Thank you for all the work you do to educate (and of course, inspire) us. You make things easy to understand. I'm so grateful. Because you are such a good teacher, I have many times told people about stakeholder vs shareholder capitalism in one or two minutes. Identifying the problem is not partisan and it's a quick way to plant a seed.
The people Icahn hurt should be the story. Tens of thousands of them. Did they experience pain and suffering?
Same for Trump. As I said yesterday, Trump's real story, not covered by MSM on page 1, is the 75% decline in Truth Social stock value. Who are the schmucks that bought at $79?
Who are the people he scammed by his 2020 reelection campaign? He had to refund $122.7 million to supporters in 2020, giving back nearly 11% of the money it raised.
As soon as he had "assassination" attempts, he had a grift in place. What did he sell? To whom. How was he able to start grifting so fast?
Oh, Peggy! These are horrible thoughts, aren’t they? I don’t know how these sad, unbalanced individuals could have been recruited to participate in planned “attempts” {I don’t see that as possible, though I DO realize someone could have had eyes on them for a bit longer than we’re told}. It’s so very confusing, isn’t it? That sad 20-year-old who got SO far — That sad 58-year-old, whose entire life seems to be one bit of legal uproar after another, getting so close … And they were both from the Republican camp, for starters … And both apparently fixated on BOTH men at the top of the tickets, Biden and Trump in their sights {as though the gunmen were more intent on making some kind of show than on removing a particular person from the scene …}. To hear Republicans blaming Democrats for the “rhetoric” is the HEIGHT of ludicrous. EGAD! Can they be serious? Can they believe their own blather? It all makes me literally sick — the nausea rises every time I see the name of DJT, or his awful face, or Vance, or see another headline … The cumulative stress that the Donald has inflicted on our entire populace is toxic .. So, so, so toxic.
Pat, take a deep breath and let it out slowly. From your post, I felt like that myself just this past week! Professor Reich had posted about how MAGA would still be around even if the orange man isn't elected. I felt so helpless, so tired, so fed up that I even considered just stopping engaging altogether! I was going to hang it up and let everybody else handle it. Silly, huh? Instead, I put my postcards and letters in my desk, turned off my computer and spent the day enjoying all of the things that make me happy. Playing with my furry family, working in my garden, taking a cup of coffee and a really good book out on the patio and talking to my friends and family on my phone. After a day of backing away, I realized, that is what the orange man, his running mate and MAGA want us to do! Become so tired and defeated we will quit working and talking to get Kamala Harris elected in November. He will NOT get that pleasure from me! I came back to it and started working just as hard as ever. We have 47 days until election day. We can do this, Pat! Don't let them get to you. I can tell from the posts you have written on this substack, you are strong. Let's work as hard as we can until November 5. Together we will get Kamala Harris in that White House as our next president! Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
Pat, sort of reminds me of Jack Ruby who shot Oswald in 1963, then died of terminal cancer 3 years later. No trial or testimony from Oswald and even to this day some (of us) suspect a cover-up. Was the Butler nutcase a good aim who could miss by 1 inch? The Mar-a-Lago nutcase waited 12 hours for the cops to spot him. Was that on purpose or were both men John Hinckley grade assassins?
So much left in the shadows, Rob — and I HATE the distrust and cynical suspicion that prevails. But we swing from pillar to post, wondering if we are idiots to BELIEVE in conspiracies … or NOT to believe … ???
Depends on the conspiracy, I think. The military/CIA getting rid of JFK because he wanted to get out of Vietnam? Not at all unlikely; probable, even, IMO. Dems trafficking children via the [non-existent] basement of a D.C. pizza parlor? Not so much.
When Dick Cheney was in charge of the executive branch, he made a remark that I will paraphrase: “We create reality.” I remember being mildly shocked that he would admit to lying. Fast forward to last week, when Cheney, in disavowing Drumpf, appeared to be someone trustworthy, almost like an old uncle we’re fond of. If we thought we were in deep trouble when Cheney was in power, how much worse are we off in the Drumpf era?
Stan, YES!!! I think people heard that pretty much in the way they hear that old saw, “History is written by the victors.” They see it as meaning what happens is INTERPRETED as the victors see fit, and reality is what the victors claim it is.
But, did Cheney mean they actually conspire to create their own reality — They orchestrate events and present them in terms THEY want to sell to the people?
Vance’s comment about creating stories, too — he can say he meant “encouraging people to talk about things,” but he could as easily have meant “make up sh*t.”
This kind of confusion, inconclusive perception, worry and “wonder” is how we discombobulate our entire social fabric — and we become easy prey for the Fascist Foxes.
Gad.
I don’t WANT to be a purveyor of that kind of constant fear .. and yet … and yet …
"...did Cheney mean they actually conspire to create their own reality — They orchestrate events and present them in terms THEY want to sell to the people?"
Considering that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and company "created the reality" of WMD in Iraq and implemented their war plans (see: PNAC), I'd say the answer to your question is an unequivocal, "yes," Pat.
But also, they create "alternative facts" to spin actual events. In short, they can't be trusted as far as you or I could throw a Buick.
Daniel Soloman, yes, indeed. I believe that one of our human purposes should be to aspire to be aware of and understand the suffering of others and ourselves. For this is what will push human (and individual) evolution in the right direction.
Many of the questions you ask arise from looking at the pain. Which is important in the pursuit to alleviate current and prevent future suffering.
The telling of stories helps us see the depth and breadth of the problem and how one's actions are interconnected with us all.
Didn't PT Barnum say a sucker is born every minute?
As regards Sharehold Capitalism. RR said:"These people put an end to the era of “stakeholder capitalism,” in which corporations and their CEOs had responsibilities to their workers and communities, as well as to their shareholders. In its place they launched the era of “shareholder capitalism,” in which a CEO’s only responsibility is to maximize shareholder returns."
The problem goes back to 1919 in Dodge v Ford Motor CompaThese people put an end to the era of “stakeholder capitalism,” in which corporations and their CEOs had responsibilities to their workers and communities, as well as to their shareholders. In its place they launched the era of “shareholder capitalism,” in which a CEO’s only responsibility is to maximize shareholder returns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
And the problem goes back to the end of the 19th Century. At that time states had corporate charter laws that gave a corporation a limited life span,usually 50 years, and to renew it, the corporation had to prove it operated in the public interest
John D. Rockefeller who said "competition is a sin", announced he would move his corporation to the state with the best corporate charter laws,thus started the Charter wars. New Jersey won , and he moved and became Standard Oil of NJ. Ohio saw what happened and changed their charters and later we had SOHIO.
No to be outdone, Delaware, a small struggle state with no real industry, did NJ one better and today ever 600 corporations, insurance, financial have corporate headquarters in Delaware, and the Senators from Delaware are known as Senators from Wall Street.
If we are supposed to be the United States, isn’t it time for there to be federal laws that protect people s kind of manipulation? The Constitution was to form a more perfect union after the Confederation of States failed. With the passage of time, weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation became apparent; Congress commanded little respect and no support from state governments anxious to maintain their power. Congress could not raise funds, regulate trade, or conduct foreign policy without the voluntary agreement of the states. Now in addition to states, we have the money of a few who have weakened the ability of Congress to regulate them and protect the common good. Hopefully we are at another reckoning point and will rise to again form a more perfect union.
Hope springs eternal in the human breast. If Trump wins it is forlorn hope.
You do know that the Constitution was written by wealthy, [propertied men, the 18th Century equivalent of the 3%, it enfranchised propertied men and no one else, it took 200 years and three amendments the 15th,17th, and 19th Amendments to finally bring into being a true democracy, and the Republicans are moving heaven and earth to bring it all down.in 56 days.
Didn't Trump bilk the 2,000 small businesses who built his casino? Wasn't it Trump's MO to not pay the 3rd drop that puts a company back in the black? I really think Trump's image as a good "businessman" should be exposed as a fraud and a shyster.
' illionaires stradegy to not pay tax when shedding excess money and an unlawful unethical mental deficient is not new.
Wasting lifetime with no adult participation describes the mental development " health" crisis "of life of leisure. Blowing through atmosphere polluting yammering nonsense play acting on camera....Donald ...duck! Shares a meaningless life as do the go.pro voyuer employers funding atrocity....besides crime felony crime against humanity these bozos are weird mentally deficient. Free pollution and liars perverts are deviant business
His recently announced crypto scam should be getting more MSM coverage as well. A grifter and national security threat on top of his felonies and rapid mental decline.
Gotta admit, Daniel, that I have zero sympathy for those "schumucks who bought at $79." If they gave the Donvict the funds to continue his criming and his hate speech, they deserve to lose their investments.
A lot of English drama was allegory, written for the illiterate masses.
E.G. What is the moral of Trump University when Trump had to fork over $25 mil to compensate for consequential damages for being a schmuck for Trump?
ANS: Don't be a schmuck for Trump!
Same for any ordinary person who worked for him. A litany of plumbers, electricians, plasterers, etc were debtors in his six (6) bankruptcies.
Who but a schmuck would buy gold Trump tennis shoes or his playing cards, or the rest of his merch. Who but a schmuck would donate to a billionaire's campaign or defense fund.
Exactly, Daniel. What it is called when the schmucks get ripped off but still come back for more? Betcha there are a lot of orange cultists who contributed for the wall, and still send money for whatever this week's grift is. Is there a name for those people?
It seems like unscrupulous, short-term investors and self-serving CEO's should be taxed at much higher rate to deter them from selling workers and communities out. It goes without saying that billionaires should be taxed more. A CEO, as the leader, is responsible for the ship. Why not a tax code or rules that make them more accountable to workers and stock holders?
Maybe Republicans and Democrats can come together to work on legislation that creates incentives for good treatment of workers and long-term investments in the company? Republicans are pro-business, right? Or are they just for short-term profits at the expense of workers and communities? I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
A progressive Representive should work on the framework with a Republican on the record for supporting workers. If Republicans don't want to help workers and make companies more accountable to workers and stock holders, then they are not pro-business. They are pro-greed at the cost of workers and communities.
Democrats and Republicans should come together to make incentives for stronger business and workers... OR It should be an issue in 2026.
Danny Piper, based on prolific evidence of past and present behavior, I cannot don't even have a grain of sand of faith in the R representatives to actually do what is right. They are pro-themselves, pro- the biggest donors to my campaign, pro-elected by any means necessary. Pro-business is a schtick, a marketing strategy, a front, to disguise their power and profit by any means necessary beliefs to the people, and broadcast them loudly to the biggest donors.
You're right. In fact, most Republicans ignored Trump's shameful, disrespect of POW war hero Sen. McCain to side with possibly the worst "businessman" in history. In fact, Trump sank a cash cow casino while he bilked 2,000 small businesses who helped build the casino. It was his M.O. to not pay the 3rd drop which puts the companies back in the black. That's beyond bad business. It's a shameful and criminal business model.
Yes, Republicans would likely balk at a bipartisan measure to tweak the tax code to create incentives for good management practices that put workers and stock holders first. What a perfect way to shine a light on Republicans phoney "pro-business" rhetoric in 2026. It's time to shine a little light on their pro-business bamboozle.
Danny Piper, yes. Although, I hope there will be a 2026. Their "pro-life" schtick is falling apart. A good sign. I hope it crumbles to pieces in time for Harris/Walz.
Danny Piper, PS, I hadn't thought about that until you mentioned it. His lack of business acumen is not at all important. Saying he is a successful businessman just acts as rationalization to vote for him.
For example refrigerators. A solid well insulated refrigerator doesn't loose all the persishables in a day power out. They also do not become land fill paced for replacement in mere years.
Paying for stupid is not just an ' illionaire broadcasters crap a day gazillion income stream.
Elon, can not spell felon without Elon, ' illionaire atmospheric polututer and space litter deviant taping out " f word your own face" to whoever is a symptom of mental deprevity. Or projecting his own wish for self soothing power in a world he is struggling to occupy his own fleeting lifespan in a rage.
The ' illionaire hoarder as this post is centered has no inclusive consideration for the harm they do do in an obsessed stupor over a string of zero's.
Income caps for ' illionaires who are not contributing " workers" and whose financial dalliance is a free pollution greed past time for no merit of any type. Mental unwellness activities for bored need nothing want for nothings that are harmful do not have to be as atrocious as GoPro internet display of paid employee gang rape mass murder torture to be deviant crime against humanity.
"..are they just for short-term profits at the expense of workers and communities?"
In a word, absolutely, Danny.
But that mindset isn't a political thing, per se. It's the mantra of almost every corporation. I worked for four very large corporations in my career, and through my work, became familiar with several other corporations' philosophies, and I can testify that not a one of them gave a flying fig about one single thing other than the bottom line. I saw restructurings and mergers and "headcount thinnings" that cost hundreds of hard workers their jobs, saw benefits cuts that devastated people, saw an implosion that cost tens of thousands of employees their jobs.....never think for one minute that corporations in general (or Rs, for that matter) deserve the benefit of the doubt
Absolutely, M Tree! I appreciate Professor Reich's explanation about capitalism. I also appreciate the facts you present on this substack. I have used many of them when I talk to other people. This has been a learning adventure on this substack and I enjoy every minute of it! Kudos to you and Professor Reich!
Peggy Freeman, you're so kind. Thank you. And you have inspired me so many times to keep my chin up and press forward. Thank you! And your word, adventure, to describe RR's substack is excellent. I couldn't agree more.
Early in my business career I left public accounting to join a client, a well known retail brokerage firm. I worked as a fund manager of private real estate investment funds.
It was shortly after tax law changes had devalued passive losses as a tax advantage. This retail brokerage unit had just sold $250 million in shares of two private REITs (real estate investment trusts). One invested in the development of Walmart shopping centers with a “guaranteed 8% return”. The other in loans to a senior housing developer with a targeted 10% return (but the marketing language sure made it look like a guarantee).
Being a numbers guy, I tried to simplify what the investment really was on a thumbnail. To simplify, for a dollar invested, where did the money go? 15% went to costs of the offering, upfront fees to the brokerage firm and individual brokers, and reserves for “shit that happens” (the last being a variable cost in the 15%) and support of the targeted dividend in the early development and lease up phase.
I noticed that in the Walmart fund that despite cost overruns and delays the 8% dividend was being paid even though it was clear to me that the 85% investable proceeds from the offering was being canabalized.
