Your argument is flawless. But it's wasted on the Stephen Moore economists, the intellectual morons who spend their lives justifying why they have theirs and the rest have nothing. Galbreath: "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
The legal fiction is that there is a willing buyer and seller for wages on both ends, when for the most part, bargaining for a job is a normally one way, take it or leave it proposition.
They justify inequality based on flawed concepts like "trickle down" that are taught as "laws" in business schools, relying on the "Wealth of Nations" as their bible. In reality the basis was Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Moral_Sentiments
In essence, Smith asked "what is fair?"
Sociologists, rather than economists, evaluate comparative, historical, and contemporary case studies to explore changes in the ways in which American workers get paid. Of course, most of the results are random, and averaging is inaccurate, but in the end the test is what will the market bear?
In litigation, economists, not sociologists, are asked to estimate the future value of an individual worker. A common way to calculate an employee's worth to a company, is to divide the firm's net income by the number of employees. But individuals can add value. Increase skills. Move to a better market. Get a good job coach.
When I was young my innocent fledgling mind entertained numerous questions the one that puzzled me the most was why do I need to "attend school?" Both my mother and my father had college educations, my Dad was the president of a building corporation which he attributed in part to his educational background. Pop constantly reinforced the idea, in order to be successful in this world you have to make yourself a desirable commodity. I needed the sheep's skin! When I was little I needed that explained to me as well, he meant a college diploma. Without a degree or special skill, I was doomed to sweep floors for a living. His theory being, you get paid in life "what your worth" so make yourself "a valuable commodity." Now I don't know how right he was in his understanding of our society but he never abandoned his position on the importance of a good education, which I struggled with but obtained.
The difference in education and skills is important; but the point Reich is making, does it justify the Extreme inequality this rigged system is producing? No. The least skilled dimwit deserves to live a life that is not miserable squalor. Even if left to his own foolishness might choose that for himself.
Stan--I understand what Robert is getting at but the reality of the situation offers little in the way of finding economic equality for anyone. There will always be those unfortunate members of our population that fall through the cracks. That's why there are quality control inspectors in our factories, nothing is perfect. The system isn't rigged it's just imperfect. Unless you are in favor of adopting a entirely new form of society the one we currently have will have to do. Look at the sperm and the egg scenario. The best always gets the goods. In life it is our job to make ourselves into the best representation of who we desire to be and just maybe that will help us find a better life style. The dimwit your referring to that fell through the cracks, in a healthy society, the rest of us would throw him a life line to a better way of living. What part does greed play in defeating that goal? Ask a wealthy Republican.
What do you think about tax cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy like the carried interest loophole? Who do you think influences and writes the tax laws? What if it’s the same people who receive outsize benefits. Is that a form of “rigging”? What if there’s enough for everyone and extreme poverty is a political choice?
Pet--you speak to me as if you thought I was a wealthy Republican. I live on a fixed income and there isn't a tooth in my mouth. My home is 950 square feet and my economic situation doesn't allow me to own a car. I'm fully aware the wealthy Republicans get all the breaks and the rest of us basically do with out in one form or another. I accept my life for what it is and I don't complain about what "I've" created. You couldn't pay me to be rich, my family had 5 millionaire at one point and I wanted nothing to do with their way of life. Greed, mistrust, and envy are elements this chemist wants no part of in his periodic chart. In the industry there are substances known as "semi-metals" Republicans have a classification called "semi-humans."
Extreme poverty for others unless you are an ascetic which is a very bad choice in the USA because you will be othered right out of existence and buried in a paupers grave with utter disregard.
Not a question. Of course, it's a political choice--mainly since Raygunomics in 1980s started US on the path to inequality never worse than it is today.
I appreciate your perspective and admire your choice to turn away from family millions. I do believe, however, we can accept reality (and the harm the present economic hierarchy has done to its own citizens) and begin working on change. It may take two generations but we can at least begin now.
It's rigged. The quality of your education is largely based on where you are born and to whom you are born. Education relates to opportunity. If you're born into poverty in an area with poor schools it is likely you will live in poverty and so will your children. Those aren't cracks; those are gaping holes in our society. I often think of our society in terms of a small town. If we were a small town would we really tolerate such extreme inequality? Homelessness? Poverty? But we allow it and keep in place the policies that perpetuate it and encourage it. That's rigged.
Stanley--There are 107 all black colleges in this country, not a terrific amount but there is access to those who want a better education and life afterwards. The rigging is of no one's design it more like the attitude of giving up that persists. For those with real dreams there are avenues to follow that will precipitate a better way of life, all that is needed is effort. I agree that poverty is endemic to given areas and to break away takes real determination and perseverance, but it is possible not impossible.
I don’t think it has to be that way. Most of us don’t want to be millionaires. But I think we all should have access to healthcare, dental care, a safe living environment, food and affordable utilities. That is not impossible but requires change. Sounds like you are resigned. I haven’t gotten there yet.
Please site Title, Chapter, Verse of any publication that defines the SUPERIOR differences of the SPERM that "gets in" from all the others from the same source . . . that moment.
Louis--There is no best when it comes to sperm. Sperm that might suffer from a deformity which would impede their overall progress during the swim, naturally would be left from the culmination. My statement about the little guys was meant in fun.
Donald, I am not sure the "best" sperm gets the egg. It may be the fastest, or maybe not. It may be the strongest, but maybe not. It may just be luck, or maybe not. I think luck has so much to do with how things turn out in life, luck and whether or not a person is able to take advantage of opportunities, whether a person's home life is supportive and not chaotic, whether a person's brain can handle certain kinds of material while in school that comes easily to others, whether generational poverty is a factor. I don't know how to correct for these things, but it would help if rich folks could understand that part of their wealth is skill and ability but a whole lot is luck and being in the right place at the right time and being exposed to positives during childhood. Generational money or access is pretty important too.
Donald, If the 'sperm and the egg scenario. The best always gets the goods" you describe were true, we'd all be perfect specimens. The truth is there is one egg (a result of the random mixture of the females genes spread over 26 hormones) and a few hundred sperm (resulting from the same process). The first sperm to randomly penetrate the egg becomes the "father" and the offspring is pure chance.
Fay=- Now that you have regurgitated Biology 101, we already knew that, my reference was meant to apply a bit of humor to a rather disheartening subject. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
Condemning those "dimwits" to a life of squalor says more about us than it does about them. Fact is, Corporate America is a predator society, and it takes advantage of the weak and vulnerable. It's morally justifiable to them, because they're just "lazy" and "lack ambition." Such is the nature of predators . . .
The alternative track would be to treat these folk with compassion, by trying to understand their lack of motivation or inability to function in society. That doesn't mean "bleeding heart" indulgence -- it means meeting them where they live, considering what obstacles they face in functioning, and designing a program with them in mind. It doesn't mean not having strict standards for performance per aid given, but it does mean tolerance and patience. "There but for the grace go we . . ."
Predator capitalism isn't in the business of compassion.
The CEO of McDonalds makes $17 million. The President of the United States earns $400,000. One makes hamburgers where the other has the wellbeing and security of the US and thus the world in his hands.
Mary Boudreau ; I am being facetious, with a grain of truth. If that is what a person grew up with as an occasional treat, It's not a surprise that some people eat it, and may even enjoy it, especially if they live in a 'food desert' where good quality food is non existent.
In other words - it’s poison. But then there is the place they have where they shelter the sick children - why are they sick? Maybe they ate too much junk food. Whether they did or not I see it as a way of looking good despite their criminal feed. I had a roommate long ago who had a child about 8 - every night the exhausted mom and child came home with a meal from McDonalds - most of which the kid did not eat. The food looked like garbage to me and the kid was not learning in school. She was about a C student and she was very unhappy and was barely learning to read - I would guess a C student. There was no visible father that I could see. The girl was so unhappy.
It would be a wonderful country if we all could afford healthy food. Especially if they didn’t have to prepare it after a hard day at work and children and housework, etc to attend to. People do the best they can considering their circumstances.
I would rather make my own cheeseburger. But McDonalds is cheaper. What budget item can I cut when I need to? Food. At some point you get so low that the things that were once important are just out of reach.
Hale--If that was the sace why do people buy it? We live in a capitalistic society, there will always be disparaging levels of inequality, it goes with the territory. It's that very aspect of our society that give so many the drive to better themselves. The alternative, sit back and expect everything to be given to us in a hat.
An UNREGULATED capitalistic society is what we live in now, where everyone with money, does what they want - even if society suffers because of that act.. I'm old enough to know what life used to be back in the '60.. And THIS ain't it!
Don't you think we live in a REGULATED capitalistic society where the wealthy elite do the regulating via their control of so many institutions, including much of government? My humble opinion, of course! I agree this isn't the what life used to be back in 60s.
George--I spent my entire teenage years in the 60s and I hear ya, but it's the nature of the beast. When you live with lions you have to eat or be eaten.
No human deserves to make 17 million bucks a year. That is not inspiring. It pisses off the Good Humor Man! Might be a bit different if they paid a fair share of taxes.
McDonald's is tasking your money because their workers are subsidized by tax dollars. Wages are so low, the employees have to depend on food stamps to get by.
Mike--Those same employees accepted their jobs knowing full well the wages they would be making. Part time jobs meant for people that just want to make a few extra bucks wasn't meant to support anyone. Get an education and find a better job.
Unfortunately not everyone is capable of going to college. And it’s a good thing because there are a lot of jobs providing necessary services that for which no college education is necessary. Why not value everyone for their skills and pay them at least a living wage. Automobile mechanics, sanitation workers, food service workers, receptionists, nursing home aids, etc all provide a valuable service. If you want the best you need to pay them for their skills. The best scenario is people doing jobs they are skilled at, and can make a living doing. This may not be possible but there would be a lot less grumpy people in this country if we did. Next time you get a help desk that isn’t at all helpful, ask yourself is this person skilled, and if they were wouldn’t it be worth paying them more?
