that a case can be made that we had something like representative democracy and something like capitalism - as envisaged by Adam Smith - between 1948 and 1980. The whole thing went off the rails in 1980, however, when the southern states starting voting their racism in the wake of Civil Rights. That was when Republicans realized they could still get elected with a platform consisting only of cutting taxes on the wealthy. That was the end of Smith, and the point in time when the American Dream turned into the American Nightmare.
True to form, the South never learns. Filled with grievance for what has been lost, they still vote for a plutocrat who couldn't care less about them.
True Michael: About 285,000 confederates died in the civil war (most from disease)
the majority of Confederate soldiers who died in the Civil War did not own slaves, with estimates suggesting that only around 20-25% of Confederate soldiers actually owned slaves or had fathers who owned slaves; meaning a significant portion of Confederate deaths belonged to men without personal slave ownership.
The reason then as now was propaganda from the press and pulpit.
A 2nd great grandfather, John Neil, Enlisted in 37th Regiment (Bell's) Company G, 9th Arkansas Infantry on May 10, 1862. He died of a plague at Camp Hope (renamed Nelson and called Death by the troops) on Sep 16, 1862.
He was buried in a mass grave with other plague casualties.
There were 1,500 casualties of the plague, most of them lads of the 10th Texas Infantry.
He owned no slaves, left a wife and three children, one of whom was an infant,to answer his masters call.It is possible he was conscripted, for an act of conscription was passed in April 1862. after the battle of Pea Ridge in March 1862.
Having been exposed to education in Louisiana I am more than familiar with the"War of Northern Aggression",and the lament of the "lost cause" that is the leifmotif of the south.
In local cemeteries the graves of Confederate veterans are marked with the confederate battle flag.
Perhaps in most wars, young men can be persuaded to lay down their lives for the Emperor (Japan), the Kaiser and Vaterland (Germany), King and Country (England and Scotland), or the slave owner (United States).
The young are useful in war perhaps because they never imagine they will die.
The Grand adventure. I remember when I was immortal
They seem not incompatible. But in constant tension.
I don't give racism quite the weight many here do. We've always had racism. I ascribe what we are seeing more to power shifts in economic, media , and thus political changes.
Citizens United didn't help
Yeah for sure. Throw in the democracy hating Supreme Court, though you could just count them as part of the political change. A case could be made that the SC is now the greatest danger we face as a democracy.
http://www.lpbr.net/2016/07/the-case-against-supreme-court.html
It went sideways in November 1963. With the people should be demanding social democracy the proven brest policy practice.
Capitalism relies on to absolute prerequisites that are equally important. A free and unfettered market which we don't have other than the farmers market at the park on Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings. As well as thoughtfully emplaced and strictly enforced consumer Protections. We have neither. We have "rape and pillage". Referred to in macro economic 101 classrooms around the world as "imperialism"
Your term "free and unfettered" is extremely misleading. "Unfettered" here means to let the greedy do whatever they want to take away the freedom to be free of their harmful business practices. NOW is the best time to wake up PLEASE
Unfettered is the libertarian/Republican goal. Encapsulated in Project 2025 with the disestablishment of regulatory cabinets and commissions.
You have no idea what you're speaking of. Sit down and be quiet. That's the whole point of the consumer protections. The only reason that dynamic exists now is because there's not a free market. There's not a single free market in any sector of our economy. You have no idea what you're talking about you are an industry mouthpiece.
Why not bar any publicly traded company which gets a subsidy from the feds from buying back its stock for a period of years after receipt of the subsidy?
Let's eliminate the practice completely. It's fraud of the most blatant kind.
Buybacks were illegal in the past.
As they should be.
Great idea! Or they lose the subsidy
No.
Maybe you should run for Congress and try to make a thorough presentation of your position.
Excellent column. I view the entire 50 billion dollar buy back as a bribe. Not only should Intel et al have been barred from stock buy-backs, but the 50 billion dispensation should have been directly contingent on direct investment in chip building capacity (or in hiring more chips workers to produce more chips.
IN THE UNITED STATES 🇺🇸
Where are the auditors?!
Robert writes “give preference to companies who commit to not engage in stock buybacks.” Preference! That’s like asking “pretty please”. How about a written guarantee signed by the CEO and CFO that there will be no stock buybacks during the time period CHIPS Act money is being received plus 18 months afterwards. And demand written, audited reports showing where the CHIPS Act money will be used and where it was actually used. It better match.
Unless government is willing to actually run a corporation, there's no way that it can make sure that money given to a corporation will NOT be directed towards Management and shareholder compensation. For example, say government gives a sum to a corporation and dictates, "You can use this money for ONLY company expansion." Or to raise worker wages. Or to hire additional workers. Etc. What the company then WILL do is to reduce the Budget allocation for those things originally and apply the government subsidy to those things. The corporation now has freed up a sum equal to what the government provided -- to be spent on whatever the CEO and Board wants to spend that money on. Which will most likely be on "performance bonuses" and/or additional share dividends.
