I'm sorry that the Biden White House appears to be swayed by the same sort of neoliberal rubbish that swayed the Obama and Clinton White Houses, often emanating from the same people.
So where are you going to go? There are some very good people in the democratic party and the democrats, at least, push for programs that are good for the people. We need Build Back Better but the republicans, Manchin and Sinema block it. Biden had cut child poverty in half but couldn't get enough votes because of that same block to continue it.
No other party is going to help you. I was a Green for awhile but found them to be an intolerant group. They won't compromise and they are not always right, so they are impotent. Don't forget Sinema came out of the Green party and, once she got into the big time and could sell her vote, she sold out quickly.
Oh, I know no other party will "help" me. I'm not looking. I care deeply about what's happening in this country but I no longer believe that anything I do will change the trajectory of where the plutocratic class will take this country. We don't have leaders to intervene on behalf of citizens.
I once asked my congressman what is the backbone of the American economy and he snapped out without hesitation "small business". I respectfully said he was wrong. He got all huffy with me and said who is the backbone of America. I replied that the American consumer was because without us, the American consumer, small business fail. Covid-19 proved that.
If we want to change this country start buying from local small businesses and stop buying from large corporate. There is some things we have to buy from corp's like TP. Don't buy from Wal-Mart. Buy from a locally owned store, if possible. What I propose is to stop buy frivolous items. Stop using extra gas just running around. Stay home and become a family unit again. We do not need all the latest electronics. I still have iPhone 5S. A 21 year old pickup. I could afford them if I wanted to, but why. Try watching a video by Naom Chomsky "Requiem for the American Dream". It will go well with Professor Reich courses.
I wasn't sure until now if anyone out there was thinking the same thoughts as I am. You just confirmed that there is. You are absolutely right when you say "We don't have leaders to intervene on behalf of the citizens of our country". And I don't see any hope in sight for that to change anytime soon!!!
Try the Forward Party, whose goal is to break the two-party duopoly that allows domination of special interests, partisan rancor, unresponsiveness to the people. One of the ways to do this is to promote open primaries. https://www.forwardparty.com/
Leaving the Party isn't going to fix the situation. Being an Independent merely means you don't get to vote in ANY primary (in a lot of states, if not all), which means that you are stuck with whoever the two parties nominate (and you won't have had a voice in that choice). The Party needs people to work within it to pick better candidates and form better platforms.
I would almost always vote Democrat, but in MA can be unenrolled. I vote in the primaries every time without an issue. I wonder how many parties are in Sweden?
If being an Independent means you can't Vote in the Primaries, then I have been mislead. It is my understanding that the Primaries will be open to the Independent votes starting this year. I am not sure if all states are allowing this, but there was an article I read that said the Independent's were stronger in voting numbers than either of the two "Accepted Parties" and they would need those Independent votes more than ever. Guess we will have to wait and see.
In some states, but not all, Independents may vote in a primary (one or the other, not both). If this is changing to all states, it's the first I've heard of it. The statements about the Parties needing Independent votes are regarding general elections, not primary elections.
Or Democrats who are sensible, smart, centrist, and not bought by big money, like Mark Kelly of Arizona. "Progressive" is a term that is misunderstood by too many, and used wrongly by many more. Equating "Progressive" and "doesn't take corporate money" is one of those errors.
Meredith Lane Brown ; I like Mark Kelly, but am unfamiliar with his work. This is a big country. It used to be that people contributed to their own representatives, but the money machines of the rich has caused this crazy frenzy of targeting people on the other side of the country to win the seat at all costs, because everyone is up against big money. It should be people working for their own districts, states etc. Might be more manageable the way it was originally set up.
I guess I have never seen a definition of 'Progressive', but generally, it seems the times I have seen it used it was for describing those who supported the Green New Deal, like Ed Markey and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Bernie Sanders.
You've made me make sure I was understanding terms I was using. Here are some definitions copied from Wikipedia:
"The meaning of progressivism has varied over time and differs depending on perspective. … In the 21st century, a movement that identifies as progressive is "a social or political movement that aims to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions"."
"The Congressional Progressive Caucus advocates "a universal, high-quality, Medicare for All health care system for all", living wage laws, reductions in military expenditure, a crackdown on corporate greed, putting an end to mass incarceration, supporting and implementing swift measures to start reversing climate change, immigration policies that are humane, and reparations."