People with these necessary skills for a civil society used to be paid a living wage and were respected and valued. I am not sure when plumbers, electricians, painters, builders, etc lost that respect and became viewed as a crack showing but of a joke, or when people working in stores, janitors, and care givers became seen as somehow less deserving, or when teachers, nurses, police officers, social workers all were expected to live on the joy of caring for society. None of us can function without all of these people, many jobs. I have not mentioned, but they are all vital and provide value to society. Any CEO making more than 20 times what his employees make is a person playing baby king, a self imposed privilege that has not been earned or deserved. We cannot accept that this is just the way it is now. It wasn’t in our past, and it must not be accepted in our future. People deserve to be paid a living wage and have their work appreciated and valued. We must vote out these fascists, these people who believe they have the right to get there bizarre needs met at others expense.
Betty--No matter what the job if you can't do the best you can don't do it. Some jobs just weren't meant to be fundamentally supportive. They are defined as temporary in nature and don't warrant a living wage which is a term that is over used. By forcing all jobs to promote a living wage you would be drive the prices of goods sky high, when a job is excepted the wage is known and agreed upon, no one is twisting their arm. If they feel the wage is too low negotiate or look somewhere else.
If you take the CEO and upper administrative salaries back down to a moral level of no more than 20 times their employees, then you could pay them a living wage . Since 1978 the average CEO salary has increased by 1478%. Add in all their tax advantages, weakening of antitrust laws, and stock buybacks, and you see where the money has gone. They have not put it back into the business or employee benefits. Don’t let them fool you, they have been stealing from the middle class/poor and giving it to the rich for the past 30+ years
Linda--I hear what your saying and I agree, some of those guys make way too much money for what they're doing but can we really try to control how much certain people make as opposed to others and still consider ourselves a free economy?
Donald, I am sorry your college experience was less than great. I do think a college education can prepare one for work, particularly work that requires special skills and supervised experiences, but many people don't go to college and also get excellent training and supervised practice. Which worker would be more valuable, I guess it depends on the job. Some have been rating value based on college education and its various levels. College graduates do need sufficient salary to repay loans for that education as does anyone who attended extra education for a craft, trade, or other job preparation. In any case, no workers in this country working full time should be unable to support themselves and their families. Employers know what that level is in any community. They know they have to pay sufficient wages/salaries, but often tell themselves that a particular worker isn't all that valuable, so a low salary is OK. (SNAP can help them out, right)? Well, it isn't OK!
Ruth--The whole thing is a mess, too many questions not enough answers. I loved my college years, it's just that being dyslexic made me work harder than most to get on the Deans List. I worked for a Mom and Pop business that had trouble making payroll at times and I was making 2.25 an hour. Force them into a minimum wage situation and their lively hood would have gone under. Some jobe aren't meant as positions that will ever support a family. I had 3 jobs when my kids were young just to make ends meet, I never complained I just did what I needed to do to raise a family. My economic position today, good or bad, is the result of my own making, if I was to gripe it would be to myself.
Donald, it must have been challenging to attend college with a learning difference, especially at a time when that was not exactly appreciated by many on campus. Most of us started small as you did and I hope the people you worked for appreciated that you understood their plight even though it kept you struggling. It does sound as though you have had an interesting life, facing significant challenges and overcoming. I hope your kids picked up on the "can-do" approach to life that you demonstrated. Yes, things are in a mess but I do think with some real effort we can make things better. Maybe part of it is helping people know when they have "enough," whatever that is for them. I know the very rich will never have enough and those under them probably won't either (that's where the tax code can help), but the rest of us who are not in real poverty can make something work if we worry less about the rainy days and enjoy the bright days when we have them, and we do have a lot of them. Then we need to keep Trump and Kump and the rest of the Republican party out of the presidency and out of majorities in congress and state legislatures. They do not govern, they screw things up for the benefit of someone, but it isn't exactly clear what they get out of it. Maybe it is just Baby Donnie they are bowing and scraping to. How pathetic to support a child-man who is experiencing dementia. We can do better if we have the will.
Ruth--Growing up Dyslexia was an unknown disorder. Not only did they not know what it was they didn't understand how to help those afflicted with it. For my part it just made things more interesting. However, my problems pale in comparison to that of this country's. A sickness has permeated our political system, the Republican party has developed a disease, one that even a good dose of an unknown antibiotic would help cure. Trump is a problem which this country has never seen before. The MAGA crowd has skin so thick the needle of the syringe won't pierce its surface and they don't seem to be in the mood to take an oral suspension. You can fix ignorance but stupid you're stuck with.
Our culture puts a premium on work and most intensively on income as a human being's "worth". Capitalism conditions us all in this manner. The same proponents of Capitalism tend to also be fervent, fundamentalist "Christians" without living by the values Christ Himself tried to teach us: that material wealth is NOT what "counts" in the end. Education is important - but there are many forms. Education around the real purpose of life and of spiritual reality is too often lacking in our culture. We tend to take whatever we purport to value and pervert it into dollar amounts (see Joel Osteen's "prosperity gospel": what a hypocritical oxymoron. It flies in the face of Christ's own values).
Also - we're too complacent as a nation in terms of directing our own consequences via voting. Less than half of the voting eligible public in the USA bothers to vote. In Australia - where voting is mandatory by law (or heavy fines are paid) they have about the safest gun violence record in the World and universal health care, and I THINK government sponsored higher education.
I have a book who cooked Adam smith’s dinner?. Too much unpaid labor is discounted. It was his Mama and she even moved to London from Scotland with him.
Daniel, it does seem the lottery would be a better predicter of a person's worth to many companies. I like the idea of dividing the company's value by the number of employees, then pay each a significant portion of that. Of course some have more skill or personal presence, but does that actually make them of more value at all times? What is fair? When someone asks that, it sounds as though they are talking about a kids' game rather than one's income for work done.
But it was always thus. The reason for the modern inflation of CEO pay is that the system for payment has changed. CEOs are now largely paid with corporate stock, which doesn't cost the corporation anything until the stock is sold. Even then, such selling may not affect the valuation of the corporation.
In other words, CEOs are no longer paid with cash bonuses, but with stock. This means that, under present rules, there is no tax to pay. Even when these stocks are sold, there is a very low rate of income tax. So Jeff Bezos awards himself a salary of $80,000 per year, which is taxed at a much lower rate than my assistant's similar income.
It's ridiculous.
Solution:
1. A wealth tax.
2. Tax actual hard income at the usual rate that applies to "We, the Peasants."
We have stop pretending that We the People run the country. It was never thus. If it were we would have your Wealth Tax like we had in the 50s. It was close to 90% as I recall and it wasnt all handed off to defense contractors.
I believe it was we the people who elected lawmakers to make it so at that time. For the past few decades,,we have been fed a bunch of lies by “conservatives”. They stopped playing by the same rules, but now we know the grift for what it is, a desire for many to have this country be a fascist state like Hungry, and we can vote them out.
They KNOW how to get around taxes. We need solid laws to prevent them from escaping through " tax hoops". And they will always have the money to prevent laws that stop them,by buying them off..
To avoid the moral hazard of tax loopholes don’t elect the likes of Kristen Sinema, or Joe Mansion who calls his fully staffed yacht a “houseboat”. False humility is a bad substitute for good faith in government, but it seems to work for him. And for people like him, isn’t that what really matters? I think he sees himself as a winner in the political game.
Maybe I'm wrong, but: Makes you wonder how much looney-er they are going to get (A yacht being called a houseboat - phooey).. Of course, a corporate aggregate used to be called a venture capitalist to make it sound good. (Buying out your competition, to make one big company) Were stuck with few, non-competitive, companies.
The looney thing is that they probably think we’re pitifully helpless in the face of their shameless self aggrandizement and only wish we could be like them. They are pathetic and need to stand aside. They are not what’s best for the country as a whole. We need public servants.
Kenneth Galbreath made more sense than all the Alan Greenspans and Morris Friedmans put together. He was my hero when I studied economics in the 1960's [I did not major in economics, I just took two classes]
Should the modern conservative be engaged in a superior moral justification of selflessness? Is that left up to the religious sect's in the world and how do these differ in keeping there donors for wealth differ?
Kerry, you are so right about the need for the rich to defend their selfishness. Some "christians" have established their own version of the church following what they call, "the prosperity gospel." That "gospel" says that they are rich because god wanted them to be and they should get as much as god will give them. The rest of us aren't rich because we have been bad little boys and girls, so we just don't deserve it. That whole bit is BS, of course, but it definitely lets them sleep at night, knowing that they are resting comfortably in the arms of god. They just KNOW god will let them do whatever they want with those riches, because otherwise why would he (of course he) have given it to them. It is amazing how we humans can excuse ourselves for the most appalling behavior and explanations for why it was really OK, someone really deserved what was done to them, those people couldn't deal with having a lot of money, I'm using the money for "good," ad nauseum. Then we name buildings and all kinds of things for them. Ugh!!
Kerry, you are a master of understatement, and that is a great quote from John Kenneth Galbraith. And these days those CEOs and other members of the 1% have an awful lot of selfishness for which to seek moral justification.
The title of the post says it perfectly: it's a myth. But a clever, insidious one that offers many cherrypicked examples of "worthiness." They conveniently forget the many contradictory examples. They're just "outliers." B.S. The myth is a fraudulent, self-serving meme that wears as thin as the "bootstraps" garbage.
To those whom much is given, much is expected . . . or something like that. The turnover in CEOs is yesterday's news. The general public asks few questions about why they were fired, or why their severance packages were so generous. Maybe it's because they know where the bodies are buried?
They will never admit that they made their fortunes off the backs of those who labored for them. In the case of the financial wizard, they may have made their fortunes from the Wall St. Casino, or crypto. Such "cleverness" is not impressive to those who actually work for a damn living, instead of trying to trick the system, making money from money, etc.
As the good Dr. points out, the statistical proportions of the rewards of such "worthiness" are essentially obscene. They bear no resemblance to reality.