Reading the prospectus I saw no clear outline of what amount of the 85% could be used to support the 8% guaranteed dividend. When I asked that question of senior management I didn’t get an answer until one that was friendly with me pulled me aside and said “you don’t want to ask that question”. Later, the 8% dividend would drop to 0% and our very sharp CEO turned into Sergeant Shultz.
Later, in the Beverly Wilshire Hotel restaurant, over breakfast I asked that same CEO a question when I was overseeing the takeover of the properties of the senior housing REIT’s properties that collateralized the loans. He had just complained about progressive taxation.
“Isn’t progressive taxation similar to our business model in our successful funds (the older ones) where excess proceeds are shared with development partners on a sliding scale?”
He smiled and said: “I just don’t like to pay taxes.”
Paul Corrigan, I once read an article, that quoted a wealthy industrialist from the Depression era. It has stayed with me. Before the Depression, he said that he had no choice but to trust his financial advisors that everything he was doing was financially sound and ethical because he couldn't understand the labyrinth of complicated jargon they used to support their assertions. After the collapse, this man was apologetic that he had trusted his advisors as he felt complicit in the collapse. He concludied that if something is presented in such a way that it is too difficult to understand, that's your red flag. Rationalization.
When people starting talking about Bitcoin years ago and doing mental gymnastics to try to explain it, I thought of his wise words.
When canvasing introducing cable to the neighborhood market I heard this " anything that takes that much explanation I don't need".
Rarely in my years did I live anywhere with cable myself. Once, where we did my kid complained there was nothing to watch on the gazillian channels. I asked if he had watched the other comedy channels?
We spent a hilarious session flipping between a fishing channel and a golf channel that afternoon.
As contemporary people it is important we all recognize occupying our lifespan conscious of its place in a very long timeline where in the end we ourselves are visitors pollution is nothing to take lightly and greed is a mental illness.
Back in the day, I went to a CPA continuing education class on taxes. The instructor started off with the “no one has to pay any more taxes than they owe” thing but then went on to say, “But your favorite clients are those that don’t want to pay ANY taxes.” And that’s what the whole class was about - ways to get out of paying any taxes at all. It was eye opening to me that there were people promoting this. How naive I was.
I worked for a then-Big 5 accounting firm. Part of my job was transcribing memos in defense of corporations trying to get out of paying state and local taxes. Later, I did a stint with the division that assisted wealthy individuals. You'd be amazed at how easy it is to bury an $18 million annual bonus and defray taxes until....whenever. And all legal. Truly disgusting. And yet, when I asked one of the CPAs for help because we owed a couple thousand dollars to the IRS one year (small incomes, but no kids), he told me that we didn't have enough debt. We'd bought a very modest house, with payments within our means, and he said we should have gotten a bigger house, so we could write off more mortgage interest. In other words, we were being penalized because we were trying to be responsible and frugal with our money.
A little analysis - do middle class people need tax cuts or wage increases? A 100K salary would pay (with zero extras) 22K in taxes. I can tell you many people survive on just 22K. Would a tax cut be better? I would LOVE to make 100K a year. That would be awesome.
VP Harris - It takes most people a year to make 40K. I don't have it sitting in my bank account to maybe start a business. So the "tax break" doesn't help my business at all. AND, the Small Business Admin myth buster. There are NO grants for women etc to start a business. None. I've asked. We the small people could get a loan at 7% to 10 %.
I'd love to hear her win with a binding pledge for wage increases. Then maybe I could save money to capitalize my business.
Janet Adams, I'm not a policy expert. What I do know though, is that I trust RR's policy recommendations. He is motivated by fairness and dignity for all. And only one political party is striving for the same.
I watched the debates. I even put up with listening to trump rambling for it. I haven't heard anything much. Nothing that will help the middle. A 50K tax break for a small business doesn't help much of anyone.
NPR story today - people are saying the same thing.
Janet Adams, I don't put much stock in NPR's being unbiased in their choice of stories to cover or the content re the election. They have fell from grace in the last years. And Bernie and other progressives influenced Biden and I believe are doing so with Harris. It is also just as important that those voters listen to what she says she won't do: won't extend the tax cuts for wealthiest individuals and corporations given by R's, won't take away rights to marry who you love, to healthcare, clean water and air, education, etc. All issues that impact the middle class financially.
It’s not enough. Not a single one of their proposals will help me. I will vote for Dems of course. We need higher minimum wages: $35/hr. Universal Basic Income. Better and cheaper healthcare. The system isn’t working for the vast majority. Tweaking it won’t either.
Janet Adams: You are correct. Tax breaks don't help those of us who make little money and have no investments. But wage increases don't help either. Someone or group gets a raise, and prices immediately go up to take that raise. I DREAD pay raises because they really don't help.
I Wonder if the Federal Judge in Florida that dismissed the Lawsuit against Carl Icahn was Aileen Cannon.... Didn't Milton Freedman supply the Philosophical Foundation for the Shareholder Maximization Era that We are now living in, that is sucking the Wealth of Society into the Maws of the 0.0002%?... The 'Greed Is Good Era' has Resulted in the Rise of DJT, and JD... In DJT's eyes, unless you are one of his Oligarchs, you are a 'Sucker & Loser'....
Apache, not sure if it's the same one in FL, but it seems the thinking is the same. Yes, MF was providing rationalization and justification for unlimited greed and rampant egos.
Hello M Tree... Carl Icahn, DJT, are Products of the Inbred Manhattan Financial Universe... The only thing that matters there is $$$... Those that believe in Limits & Ethics are in their Eyes, 'Suckers & Losers'....
For too many People that is True... Some People Serve A Higher Cause... They Will Do What They Believe Is Right... They have a different set of Ethics... DJT, and JD, call them 'Suckers & Losers'...
Basically, American capitalism has been gamed in multiple ways since the late 1970s, starting with Jimmy Carter's deregulatory schemes, then accelerating with Ronald Reagan and continuing under Bill Clinton. And now with the invalidation by the Supreme Court of the Chevron doctrine, we are about to enter another stage in the rich-get-richer scheme of things. Dr Reich, I look forward to further articles from you on this topic but, I hope, some will focus on the structural reforms that are desperately needed to make the US a far fairer, less corrupt society.
Adam, what I could never understand was why in the world any president would work to deregulate and get rid of the Chevron doctrine. They were in place as guardrails to keep these huge corporations from running roughshod over the American citizens.
Hi Peggy, I am not sure which President you are referring to here. I believe that the Chevron doctrine came in in about 1980-82 but I do not not know of any President who asked that it be invalidated. (That, however, is probably just my own ignorance.) Carter began the deregulation stuff but I do not remember him being particularly vocal about its importance. Ronald Reagan certainly was and Bill Clinton carried on in that spirit but I think quietly. What is clear is that the GOP and its rich donors hated this rule and have wanted to get rid of it, I suspect for decades. It is also clear that if Trump becomes President again, he will use the new Supreme Court ruling against it as a rationale for undoing much of the regulations that have been put in place to protect the pubic and that he will dismantle much of the civil service to do so, as Project 2025 promises.
You need to review the Chevron doctrine. The Supreme Court reversal simply says that judges have a responsibility to interpret laws passed by Congress. The earlier Chevron decision said only a bureaucratic expert was qualified to interpret law and write regulations, i.e. we only had two branches of Federal government, not three. And maybe only one if Congress was lazy.
Personally, I like the idea that a judge should be able to weigh in on the meaning of a law which may be vague as passed. I want you and any citizen to read and express your opinion of something buried in a 1000-page document passed in haste followed by a statement, "You will have to pass it to find out what is in it" (Nancy Pelosi on the Obamacare bill). Otherwise, we end up with a nation of the lawyers, by the lawyers, and for the lawyers.
No, I want the scientists working under the relevant governmental agency, in this case the FDA, making those determinations and then passing on their recommendations to their bosses who will make the rule. I most definitely do not want either Congressman or judges being called on to make such decisions, because they do not have the requisite knowledge. Sorry to have to point this out but we live in an advanced, complicated, technologically advanced society and we need people who actually know something in order to make informed decisions.
Your choice is to be ignorant and personally irresponsible outside or your own fields, leaving it to unelected bureaucrats and the President (Stalin and Lysenko perhaps or Collins and Fauci?) to control your life. Let's get rid of judges and Congress and go straight to a totalitarian government. Is that what you are saying? Do your really think that scientists, or "their bosses" who depend on government taxes for their income produce only work that is pure and unbiased? Pretty naive, but I know you are not alone.
Do you want the unelected bureaucrats to make all the rules and decide what a vague rule means? Your reply proves you need to gain more understanding of the Chevron doctrine.
I absolutely prefer expert civil servants supervised by the duly elected president to ignorant judicial political partisans to make critical policy decisions that require expertise.
So you would have us at mercy of corporations whose sole reason for existence is to maximize shareholder profits, at any c st,including the health of society, and individuals.
IOW Karl Marx says that it is OK to lie, Cheat, Steal in the pursuit of shareholder profits.
Government agencies are responsible to the public, corporations ae responsible to the shareholders.
Whose interests are served when shareholders can do whatever they please.
Maybe you should read up a little about the health, safety and life of the public and workers before government regulation.
All good, Robert. But the $500-odd million paid into Kamala's campaign fund is surely buying something, and I'd be happy to bet it is the leave the rich donors and their tax breaks alone.
I expect Kamala to do many good things if she gets to be President, especially if the Dems can capture both House and Senate, but at the end of the 4 years I really, really doubt that there will be any meaningful change to the way the system of America's Capitalism for the Rich actually works.
In many other countries, like here in Europe, the corporations work for society at large, and are taxed and regulated for the benefit of all citizens. All good.
But in America, society is only there to work for the corporations, so you are only relevant to them if you are an employee, a customer or an investor. Anyone else is not just irrelevant, but treated as a parasite on corporate profits through the tax system.
I really, really doubt America will ever manage to turn that around.
You are right. Look at voting roll calls in Congress. For example, whenever Congress manages to propose a bill to close an obvious tax loophole for trusts to facilitate inherited wealth, republicans vote against it en masse, but there are democrats, as well, so in the slim majorities in our government, it cannot pass. When well over 99% of our House and Senate become millionaires, why do you think this will be forevermore.?
It would be nice to think that Kamala will do good things, but to do so, she would have to get elected. That is by no means a sure thing, even with a $500 million war chest, for several reasons, but an important one is the fact that, while the rate of inflation has gone down, prices have not, and people are struggling as a result... And the tax credits that Kamala offers are not going to help the average Joe. The only thing that I can think of that would help would be a massive increase in the food stamp benefits program, an expansion whose need could be explained by the monopolistic prices, and which would prove that government can be responsive to the needs of the people that result. The subsidies would sunset as wages catch up to the cost of living- which is to say that people would gradually climb out of the program when their income increased, which would be assisted by an increase in the minimum wage. This might also get people to understand that a vote for Trump would put the problem of corporate greed on steroids.
Being in Europe, you will be in the front lines if Trump gets elected and appeases Putin, who would thus win the war in Ukraine in early 2025 with his dreams of dominating Europe, and the world still intact, and with America bankrupt as a result of the next round of tax cuts for the rich, and at war with itself. Ironically, the war would probably end in November if Kamala gets elected, because that is the only way that Russia will be able to save its oil production capability, which it will be losing this winter due to lack of use during a Siberian winter. It will take decades for Russia to get back to its previous oil production even then.
One group that is pretty much always ignored, and suffering terribly right now are seniors. As of 2022, there were 57.8 million adults aged 65 and older in the United States, which is 17.3% of the total population. This includes 31.9 million women and 25.9 million men. Social security isn't nearly cutting it anymore. For example, I am trying to suvive on $12K/year. Retirement income? You must be joking. For many of us, wages were flat from 1970 on, and "saving for retirement"--something easy to say but difficult to do--was nearly impossible. Seniors who did have retirement money are blowing through it at an increased rate, given the recent spike in "greedflation." Harris has said she'd like to increase SS payments by $200/month. If she manages to get that done--something Bernie Sanders has been trying to achieve for years!--maybe I'll finally be able to get my teeth cleaned again or buy new glasses. In the meantime, I watch from the sidelines, angry that I'm too old to work full time anymore and terrified about what will happen to me and other seniors in the next few years.
I feel this is another example of corporations winning. Ending what used to be more common practice with pensions and instead saying the government will take care of our elders and now that feels like a scam. We need to get back to an economy that is about the workers. And I believe that would increase revenue into SS which would allow for raises for our seniors currently needing their hard earned retirement. Thank you for spreading this message. $12k/he is clearly not enough for anyone, just to buy food or pay for gasoline, not including any healthcare, rent/housing, transportation, taxes, etc.
I hear you! I am still working part time and trying to religiously save. Taxes are too high for most and benefits are too low. Worst of all, try to get another job? Anyone who thinks age discrimination is not real- tell me where you work. Those college degrees and certificates mean nothing. Recently I volunteered to help with a group for political campaign public education efforts. I heard nothing back! Not even the courtesy of a response. Given my experience, it seems to me there is a wealth of untapped knowledge and experience waiting for opportunities.
Kprez: I'm on Medicare, but had a secondary through a former employer, CalPers. it was a Platinum Medicare PPO supplement. I received notice that my premium would go up 30.7%, Meaning I would actually have to pay CalPers if I kept the insurance. So I canceled, I am fortunate in that I also have Tricare for life, it was my tertiary, now it is my secondary.
I am fortunate, I made some good, but hard choices when I was young. Then again growing up poor I looked to the future and planned my life accordingly.
Never the less I feel for other seniors who have to make a choice between nutrition and medical care.
My sister died last April, she had lung cancer and gall bladder problems as well as another cancer. All she had was Medicare, she paid $35 a month for the hospital bill that Medicare doesn't cover (20%), she had sold her house to her grandson for a nominal fee, so that the debt collector could not come after her estate which was zero when she died.
How many millions of people die every year because they can't afford medical insurance. Gig workers, construction workers.
I know two men who worked in construction, they don't now, they worked until their hands got mangled in an accident,and they could not longer wield a hammer.
They take one look at you and think "I can take advantage of this old fart." Once you're a senior, you cease to be a valuable assset. You're just old. If they hire you, and that's a big if, you get offered a terrible wage, nothing even close to what you made in your prime. Yes, agism definitely exists. I started running into it at sixty!