"Where there is money involved, corporate greed WILL find a way."
Stock buybacks used to be considered market manipulation & therefore illegal.
We could reinstate that ruling for everyone.
I'm sorry but this is a defeatist position, effectively saying nothing can be done to impact the domination of finance/corporate capital in the US. The rise of the new labor unionization movement attests to the fact that it is possible to force corporations into more equitable distribution and to acknowledge workers' rights. Is it possible-yes, Do we have a long. arduous and difficult road to accomplish more meaningful reform- you bet.
The problem for controlling run amok corporations is CONGRESS. The members of Congress are the ONLY people that create and enact legislation that regulates what businesses can or can't do, to protect unionization and collective bargaining, to enforce OSHA standards, etc. While elected to office by We The People, the significant majority -- in a "Majority rules!" system -- rely heavily on the funding provided by LARGE "campaign contributions", PACs, and lobbyist largess. Which means that the majority of "Our" elected representatives are more concerned about placating their largest donors -- the Very Wealthy and corporations -- than they are in serving the needs of The People. And all they have to do to placate _Us_ is to keep issuing the People-friendly soundbites and _say_ that they are "taking on the Wealthy fat cats and corporate interests". As long as those corporate interest legislations keep "squeaking by", enough of them can keep up appearances by voting against such legislation -- KNOWING in advance that legislation _will_ still get passed.
It's all political theater, meant to keep The People from starting to build barricades and breaking out their 2nd Amendment arsenals.
The right to collective bargaining is a fundamental that must be protected - let's all vote our consciences with awareness of facts.
OR--when money is used in stock buybacks, CEO pay raises, etc., an equal amount will be returned to the Federal Government.
Nope. That absolutely would not work. A company taking in a billion will then use a half a billion for stock buybacks and so forth and return the other half and they're that much - half a billion - happier.
I'll let someone better than me in logic reply to your thesis
The bonuses should go to the people who actually DO SOMETHING for the company
We could tax the crap out of bonuses over $100k per year. We could have an amendment that states that corporations are not people and that for political campaigns, only people in the form of US citizens can make donations, small donations, to political campaigns. We could say that all corporations pay taxes based on their sales and not upon their fungible income. We could say the only deductions against those taxes are for wages (not bonuses) paid to US workers on US soil, or for new capital construction in the US. There needs to be strong compliance language, too, with harsh penalties. I guarantee we’d see off-shored business come streaming home, and we’d gain control of politics.
We could, except for the fact that the ONLY people that can make such laws -- "Our" elected representatives in Congress -- are on the payrolls of the very people those laws would most adversely affect. (Those being the Very Wealthy and Very Wealthy-run corporations that provide "Our" legislators with LARGE "campaign contributions", PAC money, and lobbyist largess.)
Yes. And that buying of the politicians is exactly what needs to be stopped.
The impossible problem to accomplishing that is that the ONLY people that can make that happen are those bought politicians, the majority of which are themselves millionaires and more interested in serving the interests of the Wealthy rather than The People. (And are being rewarded quite handsomely by the Wealthy to do so.) So how do _We_ accomplish getting those changes made since it should be quite obvious that the politicians WON'T be doing it? (Keeping in mind that the six Conservative justices on SCOTUS _will_ declare any such changes, should they ever be made, to be "unconstitutional".)
Yes. That’s the challenge.
It is not correct that government must run a business in order to provide fair business practices - fair to owners, managers, as well as to the populace. Besides Professor Reich, you might also pay attention to Nobel Laureate economists like Joseph J. Stiglitz, et al.
What makes you think he doesn't?
“ Taxpayer money should not be used to boost share prices and CEO pay. ”
I agree that it should be a part of all contracts, but I would say historically this has not been enough,,which has led us to the oligarchy we now find ourselves in, I would like to see .congress create multiple laws that not only state this must be part of all congressional contracts in dealing with all companies, but laws are also made to limit CEO pay, and the use of layoffs. AI is going to affect labor and we need serious regulations now to protect labor, The president of the United .states makes $400,000. + $50,000 expense account, Hospital CEOs make between 2-23 million. Is their job really that much harder than that of the US President? Why can’t laws require employees have a stake in the company? I will never understand why we don’t have a progressive tax for everyone, Companies use much more infrastructure than individuals. If they want to use the benefits from our taxes, why shouldn’t they pay their fair share? This feels like a watershed moment in the history of this country. Do we want a multiracial pluralistic democracy that has laws and regulations protecting equality and equity for the common good, or do we want an oligarchical authoritarian white supremacist country that rewards the cult of Christian determinism, racists, misogynists, homophobic, and xenophobes, and sociopaths? There will always be narcissists and sociopaths who will be drawn to cons and leadership positions which is why we need laws, regulations and social norms to protect the majority from being exploited.