An interesting confirmation of this come this week, via the ocean submersible drama. I've seen very little pity for those passengers, who could afford to blow a wad of a quarter of a million on a personal experience. What good that money could have done for society, AND their personal legacy.
FDR, Kenes, H Ford, and this guy created the 1st middle class based on a demand economy. It was even called Fordism, before reagan, jack welsh, and media monopolies made employees capital assets to be liquidated. This was Eccles testimony to Congress in 1933 establishing a consumer, demand, economy that grew an average of 5.2% , vs GOP triad growing at 1.2%, hign unemployment, and leaving debt. Mixed R and D get 2.2% growth with still high unemployment. Eccles name is etched in the cornice of the Federal Reserve Bank in DC (or NY?) https://londonbanker.blogspot.com/2011/09/testimony-of-marriner-eccles-to.html
Well done Dr Reich. Trickle-down economics is as funny to me as it is gross. When one says trickle-down economics I can only think of tRrump and his buddies standing on top of Trump Tower and peeing over the edge. There are millions of people below them. I hope that's not too gross of a picture but that's the way I see it.
The other thing that correlates to this is the fact that our election funding is all private,instead of publicly funded like many other countries are,so those same rich fat cat SOBs can donate a small fortune to their preferred candidates,and thus the candidates actually only represent those highest bidders and cater to their will with lower taxes and more income through corporate welfare programs,whilst raising the taxes on lower income people,and limiting the help that can be applied for or received by said lower income people.
You're damned right this is unfair,and maybe getting publicly funded election campaigns is another way to level that playing field for all us citizens,not just rich folks.
In the early 80s Reagan tried to cut all funding for the national endowment for the arts-slashed funding for national public radio-they have struggled since. I know in Minnesota, fundraising is tough.
Reagan also emptied out the psychiatric hospitals. NIMBY saw to it inmates ended o the streets talking to voices. We still don’t care for people who can’t look after themselves.
Perhaps as governor, not president. In New York, Nelson Rockefeller emptied the state mental hospitals and the community treatment centers that were supposed to replace them never materialized. We've struggled ever since from that and for the punishing drug laws named for him. Homelessness didn't come out of the blue.
And that was not the only thing he destroyed in the Golden State. It is why it has been so difficult for CA to raise itself up again from how expensive it is to live there and do business. It was a beautiful state that had forward thinking about the climate and planet, diversity, spectacular low cost education accessible for almost everyone, affordable housing, even great public transportation until Regan became Governor and it slowly went downhill. So very sad. I still hope it can turn things around but with the many absurd SCOTUS decisions etc, the task is daunting. IMHO
The first thing he went after when he got into office was the union of radar workers at the airports. He destroyed that union and went after others. He vilified, unions. And sadly, unions started ruining things unions stand for, by getting too greedy themselves. A LOT of people died to bring us unions.
I remember it well and I wonder if young people today even have a clue about it as Reagan also began the destruction of the educational system - esp. higher education but the entire thing. The working class, with good paying union jobs had been sending their kids to college. The kids were getting wise and that created a protest movement in the 60’s and 70’s that was widespread. So now working class kids have to go into huge lifelong debt in order to get an “education”. My daughter, in her late 50’s is still paying it off and might never finish the job. She is a human rights worker.
The concept of “worth” as it relates to employment actually has two separate expressions.
One is that workers are not paid the full value of their labor: money is withheld from their weekly paychecks to fund the Social Security and Medicare payments they will begin to receive when they retire (do NOT allow any political, Republican or Democrat, to refer to these programs as “entitlements”; it is the workers’ OWN money, for whose management for their retirement they are not charged a penny by the federal government for the administration and investment of those funds!); employers who provide health insurance for their workers are also not bestowing gifts — they finance the costs of that insurance by withholding part of what the employees’ labor is actually worth to them. Whenever an employer discontinues health insurance for its workers and doesn’t then return what it had been withholding from their pay, they are STEALING from them, period.
The second expression relates to this
“Meanwhile, according to this same view, CEOs who rake in tens of millions and Wall Street traders who rake in hundreds of millions are simply being paid what they’re “worth” because that’s what the market has dictated.”
The fact is that, contrary to what everyone is always taught, our society doesn’t reward hard work, it rewards TALENT, real or merely perceived. In fact, many people, mostly in glamorous or high-profile professions — entertainment, sports, industry — are often handsomely compensated, usually under contract, merely to keep those ostensibly talented individuals out of the hands of the businesses’ competitors, even if the use and value of the individuals to the company of the first part are not immediately, or ever, apparent.
It all boils down to value to an entity, usually a business, versus value to SOCIETY. I like to say that if all the movie stars in the world suddenly disappeared, the world world surely be somewhat duller place, but life would go on. But if half the garbage collectors suddenly disappeared, we’d all be up t our necks in insects, vermin, ticks and plague, and civilization would come to an end.
We reward entertainment not talent. Just like the gladiators of the past - it appeases the masses and keeps them from asking the hard questions - or valuing the real work.
We are a government of the rich, by the rich and FOR the rich. It's simple. Oligarchs buy the elections. Oligarchs write the laws for the political puppets they install. And they do it all from the decks of their very large yachts or swimming pools at multi-million dollar palaces.
It is time for a bloodless revolution. It is time for a leader from the Democratic Party to pull a Norma Rae. Stand on a table and scream "STRIKE!". Time for Democrats to stop taking dark money. Time for them to walk picket lines. Time for them to LAND in flyover country. Time for them to take a hint from someone like Sherrod Brown.
Anyone who works hard at a full time job has a human right to decent housing, safe water, food security, health care and education for their kids. Garbage collectors and anyone else that IS the fabric of our society. All of us.
Time for a bust up of monopolies, duopolies, etc. Time for a claw back of the National Treasure stolen - the crime that started with Ronnie Raygun.
As Tom Rush says: "The problem with America is that the poor have too much money and the rich don't have enough!" /s
John D. Rockerfeller (The original oil tycoon) was asked: 'How much money would it take to satisfy you. He said: 'A little more than what I have'.. A lot of money is another addiction.
Yes. I read Titan by Ron Chernow. JDR was a brilliant and ruthless businessman. Brutal, quiet, strategic and he wrapped himself in a religious cloak. He was generous to specific people. And he ruined the lives of thousands. And he established hospitals. And he was a crook.
After reading it, I thought I had met a perfect monster.
Avie. 1. FICA is social insurance that, on average gives employees a $million policy to cover disability, orphans and widow(ers) benefits, that may cover the entire family.
2. As long as CEOS and companies pay their fair shar in taxes, we can't complain. The problem is sometimes they get tax breaks and in some cases completely avoid taxes.
2) Sure we can complain. Executive compensation is determined by corporate boards, whose members are in bed with the people they hire. There’s a lot of mutual back-scratching going on. Even the shareholders can, and should, complain as that compensation is often wildly disproportionate to the performance of the companies many of these executives run. The fact is that there are few companies whose CEOs are making tens of millions of dollars that could not be run by talented unknowns who’d be willing to do it for, oh, say, the $400,000 a year the president of the United States earns. Of course, if the unknowns do a good job and get known, they’re eventually going to start demanding the same multi-million-dollar compensation other CEOs get, or they’ll take their talents elsewhere. Is there a cure for this? Giving workers an equity stake in the companies that employ them, and seats on the board of directors would be a good place to start.
Unless you're a shareholder or a whistleblower, you probably have no standing.
IMHO government can establish that corporations have some public sense of responsibility, but the chance that this will be done is close to zero. Everything in life is a gamble. Many people do not analyze the risk reward relationship involved in most of our daily lives. I've been involved on all sides in collective bargaining. I believe in transactional analysis. I don't justify it but the reality is that with big business both parties know that they're gambling. They hire economists to analyze comparative salaries. Some win some lose.
When my high school hires a football coach, they pay on the expectation of results, not to just fill a slot.
I liked your comment, “Many people do not analyze the risk-reward relationship involved in most of our daily lives.” Too bad there will likely never be a .gov statistic to show numbers for those who did or didn’t look at where they were, are, and want to be. Avie Hern’s comment “Giving workers an equity stake in the companies that employ them, and seats on the board of directors would be a good place to start.” is, at a guess, logical to many. Still, it’s unlikely large corporations would ever do that.
Some might agree that if we as a nation would educate fifteen to eighteen-year-olds in high school on risk analysis and the basics of how inequity is created in general in America, perhaps many of those who will not be obtaining post-secondary educations would at least hypothetically have some inkling of what to expect from society, business, and the government as they start their working lives.
Scanlon plans led to unions such as the United Steelworkers at Chrysler, or at United Airlines to negotiate board representation, although usually this was forcibly linked to employee share schemes.
There are other variations, like ESOP. An employee-ownership business plan, ESOP, gives workers stock in the company as part of their compensation. Currently there are approximately 7,000 ESOP plans being used by more than 14 million employees. The largest company to adopt the business model in the U.S. is Publix Super Markets, which has over 200,000 staff. https://www.nceo.org/articles/employee-ownership-100
If the CEO’s and the large corporations paid their share of taxes or “provided the necessary services” for society, professor Reich would not have to have written this article.
Read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged and really try to understand it. Then you will be aware.
Sometimes is an understatement. Imagine if CEOs paid FICA on the worth of those stock shares they receive. We'd never have to worry about the future of Social Security or any of our other programs. Instead, we take a big hunk out of already paltry salaries, and Republicans are focused on raising the retirement age.
Sorry Daniel S., but I think they will get around that Act, somehow... I'm not optimistic. And compared to a trillion 300 billion is peanuts to me, because, you need another 700 billion to make one trillion. And it''s stretched over 10 years.
Agree with you except for one thing. SS etc are ENTITLEMENTS, BECAUSE it is their OWN money. They are ENTITLED to it, because it BELONGS to them. Who redefined the word “entitlement” to mean “something to which you are NOT entitled”? Don’t let the gaslighters do that. Reclaim the word!