Ageism is rampant in America. Poorly regulated corporations dismiss older workers and replace them with younger, cheaper models and they do it with impunity.
After 20 years on the job, my wife, at age 50, was finally making an acceptable salary. Progress reports of her fine work had boosted her salary during those years and the benefits were good.
Then, from out of left field she is laid off for a “reduction in force” according to her employer.
After 20 years working there, of course she maintains many relationships with current employees. They were only too glad to inform her that her replacement, a fresh faced college graduate, was hired a month later…for far less money and less benefits.
Except for gasoline, because of competition, the prices never go down. Food is a necessity, in economic terms, it faces and inelastic demand. and there is no competition in the processed food industry,. the processed food industry is dominated by five food giants, and they either conspire, or have convinced people via advertising to prefer one brand over another
I remember when gas was 29 cents a gallon and a Clark Bar was 5 cents, Gas is now $3 to $5 a gallon and a Clark Bar is $1.49, and the Clark Bar is smaller than it was at $.05
The only way to have prices go down is to stop buying the product. But the consumer is his or her own worst enemy.
On the other hand manufacturers will dispose of unsought and unsold product, rather than reduce prices, and take the loss as a tax write off., because the Chamber of Commerce lobbyists have written our tax laws.
Az, I like the system you have in Europe. I would hope that when Kamala gets in the White House, she will tackle this problem and work on correcting it. It will not happen overnight but she does have Lina Kahn and others working hard to fix some of it right now. Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
As I keep saying to all those that think Kamala has already won, the polls are still 50/50 within the 4% margin of error, and the last debate has barely made them twitch. Apparently almost all voters had already made up their minds, so there won't be a landslide, it is highly unlikely that Kamala will win both Senate and House, and Trump will contest every result leasing to months of court cases. And that's last one is the better scenario - he could easily try for a coup!
As for the Ukraine War, my concern is that America is lined up for involvement in 3 wars right now; Ukraine with NATO (currently seems inevitable), a Middle East war on the side of Israel and Saudi against Iran and Hamas, and perhaps a Far East action when China invades Taiwan (that may also trigger North Korea attacking the South).
One reason friends of mine in Europe actually prefer Trump is because they think he will keep America out of all three conflicts, de-escalating and so avoiding WW3. Of course that will pander to Putin, Xi and Kim Jong Un, which is exactly what Trump would do for his best mates, and leaves Ukraine, Taiwan and South Korea completely shafted.
I suspect many Americans may be making the same calculation. As I would if I lived in America, particularly if I had a 20-year-old son, for example!
If Trump wins, the chances of war are still the same,only greater, because Putin will take over Ukraine, rest,rebuild, replenish (maybe) and take over Moldova and Lithuania, the Baltic States and then Poland.
China certainly invade Taiwan, and North Korea the South, and even Trump will be hard pressed to keep us out of those wars.
The deterrent to war is fear by the aggressor, and Trump removes that fear., and gives them license to proceed.
If Trump wins, he will fulfill his promises to revenge,punish and deport and America will overnight become a third world nation, demoralized, deconstructed at war with itself, and that alone will give Putin the breathing space and opportunity he needs to run through Europe.
Europe has demilitarized, it no longer has the industrial capability to support an arms industry much like produce enough munitions to fight a sustained battle, meanwhile Russia, because of the experience in Ukraine is rebuilding and ramping up theirs.
Putin does not have any countervailing force, no public restraints to impeded his militarization, he has in effect revived Stalinist Russia
And Britain, that used to have a couple of lines of deep sonar buoys that tracked all the Russian (and other) subs in and out of the Atlantic, North Sea and Irish Sea. I'm sure they still have the capability, not least because all those oil and gas rigs, and now the wind turbines too.
I agree in principle, but I think Putin would have to stop for a while if he takes Eastern Ukraine for Russia. He has taken a huge hit, financially, his weaponry, and in particular he is literally running out on men to fight. He'd have to keep hold of the captured territory, and would surely face insurrectionists and terrorism within both that territory and in Russia.
I also wonder if Putin's aims are wider than the capture of oil and food resources and the Black Sea ports. Climate change will mean the turning off of AMOC that may plunge much of Russia into perpetual ice. Ukrainian territory would give Russians a place to go.
As for Trump unleashing all the dictators to do as they want, then I agree. I think they are all watching the American news very carefully indeed!
No Doubt Az that Putin would have to stop, to replenish and rebuild, but as regards cannon fodder, humans are a self renewing resource.
Russia isn't China, but back during the Soviet Sino war (do you remember that), it was estimated that if Russia wiped out the leading ranks of a Chinese Army thy losses would be constantly replenished from behind, and by sheer numbers the Chinese would be in Moscow.
Putin has the full resources of the "Republics", and Siberia is not empty,in fact both Stalin and Putin have used the Asiatic tribes in Siberia as human fodder in their human waves.
I don't credit Putin with enough forward thinking to consider the disruption of AMOC (Atlantic Meridonal Overturning Circulation) as a threat, especially as it doesn't benefit Russia, Western Europe and England are the beneficiares of the AMOC.
I don't credit Putin with thinking any further ahead than his own needs and desire to go down in history as Vladimir the great,alongside Peter and Katherine, and I suspect that he is one of 16.6666 % of Russians that is a descendant of Jenghis Khan. he sure acts like it
I have never considered Putin to be stupid, nor badly informed. I agree he wants his legacy secured and cannot do that if Ukraine is unfinished business when he dies. He's 'only' 72 but I've always assumed that Russia, with 144 million people, and all those ambitious oligarchs, and all that suppressed anger and ambition, must have a long list of people with a longer list of reasons who'd be happy to help Putin into the next life!
The Russian sea route to the north Atlantic is only ever ice-free because of AMOC, and that means the 63 strong submarine fleet, much of it at it's main base at Severomorsk, would be ice-bound most or all the year. If AMOC turns off, it's loss would be seen as catastrophic for Russian défenses in the Atlantic.
Lastly, the Ukrainians seem to be mastering the technological advances of modern warfare very quickly indeed, forcing Russia to buy in tech from Iran, North Korea, and probably China through intermediaries. Putin needs a deal very soon, or else runs the real risks of Russians losing faith in him. The latest successful Ukrainian attack on the huge arms dump near Moscow will not have played well with Moscovites!
I would not suggest Putin is stupid, he just isn't capable of thinking long term, anymore than our billionaires who fund Trump are able. It is the present that they live in, that preoccupies them. They and frankly most people don't even give the future or consequences a nod.
When I was 17 I planned for my retirement. And today I plan for a future which may not arrive, after all I am 85
As regards hitting inside of Russia, I blame Jake Sullivan for Biden's decision not to support Zelensky.
Either Jake is a timid soul or he is a Putin Asset. I hope Harris gets rid of him, and most of Biden's advisers, and especially the current Trump humping staff of Secret Service.
Thanks for the education on the Russian sea route to the Baltic. they still have to sail past
Gloomy for sure. But Europe is not devoid of the same problems...these are all multinational remember. It is that they are draped over a frame of what we here call socialism...basic social services and education, health care, childcare, housing subsidies.. are provided universally (sometimes even to immigrants because it's cheaper than dealing with the mess.) Our "social welfare" is employer-based...and the owners see no point in providing it if they're too busy planning the next buy out. Stock price has nothing to do with goods and services. It is essentially an addictive fiction...
Of course we have problems here in France and in the rest of Europe. But the scale of the problems in America dwarf the problems over here, even though the French are notoriously negative about the state of their country and the difficulties they face. There is a saying in Europe,"The French live in Paradise, but they all seem to think they are living in Hell!"
Here is a France 24 news channel program on the French system. Warning - you may never be content in America again if you watch it! 😬
But in terms of multi-national companies, particularly American companies operating in France and Europe, I have said before that all those companies operate under our laws. Their workers are only allowed to work 36 hours a week, have set break times and lunch hours, get at least 4 or 6 weeks holiday a year, and have generous protections where the company pays substantial sums if they are laid off, or the business is closed down, or if they are unfairly treated or discriminated against. Women get generous maternity leave, maternity pay, and their job has to be kept open. Men also get statutory maternity leave and benefits.
The companies themselves are controlled by strict and heavily enforced rules on pollution, sourcing ethical materials, cyber security, advertising, business practices, share dealing, and a host of things we call Fraud that you guys think of as normal. Etc, etc, etc.........
And yet, those American companies pay for all that stuff, put up with the rules and THEY MAKE DECENT PROFITS FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS!!!
So I have absolutely NO time for those assholes that believe the American way of business is the only way, because the evidence is all around.
Or indeed that socialism would destroy America. On the contrary, it could make America join the rest of the civilised world. Because unless you are rich in America and can buy the stuff we all take for granted, at the moment it really is not.
I am watching the video Az, and see a flaw, Only the working class pay into the Social security system (that leaves the investing class, the inheritance class, the entitled class not paying into the system, and as a result it is in the red and there is no way out, per French politics.
Not so. Companies pay around the same per head as people, and there are wealth taxes, inheritance taxes and a progressive income tax system. And everyone pays into the social security system.
Where in Europe are they now getting better for the people? From what I am hearing, in the UK, the most basic services are increasingly falling apart due to Brexit.
Brexit has hit Britain hard, as did Covid, but the underlying problems have been around for a long time. For decades Britain has, in European terms, been 'America Lite' with capitalism and mercantilism at it's core, although after Ww2 it did dream of a more socialist, equitable society with Unionisation and the NHS two obvious examples. Then Maggie Thatcher did to Britain as Reagan did to America, and put Britain on a path to a low-tax, low-regulation and low-morality, every-man-for-himself country that then didn't make the richest pay enough taxes to maintain the services. The NHS for example, provides universal healthcare for half the cost of the French system, for roughly the same population. But is relies on the excellent staff (mostly now from other countries) working long hours for low wages, and with frequent errors and issues.
I had been in England before Brexit and by leaving for France before the final date, took advantage of an EU scheme to retain my EU citizenship as a resident in France. I did so because France is more civilised, services are better funded, and I suppose I always assumed I would spend my retirement here. It is practical to do so, with one of the world's best healthcare systems, and best protections for old people, and one of the longest life expectancies (lots of 'if shit hits the fan' type services like hot meals delivered daily, and a cleaner or home helper supplied, etc.).
And on a practical note, that I can moor my boat alongside the ancient quay in this pretty little town for one-quarter of the cost of any harbour in southern England. And watch the young otter, or the occasional coypu, and the 30 or 40 young cormorants move in about now to fish the river for the winter.
That said, I also like that I can sit in a cafe with people of all ages, from teenagers and 20-year olds to old codgers like me, and everyone takes everyone seriously, and properly listens, and give honest opinions. And I can walk the dog late at night with no thought of young yobs causing trouble - in fact they will invariably wish us a good evening. Not everything in life is about money.
Is France getting better? No. But I see few signs it's getting worse. Many talk highly of Portugal, especially Lisbon, and I love it there myself, but it's too hot for me in summer and I speak some French and no Portuguese. The Scandinavian countries have their problems, though Finland is very highly rated, though bloody cold in winter. I haven't been to Denmark for years, but loved Copenhagen, and it is regularly voted one of the happiest places.
I would say that many Americans that come to Europe suffer such a culture shock that they find it hard to cope. About 50% rush back to the familiarity of 'home'. For those that make it through the first 2 or 3 years, many find they can never move back as their perspective has changed.
An American friend here in France has been here for 20 years plus, and visits elderly parents in America. She goes for a week and she says she hates every minute of it, and feels scared if she is meeting friends in the evenings. She is scared of breaking down on the road. She is scared in gasoline stations. She says she comes back to France with neck and shoulder pain from the stress!
I don't know if that ramble helped at all. But to finish up, even Britain with all it's issues is demonstrably far safer, more civilised and a happier place than America, by any measure. And they speak English. If you are wondering, why not give it a go.
Professor Reich: woah. i've read little about Carl Icahn and his monetary machinations, so this piece was a REAL EYE-OPENER. on one hand, i knew he was evil (all millionaires/billionaires are evil, that's how they become obscenely wealthy in the first place). but the methods employed to become so have not been on my radar. thanks for this informative piece, i now have one more thing to keep in mind.
that said, i wonder what "trump country" would think if they were aware of all this greedy double-dealing? what would they think, knowing Carl Icahn is taking them to the cleaners with his ponzi schemes, sucking up their money, and destroying their lives? i'd be LIVID if this happened to me, so i can only guess that the reason that trumpers are not similarly furious is due to ignorance or, if they do know, racism and misogyny.
My guess is that the trump country inhabitants are so thrown off by those childless cat ladies, illegal immigrants, and child killers, and the other people that trump and jd are busy scapegoating, that they don’t see the corporate raiders who are the actual ones stealing their jobs and degrading their lives. Just a thought…
There it is in a nutshell. The true perpetrators are playing the game of distract and then destroy via their obscene wealth. They are trying to turn us against each other to keep us from noticing the depth of their evil doings. We must not be distracted by MSM playing the same bits of biased ‘news‘ and poll results incessantly. We are all hyper– aware of the horrors running rampant in our world; wars, drought, genocides, mass shootings, climate catastrophies, etc. It is entirely overwhelming; yet to affect any change we must focus on the coming election and spread the word that if we have any hope of rounding up and prosecuting the criminals running our lives and remaining a great country, we must VOTE BLUE!
Why do you think that starting with the Regan years, public education has slowly been dismantled? I believe maga is composed of two groups: the uneducated, who do not have the basis to analyze or think their way out of a paper bag, and the 1% who want Trump in perpetuity for their financial gain.
Furthermore, our country upholds a malignant mental diagnosis as enviable. That is, narcissistic sociopathy. Sometimes called toxic masculinity, it is commonly found among male c-suite types, politicians, and the rich. How else to explain the amassing of wealth? How else to explain a continual need to increase one’s wealth? To paraphrase Mary Trump, how much is enough?
Our unfettered, late stage capitalism will kill the remains of our country.
GrrlScientist, the MAGAs are so enthralled with their orange messiah, they would happily give him every last cent they had. They would just tell you that the story about Carl Icahn was just fake news and never give it a second thought.