We need to get the "dark money" out of political contests that the poorly decided "Citizens United" supreme court decision provided the wealthy who want to keep the lawmakers they own funneling money back into their investment portfolios rather than into job producing
similar to programs to take advantage of the now profitable "green" environmental protecting industries that have come about during the Biden/Harris administration.
A political career is especially remunerative The Clinton's left office 1 million in legal debts and next to nothing in net worth, now they are worth $270 million. Chelsea Clinton and husband have a net worth of $30 million, The Obama's $70 million.
Has anyone noticed that lawyers are over represented among the political class. , 30% of House Members, and 51% of Senators, have law degrees and have practiced law.
What did Shakespeare say about lawyers? Was it in Macbeth?
“The first thing we do is, let’s kill all the lawyers.” It’s said by a character called Dick the Butcher in Act IV, Scene II of William Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part II,
Actually the quote is by Dick the anti intellectual In context Shakespeare represented lawyers as the most fundamental defense against the grossest manifestations of power-hungry antics wrought by the scum of humanity.
Interesting isn't it, how things, taken out of context are misconstrued, Then again lawyering has changed quite a bit in the last 400 years.
https://lithub.com/what-did-shakespeare-mean-when-he-wrote-lets-kill-all-the-lawyers/
To conserve was once prudent an noble (Conservationist Societies for example)
Today it has a completely different meaning.
The importance of the CHIPS Act extends far beyond the employment of American workers and the country's own industrial base.
Years ago, the U.S. ceded chip development and manufacturing supermacy to a handful of Taiwanese companies. With that island an increasingly likely target of Chinese aggression, and the danger of the world's most advanced chip technology falling into Chinese hands, it's critical that the capacity to develop and produce chips at the forefront of technology also be safely located where the Chinese can't get their hands on the facilities: the U.S., or Western Europe. Should the supply of high-end chips be cut off, rationed or ransomed by the Chinese, the wotld's economy will, at least in the short term, collapse -- they're THAT important.
The plants that will be built here in association with Taiwanese chipmakers will guarantee that won't happen. And American workers will benefit in the process -- IF the cultural differences and business practices of the two traditions can be reconciled, not a minor point.
Yours was an insightful and important geopolitical perspective. Thank you.
We've reached new levels of greed. Something must be done or this will end badly. If Trump were to steal the election, America will never be the same. Go Kamala!
Yes. However, is it if, or when, Trump steals the election? He is now in the process of trying to steal the election. If he does, America will not just "never be the same" - -America will be destroyed, by self-destruction.
You're suffering from the illusion of choice little cyber bot
As a country we are between a rock and a hard place. In order to stay ahead of the rest of the world the government has to provide grants to these companies. But the Greed by the executives of these companies is palpable!
They don't have to provide taxpayer monies. They do so as payback for donor class contributions.
Professor Reich: wow, all these fancy boyz lining a trough full of cash like a bunch of grimy, shit-covered pigs.
it's revolting.
From your description, I am visualizing them, along with pigs, with their faces down in a trough full of muddy shit, going after wet $100 bills and coins trying to scarf up the last slime-covered filthy penny; and enjoying every minute of it.
Grants need to have strings attached that say they cannot buy back their own shares for x number of years after receiving government money
No. Corporate share buybacks should be eliminated entirely
Definitely, Prof. Reich, our federal government should quickly put an end to all this and its other forms of the entire planet's principal economic system: socialism for the rich, aka corporate welfare. Not only are the 1% destroying our planet's ecosystems with their government-subsidized fossil fool (pun intended!) layouts, they're corroding the economic well-being of hard-working families too. Hope is just around the corner this November 5, however. In the wake of Brazil's, Australia's and the UK's much saner shifts to ecologically conscious and progressive governments, the US can follow suit by electing Kamala Devi Harris and Timothy James Walz to 2 consecutive 4-year terms. Let's get to work!
Thank you, Robert. Stock buy-backs should definitely be illegal, and anti-trust efforts should increase 100-fold
Socialism for the super-rich
I admit I'm very uninformed about legislation and how the provisions get added and changed to satisfy the opposition. But how is it that subsidies for companies don't have limits on how these funds are used. If you get food stamps I see lots of signs that they are not to be used for hot foods, etc, so restrictions on normal people on benefits are normal. But for corporations to use them to enrich themselves and stock holders and investors is criminal. This needs much more attention from the public .
I do not understand why a prohibition against stock buybacks is not already a requirement for receiving a CHIPS grant. I'm hoping your letter reaches Gina Raimondo's desk and she takes immediate action.
Remember Ross Perot and his “giant sucking sound”? Today the source of that sound is CEOs pockets.