You are, of course, correct linguistically, BUT politics have twisted the word to mean, in this context, the very opposite of what it’s supposed to. Republicans have demonized it and conditioned voters of every political stripe to think it’s one thing when it’s another. Rather than waste time trying to re-condition them to understand that correct definition, I think it better to simply refute Republicans’ implication that it’s welfare by another name and hammer home that it is workers’ salary, deferred. If you want to add to that refrain that it’s money they’re entitled to and let them make the connection between that word and its derivative, by all means.
I think an additional problem deserves comment; the consolidation of corporations. The mergers and acquisitions departments have managed to reduce competition to a point where there is no reason not to pay their CEOs so much. There are no markets forces dimming their desire for wealth. Healthy competition keeps prices down, and wages for employees up. Competition has diminished in our system creating the plutocracy we have now in the business world, and hence government since they buy it. At least with beer, over-consolidation provoked a successful microbrewery response, but that is nearly impossible to conceive in the defense industry.
Wayne, I agree wholeheartedly. What we need is another Teddy Roosevelt, who was a pretty good monopoly buster in his time. We also need someone to ride herd on those who approve these damnable mergers (FTC)!
Laurie, I am embarrassed to say that I don’t know if it’s underfunded or not. It’s a matter of noticing how many mergers are approved as opposed to those that are not.
In 1983 there were 50 corporations controlling the broadcast media. Now it's just 5. And all of them have corporate directors who are aching to "BUY ANOTHER YACHT"
Preach it, Brother Robert! No one, NO ONE, is worth $20,000,000 a year in pay. Or more. It’s an ugly myth that needs to die. No one does it on his own. And it’s almost always a “his” isn’t it? It’s way past time to unrig the system.
While no one is worth exorbitant salaries, options and incentives it’s also true that one of the basic criteria of capitalism is supply and demand. So called qualified CEO’s and other execs with a proven track record for generating profits are in demand, scarce as hens teeth, and they can write their own ticket because of it. Whereas, undereducated, under-skilled workers are also in demand; however, they are not scarce. Because of this they are also undervalued and not only do they not write any tickets, they pay them.
Capitalism was not designed by those who wanted to uplift society as a whole. It was designed to reward the few and tolerate the many who are the consumers. The problem that the inner corporate manipulators have, is that they are killing the middle and lower income earners who are their biggest consumers. You can’t have it both ways, but they keep on trying.
You are half way there G.P.Baltimore. True Capitalism, by itself; will devour itself. But REGULATED Capitalism was fantastic to me when I was a kid in the 1960's. The politicians were well behaved as most of the public was. And a 2 car with a 2 car garage was a reality.
thank you for this and more importantly for your work on behalf of part of my chosen family.
I do not know what you mean by "worth" or "paid" or "Myth"
I have no earned income.
The USA government, has determined that I am disabled(unable to engage in substantial work), Worse, I am increasingly unable to engage in activities of daily life, (Cook, clean, ect)
I suspect that almost everybody will before they die, become unable to engage in these activities, some for a short time some for a long time.
It suggests that you are unemployable, or that you are not profitable to some corporate greedhead, and can't be exploited. You are of great value to your friends and family. They would presume to value the lives of those they would see as usable for their own interests.
Perhaps the case for a universal basic income needs to be made on the basis that no-one should have too little, i.e. that America should not be a "Third World country with money" - as a person in the North-West of England said to me once, and with which saying, to my surprise, a relation in New York who's a US citizen agreed.
I'm saying that it will be good for America's image, both self and abroad, if no-one within her borders have too little, that America have something similar to Britain's National Health Service, and that the power of drug companies to set the highest prices in the world be regulated in some way.
Trickle-down economics is as funny to me as it is gross. When one says trickle-down economics I can only think of tRrump and his buddies standing on top of Trump Tower and peeing over the edge. There are millions of people below them. I hope that's not too gross of a picture but that's the way I see it.
Keith ; Remember when the United Nations responded to tRump when he said in a speech to that body something like " I am the best President in the history of the United States " and the whole place erupted in laughter!?
Think of MTG, Jim Jordan, Cruz, etc. when you read this and particularly notice the AVERAGE nearly FOUR MILLION DOLLAR AVERAGE ALLOWANCE! And they want to postpone social security & fight against raising the Debt Ceiling???:
“Most senators and representatives make an annual salary of $174,000. Those in leadership make a bit more. For example, the speaker of the House makes $223,500 and majority and minority leaders in the House and Senate make $193,400. Congressmen earn this annual salary for the duration of their terms. Senators serve six-year terms, while members of the House serve for two years. There are no term limits on either part of Congress.”
“Members also get allowances to pay their staff and cover office and travel expenses. Senators’ average allowance recently was $3,738,775, while representatives’ was $1,382,139. Congressmen are also able to deduct $3,000 a year for the living expenses they accrue while they’re away from their home states or congressional districts.”
“ Members also get allowances to pay their staff and cover office and travel expenses. Senators’ average allowance recently was $3,738,775, while representatives’ was $1,382,139. Congressmen are also able to deduct $3,000 a year for the living expenses they accrue while they’re away from their home states or congressional districts.”
To put it simply this is class warfare. The intent is to keep the average persons pointing fingers at each other, and being distracted by the voluminous propaganda and media nonsense. The pot is boiling over. The tremendous wealth inequality begs for an immediate program of forgiveness of debts, and redistribution of the wealth, along with livable wages and governmental programs of universal health care and aid to those most in need. We all need to cut waste and halt the insatiable appetite for more nonsense stuff.
Unregulated capitalism is destroying our world. Let’s start by throwing the lobbyists out of the halls of our government. We need to stop the unending wars and reinvest that energy into making the world healthier.
Michael, I call it predation. How do you out smart and tame the tigers? They would like it to be warfare because they control the field and the resources. George W. Bush once sniped at a question of an economic nature (I don’t remember the question because his response was so nakedly condescending). He said, “You want class warfare? Go ahead. We’ll win!” He was saying the quiet part out loud. The Royal we right out in the open like a big swinging dick.
If they could dispense with people and use AI they would. That’s what makes AI so dangerous, human spite and blind ambition.
A long time ago, I heard some quotes from Henry Ford II. I can't remember them verbatim, but it went something like this. Henry Ford II was asked how much he made and he stated the amount. Someone asked him, "What makes you think you are worth $XXX?" He said, "I didn't say I was worth it, I said that is how much I got." An interesting kind of honesty.
Agreed! This schemed wage & income inequality needs to cease. I am a member of the fortunate. I have social security, state pension and IRA sources for my retirement income. I believe the wealthier of us Americans should be taxed fairly and at a much higher rate than over the past 40 plus years.
As I said, Republicans are fighting to stop adding 80,000 people to work at the Overwhelmed IRS. Biden knows that it will bring money in from those Billionaires and people cheating on their income taxes! Of course Republicans are going to bargain with giving money to Ukraine and this bill to add people to work for the IRS! CLEAR AS A BELL!
Your argument is flawless. But it's wasted on the Stephen Moore economists, the intellectual morons who spend their lives justifying why they have theirs and the rest have nothing. Galbreath: "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
The legal fiction is that there is a willing buyer and seller for wages on both ends, when for the most part, bargaining for a job is a normally one way, take it or leave it proposition.
They justify inequality based on flawed concepts like "trickle down" that are taught as "laws" in business schools, relying on the "Wealth of Nations" as their bible. In reality the basis was Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Moral_Sentiments
In essence, Smith asked "what is fair?"
Sociologists, rather than economists, evaluate comparative, historical, and contemporary case studies to explore changes in the ways in which American workers get paid. Of course, most of the results are random, and averaging is inaccurate, but in the end the test is what will the market bear?
In litigation, economists, not sociologists, are asked to estimate the future value of an individual worker. A common way to calculate an employee's worth to a company, is to divide the firm's net income by the number of employees. But individuals can add value. Increase skills. Move to a better market. Get a good job coach.
In my case, I play the lottery.
When I was young my innocent fledgling mind entertained numerous questions the one that puzzled me the most was why do I need to "attend school?" Both my mother and my father had college educations, my Dad was the president of a building corporation which he attributed in part to his educational background. Pop constantly reinforced the idea, in order to be successful in this world you have to make yourself a desirable commodity. I needed the sheep's skin! When I was little I needed that explained to me as well, he meant a college diploma. Without a degree or special skill, I was doomed to sweep floors for a living. His theory being, you get paid in life "what your worth" so make yourself "a valuable commodity." Now I don't know how right he was in his understanding of our society but he never abandoned his position on the importance of a good education, which I struggled with but obtained.
The difference in education and skills is important; but the point Reich is making, does it justify the Extreme inequality this rigged system is producing? No. The least skilled dimwit deserves to live a life that is not miserable squalor. Even if left to his own foolishness might choose that for himself.
Stan--I understand what Robert is getting at but the reality of the situation offers little in the way of finding economic equality for anyone. There will always be those unfortunate members of our population that fall through the cracks. That's why there are quality control inspectors in our factories, nothing is perfect. The system isn't rigged it's just imperfect. Unless you are in favor of adopting a entirely new form of society the one we currently have will have to do. Look at the sperm and the egg scenario. The best always gets the goods. In life it is our job to make ourselves into the best representation of who we desire to be and just maybe that will help us find a better life style. The dimwit your referring to that fell through the cracks, in a healthy society, the rest of us would throw him a life line to a better way of living. What part does greed play in defeating that goal? Ask a wealthy Republican.
What do you think about tax cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy like the carried interest loophole? Who do you think influences and writes the tax laws? What if it’s the same people who receive outsize benefits. Is that a form of “rigging”? What if there’s enough for everyone and extreme poverty is a political choice?
Exactly. And it is not even a "what if". Our system is flawed because it is rigged.