One more crazy thought. I finally thought to ask myself, what does JD actually stand for in JD Vance’s name. Turns out that JD stands for, wait for it….James Donald. Vance shared his middle and name with his biological father, Donald Ray (Bowman). Looks like JD is the mirror image of Donald J. JDT/ DJV. 2 sides of the same, sick coin.
Let me be clear about something...by neo, I do NOT mean new. What I mean is, is already here and has only just begun...we're at the earliest stage, which WILL only get worse unless we use our Democracy to stop it in it's tracks & reverse what the wannabe Kings/Lords have already stolen from the working class.
As the Talking Heads warn us in "Life During Wartime,"
"This ain't no party,
this ain't no disco,
This ain't no fooling around!"
These monsters have an INSATIABLE appetite for BOTH: Wealth & Control! TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY, before your children suffer the price.
I CRINGE while others discuss economic metrics that simply nolonger apply under our present circumstances. People KNOW they are suffering. Using these old metrics to defend Biden misses the Mark. YES, we're better off under Dems, but if you don't explain why nor explain how & why things will only get worse under Republicans, even in just the economic sense, we could fall into an economic trap most of us won't live long enough to see us ever get out of. It's ALREADY very bad.
We need to start expressing economics withing the framework of finite resources, diminishing resources, and % ownership of resources vs. currency.
The term neo-feudalism is useful and appropriate. We're seeing an increase in gated communities, private armies (excuse me, security) and home schooling, to the detriment of the common weal. What needs to be done is not to limit wealth accumulation, but to limit the ability to pass that wealth on to the next generation, to inhibit the development of a feudal aristocracy.
What James? You dare suggest that I can't cheat the grave by passing on all of my goodies to my mini me's Isn't that why we copulate? To breed replicants that carry on and enjoy the stuff we acquire? /s
Actually Flaury all you have to do is click on the three dots just below and to the right of your comment, then click on edit. Or review your post and correct all of the words underlined in red.
Shocking truth's again. Yesterday I read about thousands off lay off's without pay by Boeing. That still is an industrial and manufacturing monument. Problems of the company are big, because of the blurring frontiers between ownership and management. Quality in production costs money, so it is no priority. Customers are finding out.
Agree with your gloom. But swapping? The better words are suggested by Reich: blurring between ownership and management. Shareholders are owners of a piece of paper that is ascribed some value. But management is supposed to sell a product of quality.
Air travel involves risk. External conditions and the possibility of human error make it so. But nobody wants to fly in an aircraft that might not make it due to some stupid mechanical issue or construction flaw. And the Starliner disaster would support the argument that things haven't improved at Boeing.
Sorry but No, swapping is the right word. I witnessed this personally twice in my late career, when my engineer/scientist supervisors were replaced by MBAs with whom I could not discuss alternative technical approaches to solving the customer's problems because they did not know Jack Shit about science or engineering.
Dodge v. Ford Motor Co, Michigan 1919. the only purpose of a corporation is to provide a positive rate of return for investors. Not to produce a product of quality.
I agree with you Tom, but that is not the law nor the purpose of a corporation.
The U.S.A. had it's start as a Joint Venture Company, called the London Company of Viriginia, a group of lesser nobility, mechants ,and masters of guilds, pooled their money after prevailing upon King James I to grant them a charter to adventure into the new world, that part from the vanished community of Roanoke to what is now Maine, which was called Virginia, to explore for and exploit gold and silver. Chater was granted in1607, removed in 1624, and made a crown colony
Boeing, like all corporations, can't help themselves. The shareholders want a positive stream of investment returns, and most shares are owned by institutions. Investors have representatives on the Board of Directors whose mandate is to ensure a positive rate of return, not only positive, but better than the last quarters profit and loss.
To achieve their goal, the board hires a CEO, COO, CFO, etc to achieve that goal, the CEO has one mandate, one job, or else he or she is out of a job, and that is to produce a positive rate of return, and one better than the last quarter. If they do, they get bonuses, if they don't they get fired, if they consistently under perform.
The system motivates them to cut variable costs (labor) and costs of materials. And the result, accidents that cost lives. And the cost is not born by the company, but by the insurer, but that raises premiums, which are tax deductible, and the expense of profiteering is born by the public who pays taxes.
The way that Boeing or any other corporation is hurt for producing a faulty and unsound product is by a reduction in consumer demand.
so long as there was a demand for Boeing Aircraft there was no motivation to change.
And even then the profit motive has driven a lot of corporations into bankruptcy.
It is quite a change in corporate ethos and mentality, the founder of Boeing said that he would rather shutter the doors than produce one unsafe airplane.
The last real CEO of Boeing was T.A. Wilson in the 1980's. He lived modestly in a middle class home, and when he had conferences or entertained he rented a conference room at Double Tree Inn in Renton.
The current crop of CEO's are experienced at doing one thing, and one thing only, reducing costs.
The repeal of the Glass Steagall act in 1999 and the rolling back part of the Dodd Frank Act in 2018 are major reasons for this lawlessness. I think 1/4 billion dollars is enough for anyone, so I would cap total wealth in the US at $250,000,000. We are headed for another October 1929 since most of the restrictive laws passed in the 30's have been overturned or seriously weakened.
Losing Glass/Steagall/Dodd/Frank sure has been an accelerant to our current situation.
When there’s no limit to the wealth that can be earned, and there are barely any meaningful enforced regulations to curb the greed and avarice…it pits the craven denizens of this sociopathic financial system and the billionaire class against the rest of us. Now these massive rewards they reap are still not enough, and the wealth class wants to keep tilting the table for the money to roll straight into their accounts. Since it will never be enough for them, a cap on wealth to discourage the unchecked greed and divert wealth earned over that amount to properly funding public services would stabilize the nation, address inequality, build trust in public institutions and services as well as in the financial system, and promotes advancement for everyone who engages.
Plus, we’d have more money to spend on goods and services, which I hear they’re big fans of us doing. But it’s hard to spend that money when you don’t have it, and the vast majority of the money is flying to the wealthiest few people at top speed, out of our reach. No matter how many hours we work, how many costs and expenses we try to keep down.
Robert R why not include in your article the huge damage done by private equity and hedge funds accumulating vast swaths of America’s single , multi-family and other income-producing housing to flip or otherwise squeeze out ordinary citizens? Why no regulations/laws tightening or preventing this activity? The media silence on this flagrant action is deafening.
Have to believe RR you’ve written about this issue. If not, go for it!
Telling title, centering around "American." However, Capitalism has never worked for masses in the Global South; in the final stage of capitalism, it's not working for the masses in the US, either.
whether the Americans can get over the word "social" without half the country screaming "communism" due to past indoctrination remains to be seen
populism (ie system that would also favor the masses) is again a loaded word and couldnt ever pass as an alternative system
Maybe the best would be the stakeholder capitalism Prof Reich favors... but the "stakeholders" are still so easy to overlook and forget like history shows
Or perhaps something like Chestertonian distributism, but on a bigger scale and stripped of its overtly Catholic connotations. Mega-mergers often help market efficiency, but a single earthquake, or pandemic, or agricultural plague puts all of us in jeopardy.
the same half of the country would also froth at "distibutism" :P
Mega-mergers are market efficient... but market efficiency is good only for the company while the greater monopoly power it allows harms ALL other stakeholders (workers, suppliers, producers, consumers...)
At some point in time people will need to stop considering education, climate and healthcare to be redistribution... but an investment for the society as a whole
but for that a lot more education needs to be done to help the next generations reach that point....
Unfortunately the necessary change is always hindered by those with power since they dont want competition or smart massess... they want minimally educated sheep to control and all "excessive" education is sold as unwanted "redistribution" (read taxes) or excessive costs harming the bottom line and reserved only for the upper echelons who can afford the best (as is their self-perceived "right")
Bingo! But I'm not so sure that it's half the country anymore. COVID and normal mortality have diminished MAGAstan since the last national election and not enough MAGAts are being produced to replace those who have gone away. We'll see soon enough.
Ivan Sabol, PS, on second thought, I think Mainstreet does need our RR's words of stakeholder and shareholder capitalism to go beyond the abstract word of fairness. They encourage digging deeper where concrete examples of motivation meets public policy choices can be found.
Ivan Sabol, I wonder if mainstreet people in everyday conversation even need a word, other than fair government policies. Sure in academia and in business policy discussions, labels could be helpful. But they can also be harmful, as they are limiting and divisive. I like the words RR uses, stakeholder and shareholder capitalism, because they clearly strike the nail, the most important, the operative word, fairness.
my first opinion is that normal people wouldnt need labels...
but from what i see across the pond, your situation is so particular that any progressive idea (ie Bernie, now Reich, possibly Kamala) immediately gets labaeled socialist or communist and dismissed by ~half the country without any consideration of the merit of the idea
american politics became so loaded and polarized that untill you can make the common people use a non loaded new term to describe the progressive capitalism, all discussion with the other side will stop after communism cry
In my personal opinion the stakeholder capitalism is not different enough from the current status quo ... (and currently democrats are blamed for not helping the little people enough, and this is not actually far from truth again in my view)
This neccesitates the so called progressives to offer something new with a catchy name that could both help people on the raitional level, but also appeal to the masses on the gut level... and that unfortunately means having some buzzword like MAGA which fired a lot of hearts irrationally but undeniably efficiently
unless you can utilize the same tools, and only focus on the rationallity of voters, in the long term it will not be enough
Trump won on empty words
Sanders lost despite having great ideas
Now progressives need to sell great ideas with at least some specific words capable of motivating the masses on the gut level to the similar extent... "stakeholder capitalism" is simply not as catchy as MAGA
Ivan Sabol, great point that the words needs to be catchy. The R's have for a long time cornered the market on strategic, effective, expert wordsmithing of slogans, labels, and phrases. Albeit, deceptive expertise.
The impact of raiders like Carl Icahn is not limited to the companies that they seize control of. I spent almost twenty years at Motorola and the threat of an Icahn raid was an ever present shadow over the way that company was run for many of those years. Stock buy backs and ruthless cost cutting to try to satisfy these “activist” shareholders led directly to the demise of that once great American company. If you survey the landscape of American corporations today you will find a dominant group think around cost cutting and off-shoring that is a direct consequence of this fixation on stock price rather than stock value and a total lack of concern about workers and the communities that have allowed those corporations to grow and become successful.
Greed of a few is what is killing the average American. Greed in corporations, Greed in healthcare and a Greed based economy! Mutualist Capitalism is the way to go. A healthy economy based on profit sharing and prosperity for all. Sadly, these greed driven profiteers have their champion in tfg. TFG should never been allowed into power as his business interests were always going to be in conflict with his ability to do his job as president. He is the Greedmaster in Chief! Driven not by helping all prosper but just a few and himself to prosper! Thanks Robert for an enlightening article shedding light on yet another greedy capitalist!
Bravo! This is a story that needs telling in detail. Working people have lost most of their pensions as a result of the Private Equity firms. That's the tip of the iceberg. Donald Trump uses misdirection on this point. He blames illegal aliens for what the Private Equity firms have done to our economy. While people are worried about border security, Private Equity firms buy their local hospitals. They either close the hospital or raise prices, depending on which makes more money for the General Partners. Meanwhile, they lay off nurses. Patient care deteriorates, but all Fox News reports is border security. Donald Trump claims that his tariffs will cause people to build factories in the United States. Who are these mystery people? Not the Private Equity firms, they have either destroyed U.S. jobs or exported them. This is like when Donald Trump claimed that Covid would go away, and instead it killed 1.2 million Americans. Changing the subject, one way the so-called mainstream media is helping Donald Trump is giving air time to Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is a great American, but people hate her. The more they see her, the more they vote against Kamala Harris.
Professor Reich, I had never heard of Carl Icahan until I read this article. What an absolutely evil man! I wholeheartedly agree that for Americans' sake we must return to Stakeholder Capitalism. These 'corporate raiders' are as much to blame for the problems middle Americans are facing as much as anything else. I have preached and preached to my conservative friends about Stakeholder Capitalism vs Shareholder Capitalism and can finally see some light shining through. I intend to discuss this Carl Icahan as another reason we need to return to Stakeholder Capitalism if we want our country to improve. Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
Trump maga are unaware that the man they are supporting will be the same person that takes their job away and puts them in the poor house - greed does kill - Trump and his kind like Icahn are only about greed - they don’t care how many lives on earth they ruin - but there will be a reckoning soon.
Thank you for all the work you do to educate (and of course, inspire) us. You make things easy to understand. I'm so grateful. Because you are such a good teacher, I have many times told people about stakeholder vs shareholder capitalism in one or two minutes. Identifying the problem is not partisan and it's a quick way to plant a seed.
The people Icahn hurt should be the story. Tens of thousands of them. Did they experience pain and suffering?
Same for Trump. As I said yesterday, Trump's real story, not covered by MSM on page 1, is the 75% decline in Truth Social stock value. Who are the schmucks that bought at $79?
Who are the people he scammed by his 2020 reelection campaign? He had to refund $122.7 million to supporters in 2020, giving back nearly 11% of the money it raised.
As soon as he had "assassination" attempts, he had a grift in place. What did he sell? To whom. How was he able to start grifting so fast?
Daniel, I can only guess, but it was all very suspicious - almost as if it was planned?
Oh, Peggy! These are horrible thoughts, aren’t they? I don’t know how these sad, unbalanced individuals could have been recruited to participate in planned “attempts” {I don’t see that as possible, though I DO realize someone could have had eyes on them for a bit longer than we’re told}. It’s so very confusing, isn’t it? That sad 20-year-old who got SO far — That sad 58-year-old, whose entire life seems to be one bit of legal uproar after another, getting so close … And they were both from the Republican camp, for starters … And both apparently fixated on BOTH men at the top of the tickets, Biden and Trump in their sights {as though the gunmen were more intent on making some kind of show than on removing a particular person from the scene …}. To hear Republicans blaming Democrats for the “rhetoric” is the HEIGHT of ludicrous. EGAD! Can they be serious? Can they believe their own blather? It all makes me literally sick — the nausea rises every time I see the name of DJT, or his awful face, or Vance, or see another headline … The cumulative stress that the Donald has inflicted on our entire populace is toxic .. So, so, so toxic.