Political Columnist and author John Avlon wrote in his 2005 book "Independent Nation" that centrism is ... an antidote to the politics of divisiveness, providing principled opposition to political extremes.
Not anywhere close. Please refer to Dr. Reich's article from a day or so ago about the political spectrum and how it has shifted in the post-Gingrich years.
I look at those who were mentored by Bernie Sanders who do not take corporate money and have track records that are impressive in what they have done and attempted to do.
My comment below is about Bernie Sanders, who was able to get large numbers of small donors to be able to run. Our media and Establishment on both sides were able to mislead the voters. When you think of it, Bernie represents the desire to support the common good. Everyone getting corporate money is just the opposite.
Laurie, the evidence does not support your thesis. The majority of Americans are not Progressives. According to the Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/progressive-left/, the Progressive Left are 6% of the public. 7% of registered voters. 12% of Democrats. Further, these numbers are down from 2020.
According to Gallup in July 2020, only 26% of Americans identify themselves as liberal, compared with conservative (34%) or moderate (40%).
Not only are progressives a minority of American voters, they are also a minority of Democratic voters. According to Pew, in 2020 only 47% of Democrats described themselves as “liberal” or “very liberal”. The majority of Democrats are “moderate” (45%) or “conservative” (14%).
Voters of color are mostly Democratic, but that does not mean they are leftwing, as black support for Joe Biden over Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary proved. Only 28% of black Americans and 30% of Hispanic Americans identify themselves as liberal.
So in order to have rational discourse we need to all agree on the facts. If people are acting on the basis of wishful thinking again, we know the outcome.
Martha, it is not a thesis. There are myriad semantic problems with some of the labels and categories. Gallup is not God, either. I am a 20th century person who lived through the sixties and have seen what the people (humans) can do.
I would like to know where they do their research for the polls. What are the cross sections of groups? Where (geographically )are the cross sections of groups? What are the income levels of the groups being polled? Just little things like that. Somehow I just don't trust polls. Especially when they rig the questions.
Alas, victims of a warped political construct that we are. True social humanitarians such as Senator Sanders marching along with the weight of labels and innuendo slowing their progress and convoluting their message stand little chance against the machine. The corptocracy's overthrow of our fragile society I'm afraid complete. They control the average American's information sources, cash flow and food on the table. While we sit back and banter back and forth over hollow labels such as democrat and Republican. While both are so deep in corporate pockets all we see are the soles of their feet ! WAKE UP AMERICA ! !
Not so fast, Mark. Bernie is still in the Senate and he has some people he mentors that are young. He still avoids corporate donors, and now there is a growing number of forward looking people getting in to office who also avoid the trap of corporate money. As another person on this forum pointed out an estimated 20% of people who do get corporate money are true to their constituents. It's a start.
Claire ; true! money is powerful! But look at the campaign he put together with single donor contributions. The DNC and corporate media did him in. But he is still in the Senate and can do some good. He nudged the Dem party to the left. Too bad about Manchin and Synema though. What they did should be illegal! The vows representatives take must be improved and real.
Correction Claire. It's 'my' fault, it's your fault, it's all our faults; we were too busy with 'other stuff', and left out the car keys and hoped for the best. The signs were all there in the early '80's - not just apparent as a single party fault, but quite obviously both parties. The problem is that the party labels also hide those concealing their true and first blood alliance.
D4n ; Many voters are so misinformed by even mainstream media that they think it's covered in the 'news'. Information that is wrong or misleading gets the monied interests what they want. People working lots of hours or multiple jobs to get by while trying to raise kids and actually stay healthy are at a disadvantage at keeping up with politics.
Absolutely Laurie; it's part and parcel of our larger problems. Knowing just how true that is, helps me to be patient and kind as I can be and cut most folks an awful lot of slack. Even most media pros are awfully challenged given the internet and the dynamics of the 24/7 news cycle.
Claire -- Left for WHAT? The Republican Party? Sadly we in America live in a binomial world politically, and your action is benefiting vastly more odious forces than those you find unworthy in the Democratic Party. Abandoning the Democratic Party due to its progressive imperfections is what gave us four years of President Trump. I rest my case.