Pet--you speak to me as if you thought I was a wealthy Republican. I live on a fixed income and there isn't a tooth in my mouth. My home is 950 square feet and my economic situation doesn't allow me to own a car. I'm fully aware the wealthy Republicans get all the breaks and the rest of us basically do with out in one form or another. I accept my life for what it is and I don't complain about what "I've" created. You couldn't pay me to be rich, my family had 5 millionaire at one point and I wanted nothing to do with their way of life. Greed, mistrust, and envy are elements this chemist wants no part of in his periodic chart. In the industry there are substances known as "semi-metals" Republicans have a classification called "semi-humans."
Extreme poverty for others unless you are an ascetic which is a very bad choice in the USA because you will be othered right out of existence and buried in a paupers grave with utter disregard.
Not a question. Of course, it's a political choice--mainly since Raygunomics in 1980s started US on the path to inequality never worse than it is today.
I appreciate your perspective and admire your choice to turn away from family millions. I do believe, however, we can accept reality (and the harm the present economic hierarchy has done to its own citizens) and begin working on change. It may take two generations but we can at least begin now.
Maureen--If I had a hammer (PP&M) I'd help drive the first spike.
It's rigged. The quality of your education is largely based on where you are born and to whom you are born. Education relates to opportunity. If you're born into poverty in an area with poor schools it is likely you will live in poverty and so will your children. Those aren't cracks; those are gaping holes in our society. I often think of our society in terms of a small town. If we were a small town would we really tolerate such extreme inequality? Homelessness? Poverty? But we allow it and keep in place the policies that perpetuate it and encourage it. That's rigged.
This is precisely the systemic nature of reality which the far right wing either can not fathom and / or refuses to fathom.
Stanley--There are 107 all black colleges in this country, not a terrific amount but there is access to those who want a better education and life afterwards. The rigging is of no one's design it more like the attitude of giving up that persists. For those with real dreams there are avenues to follow that will precipitate a better way of life, all that is needed is effort. I agree that poverty is endemic to given areas and to break away takes real determination and perseverance, but it is possible not impossible.
I don’t think it has to be that way. Most of us don’t want to be millionaires. But I think we all should have access to healthcare, dental care, a safe living environment, food and affordable utilities. That is not impossible but requires change. Sounds like you are resigned. I haven’t gotten there yet.
Betty--Oh I'm there, I just can't see how it will ever happen with the Republican frame of mind in control.
You could have this but Americans dislike socialism in any form.
Please site Title, Chapter, Verse of any publication that defines the SUPERIOR differences of the SPERM that "gets in" from all the others from the same source . . . that moment.
Louis--There is no best when it comes to sperm. Sperm that might suffer from a deformity which would impede their overall progress during the swim, naturally would be left from the culmination. My statement about the little guys was meant in fun.
Donald, I am not sure the "best" sperm gets the egg. It may be the fastest, or maybe not. It may be the strongest, but maybe not. It may just be luck, or maybe not. I think luck has so much to do with how things turn out in life, luck and whether or not a person is able to take advantage of opportunities, whether a person's home life is supportive and not chaotic, whether a person's brain can handle certain kinds of material while in school that comes easily to others, whether generational poverty is a factor. I don't know how to correct for these things, but it would help if rich folks could understand that part of their wealth is skill and ability but a whole lot is luck and being in the right place at the right time and being exposed to positives during childhood. Generational money or access is pretty important too.
Ruth--Sperm is sperm, the one that gets there first gets the prize. The rest you seem to have a good grasp of.
Donald, If the 'sperm and the egg scenario. The best always gets the goods" you describe were true, we'd all be perfect specimens. The truth is there is one egg (a result of the random mixture of the females genes spread over 26 hormones) and a few hundred sperm (resulting from the same process). The first sperm to randomly penetrate the egg becomes the "father" and the offspring is pure chance.
Fay=- Now that you have regurgitated Biology 101, we already knew that, my reference was meant to apply a bit of humor to a rather disheartening subject. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
If you "ve been down long enough, it can look like up, because you really don't know the difference!
Exactly! Not to mention that some of the lowest paying jobs are hard, so who really deserves higher pay?
Condemning those "dimwits" to a life of squalor says more about us than it does about them. Fact is, Corporate America is a predator society, and it takes advantage of the weak and vulnerable. It's morally justifiable to them, because they're just "lazy" and "lack ambition." Such is the nature of predators . . .
The alternative track would be to treat these folk with compassion, by trying to understand their lack of motivation or inability to function in society. That doesn't mean "bleeding heart" indulgence -- it means meeting them where they live, considering what obstacles they face in functioning, and designing a program with them in mind. It doesn't mean not having strict standards for performance per aid given, but it does mean tolerance and patience. "There but for the grace go we . . ."
Predator capitalism isn't in the business of compassion.
The CEO of McDonalds makes $17 million. The President of the United States earns $400,000. One makes hamburgers where the other has the wellbeing and security of the US and thus the world in his hands.
By the way McDonalds food is crap!
It isn’t even food
Mary Boudreau ; I am being facetious, with a grain of truth. If that is what a person grew up with as an occasional treat, It's not a surprise that some people eat it, and may even enjoy it, especially if they live in a 'food desert' where good quality food is non existent.
In other words - it’s poison. But then there is the place they have where they shelter the sick children - why are they sick? Maybe they ate too much junk food. Whether they did or not I see it as a way of looking good despite their criminal feed. I had a roommate long ago who had a child about 8 - every night the exhausted mom and child came home with a meal from McDonalds - most of which the kid did not eat. The food looked like garbage to me and the kid was not learning in school. She was about a C student and she was very unhappy and was barely learning to read - I would guess a C student. There was no visible father that I could see. The girl was so unhappy.
The mother was most likely unhappy too. Sounds like she was overworked and underpaid, like so many working class working moms. Very sad!
It would be a wonderful country if we all could afford healthy food. Especially if they didn’t have to prepare it after a hard day at work and children and housework, etc to attend to. People do the best they can considering their circumstances.
Hale Irwin-VT; Rat Mac's is great if you are hungry enough!
I would rather make my own cheeseburger. But McDonalds is cheaper. What budget item can I cut when I need to? Food. At some point you get so low that the things that were once important are just out of reach.
I have found that fresh organic vegetables and high quality eggs and meats are cheaper than packaged foods and easier to prepare.
The CEO doesn't even make hamburgers! He just lives off the labor of those who do.
Hale, Good reference!
Hale--If that was the sace why do people buy it? We live in a capitalistic society, there will always be disparaging levels of inequality, it goes with the territory. It's that very aspect of our society that give so many the drive to better themselves. The alternative, sit back and expect everything to be given to us in a hat.
An UNREGULATED capitalistic society is what we live in now, where everyone with money, does what they want - even if society suffers because of that act.. I'm old enough to know what life used to be back in the '60.. And THIS ain't it!
Don't you think we live in a REGULATED capitalistic society where the wealthy elite do the regulating via their control of so many institutions, including much of government? My humble opinion, of course! I agree this isn't the what life used to be back in 60s.
George--I spent my entire teenage years in the 60s and I hear ya, but it's the nature of the beast. When you live with lions you have to eat or be eaten.
No human deserves to make 17 million bucks a year. That is not inspiring. It pisses off the Good Humor Man! Might be a bit different if they paid a fair share of taxes.
Hale--I totally agree.
McDonald's is tasking your money because their workers are subsidized by tax dollars. Wages are so low, the employees have to depend on food stamps to get by.
Mike--Those same employees accepted their jobs knowing full well the wages they would be making. Part time jobs meant for people that just want to make a few extra bucks wasn't meant to support anyone. Get an education and find a better job.
Oh! my! Either / or…a lot like both/ and.
…Creative thinking and, sometimes, change for the better, moves beyond either/or and both/and…
Dorothy--You sound like you have a lot to say, spill it.
Not my experience. At all. Do you have facts to back that up? Or did you just buy it hook, line and sinker.
Betty-- I love to fish but I rarely take the bait myself. What are you referring to?
Unfortunately not everyone is capable of going to college. And it’s a good thing because there are a lot of jobs providing necessary services that for which no college education is necessary. Why not value everyone for their skills and pay them at least a living wage. Automobile mechanics, sanitation workers, food service workers, receptionists, nursing home aids, etc all provide a valuable service. If you want the best you need to pay them for their skills. The best scenario is people doing jobs they are skilled at, and can make a living doing. This may not be possible but there would be a lot less grumpy people in this country if we did. Next time you get a help desk that isn’t at all helpful, ask yourself is this person skilled, and if they were wouldn’t it be worth paying them more?
People with these necessary skills for a civil society used to be paid a living wage and were respected and valued. I am not sure when plumbers, electricians, painters, builders, etc lost that respect and became viewed as a crack showing but of a joke, or when people working in stores, janitors, and care givers became seen as somehow less deserving, or when teachers, nurses, police officers, social workers all were expected to live on the joy of caring for society. None of us can function without all of these people, many jobs. I have not mentioned, but they are all vital and provide value to society. Any CEO making more than 20 times what his employees make is a person playing baby king, a self imposed privilege that has not been earned or deserved. We cannot accept that this is just the way it is now. It wasn’t in our past, and it must not be accepted in our future. People deserve to be paid a living wage and have their work appreciated and valued. We must vote out these fascists, these people who believe they have the right to get there bizarre needs met at others expense.
Well said!
Betty--No matter what the job if you can't do the best you can don't do it. Some jobs just weren't meant to be fundamentally supportive. They are defined as temporary in nature and don't warrant a living wage which is a term that is over used. By forcing all jobs to promote a living wage you would be drive the prices of goods sky high, when a job is excepted the wage is known and agreed upon, no one is twisting their arm. If they feel the wage is too low negotiate or look somewhere else.
If you take the CEO and upper administrative salaries back down to a moral level of no more than 20 times their employees, then you could pay them a living wage . Since 1978 the average CEO salary has increased by 1478%. Add in all their tax advantages, weakening of antitrust laws, and stock buybacks, and you see where the money has gone. They have not put it back into the business or employee benefits. Don’t let them fool you, they have been stealing from the middle class/poor and giving it to the rich for the past 30+ years
Linda--I hear what your saying and I agree, some of those guys make way too much money for what they're doing but can we really try to control how much certain people make as opposed to others and still consider ourselves a free economy?