Pat, take a deep breath and let it out slowly. From your post, I felt like that myself just this past week! Professor Reich had posted about how MAGA would still be around even if the orange man isn't elected. I felt so helpless, so tired, so fed up that I even considered just stopping engaging altogether! I was going to hang it up and let everybody else handle it. Silly, huh? Instead, I put my postcards and letters in my desk, turned off my computer and spent the day enjoying all of the things that make me happy. Playing with my furry family, working in my garden, taking a cup of coffee and a really good book out on the patio and talking to my friends and family on my phone. After a day of backing away, I realized, that is what the orange man, his running mate and MAGA want us to do! Become so tired and defeated we will quit working and talking to get Kamala Harris elected in November. He will NOT get that pleasure from me! I came back to it and started working just as hard as ever. We have 47 days until election day. We can do this, Pat! Don't let them get to you. I can tell from the posts you have written on this substack, you are strong. Let's work as hard as we can until November 5. Together we will get Kamala Harris in that White House as our next president! Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
Pat, sort of reminds me of Jack Ruby who shot Oswald in 1963, then died of terminal cancer 3 years later. No trial or testimony from Oswald and even to this day some (of us) suspect a cover-up. Was the Butler nutcase a good aim who could miss by 1 inch? The Mar-a-Lago nutcase waited 12 hours for the cops to spot him. Was that on purpose or were both men John Hinckley grade assassins?
So much left in the shadows, Rob — and I HATE the distrust and cynical suspicion that prevails. But we swing from pillar to post, wondering if we are idiots to BELIEVE in conspiracies … or NOT to believe … ???
Depends on the conspiracy, I think. The military/CIA getting rid of JFK because he wanted to get out of Vietnam? Not at all unlikely; probable, even, IMO. Dems trafficking children via the [non-existent] basement of a D.C. pizza parlor? Not so much.
When Dick Cheney was in charge of the executive branch, he made a remark that I will paraphrase: “We create reality.” I remember being mildly shocked that he would admit to lying. Fast forward to last week, when Cheney, in disavowing Drumpf, appeared to be someone trustworthy, almost like an old uncle we’re fond of. If we thought we were in deep trouble when Cheney was in power, how much worse are we off in the Drumpf era?
Stan, YES!!! I think people heard that pretty much in the way they hear that old saw, “History is written by the victors.” They see it as meaning what happens is INTERPRETED as the victors see fit, and reality is what the victors claim it is.
But, did Cheney mean they actually conspire to create their own reality — They orchestrate events and present them in terms THEY want to sell to the people?
Vance’s comment about creating stories, too — he can say he meant “encouraging people to talk about things,” but he could as easily have meant “make up sh*t.”
This kind of confusion, inconclusive perception, worry and “wonder” is how we discombobulate our entire social fabric — and we become easy prey for the Fascist Foxes.
Gad.
I don’t WANT to be a purveyor of that kind of constant fear .. and yet … and yet …
"...did Cheney mean they actually conspire to create their own reality — They orchestrate events and present them in terms THEY want to sell to the people?"
Considering that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and company "created the reality" of WMD in Iraq and implemented their war plans (see: PNAC), I'd say the answer to your question is an unequivocal, "yes," Pat.
But also, they create "alternative facts" to spin actual events. In short, they can't be trusted as far as you or I could throw a Buick.
OMG....Cheeto-topped crucifixes! You're right!
Daniel Soloman, yes, indeed. I believe that one of our human purposes should be to aspire to be aware of and understand the suffering of others and ourselves. For this is what will push human (and individual) evolution in the right direction.
Many of the questions you ask arise from looking at the pain. Which is important in the pursuit to alleviate current and prevent future suffering.
The telling of stories helps us see the depth and breadth of the problem and how one's actions are interconnected with us all.
Beautifully said, M Tree! Thank you!
Didn't PT Barnum say a sucker is born every minute?
As regards Sharehold Capitalism. RR said:"These people put an end to the era of “stakeholder capitalism,” in which corporations and their CEOs had responsibilities to their workers and communities, as well as to their shareholders. In its place they launched the era of “shareholder capitalism,” in which a CEO’s only responsibility is to maximize shareholder returns."
The problem goes back to 1919 in Dodge v Ford Motor CompaThese people put an end to the era of “stakeholder capitalism,” in which corporations and their CEOs had responsibilities to their workers and communities, as well as to their shareholders. In its place they launched the era of “shareholder capitalism,” in which a CEO’s only responsibility is to maximize shareholder returns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.
And the problem goes back to the end of the 19th Century. At that time states had corporate charter laws that gave a corporation a limited life span,usually 50 years, and to renew it, the corporation had to prove it operated in the public interest
John D. Rockefeller who said "competition is a sin", announced he would move his corporation to the state with the best corporate charter laws,thus started the Charter wars. New Jersey won , and he moved and became Standard Oil of NJ. Ohio saw what happened and changed their charters and later we had SOHIO.
No to be outdone, Delaware, a small struggle state with no real industry, did NJ one better and today ever 600 corporations, insurance, financial have corporate headquarters in Delaware, and the Senators from Delaware are known as Senators from Wall Street.
If we are supposed to be the United States, isn’t it time for there to be federal laws that protect people s kind of manipulation? The Constitution was to form a more perfect union after the Confederation of States failed. With the passage of time, weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation became apparent; Congress commanded little respect and no support from state governments anxious to maintain their power. Congress could not raise funds, regulate trade, or conduct foreign policy without the voluntary agreement of the states. Now in addition to states, we have the money of a few who have weakened the ability of Congress to regulate them and protect the common good. Hopefully we are at another reckoning point and will rise to again form a more perfect union.
Hope springs eternal in the human breast. If Trump wins it is forlorn hope.
You do know that the Constitution was written by wealthy, [propertied men, the 18th Century equivalent of the 3%, it enfranchised propertied men and no one else, it took 200 years and three amendments the 15th,17th, and 19th Amendments to finally bring into being a true democracy, and the Republicans are moving heaven and earth to bring it all down.in 56 days.
Didn't Trump bilk the 2,000 small businesses who built his casino? Wasn't it Trump's MO to not pay the 3rd drop that puts a company back in the black? I really think Trump's image as a good "businessman" should be exposed as a fraud and a shyster.
' illionaires stradegy to not pay tax when shedding excess money and an unlawful unethical mental deficient is not new.
Wasting lifetime with no adult participation describes the mental development " health" crisis "of life of leisure. Blowing through atmosphere polluting yammering nonsense play acting on camera....Donald ...duck! Shares a meaningless life as do the go.pro voyuer employers funding atrocity....besides crime felony crime against humanity these bozos are weird mentally deficient. Free pollution and liars perverts are deviant business
His recently announced crypto scam should be getting more MSM coverage as well. A grifter and national security threat on top of his felonies and rapid mental decline.
Gotta admit, Daniel, that I have zero sympathy for those "schumucks who bought at $79." If they gave the Donvict the funds to continue his criming and his hate speech, they deserve to lose their investments.
Moral: DON"T BE A SCHMUCK FOR TRUMP!
A lot of English drama was allegory, written for the illiterate masses.
E.G. What is the moral of Trump University when Trump had to fork over $25 mil to compensate for consequential damages for being a schmuck for Trump?
ANS: Don't be a schmuck for Trump!
Same for any ordinary person who worked for him. A litany of plumbers, electricians, plasterers, etc were debtors in his six (6) bankruptcies.
Who but a schmuck would buy gold Trump tennis shoes or his playing cards, or the rest of his merch. Who but a schmuck would donate to a billionaire's campaign or defense fund.
Capish?
Exactly, Daniel. What it is called when the schmucks get ripped off but still come back for more? Betcha there are a lot of orange cultists who contributed for the wall, and still send money for whatever this week's grift is. Is there a name for those people?
Did you watch yesterdays The Daily Show? They review Trumps latest crypto scam and the lowlifes he has running it,
I agree on the stated solution.
It seems like unscrupulous, short-term investors and self-serving CEO's should be taxed at much higher rate to deter them from selling workers and communities out. It goes without saying that billionaires should be taxed more. A CEO, as the leader, is responsible for the ship. Why not a tax code or rules that make them more accountable to workers and stock holders?
Maybe Republicans and Democrats can come together to work on legislation that creates incentives for good treatment of workers and long-term investments in the company? Republicans are pro-business, right? Or are they just for short-term profits at the expense of workers and communities? I will give them the benefit of the doubt for now.
A progressive Representive should work on the framework with a Republican on the record for supporting workers. If Republicans don't want to help workers and make companies more accountable to workers and stock holders, then they are not pro-business. They are pro-greed at the cost of workers and communities.
Democrats and Republicans should come together to make incentives for stronger business and workers... OR It should be an issue in 2026.
Danny Piper, based on prolific evidence of past and present behavior, I cannot don't even have a grain of sand of faith in the R representatives to actually do what is right. They are pro-themselves, pro- the biggest donors to my campaign, pro-elected by any means necessary. Pro-business is a schtick, a marketing strategy, a front, to disguise their power and profit by any means necessary beliefs to the people, and broadcast them loudly to the biggest donors.
You're right. In fact, most Republicans ignored Trump's shameful, disrespect of POW war hero Sen. McCain to side with possibly the worst "businessman" in history. In fact, Trump sank a cash cow casino while he bilked 2,000 small businesses who helped build the casino. It was his M.O. to not pay the 3rd drop which puts the companies back in the black. That's beyond bad business. It's a shameful and criminal business model.
Yes, Republicans would likely balk at a bipartisan measure to tweak the tax code to create incentives for good management practices that put workers and stock holders first. What a perfect way to shine a light on Republicans phoney "pro-business" rhetoric in 2026. It's time to shine a little light on their pro-business bamboozle.
Danny Piper, yes. Although, I hope there will be a 2026. Their "pro-life" schtick is falling apart. A good sign. I hope it crumbles to pieces in time for Harris/Walz.
Danny Piper, PS, I hadn't thought about that until you mentioned it. His lack of business acumen is not at all important. Saying he is a successful businessman just acts as rationalization to vote for him.
For example refrigerators. A solid well insulated refrigerator doesn't loose all the persishables in a day power out. They also do not become land fill paced for replacement in mere years.
Paying for stupid is not just an ' illionaire broadcasters crap a day gazillion income stream.
Elon, can not spell felon without Elon, ' illionaire atmospheric polututer and space litter deviant taping out " f word your own face" to whoever is a symptom of mental deprevity. Or projecting his own wish for self soothing power in a world he is struggling to occupy his own fleeting lifespan in a rage.
The ' illionaire hoarder as this post is centered has no inclusive consideration for the harm they do do in an obsessed stupor over a string of zero's.
Income caps for ' illionaires who are not contributing " workers" and whose financial dalliance is a free pollution greed past time for no merit of any type. Mental unwellness activities for bored need nothing want for nothings that are harmful do not have to be as atrocious as GoPro internet display of paid employee gang rape mass murder torture to be deviant crime against humanity.
"..are they just for short-term profits at the expense of workers and communities?"
In a word, absolutely, Danny.
But that mindset isn't a political thing, per se. It's the mantra of almost every corporation. I worked for four very large corporations in my career, and through my work, became familiar with several other corporations' philosophies, and I can testify that not a one of them gave a flying fig about one single thing other than the bottom line. I saw restructurings and mergers and "headcount thinnings" that cost hundreds of hard workers their jobs, saw benefits cuts that devastated people, saw an implosion that cost tens of thousands of employees their jobs.....never think for one minute that corporations in general (or Rs, for that matter) deserve the benefit of the doubt
Absolutely, M Tree! I appreciate Professor Reich's explanation about capitalism. I also appreciate the facts you present on this substack. I have used many of them when I talk to other people. This has been a learning adventure on this substack and I enjoy every minute of it! Kudos to you and Professor Reich!
Peggy Freeman, you're so kind. Thank you. And you have inspired me so many times to keep my chin up and press forward. Thank you! And your word, adventure, to describe RR's substack is excellent. I couldn't agree more.
Early in my business career I left public accounting to join a client, a well known retail brokerage firm. I worked as a fund manager of private real estate investment funds.
It was shortly after tax law changes had devalued passive losses as a tax advantage. This retail brokerage unit had just sold $250 million in shares of two private REITs (real estate investment trusts). One invested in the development of Walmart shopping centers with a “guaranteed 8% return”. The other in loans to a senior housing developer with a targeted 10% return (but the marketing language sure made it look like a guarantee).
Being a numbers guy, I tried to simplify what the investment really was on a thumbnail. To simplify, for a dollar invested, where did the money go? 15% went to costs of the offering, upfront fees to the brokerage firm and individual brokers, and reserves for “shit that happens” (the last being a variable cost in the 15%) and support of the targeted dividend in the early development and lease up phase.
I noticed that in the Walmart fund that despite cost overruns and delays the 8% dividend was being paid even though it was clear to me that the 85% investable proceeds from the offering was being canabalized.
Reading the prospectus I saw no clear outline of what amount of the 85% could be used to support the 8% guaranteed dividend. When I asked that question of senior management I didn’t get an answer until one that was friendly with me pulled me aside and said “you don’t want to ask that question”. Later, the 8% dividend would drop to 0% and our very sharp CEO turned into Sergeant Shultz.
Later, in the Beverly Wilshire Hotel restaurant, over breakfast I asked that same CEO a question when I was overseeing the takeover of the properties of the senior housing REIT’s properties that collateralized the loans. He had just complained about progressive taxation.
“Isn’t progressive taxation similar to our business model in our successful funds (the older ones) where excess proceeds are shared with development partners on a sliding scale?”
He smiled and said: “I just don’t like to pay taxes.”
Paul Corrigan, I once read an article, that quoted a wealthy industrialist from the Depression era. It has stayed with me. Before the Depression, he said that he had no choice but to trust his financial advisors that everything he was doing was financially sound and ethical because he couldn't understand the labyrinth of complicated jargon they used to support their assertions. After the collapse, this man was apologetic that he had trusted his advisors as he felt complicit in the collapse. He concludied that if something is presented in such a way that it is too difficult to understand, that's your red flag. Rationalization.
When people starting talking about Bitcoin years ago and doing mental gymnastics to try to explain it, I thought of his wise words.
When canvasing introducing cable to the neighborhood market I heard this " anything that takes that much explanation I don't need".
Rarely in my years did I live anywhere with cable myself. Once, where we did my kid complained there was nothing to watch on the gazillian channels. I asked if he had watched the other comedy channels?