Donald, I am sorry your college experience was less than great. I do think a college education can prepare one for work, particularly work that requires special skills and supervised experiences, but many people don't go to college and also get excellent training and supervised practice. Which worker would be more valuable, I guess it depends on the job. Some have been rating value based on college education and its various levels. College graduates do need sufficient salary to repay loans for that education as does anyone who attended extra education for a craft, trade, or other job preparation. In any case, no workers in this country working full time should be unable to support themselves and their families. Employers know what that level is in any community. They know they have to pay sufficient wages/salaries, but often tell themselves that a particular worker isn't all that valuable, so a low salary is OK. (SNAP can help them out, right)? Well, it isn't OK!
Ruth--The whole thing is a mess, too many questions not enough answers. I loved my college years, it's just that being dyslexic made me work harder than most to get on the Deans List. I worked for a Mom and Pop business that had trouble making payroll at times and I was making 2.25 an hour. Force them into a minimum wage situation and their lively hood would have gone under. Some jobe aren't meant as positions that will ever support a family. I had 3 jobs when my kids were young just to make ends meet, I never complained I just did what I needed to do to raise a family. My economic position today, good or bad, is the result of my own making, if I was to gripe it would be to myself.
Donald, it must have been challenging to attend college with a learning difference, especially at a time when that was not exactly appreciated by many on campus. Most of us started small as you did and I hope the people you worked for appreciated that you understood their plight even though it kept you struggling. It does sound as though you have had an interesting life, facing significant challenges and overcoming. I hope your kids picked up on the "can-do" approach to life that you demonstrated. Yes, things are in a mess but I do think with some real effort we can make things better. Maybe part of it is helping people know when they have "enough," whatever that is for them. I know the very rich will never have enough and those under them probably won't either (that's where the tax code can help), but the rest of us who are not in real poverty can make something work if we worry less about the rainy days and enjoy the bright days when we have them, and we do have a lot of them. Then we need to keep Trump and Kump and the rest of the Republican party out of the presidency and out of majorities in congress and state legislatures. They do not govern, they screw things up for the benefit of someone, but it isn't exactly clear what they get out of it. Maybe it is just Baby Donnie they are bowing and scraping to. How pathetic to support a child-man who is experiencing dementia. We can do better if we have the will.
Ruth--Growing up Dyslexia was an unknown disorder. Not only did they not know what it was they didn't understand how to help those afflicted with it. For my part it just made things more interesting. However, my problems pale in comparison to that of this country's. A sickness has permeated our political system, the Republican party has developed a disease, one that even a good dose of an unknown antibiotic would help cure. Trump is a problem which this country has never seen before. The MAGA crowd has skin so thick the needle of the syringe won't pierce its surface and they don't seem to be in the mood to take an oral suspension. You can fix ignorance but stupid you're stuck with.
Our culture puts a premium on work and most intensively on income as a human being's "worth". Capitalism conditions us all in this manner. The same proponents of Capitalism tend to also be fervent, fundamentalist "Christians" without living by the values Christ Himself tried to teach us: that material wealth is NOT what "counts" in the end. Education is important - but there are many forms. Education around the real purpose of life and of spiritual reality is too often lacking in our culture. We tend to take whatever we purport to value and pervert it into dollar amounts (see Joel Osteen's "prosperity gospel": what a hypocritical oxymoron. It flies in the face of Christ's own values).
Jon--Until we come up with a replacement we'll have to find to make this one work, good or bad.
Also - we're too complacent as a nation in terms of directing our own consequences via voting. Less than half of the voting eligible public in the USA bothers to vote. In Australia - where voting is mandatory by law (or heavy fines are paid) they have about the safest gun violence record in the World and universal health care, and I THINK government sponsored higher education.
Jon--Odd, our founding fathers didn't think the general public was capable of making a qualified decision concerning voting for President.
I have a book who cooked Adam smith’s dinner?. Too much unpaid labor is discounted. It was his Mama and she even moved to London from Scotland with him.
Daniel, it does seem the lottery would be a better predicter of a person's worth to many companies. I like the idea of dividing the company's value by the number of employees, then pay each a significant portion of that. Of course some have more skill or personal presence, but does that actually make them of more value at all times? What is fair? When someone asks that, it sounds as though they are talking about a kids' game rather than one's income for work done.
But it was always thus. The reason for the modern inflation of CEO pay is that the system for payment has changed. CEOs are now largely paid with corporate stock, which doesn't cost the corporation anything until the stock is sold. Even then, such selling may not affect the valuation of the corporation.
In other words, CEOs are no longer paid with cash bonuses, but with stock. This means that, under present rules, there is no tax to pay. Even when these stocks are sold, there is a very low rate of income tax. So Jeff Bezos awards himself a salary of $80,000 per year, which is taxed at a much lower rate than my assistant's similar income.
It's ridiculous.
Solution:
1. A wealth tax.
2. Tax actual hard income at the usual rate that applies to "We, the Peasants."
We have stop pretending that We the People run the country. It was never thus. If it were we would have your Wealth Tax like we had in the 50s. It was close to 90% as I recall and it wasnt all handed off to defense contractors.
I believe it was we the people who elected lawmakers to make it so at that time. For the past few decades,,we have been fed a bunch of lies by “conservatives”. They stopped playing by the same rules, but now we know the grift for what it is, a desire for many to have this country be a fascist state like Hungry, and we can vote them out.
They KNOW how to get around taxes. We need solid laws to prevent them from escaping through " tax hoops". And they will always have the money to prevent laws that stop them,by buying them off..
To avoid the moral hazard of tax loopholes don’t elect the likes of Kristen Sinema, or Joe Mansion who calls his fully staffed yacht a “houseboat”. False humility is a bad substitute for good faith in government, but it seems to work for him. And for people like him, isn’t that what really matters? I think he sees himself as a winner in the political game.
Maybe I'm wrong, but: Makes you wonder how much looney-er they are going to get (A yacht being called a houseboat - phooey).. Of course, a corporate aggregate used to be called a venture capitalist to make it sound good. (Buying out your competition, to make one big company) Were stuck with few, non-competitive, companies.
The looney thing is that they probably think we’re pitifully helpless in the face of their shameless self aggrandizement and only wish we could be like them. They are pathetic and need to stand aside. They are not what’s best for the country as a whole. We need public servants.
Kenneth Galbreath made more sense than all the Alan Greenspans and Morris Friedmans put together. He was my hero when I studied economics in the 1960's [I did not major in economics, I just took two classes]
Should the modern conservative be engaged in a superior moral justification of selflessness? Is that left up to the religious sect's in the world and how do these differ in keeping there donors for wealth differ?
Kerry, you are so right about the need for the rich to defend their selfishness. Some "christians" have established their own version of the church following what they call, "the prosperity gospel." That "gospel" says that they are rich because god wanted them to be and they should get as much as god will give them. The rest of us aren't rich because we have been bad little boys and girls, so we just don't deserve it. That whole bit is BS, of course, but it definitely lets them sleep at night, knowing that they are resting comfortably in the arms of god. They just KNOW god will let them do whatever they want with those riches, because otherwise why would he (of course he) have given it to them. It is amazing how we humans can excuse ourselves for the most appalling behavior and explanations for why it was really OK, someone really deserved what was done to them, those people couldn't deal with having a lot of money, I'm using the money for "good," ad nauseum. Then we name buildings and all kinds of things for them. Ugh!!
AKA gaslighting
*Galbraith! Forgive my misspelling. John Kenneth Galbraith. Oy.
Great quote, Kerry! And sad but true.
Kerry, you are a master of understatement, and that is a great quote from John Kenneth Galbraith. And these days those CEOs and other members of the 1% have an awful lot of selfishness for which to seek moral justification.
The title of the post says it perfectly: it's a myth. But a clever, insidious one that offers many cherrypicked examples of "worthiness." They conveniently forget the many contradictory examples. They're just "outliers." B.S. The myth is a fraudulent, self-serving meme that wears as thin as the "bootstraps" garbage.
To those whom much is given, much is expected . . . or something like that. The turnover in CEOs is yesterday's news. The general public asks few questions about why they were fired, or why their severance packages were so generous. Maybe it's because they know where the bodies are buried?
They will never admit that they made their fortunes off the backs of those who labored for them. In the case of the financial wizard, they may have made their fortunes from the Wall St. Casino, or crypto. Such "cleverness" is not impressive to those who actually work for a damn living, instead of trying to trick the system, making money from money, etc.
As the good Dr. points out, the statistical proportions of the rewards of such "worthiness" are essentially obscene. They bear no resemblance to reality.
An interesting confirmation of this come this week, via the ocean submersible drama. I've seen very little pity for those passengers, who could afford to blow a wad of a quarter of a million on a personal experience. What good that money could have done for society, AND their personal legacy.
FDR, Kenes, H Ford, and this guy created the 1st middle class based on a demand economy. It was even called Fordism, before reagan, jack welsh, and media monopolies made employees capital assets to be liquidated. This was Eccles testimony to Congress in 1933 establishing a consumer, demand, economy that grew an average of 5.2% , vs GOP triad growing at 1.2%, hign unemployment, and leaving debt. Mixed R and D get 2.2% growth with still high unemployment. Eccles name is etched in the cornice of the Federal Reserve Bank in DC (or NY?) https://londonbanker.blogspot.com/2011/09/testimony-of-marriner-eccles-to.html
Great Galbraith quote
The ability for an intelligent person to rationalize in order to justify anything is unlimited!!
Precisely!
Well done Dr Reich. Trickle-down economics is as funny to me as it is gross. When one says trickle-down economics I can only think of tRrump and his buddies standing on top of Trump Tower and peeing over the edge. There are millions of people below them. I hope that's not too gross of a picture but that's the way I see it.