We spent a hilarious session flipping between a fishing channel and a golf channel that afternoon.
As contemporary people it is important we all recognize occupying our lifespan conscious of its place in a very long timeline where in the end we ourselves are visitors pollution is nothing to take lightly and greed is a mental illness.
Patricia Rouse, true as you say, "... pollution is nothing to take lightly and greed is a mental illness."
Back in the day, I went to a CPA continuing education class on taxes. The instructor started off with the “no one has to pay any more taxes than they owe” thing but then went on to say, “But your favorite clients are those that don’t want to pay ANY taxes.” And that’s what the whole class was about - ways to get out of paying any taxes at all. It was eye opening to me that there were people promoting this. How naive I was.
I worked for a then-Big 5 accounting firm. Part of my job was transcribing memos in defense of corporations trying to get out of paying state and local taxes. Later, I did a stint with the division that assisted wealthy individuals. You'd be amazed at how easy it is to bury an $18 million annual bonus and defray taxes until....whenever. And all legal. Truly disgusting. And yet, when I asked one of the CPAs for help because we owed a couple thousand dollars to the IRS one year (small incomes, but no kids), he told me that we didn't have enough debt. We'd bought a very modest house, with payments within our means, and he said we should have gotten a bigger house, so we could write off more mortgage interest. In other words, we were being penalized because we were trying to be responsible and frugal with our money.
A little analysis - do middle class people need tax cuts or wage increases? A 100K salary would pay (with zero extras) 22K in taxes. I can tell you many people survive on just 22K. Would a tax cut be better? I would LOVE to make 100K a year. That would be awesome.
VP Harris - It takes most people a year to make 40K. I don't have it sitting in my bank account to maybe start a business. So the "tax break" doesn't help my business at all. AND, the Small Business Admin myth buster. There are NO grants for women etc to start a business. None. I've asked. We the small people could get a loan at 7% to 10 %.
I'd love to hear her win with a binding pledge for wage increases. Then maybe I could save money to capitalize my business.
The people who call most vociferously for tax cuts people who are unsatisfied with more money than they know what to do with.
or people who get paid shit
Janet Adams, I'm not a policy expert. What I do know though, is that I trust RR's policy recommendations. He is motivated by fairness and dignity for all. And only one political party is striving for the same.
I'm just expanding on his comment. If the Dems want to win - it needs to be about the middle class not the tax breaks that only benefit the 10% or 1%.
:)
Janet Adams, Dems are talking constantly about how they will help the middle class.
I watched the debates. I even put up with listening to trump rambling for it. I haven't heard anything much. Nothing that will help the middle. A 50K tax break for a small business doesn't help much of anyone.
NPR story today - people are saying the same thing.
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/19/nx-s1-5118393/undecided-voters-kamala-harris-donald-trump
The Dems need to listen to people - AND show up for their events ;)
I'm trying to help you all win - if they refuse to put Bernie on the ballot then they need to follow his policies before it's too late.
Cheers :)
Janet Adams, I don't put much stock in NPR's being unbiased in their choice of stories to cover or the content re the election. They have fell from grace in the last years. And Bernie and other progressives influenced Biden and I believe are doing so with Harris. It is also just as important that those voters listen to what she says she won't do: won't extend the tax cuts for wealthiest individuals and corporations given by R's, won't take away rights to marry who you love, to healthcare, clean water and air, education, etc. All issues that impact the middle class financially.
Agree completely. Janet.
Agreed
It’s not enough. Not a single one of their proposals will help me. I will vote for Dems of course. We need higher minimum wages: $35/hr. Universal Basic Income. Better and cheaper healthcare. The system isn’t working for the vast majority. Tweaking it won’t either.
And that's exactly it, M Tree. They TALK about how they will help the middle class. And that's about as far as it goes.
Janet Adams: You are correct. Tax breaks don't help those of us who make little money and have no investments. But wage increases don't help either. Someone or group gets a raise, and prices immediately go up to take that raise. I DREAD pay raises because they really don't help.
we should raise wages and lower prices
"The SEC must return to its old rule, prior to the Reagan administration, that stock buybacks are illegal manipulations of share prices."
This should be bolded and underlined. Reagan did so much damage
Diane, and written in the sky.
I Wonder if the Federal Judge in Florida that dismissed the Lawsuit against Carl Icahn was Aileen Cannon.... Didn't Milton Freedman supply the Philosophical Foundation for the Shareholder Maximization Era that We are now living in, that is sucking the Wealth of Society into the Maws of the 0.0002%?... The 'Greed Is Good Era' has Resulted in the Rise of DJT, and JD... In DJT's eyes, unless you are one of his Oligarchs, you are a 'Sucker & Loser'....
Apache, not sure if it's the same one in FL, but it seems the thinking is the same. Yes, MF was providing rationalization and justification for unlimited greed and rampant egos.
Hello M Tree... Carl Icahn, DJT, are Products of the Inbred Manhattan Financial Universe... The only thing that matters there is $$$... Those that believe in Limits & Ethics are in their Eyes, 'Suckers & Losers'....
Apache, everything's a transaction.
For too many People that is True... Some People Serve A Higher Cause... They Will Do What They Believe Is Right... They have a different set of Ethics... DJT, and JD, call them 'Suckers & Losers'...
Basically, American capitalism has been gamed in multiple ways since the late 1970s, starting with Jimmy Carter's deregulatory schemes, then accelerating with Ronald Reagan and continuing under Bill Clinton. And now with the invalidation by the Supreme Court of the Chevron doctrine, we are about to enter another stage in the rich-get-richer scheme of things. Dr Reich, I look forward to further articles from you on this topic but, I hope, some will focus on the structural reforms that are desperately needed to make the US a far fairer, less corrupt society.
Adam, what I could never understand was why in the world any president would work to deregulate and get rid of the Chevron doctrine. They were in place as guardrails to keep these huge corporations from running roughshod over the American citizens.
Hi Peggy, I am not sure which President you are referring to here. I believe that the Chevron doctrine came in in about 1980-82 but I do not not know of any President who asked that it be invalidated. (That, however, is probably just my own ignorance.) Carter began the deregulation stuff but I do not remember him being particularly vocal about its importance. Ronald Reagan certainly was and Bill Clinton carried on in that spirit but I think quietly. What is clear is that the GOP and its rich donors hated this rule and have wanted to get rid of it, I suspect for decades. It is also clear that if Trump becomes President again, he will use the new Supreme Court ruling against it as a rationale for undoing much of the regulations that have been put in place to protect the pubic and that he will dismantle much of the civil service to do so, as Project 2025 promises.
The Chevron doctrine said the courts had to accept the interpretation of the law from the government agency. Ponder that.
You need to review the Chevron doctrine. The Supreme Court reversal simply says that judges have a responsibility to interpret laws passed by Congress. The earlier Chevron decision said only a bureaucratic expert was qualified to interpret law and write regulations, i.e. we only had two branches of Federal government, not three. And maybe only one if Congress was lazy.
Personally, I like the idea that a judge should be able to weigh in on the meaning of a law which may be vague as passed. I want you and any citizen to read and express your opinion of something buried in a 1000-page document passed in haste followed by a statement, "You will have to pass it to find out what is in it" (Nancy Pelosi on the Obamacare bill). Otherwise, we end up with a nation of the lawyers, by the lawyers, and for the lawyers.
Corporate control of politicians and much of the media.
Yes. A lot of RR’s solutions, while good, are bandaids on a hemorrhaging system.
I am glad the Supreme Court invalidated the Chevron doctrine.
You want unelected judicial bureaucrats deciding whether your prescription medication is safe and effective?
No, I want the scientists working under the relevant governmental agency, in this case the FDA, making those determinations and then passing on their recommendations to their bosses who will make the rule. I most definitely do not want either Congressman or judges being called on to make such decisions, because they do not have the requisite knowledge. Sorry to have to point this out but we live in an advanced, complicated, technologically advanced society and we need people who actually know something in order to make informed decisions.
Your choice is to be ignorant and personally irresponsible outside or your own fields, leaving it to unelected bureaucrats and the President (Stalin and Lysenko perhaps or Collins and Fauci?) to control your life. Let's get rid of judges and Congress and go straight to a totalitarian government. Is that what you are saying? Do your really think that scientists, or "their bosses" who depend on government taxes for their income produce only work that is pure and unbiased? Pretty naive, but I know you are not alone.
Totally agree.
Do you want the unelected bureaucrats to make all the rules and decide what a vague rule means? Your reply proves you need to gain more understanding of the Chevron doctrine.
I absolutely prefer expert civil servants supervised by the duly elected president to ignorant judicial political partisans to make critical policy decisions that require expertise.
So you would have us at mercy of corporations whose sole reason for existence is to maximize shareholder profits, at any c st,including the health of society, and individuals.
IOW Karl Marx says that it is OK to lie, Cheat, Steal in the pursuit of shareholder profits.
Government agencies are responsible to the public, corporations ae responsible to the shareholders.
Whose interests are served when shareholders can do whatever they please.
Maybe you should read up a little about the health, safety and life of the public and workers before government regulation.
I'm glad that the ovum which your fathers sperm penetrated was aged.
Is that an insult ? Truly pathetic !
Your defending Karl Marx?
All good, Robert. But the $500-odd million paid into Kamala's campaign fund is surely buying something, and I'd be happy to bet it is the leave the rich donors and their tax breaks alone.
I expect Kamala to do many good things if she gets to be President, especially if the Dems can capture both House and Senate, but at the end of the 4 years I really, really doubt that there will be any meaningful change to the way the system of America's Capitalism for the Rich actually works.
In many other countries, like here in Europe, the corporations work for society at large, and are taxed and regulated for the benefit of all citizens. All good.
But in America, society is only there to work for the corporations, so you are only relevant to them if you are an employee, a customer or an investor. Anyone else is not just irrelevant, but treated as a parasite on corporate profits through the tax system.
I really, really doubt America will ever manage to turn that around.
You are right. Look at voting roll calls in Congress. For example, whenever Congress manages to propose a bill to close an obvious tax loophole for trusts to facilitate inherited wealth, republicans vote against it en masse, but there are democrats, as well, so in the slim majorities in our government, it cannot pass. When well over 99% of our House and Senate become millionaires, why do you think this will be forevermore.?
You are right for exactly the reasons you give - all politicians are in it for themselves and 'turkeys don't vote for Thanksgiving"!
It is not over 99% of our congress critters that are millionaires, but the majority are
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2020/04/majority-of-lawmakers-millionaires/
Well it’s nice to know her opposition’s policy positions are so good… Wait? What? Never mind Geeesch!
It would be nice to think that Kamala will do good things, but to do so, she would have to get elected. That is by no means a sure thing, even with a $500 million war chest, for several reasons, but an important one is the fact that, while the rate of inflation has gone down, prices have not, and people are struggling as a result... And the tax credits that Kamala offers are not going to help the average Joe. The only thing that I can think of that would help would be a massive increase in the food stamp benefits program, an expansion whose need could be explained by the monopolistic prices, and which would prove that government can be responsive to the needs of the people that result. The subsidies would sunset as wages catch up to the cost of living- which is to say that people would gradually climb out of the program when their income increased, which would be assisted by an increase in the minimum wage. This might also get people to understand that a vote for Trump would put the problem of corporate greed on steroids.
Being in Europe, you will be in the front lines if Trump gets elected and appeases Putin, who would thus win the war in Ukraine in early 2025 with his dreams of dominating Europe, and the world still intact, and with America bankrupt as a result of the next round of tax cuts for the rich, and at war with itself. Ironically, the war would probably end in November if Kamala gets elected, because that is the only way that Russia will be able to save its oil production capability, which it will be losing this winter due to lack of use during a Siberian winter. It will take decades for Russia to get back to its previous oil production even then.
One group that is pretty much always ignored, and suffering terribly right now are seniors. As of 2022, there were 57.8 million adults aged 65 and older in the United States, which is 17.3% of the total population. This includes 31.9 million women and 25.9 million men. Social security isn't nearly cutting it anymore. For example, I am trying to suvive on $12K/year. Retirement income? You must be joking. For many of us, wages were flat from 1970 on, and "saving for retirement"--something easy to say but difficult to do--was nearly impossible. Seniors who did have retirement money are blowing through it at an increased rate, given the recent spike in "greedflation." Harris has said she'd like to increase SS payments by $200/month. If she manages to get that done--something Bernie Sanders has been trying to achieve for years!--maybe I'll finally be able to get my teeth cleaned again or buy new glasses. In the meantime, I watch from the sidelines, angry that I'm too old to work full time anymore and terrified about what will happen to me and other seniors in the next few years.
I feel this is another example of corporations winning. Ending what used to be more common practice with pensions and instead saying the government will take care of our elders and now that feels like a scam. We need to get back to an economy that is about the workers. And I believe that would increase revenue into SS which would allow for raises for our seniors currently needing their hard earned retirement. Thank you for spreading this message. $12k/he is clearly not enough for anyone, just to buy food or pay for gasoline, not including any healthcare, rent/housing, transportation, taxes, etc.
I hear you! I am still working part time and trying to religiously save. Taxes are too high for most and benefits are too low. Worst of all, try to get another job? Anyone who thinks age discrimination is not real- tell me where you work. Those college degrees and certificates mean nothing. Recently I volunteered to help with a group for political campaign public education efforts. I heard nothing back! Not even the courtesy of a response. Given my experience, it seems to me there is a wealth of untapped knowledge and experience waiting for opportunities.
Kprez: I'm on Medicare, but had a secondary through a former employer, CalPers. it was a Platinum Medicare PPO supplement. I received notice that my premium would go up 30.7%, Meaning I would actually have to pay CalPers if I kept the insurance. So I canceled, I am fortunate in that I also have Tricare for life, it was my tertiary, now it is my secondary.
I am fortunate, I made some good, but hard choices when I was young. Then again growing up poor I looked to the future and planned my life accordingly.
Never the less I feel for other seniors who have to make a choice between nutrition and medical care.
My sister died last April, she had lung cancer and gall bladder problems as well as another cancer. All she had was Medicare, she paid $35 a month for the hospital bill that Medicare doesn't cover (20%), she had sold her house to her grandson for a nominal fee, so that the debt collector could not come after her estate which was zero when she died.
How many millions of people die every year because they can't afford medical insurance. Gig workers, construction workers.
I know two men who worked in construction, they don't now, they worked until their hands got mangled in an accident,and they could not longer wield a hammer.
Ironically they are Trump voters.
They take one look at you and think "I can take advantage of this old fart." Once you're a senior, you cease to be a valuable assset. You're just old. If they hire you, and that's a big if, you get offered a terrible wage, nothing even close to what you made in your prime. Yes, agism definitely exists. I started running into it at sixty!
f you are 50 or over, you are virtually unemployable, except may bagging at Krogers or greeting at WalMart
Ageism is rampant in America. Poorly regulated corporations dismiss older workers and replace them with younger, cheaper models and they do it with impunity.
After 20 years on the job, my wife, at age 50, was finally making an acceptable salary. Progress reports of her fine work had boosted her salary during those years and the benefits were good.
Then, from out of left field she is laid off for a “reduction in force” according to her employer.
After 20 years working there, of course she maintains many relationships with current employees. They were only too glad to inform her that her replacement, a fresh faced college graduate, was hired a month later…for far less money and less benefits.
This is how they do!
They got rid of greeters at Walmart in 2019.
Except for gasoline, because of competition, the prices never go down. Food is a necessity, in economic terms, it faces and inelastic demand. and there is no competition in the processed food industry,. the processed food industry is dominated by five food giants, and they either conspire, or have convinced people via advertising to prefer one brand over another
I remember when gas was 29 cents a gallon and a Clark Bar was 5 cents, Gas is now $3 to $5 a gallon and a Clark Bar is $1.49, and the Clark Bar is smaller than it was at $.05
The only way to have prices go down is to stop buying the product. But the consumer is his or her own worst enemy.
On the other hand manufacturers will dispose of unsought and unsold product, rather than reduce prices, and take the loss as a tax write off., because the Chamber of Commerce lobbyists have written our tax laws.
Well said!
Az, I like the system you have in Europe. I would hope that when Kamala gets in the White House, she will tackle this problem and work on correcting it. It will not happen overnight but she does have Lina Kahn and others working hard to fix some of it right now. Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
Just so you know what you guys are missing.
https://youtu.be/aCsgzUriC8o?feature=shared
As I keep saying to all those that think Kamala has already won, the polls are still 50/50 within the 4% margin of error, and the last debate has barely made them twitch. Apparently almost all voters had already made up their minds, so there won't be a landslide, it is highly unlikely that Kamala will win both Senate and House, and Trump will contest every result leasing to months of court cases. And that's last one is the better scenario - he could easily try for a coup!
As for the Ukraine War, my concern is that America is lined up for involvement in 3 wars right now; Ukraine with NATO (currently seems inevitable), a Middle East war on the side of Israel and Saudi against Iran and Hamas, and perhaps a Far East action when China invades Taiwan (that may also trigger North Korea attacking the South).
One reason friends of mine in Europe actually prefer Trump is because they think he will keep America out of all three conflicts, de-escalating and so avoiding WW3. Of course that will pander to Putin, Xi and Kim Jong Un, which is exactly what Trump would do for his best mates, and leaves Ukraine, Taiwan and South Korea completely shafted.
I suspect many Americans may be making the same calculation. As I would if I lived in America, particularly if I had a 20-year-old son, for example!
If Trump wins, the chances of war are still the same,only greater, because Putin will take over Ukraine, rest,rebuild, replenish (maybe) and take over Moldova and Lithuania, the Baltic States and then Poland.
China certainly invade Taiwan, and North Korea the South, and even Trump will be hard pressed to keep us out of those wars.
The deterrent to war is fear by the aggressor, and Trump removes that fear., and gives them license to proceed.
If Trump wins, he will fulfill his promises to revenge,punish and deport and America will overnight become a third world nation, demoralized, deconstructed at war with itself, and that alone will give Putin the breathing space and opportunity he needs to run through Europe.
Europe has demilitarized, it no longer has the industrial capability to support an arms industry much like produce enough munitions to fight a sustained battle, meanwhile Russia, because of the experience in Ukraine is rebuilding and ramping up theirs.
Putin does not have any countervailing force, no public restraints to impeded his militarization, he has in effect revived Stalinist Russia
And Britain, that used to have a couple of lines of deep sonar buoys that tracked all the Russian (and other) subs in and out of the Atlantic, North Sea and Irish Sea. I'm sure they still have the capability, not least because all those oil and gas rigs, and now the wind turbines too.
I am sure that nothing moves without everyone knowing about it.
I agree in principle, but I think Putin would have to stop for a while if he takes Eastern Ukraine for Russia. He has taken a huge hit, financially, his weaponry, and in particular he is literally running out on men to fight. He'd have to keep hold of the captured territory, and would surely face insurrectionists and terrorism within both that territory and in Russia.
I also wonder if Putin's aims are wider than the capture of oil and food resources and the Black Sea ports. Climate change will mean the turning off of AMOC that may plunge much of Russia into perpetual ice. Ukrainian territory would give Russians a place to go.
As for Trump unleashing all the dictators to do as they want, then I agree. I think they are all watching the American news very carefully indeed!
No Doubt Az that Putin would have to stop, to replenish and rebuild, but as regards cannon fodder, humans are a self renewing resource.
Russia isn't China, but back during the Soviet Sino war (do you remember that), it was estimated that if Russia wiped out the leading ranks of a Chinese Army thy losses would be constantly replenished from behind, and by sheer numbers the Chinese would be in Moscow.
Putin has the full resources of the "Republics", and Siberia is not empty,in fact both Stalin and Putin have used the Asiatic tribes in Siberia as human fodder in their human waves.
I don't credit Putin with enough forward thinking to consider the disruption of AMOC (Atlantic Meridonal Overturning Circulation) as a threat, especially as it doesn't benefit Russia, Western Europe and England are the beneficiares of the AMOC.
I don't credit Putin with thinking any further ahead than his own needs and desire to go down in history as Vladimir the great,alongside Peter and Katherine, and I suspect that he is one of 16.6666 % of Russians that is a descendant of Jenghis Khan. he sure acts like it
I have never considered Putin to be stupid, nor badly informed. I agree he wants his legacy secured and cannot do that if Ukraine is unfinished business when he dies. He's 'only' 72 but I've always assumed that Russia, with 144 million people, and all those ambitious oligarchs, and all that suppressed anger and ambition, must have a long list of people with a longer list of reasons who'd be happy to help Putin into the next life!
The Russian sea route to the north Atlantic is only ever ice-free because of AMOC, and that means the 63 strong submarine fleet, much of it at it's main base at Severomorsk, would be ice-bound most or all the year. If AMOC turns off, it's loss would be seen as catastrophic for Russian défenses in the Atlantic.
Lastly, the Ukrainians seem to be mastering the technological advances of modern warfare very quickly indeed, forcing Russia to buy in tech from Iran, North Korea, and probably China through intermediaries. Putin needs a deal very soon, or else runs the real risks of Russians losing faith in him. The latest successful Ukrainian attack on the huge arms dump near Moscow will not have played well with Moscovites!
I would not suggest Putin is stupid, he just isn't capable of thinking long term, anymore than our billionaires who fund Trump are able. It is the present that they live in, that preoccupies them. They and frankly most people don't even give the future or consequences a nod.
When I was 17 I planned for my retirement. And today I plan for a future which may not arrive, after all I am 85
As regards hitting inside of Russia, I blame Jake Sullivan for Biden's decision not to support Zelensky.
Either Jake is a timid soul or he is a Putin Asset. I hope Harris gets rid of him, and most of Biden's advisers, and especially the current Trump humping staff of Secret Service.
Thanks for the education on the Russian sea route to the Baltic. they still have to sail past
Sweden and Denmark though
Gloomy for sure. But Europe is not devoid of the same problems...these are all multinational remember. It is that they are draped over a frame of what we here call socialism...basic social services and education, health care, childcare, housing subsidies.. are provided universally (sometimes even to immigrants because it's cheaper than dealing with the mess.) Our "social welfare" is employer-based...and the owners see no point in providing it if they're too busy planning the next buy out. Stock price has nothing to do with goods and services. It is essentially an addictive fiction...
Of course we have problems here in France and in the rest of Europe. But the scale of the problems in America dwarf the problems over here, even though the French are notoriously negative about the state of their country and the difficulties they face. There is a saying in Europe,"The French live in Paradise, but they all seem to think they are living in Hell!"
Here is a France 24 news channel program on the French system. Warning - you may never be content in America again if you watch it! 😬
https://youtu.be/aCsgzUriC8o?feature=shared
But in terms of multi-national companies, particularly American companies operating in France and Europe, I have said before that all those companies operate under our laws. Their workers are only allowed to work 36 hours a week, have set break times and lunch hours, get at least 4 or 6 weeks holiday a year, and have generous protections where the company pays substantial sums if they are laid off, or the business is closed down, or if they are unfairly treated or discriminated against. Women get generous maternity leave, maternity pay, and their job has to be kept open. Men also get statutory maternity leave and benefits.
The companies themselves are controlled by strict and heavily enforced rules on pollution, sourcing ethical materials, cyber security, advertising, business practices, share dealing, and a host of things we call Fraud that you guys think of as normal. Etc, etc, etc.........
And yet, those American companies pay for all that stuff, put up with the rules and THEY MAKE DECENT PROFITS FOR THEIR SHAREHOLDERS!!!
So I have absolutely NO time for those assholes that believe the American way of business is the only way, because the evidence is all around.
Or indeed that socialism would destroy America. On the contrary, it could make America join the rest of the civilised world. Because unless you are rich in America and can buy the stuff we all take for granted, at the moment it really is not.
Just my view. Enjoy the YouTube video!
I am watching the video Az, and see a flaw, Only the working class pay into the Social security system (that leaves the investing class, the inheritance class, the entitled class not paying into the system, and as a result it is in the red and there is no way out, per French politics.
Not so. Companies pay around the same per head as people, and there are wealth taxes, inheritance taxes and a progressive income tax system. And everyone pays into the social security system.
That is not what your video said at the beginning, it said that Social security was paid for by the working class.
Where in Europe are they now getting better for the people? From what I am hearing, in the UK, the most basic services are increasingly falling apart due to Brexit.
Brexit has hit Britain hard, as did Covid, but the underlying problems have been around for a long time. For decades Britain has, in European terms, been 'America Lite' with capitalism and mercantilism at it's core, although after Ww2 it did dream of a more socialist, equitable society with Unionisation and the NHS two obvious examples. Then Maggie Thatcher did to Britain as Reagan did to America, and put Britain on a path to a low-tax, low-regulation and low-morality, every-man-for-himself country that then didn't make the richest pay enough taxes to maintain the services. The NHS for example, provides universal healthcare for half the cost of the French system, for roughly the same population. But is relies on the excellent staff (mostly now from other countries) working long hours for low wages, and with frequent errors and issues.
I had been in England before Brexit and by leaving for France before the final date, took advantage of an EU scheme to retain my EU citizenship as a resident in France. I did so because France is more civilised, services are better funded, and I suppose I always assumed I would spend my retirement here. It is practical to do so, with one of the world's best healthcare systems, and best protections for old people, and one of the longest life expectancies (lots of 'if shit hits the fan' type services like hot meals delivered daily, and a cleaner or home helper supplied, etc.).
And on a practical note, that I can moor my boat alongside the ancient quay in this pretty little town for one-quarter of the cost of any harbour in southern England. And watch the young otter, or the occasional coypu, and the 30 or 40 young cormorants move in about now to fish the river for the winter.
That said, I also like that I can sit in a cafe with people of all ages, from teenagers and 20-year olds to old codgers like me, and everyone takes everyone seriously, and properly listens, and give honest opinions. And I can walk the dog late at night with no thought of young yobs causing trouble - in fact they will invariably wish us a good evening. Not everything in life is about money.
Is France getting better? No. But I see few signs it's getting worse. Many talk highly of Portugal, especially Lisbon, and I love it there myself, but it's too hot for me in summer and I speak some French and no Portuguese. The Scandinavian countries have their problems, though Finland is very highly rated, though bloody cold in winter. I haven't been to Denmark for years, but loved Copenhagen, and it is regularly voted one of the happiest places.
I would say that many Americans that come to Europe suffer such a culture shock that they find it hard to cope. About 50% rush back to the familiarity of 'home'. For those that make it through the first 2 or 3 years, many find they can never move back as their perspective has changed.
An American friend here in France has been here for 20 years plus, and visits elderly parents in America. She goes for a week and she says she hates every minute of it, and feels scared if she is meeting friends in the evenings. She is scared of breaking down on the road. She is scared in gasoline stations. She says she comes back to France with neck and shoulder pain from the stress!
I don't know if that ramble helped at all. But to finish up, even Britain with all it's issues is demonstrably far safer, more civilised and a happier place than America, by any measure. And they speak English. If you are wondering, why not give it a go.
Professor Reich: woah. i've read little about Carl Icahn and his monetary machinations, so this piece was a REAL EYE-OPENER. on one hand, i knew he was evil (all millionaires/billionaires are evil, that's how they become obscenely wealthy in the first place). but the methods employed to become so have not been on my radar. thanks for this informative piece, i now have one more thing to keep in mind.
that said, i wonder what "trump country" would think if they were aware of all this greedy double-dealing? what would they think, knowing Carl Icahn is taking them to the cleaners with his ponzi schemes, sucking up their money, and destroying their lives? i'd be LIVID if this happened to me, so i can only guess that the reason that trumpers are not similarly furious is due to ignorance or, if they do know, racism and misogyny.
My guess is that the trump country inhabitants are so thrown off by those childless cat ladies, illegal immigrants, and child killers, and the other people that trump and jd are busy scapegoating, that they don’t see the corporate raiders who are the actual ones stealing their jobs and degrading their lives. Just a thought…
There it is in a nutshell. The true perpetrators are playing the game of distract and then destroy via their obscene wealth. They are trying to turn us against each other to keep us from noticing the depth of their evil doings. We must not be distracted by MSM playing the same bits of biased ‘news‘ and poll results incessantly. We are all hyper– aware of the horrors running rampant in our world; wars, drought, genocides, mass shootings, climate catastrophies, etc. It is entirely overwhelming; yet to affect any change we must focus on the coming election and spread the word that if we have any hope of rounding up and prosecuting the criminals running our lives and remaining a great country, we must VOTE BLUE!