The other thing that correlates to this is the fact that our election funding is all private,instead of publicly funded like many other countries are,so those same rich fat cat SOBs can donate a small fortune to their preferred candidates,and thus the candidates actually only represent those highest bidders and cater to their will with lower taxes and more income through corporate welfare programs,whilst raising the taxes on lower income people,and limiting the help that can be applied for or received by said lower income people.
You're damned right this is unfair,and maybe getting publicly funded election campaigns is another way to level that playing field for all us citizens,not just rich folks.
Some other countries also have a publicly funded media in addition to the corporate media news that is swayed by advertisers.
We did until was it Nixon or Reagan....
Nixon AND Reagan did a lot of damage to the laws that kept things kind of "equal".
PBS... public Broadcasting
I didn't know that. What was it called?
In the early 80s Reagan tried to cut all funding for the national endowment for the arts-slashed funding for national public radio-they have struggled since. I know in Minnesota, fundraising is tough.
Reagan also emptied out the psychiatric hospitals. NIMBY saw to it inmates ended o the streets talking to voices. We still don’t care for people who can’t look after themselves.
Perhaps as governor, not president. In New York, Nelson Rockefeller emptied the state mental hospitals and the community treatment centers that were supposed to replace them never materialized. We've struggled ever since from that and for the punishing drug laws named for him. Homelessness didn't come out of the blue.
And that was not the only thing he destroyed in the Golden State. It is why it has been so difficult for CA to raise itself up again from how expensive it is to live there and do business. It was a beautiful state that had forward thinking about the climate and planet, diversity, spectacular low cost education accessible for almost everyone, affordable housing, even great public transportation until Regan became Governor and it slowly went downhill. So very sad. I still hope it can turn things around but with the many absurd SCOTUS decisions etc, the task is daunting. IMHO
The first thing he went after when he got into office was the union of radar workers at the airports. He destroyed that union and went after others. He vilified, unions. And sadly, unions started ruining things unions stand for, by getting too greedy themselves. A LOT of people died to bring us unions.
I remember it well and I wonder if young people today even have a clue about it as Reagan also began the destruction of the educational system - esp. higher education but the entire thing. The working class, with good paying union jobs had been sending their kids to college. The kids were getting wise and that created a protest movement in the 60’s and 70’s that was widespread. So now working class kids have to go into huge lifelong debt in order to get an “education”. My daughter, in her late 50’s is still paying it off and might never finish the job. She is a human rights worker.
Republicans..this is their system..
This is the Republican system, built on lies and at times backed by violence.
Yes..they do not want the little guy take power. If we did, the House and Senate, we may get something positive accomplished.
Very much agree.
$7.50 is slavery.
Depending on where one lives, so is $20
The concept of “worth” as it relates to employment actually has two separate expressions.
One is that workers are not paid the full value of their labor: money is withheld from their weekly paychecks to fund the Social Security and Medicare payments they will begin to receive when they retire (do NOT allow any political, Republican or Democrat, to refer to these programs as “entitlements”; it is the workers’ OWN money, for whose management for their retirement they are not charged a penny by the federal government for the administration and investment of those funds!); employers who provide health insurance for their workers are also not bestowing gifts — they finance the costs of that insurance by withholding part of what the employees’ labor is actually worth to them. Whenever an employer discontinues health insurance for its workers and doesn’t then return what it had been withholding from their pay, they are STEALING from them, period.
The second expression relates to this
“Meanwhile, according to this same view, CEOs who rake in tens of millions and Wall Street traders who rake in hundreds of millions are simply being paid what they’re “worth” because that’s what the market has dictated.”
The fact is that, contrary to what everyone is always taught, our society doesn’t reward hard work, it rewards TALENT, real or merely perceived. In fact, many people, mostly in glamorous or high-profile professions — entertainment, sports, industry — are often handsomely compensated, usually under contract, merely to keep those ostensibly talented individuals out of the hands of the businesses’ competitors, even if the use and value of the individuals to the company of the first part are not immediately, or ever, apparent.
It all boils down to value to an entity, usually a business, versus value to SOCIETY. I like to say that if all the movie stars in the world suddenly disappeared, the world world surely be somewhat duller place, but life would go on. But if half the garbage collectors suddenly disappeared, we’d all be up t our necks in insects, vermin, ticks and plague, and civilization would come to an end.
We reward entertainment not talent. Just like the gladiators of the past - it appeases the masses and keeps them from asking the hard questions - or valuing the real work.
We are a government of the rich, by the rich and FOR the rich. It's simple. Oligarchs buy the elections. Oligarchs write the laws for the political puppets they install. And they do it all from the decks of their very large yachts or swimming pools at multi-million dollar palaces.
It is time for a bloodless revolution. It is time for a leader from the Democratic Party to pull a Norma Rae. Stand on a table and scream "STRIKE!". Time for Democrats to stop taking dark money. Time for them to walk picket lines. Time for them to LAND in flyover country. Time for them to take a hint from someone like Sherrod Brown.
Anyone who works hard at a full time job has a human right to decent housing, safe water, food security, health care and education for their kids. Garbage collectors and anyone else that IS the fabric of our society. All of us.
Time for a bust up of monopolies, duopolies, etc. Time for a claw back of the National Treasure stolen - the crime that started with Ronnie Raygun.
As Tom Rush says: "The problem with America is that the poor have too much money and the rich don't have enough!" /s
John D. Rockerfeller (The original oil tycoon) was asked: 'How much money would it take to satisfy you. He said: 'A little more than what I have'.. A lot of money is another addiction.
Yes. I read Titan by Ron Chernow. JDR was a brilliant and ruthless businessman. Brutal, quiet, strategic and he wrapped himself in a religious cloak. He was generous to specific people. And he ruined the lives of thousands. And he established hospitals. And he was a crook.
After reading it, I thought I had met a perfect monster.
Are the super wealthy happy people?
This is the definition of an “aware” individual.
@Bill A. That means it's time for RFK Jr. https://rfk4president.substack.com/archive.
Sure, another delusional ultra rich guy in the WH.
"Shirley, you jest!"
Oh No! RFK DEFINITELY would be bad for this country!
Totally wrong. I'm a good judge of character.
You’re joking, right?
Am I contradicting the technocracy's mainstream media propagandists?
Avie. 1. FICA is social insurance that, on average gives employees a $million policy to cover disability, orphans and widow(ers) benefits, that may cover the entire family.
2. As long as CEOS and companies pay their fair shar in taxes, we can't complain. The problem is sometimes they get tax breaks and in some cases completely avoid taxes.
1) What does FICA have to do with this? And
2) Sure we can complain. Executive compensation is determined by corporate boards, whose members are in bed with the people they hire. There’s a lot of mutual back-scratching going on. Even the shareholders can, and should, complain as that compensation is often wildly disproportionate to the performance of the companies many of these executives run. The fact is that there are few companies whose CEOs are making tens of millions of dollars that could not be run by talented unknowns who’d be willing to do it for, oh, say, the $400,000 a year the president of the United States earns. Of course, if the unknowns do a good job and get known, they’re eventually going to start demanding the same multi-million-dollar compensation other CEOs get, or they’ll take their talents elsewhere. Is there a cure for this? Giving workers an equity stake in the companies that employ them, and seats on the board of directors would be a good place to start.
Unless you're a shareholder or a whistleblower, you probably have no standing.
IMHO government can establish that corporations have some public sense of responsibility, but the chance that this will be done is close to zero. Everything in life is a gamble. Many people do not analyze the risk reward relationship involved in most of our daily lives. I've been involved on all sides in collective bargaining. I believe in transactional analysis. I don't justify it but the reality is that with big business both parties know that they're gambling. They hire economists to analyze comparative salaries. Some win some lose.
When my high school hires a football coach, they pay on the expectation of results, not to just fill a slot.
I liked your comment, “Many people do not analyze the risk-reward relationship involved in most of our daily lives.” Too bad there will likely never be a .gov statistic to show numbers for those who did or didn’t look at where they were, are, and want to be. Avie Hern’s comment “Giving workers an equity stake in the companies that employ them, and seats on the board of directors would be a good place to start.” is, at a guess, logical to many. Still, it’s unlikely large corporations would ever do that.
Some might agree that if we as a nation would educate fifteen to eighteen-year-olds in high school on risk analysis and the basics of how inequity is created in general in America, perhaps many of those who will not be obtaining post-secondary educations would at least hypothetically have some inkling of what to expect from society, business, and the government as they start their working lives.
I wish they would have to post what BOTH sides voted on, so you can keep tabs on WHO you want to vote for.
"“Giving workers an equity stake in the companies that employ them, and seats on the board of directors would be a good place to start.”
That would be a matter of state, not federal law., although there were attempts do do it The way it is done is through collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scanlon_plan#:~:text=The%20Scanlon%20plan%20is%20a,system%20linked%20to%20organization%20performance.
Scanlon plans led to unions such as the United Steelworkers at Chrysler, or at United Airlines to negotiate board representation, although usually this was forcibly linked to employee share schemes.
There are other variations, like ESOP. An employee-ownership business plan, ESOP, gives workers stock in the company as part of their compensation. Currently there are approximately 7,000 ESOP plans being used by more than 14 million employees. The largest company to adopt the business model in the U.S. is Publix Super Markets, which has over 200,000 staff. https://www.nceo.org/articles/employee-ownership-100
If the CEO’s and the large corporations paid their share of taxes or “provided the necessary services” for society, professor Reich would not have to have written this article.
Read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged and really try to understand it. Then you will be aware.
Sometimes is an understatement. Imagine if CEOs paid FICA on the worth of those stock shares they receive. We'd never have to worry about the future of Social Security or any of our other programs. Instead, we take a big hunk out of already paltry salaries, and Republicans are focused on raising the retirement age.
Daniel S. You mean like Boeing?? They pay no taxes. In fact some companies get money back! Corporate Welfare..