Why do you think that starting with the Regan years, public education has slowly been dismantled? I believe maga is composed of two groups: the uneducated, who do not have the basis to analyze or think their way out of a paper bag, and the 1% who want Trump in perpetuity for their financial gain.
Furthermore, our country upholds a malignant mental diagnosis as enviable. That is, narcissistic sociopathy. Sometimes called toxic masculinity, it is commonly found among male c-suite types, politicians, and the rich. How else to explain the amassing of wealth? How else to explain a continual need to increase one’s wealth? To paraphrase Mary Trump, how much is enough?
Our unfettered, late stage capitalism will kill the remains of our country.
😔
GrrlScientist, the MAGAs are so enthralled with their orange messiah, they would happily give him every last cent they had. They would just tell you that the story about Carl Icahn was just fake news and never give it a second thought.
One more crazy thought. I finally thought to ask myself, what does JD actually stand for in JD Vance’s name. Turns out that JD stands for, wait for it….James Donald. Vance shared his middle and name with his biological father, Donald Ray (Bowman). Looks like JD is the mirror image of Donald J. JDT/ DJV. 2 sides of the same, sick coin.
MAGAs who would learn about this would only be disappointed about the fact that they weren’t in on it to make a buck.
From one Economist, to another,
In a word: NEO-FEUDALISM
Let me be clear about something...by neo, I do NOT mean new. What I mean is, is already here and has only just begun...we're at the earliest stage, which WILL only get worse unless we use our Democracy to stop it in it's tracks & reverse what the wannabe Kings/Lords have already stolen from the working class.
As the Talking Heads warn us in "Life During Wartime,"
"This ain't no party,
this ain't no disco,
This ain't no fooling around!"
These monsters have an INSATIABLE appetite for BOTH: Wealth & Control! TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY, before your children suffer the price.
I CRINGE while others discuss economic metrics that simply nolonger apply under our present circumstances. People KNOW they are suffering. Using these old metrics to defend Biden misses the Mark. YES, we're better off under Dems, but if you don't explain why nor explain how & why things will only get worse under Republicans, even in just the economic sense, we could fall into an economic trap most of us won't live long enough to see us ever get out of. It's ALREADY very bad.
We need to start expressing economics withing the framework of finite resources, diminishing resources, and % ownership of resources vs. currency.
The term neo-feudalism is useful and appropriate. We're seeing an increase in gated communities, private armies (excuse me, security) and home schooling, to the detriment of the common weal. What needs to be done is not to limit wealth accumulation, but to limit the ability to pass that wealth on to the next generation, to inhibit the development of a feudal aristocracy.
What James? You dare suggest that I can't cheat the grave by passing on all of my goodies to my mini me's Isn't that why we copulate? To breed replicants that carry on and enjoy the stuff we acquire? /s
Sorry for they typos.Substack isn't exactly edit-friendly.
Actually Flaury all you have to do is click on the three dots just below and to the right of your comment, then click on edit. Or review your post and correct all of the words underlined in red.
@RobertReich hoping & praying you see my contribution here.
Greed kills
Shocking truth's again. Yesterday I read about thousands off lay off's without pay by Boeing. That still is an industrial and manufacturing monument. Problems of the company are big, because of the blurring frontiers between ownership and management. Quality in production costs money, so it is no priority. Customers are finding out.
Swapping out engineers for financiers has damaged Boeing enormously. I'm not sure it will ever recover.
Agree with your gloom. But swapping? The better words are suggested by Reich: blurring between ownership and management. Shareholders are owners of a piece of paper that is ascribed some value. But management is supposed to sell a product of quality.
Air travel involves risk. External conditions and the possibility of human error make it so. But nobody wants to fly in an aircraft that might not make it due to some stupid mechanical issue or construction flaw. And the Starliner disaster would support the argument that things haven't improved at Boeing.
Sorry but No, swapping is the right word. I witnessed this personally twice in my late career, when my engineer/scientist supervisors were replaced by MBAs with whom I could not discuss alternative technical approaches to solving the customer's problems because they did not know Jack Shit about science or engineering.
Dodge v. Ford Motor Co, Michigan 1919. the only purpose of a corporation is to provide a positive rate of return for investors. Not to produce a product of quality.
I agree with you Tom, but that is not the law nor the purpose of a corporation.
The U.S.A. had it's start as a Joint Venture Company, called the London Company of Viriginia, a group of lesser nobility, mechants ,and masters of guilds, pooled their money after prevailing upon King James I to grant them a charter to adventure into the new world, that part from the vanished community of Roanoke to what is now Maine, which was called Virginia, to explore for and exploit gold and silver. Chater was granted in1607, removed in 1624, and made a crown colony
Boeing, like all corporations, can't help themselves. The shareholders want a positive stream of investment returns, and most shares are owned by institutions. Investors have representatives on the Board of Directors whose mandate is to ensure a positive rate of return, not only positive, but better than the last quarters profit and loss.
To achieve their goal, the board hires a CEO, COO, CFO, etc to achieve that goal, the CEO has one mandate, one job, or else he or she is out of a job, and that is to produce a positive rate of return, and one better than the last quarter. If they do, they get bonuses, if they don't they get fired, if they consistently under perform.
The system motivates them to cut variable costs (labor) and costs of materials. And the result, accidents that cost lives. And the cost is not born by the company, but by the insurer, but that raises premiums, which are tax deductible, and the expense of profiteering is born by the public who pays taxes.
The way that Boeing or any other corporation is hurt for producing a faulty and unsound product is by a reduction in consumer demand.
so long as there was a demand for Boeing Aircraft there was no motivation to change.
And even then the profit motive has driven a lot of corporations into bankruptcy.
It is quite a change in corporate ethos and mentality, the founder of Boeing said that he would rather shutter the doors than produce one unsafe airplane.
The last real CEO of Boeing was T.A. Wilson in the 1980's. He lived modestly in a middle class home, and when he had conferences or entertained he rented a conference room at Double Tree Inn in Renton.
The current crop of CEO's are experienced at doing one thing, and one thing only, reducing costs.
The repeal of the Glass Steagall act in 1999 and the rolling back part of the Dodd Frank Act in 2018 are major reasons for this lawlessness. I think 1/4 billion dollars is enough for anyone, so I would cap total wealth in the US at $250,000,000. We are headed for another October 1929 since most of the restrictive laws passed in the 30's have been overturned or seriously weakened.
🛎️🛎️🛎️^^^
Thank you for posting that! Yes!👍
Losing Glass/Steagall/Dodd/Frank sure has been an accelerant to our current situation.
When there’s no limit to the wealth that can be earned, and there are barely any meaningful enforced regulations to curb the greed and avarice…it pits the craven denizens of this sociopathic financial system and the billionaire class against the rest of us. Now these massive rewards they reap are still not enough, and the wealth class wants to keep tilting the table for the money to roll straight into their accounts. Since it will never be enough for them, a cap on wealth to discourage the unchecked greed and divert wealth earned over that amount to properly funding public services would stabilize the nation, address inequality, build trust in public institutions and services as well as in the financial system, and promotes advancement for everyone who engages.
Plus, we’d have more money to spend on goods and services, which I hear they’re big fans of us doing. But it’s hard to spend that money when you don’t have it, and the vast majority of the money is flying to the wealthiest few people at top speed, out of our reach. No matter how many hours we work, how many costs and expenses we try to keep down.
Robert R why not include in your article the huge damage done by private equity and hedge funds accumulating vast swaths of America’s single , multi-family and other income-producing housing to flip or otherwise squeeze out ordinary citizens? Why no regulations/laws tightening or preventing this activity? The media silence on this flagrant action is deafening.
Have to believe RR you’ve written about this issue. If not, go for it!
Good idea.
It sounds like the CEOs read Trump’s book , “How To Ripoff The Average American”! Sarcasm
Telling title, centering around "American." However, Capitalism has never worked for masses in the Global South; in the final stage of capitalism, it's not working for the masses in the US, either.
it is in the title... it works for the capitalists... not the massess
the same as feudalism which worked for feudal lords and not for the plebs
obviously socialism in its forms (extreme forms?) like no private ownership or central planning of everything doesnt work for anyone....
but what needs to be done is to "invent" another way that is more centralistic than either
but all good ideas were already thought of by someone and a quick google finds https://www.socialcapitalresearch.com/what-is-social-capitalism-2/
whether the Americans can get over the word "social" without half the country screaming "communism" due to past indoctrination remains to be seen
populism (ie system that would also favor the masses) is again a loaded word and couldnt ever pass as an alternative system
Maybe the best would be the stakeholder capitalism Prof Reich favors... but the "stakeholders" are still so easy to overlook and forget like history shows
Or perhaps something like Chestertonian distributism, but on a bigger scale and stripped of its overtly Catholic connotations. Mega-mergers often help market efficiency, but a single earthquake, or pandemic, or agricultural plague puts all of us in jeopardy.
the same half of the country would also froth at "distibutism" :P
Mega-mergers are market efficient... but market efficiency is good only for the company while the greater monopoly power it allows harms ALL other stakeholders (workers, suppliers, producers, consumers...)
At some point in time people will need to stop considering education, climate and healthcare to be redistribution... but an investment for the society as a whole
but for that a lot more education needs to be done to help the next generations reach that point....
Unfortunately the necessary change is always hindered by those with power since they dont want competition or smart massess... they want minimally educated sheep to control and all "excessive" education is sold as unwanted "redistribution" (read taxes) or excessive costs harming the bottom line and reserved only for the upper echelons who can afford the best (as is their self-perceived "right")
Bingo! But I'm not so sure that it's half the country anymore. COVID and normal mortality have diminished MAGAstan since the last national election and not enough MAGAts are being produced to replace those who have gone away. We'll see soon enough.
Ivan Sabol, PS, on second thought, I think Mainstreet does need our RR's words of stakeholder and shareholder capitalism to go beyond the abstract word of fairness. They encourage digging deeper where concrete examples of motivation meets public policy choices can be found.
Ivan Sabol, I wonder if mainstreet people in everyday conversation even need a word, other than fair government policies. Sure in academia and in business policy discussions, labels could be helpful. But they can also be harmful, as they are limiting and divisive. I like the words RR uses, stakeholder and shareholder capitalism, because they clearly strike the nail, the most important, the operative word, fairness.
my first opinion is that normal people wouldnt need labels...
but from what i see across the pond, your situation is so particular that any progressive idea (ie Bernie, now Reich, possibly Kamala) immediately gets labaeled socialist or communist and dismissed by ~half the country without any consideration of the merit of the idea
american politics became so loaded and polarized that untill you can make the common people use a non loaded new term to describe the progressive capitalism, all discussion with the other side will stop after communism cry
In my personal opinion the stakeholder capitalism is not different enough from the current status quo ... (and currently democrats are blamed for not helping the little people enough, and this is not actually far from truth again in my view)
This neccesitates the so called progressives to offer something new with a catchy name that could both help people on the raitional level, but also appeal to the masses on the gut level... and that unfortunately means having some buzzword like MAGA which fired a lot of hearts irrationally but undeniably efficiently
unless you can utilize the same tools, and only focus on the rationallity of voters, in the long term it will not be enough
Trump won on empty words
Sanders lost despite having great ideas
Now progressives need to sell great ideas with at least some specific words capable of motivating the masses on the gut level to the similar extent... "stakeholder capitalism" is simply not as catchy as MAGA
Ivan Sabol, great point that the words needs to be catchy. The R's have for a long time cornered the market on strategic, effective, expert wordsmithing of slogans, labels, and phrases. Albeit, deceptive expertise.
The impact of raiders like Carl Icahn is not limited to the companies that they seize control of. I spent almost twenty years at Motorola and the threat of an Icahn raid was an ever present shadow over the way that company was run for many of those years. Stock buy backs and ruthless cost cutting to try to satisfy these “activist” shareholders led directly to the demise of that once great American company. If you survey the landscape of American corporations today you will find a dominant group think around cost cutting and off-shoring that is a direct consequence of this fixation on stock price rather than stock value and a total lack of concern about workers and the communities that have allowed those corporations to grow and become successful.
Greed of a few is what is killing the average American. Greed in corporations, Greed in healthcare and a Greed based economy! Mutualist Capitalism is the way to go. A healthy economy based on profit sharing and prosperity for all. Sadly, these greed driven profiteers have their champion in tfg. TFG should never been allowed into power as his business interests were always going to be in conflict with his ability to do his job as president. He is the Greedmaster in Chief! Driven not by helping all prosper but just a few and himself to prosper! Thanks Robert for an enlightening article shedding light on yet another greedy capitalist!
Bravo! This is a story that needs telling in detail. Working people have lost most of their pensions as a result of the Private Equity firms. That's the tip of the iceberg. Donald Trump uses misdirection on this point. He blames illegal aliens for what the Private Equity firms have done to our economy. While people are worried about border security, Private Equity firms buy their local hospitals. They either close the hospital or raise prices, depending on which makes more money for the General Partners. Meanwhile, they lay off nurses. Patient care deteriorates, but all Fox News reports is border security. Donald Trump claims that his tariffs will cause people to build factories in the United States. Who are these mystery people? Not the Private Equity firms, they have either destroyed U.S. jobs or exported them. This is like when Donald Trump claimed that Covid would go away, and instead it killed 1.2 million Americans. Changing the subject, one way the so-called mainstream media is helping Donald Trump is giving air time to Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is a great American, but people hate her. The more they see her, the more they vote against Kamala Harris.
Professor Reich, I had never heard of Carl Icahan until I read this article. What an absolutely evil man! I wholeheartedly agree that for Americans' sake we must return to Stakeholder Capitalism. These 'corporate raiders' are as much to blame for the problems middle Americans are facing as much as anything else. I have preached and preached to my conservative friends about Stakeholder Capitalism vs Shareholder Capitalism and can finally see some light shining through. I intend to discuss this Carl Icahan as another reason we need to return to Stakeholder Capitalism if we want our country to improve. Vote blue, America, up and down the ballot!
Trump maga are unaware that the man they are supporting will be the same person that takes their job away and puts them in the poor house - greed does kill - Trump and his kind like Icahn are only about greed - they don’t care how many lives on earth they ruin - but there will be a reckoning soon.