Biden's Inflation Reduction Act established a 15% minimum corporate tax rate. Expected to reduce the deficit by more than $300 billion over a decade..
Sorry Daniel S., but I think they will get around that Act, somehow... I'm not optimistic. And compared to a trillion 300 billion is peanuts to me, because, you need another 700 billion to make one trillion. And it''s stretched over 10 years.
Agree with you except for one thing. SS etc are ENTITLEMENTS, BECAUSE it is their OWN money. They are ENTITLED to it, because it BELONGS to them. Who redefined the word “entitlement” to mean “something to which you are NOT entitled”? Don’t let the gaslighters do that. Reclaim the word!
You are, of course, correct linguistically, BUT politics have twisted the word to mean, in this context, the very opposite of what it’s supposed to. Republicans have demonized it and conditioned voters of every political stripe to think it’s one thing when it’s another. Rather than waste time trying to re-condition them to understand that correct definition, I think it better to simply refute Republicans’ implication that it’s welfare by another name and hammer home that it is workers’ salary, deferred. If you want to add to that refrain that it’s money they’re entitled to and let them make the connection between that word and its derivative, by all means.
Hear! Hear! Avié Hern
I think an additional problem deserves comment; the consolidation of corporations. The mergers and acquisitions departments have managed to reduce competition to a point where there is no reason not to pay their CEOs so much. There are no markets forces dimming their desire for wealth. Healthy competition keeps prices down, and wages for employees up. Competition has diminished in our system creating the plutocracy we have now in the business world, and hence government since they buy it. At least with beer, over-consolidation provoked a successful microbrewery response, but that is nearly impossible to conceive in the defense industry.
Wayne, I agree wholeheartedly. What we need is another Teddy Roosevelt, who was a pretty good monopoly buster in his time. We also need someone to ride herd on those who approve these damnable mergers (FTC)!
We have Joe Biden and some great democrats-we need a democratic majority in the house and senate...Minnesota is a good example of what can happen.
Stephanie ; is that another underfunded federal entity?
Laurie, I am embarrassed to say that I don’t know if it’s underfunded or not. It’s a matter of noticing how many mergers are approved as opposed to those that are not.
In 1983 there were 50 corporations controlling the broadcast media. Now it's just 5. And all of them have corporate directors who are aching to "BUY ANOTHER YACHT"
Did this news media concentration have its roots in the communication act of 1996?
Good question. Can someone say?
Preach it, Brother Robert! No one, NO ONE, is worth $20,000,000 a year in pay. Or more. It’s an ugly myth that needs to die. No one does it on his own. And it’s almost always a “his” isn’t it? It’s way past time to unrig the system.
They use our tax paid roads and transportation to get to that high financial point. No. They did NOT do it on their own.
And our legal system and pur banking system and our educational system to train their employees and on and on. Try building Amazon in Russia.
While no one is worth exorbitant salaries, options and incentives it’s also true that one of the basic criteria of capitalism is supply and demand. So called qualified CEO’s and other execs with a proven track record for generating profits are in demand, scarce as hens teeth, and they can write their own ticket because of it. Whereas, undereducated, under-skilled workers are also in demand; however, they are not scarce. Because of this they are also undervalued and not only do they not write any tickets, they pay them.
Capitalism was not designed by those who wanted to uplift society as a whole. It was designed to reward the few and tolerate the many who are the consumers. The problem that the inner corporate manipulators have, is that they are killing the middle and lower income earners who are their biggest consumers. You can’t have it both ways, but they keep on trying.
You are half way there G.P.Baltimore. True Capitalism, by itself; will devour itself. But REGULATED Capitalism was fantastic to me when I was a kid in the 1960's. The politicians were well behaved as most of the public was. And a 2 car with a 2 car garage was a reality.
Professor,
thank you for this and more importantly for your work on behalf of part of my chosen family.
I do not know what you mean by "worth" or "paid" or "Myth"
I have no earned income.
The USA government, has determined that I am disabled(unable to engage in substantial work), Worse, I am increasingly unable to engage in activities of daily life, (Cook, clean, ect)
I suspect that almost everybody will before they die, become unable to engage in these activities, some for a short time some for a long time.
Does that mean that I am worthless?
It suggests that you are unemployable, or that you are not profitable to some corporate greedhead, and can't be exploited. You are of great value to your friends and family. They would presume to value the lives of those they would see as usable for their own interests.
You have made valuable comments on this forum. Therefore, you are not "worthless".
Tim
Kind of you to say.
I am glad that you found some of my comments valuable.
And, if you're human, you're not worthless.
No. It means you have a DISABILITY. And that is all.
M. Fred, you think, you analyze, you comment, you pushed me to think twice. You have excellent worth.
Perhaps the case for a universal basic income needs to be made on the basis that no-one should have too little, i.e. that America should not be a "Third World country with money" - as a person in the North-West of England said to me once, and with which saying, to my surprise, a relation in New York who's a US citizen agreed.
I'm saying that it will be good for America's image, both self and abroad, if no-one within her borders have too little, that America have something similar to Britain's National Health Service, and that the power of drug companies to set the highest prices in the world be regulated in some way.
People are paid what they’re worth is a myth!
Just like the FPOTUS was a great President!
Some of us, who live in the real world, know better!
Keith, the statement that the tfg was a great president is not a myth; it is a damnable lie.
Trickle-down economics is as funny to me as it is gross. When one says trickle-down economics I can only think of tRrump and his buddies standing on top of Trump Tower and peeing over the edge. There are millions of people below them. I hope that's not too gross of a picture but that's the way I see it.
Keith ; Remember when the United Nations responded to tRump when he said in a speech to that body something like " I am the best President in the history of the United States " and the whole place erupted in laughter!?
Politicians do very little work and get paid an enormous amount of money for what they "do".
Think of MTG, Jim Jordan, Cruz, etc. when you read this and particularly notice the AVERAGE nearly FOUR MILLION DOLLAR AVERAGE ALLOWANCE! And they want to postpone social security & fight against raising the Debt Ceiling???:
“Most senators and representatives make an annual salary of $174,000. Those in leadership make a bit more. For example, the speaker of the House makes $223,500 and majority and minority leaders in the House and Senate make $193,400. Congressmen earn this annual salary for the duration of their terms. Senators serve six-year terms, while members of the House serve for two years. There are no term limits on either part of Congress.”
“Members also get allowances to pay their staff and cover office and travel expenses. Senators’ average allowance recently was $3,738,775, while representatives’ was $1,382,139. Congressmen are also able to deduct $3,000 a year for the living expenses they accrue while they’re away from their home states or congressional districts.”
Marlo, thank you! I knew they got allowances, but never realized how much they receive.
“ Members also get allowances to pay their staff and cover office and travel expenses. Senators’ average allowance recently was $3,738,775, while representatives’ was $1,382,139. Congressmen are also able to deduct $3,000 a year for the living expenses they accrue while they’re away from their home states or congressional districts.”
(From the same article)
To put it simply this is class warfare. The intent is to keep the average persons pointing fingers at each other, and being distracted by the voluminous propaganda and media nonsense. The pot is boiling over. The tremendous wealth inequality begs for an immediate program of forgiveness of debts, and redistribution of the wealth, along with livable wages and governmental programs of universal health care and aid to those most in need. We all need to cut waste and halt the insatiable appetite for more nonsense stuff.
Unregulated capitalism is destroying our world. Let’s start by throwing the lobbyists out of the halls of our government. We need to stop the unending wars and reinvest that energy into making the world healthier.
Yes! It's class warfare. The Gods of Capitalism use the corporate media to keep stirring the pot and keeping us blaming each other for our struggles.
Michael, I call it predation. How do you out smart and tame the tigers? They would like it to be warfare because they control the field and the resources. George W. Bush once sniped at a question of an economic nature (I don’t remember the question because his response was so nakedly condescending). He said, “You want class warfare? Go ahead. We’ll win!” He was saying the quiet part out loud. The Royal we right out in the open like a big swinging dick.
If they could dispense with people and use AI they would. That’s what makes AI so dangerous, human spite and blind ambition.
And where would these 1%ers be without those ‘workers’?
Using Chinese labor for less pay and more profits.
I’m old enough to remember the claptrap spawned by our own Bedtime for Bonzo Reagan-omics
A long time ago, I heard some quotes from Henry Ford II. I can't remember them verbatim, but it went something like this. Henry Ford II was asked how much he made and he stated the amount. Someone asked him, "What makes you think you are worth $XXX?" He said, "I didn't say I was worth it, I said that is how much I got." An interesting kind of honesty.
And the Citizens United ruling allows the rich to buy lawmakers. Contrary to John Roberts, dollars are not speech, they are bribes.
Well said ! John H.
Very well said thank you. I will quote you in the near future.
If there were a "god" I'd ask him to bless you, professor Reich.
You dare to speak what no one else will in this lick-spittle society. Thank you for speaking the truth.
The barbaric wolves prey upon the civilized sheep and then tell the sheep to blame themselves for being too weak.
This is why capitalism must be relegated to the dust-bin of history. Only the wolves thrive in such a system.
Agreed! This schemed wage & income inequality needs to cease. I am a member of the fortunate. I have social security, state pension and IRA sources for my retirement income. I believe the wealthier of us Americans should be taxed fairly and at a much higher rate than over the past 40 plus years.
We have left about $7 trillion in uncollected taxes on the table.
Therefore we are unfairly taxed.
https://www.businessinsider.com/yellen-shocking-7-trillion-in-taxes-uncollected-treasury-federal-government-2021-5
That's why Biden put more people in the IRS. It would weed out those who aren't paying. But Republicans are against it.
These emperors are strutting around with no clothes!
As I said, Republicans are fighting to stop adding 80,000 people to work at the Overwhelmed IRS. Biden knows that it will bring money in from those Billionaires and people cheating on their income taxes! Of course Republicans are going to bargain with giving money to Ukraine and this bill to add people to work for the IRS! CLEAR AS A BELL!
The rich don't want it to happen.