Our 'Supreme' Court giving us Citizens United made money in politics worse then ever. The greed heads went nuts and we are on the brink of ruin in almost every way, seemingly. Existential peril looms?! But The Darkest Hour is always just before the dawn.... Let's keep trying and not lose hope or determination.
Yes, for What? Granted, I don't vote for Republicans even though I consider myself an independent. But I stopped financially supporting the party. For instance, Al Franken solicits me for Midwest Pac. I have no idea who the "democrats" are that they want to support. I won't support it because I don't want moderates running the party further into the ground. So I stay away.
I am ready to do the same thing. I was raised to believe that the Democrats had a better grip on dealing with the overall population needed and was equiped to see that the people's needs came first. Somewhere down the road of life, the Dem's have taken the wrong turn and don't seem to want to get back on track. I refuse to support that kind of thinking. I will join my other friends and join the Independent's group. Maybe the People's Party some day if they get up and running.
Please don’t call it the “People’s Party”. The term is a very close similarity to the People’s Republic of China’s communist party. Perhaps The American Party would be more appropriate. People like MTG and Bobert and their ilk would be hollering ‘communist’ louder than Joseph McCarthy.
Ladybug. MTG and Boebert will yell whatever anyone does for the common good. they should be fired. Ironic that their 'boss' was famous on TV for saying 'your fired' like Ronald Reagan was an actor too. Bedtime for Bonzo was Reagan's 'Greatest role'. Birds of a feather!
I'm not aware of that. But I know I'm not "the least knowledgeable." I am cynical. I have for decades whole heartedly supported the Democratic Party but I'm sick of doing that, and pardon this, getting the same shitty results. I can hardly believe what has happened to this country today and I DO hold the Democrats complicit.
I must add, the Democrats, for the moment, have all three branches of government by a razor thin margin, yes. It is unconscionable that Americans, of all colors, are going to lose their voting rights under a Democratic administration. I hope that doesn't happen but right now, the outlook is grim.
Oh, and this is what the Democrats do, they punt on the big stuff but throw a bone to the masses like putting a black woman on the SC. (which I fully support!) But it's low hanging fruit. They need to do the HARD STUFF, fight the Republicans on all those voting laws!
I say that because in every election there is always a big block of independents who still don't know which way they are going to vote right up to the last minute. The question in my mind is always, don't they follow the issues? Don't they know that one party is threatening to run the country into the ground? And then a sizable portion of them actually vote for the party threatening to run the country into the ground.
Bernie always said that "It blows my mind how people vote for the same people who betray them over and over" and expect better results". Forget the Establishment DNC.
!!! What's up with that?! I can only think they can't get off this hamster wheel because the rich own the Dems. What else is it? The Democratic Party has lost the masses because they won't represent them, they need the plutocratic class to keep them in power, THEY THINK. They could change their whole way of politics but they're totally stuck in the mud.
One of the reasons they can flip-flop on positions and repeat what they want to be the truth (instead of the truth) ad infinitum. Unfortunately, the Democrats do have a platform, and most of its planks are pie-in-the-sky "progressive" wishful thinking. It's why I refer to myself as a "centrist" --- not that I am "in the center" between Dems and Reps, but because my opinions and beliefs are not so far left as the planks of the Democratic platform. I cannot bring myself to even mention the word "right" in terms of my position because I am in no way "rightist" as it has come to be exemplified by people who storm the Capitol or vote for an amoral, narcissistic, would-be dictator. Sigh. If the Republican party of today were the same as Abraham Lincoln's Republican party (a party FOR the common people), I would be a Republican---because the Democrats of that day were White supremacist slave-holders. But the positions of the parties over the years have changed to the point that they have completely switched positions, but the Republicans don't want to admit it...so they just avoid putting together a platform at all because if they did, the planks would be things like "Corporations rule" and "po' people just outta stay po' an' be happy abowd it" and "we reserve the right to declare what is a fact and what is not" (apparently including the laws of gravity, thermodynamics, and Malthus).
Meredith Lane Brown ; I don't think it unfortunate that Democrats do have a platform, and I do not believe that the party should just 'give up' on 'pie in the sky' ideas like increasing childcare subsidies or improving access to affordable housing or healthcare. I may be less 'leftie' than some, because I don't think we should have wide open borders; people should be allowed to apply for asylum if they have credible claims to qualify for it. One should actually be a citizen to vote. Not having a platform just to allow people to fudge or hedge on commitments to pursue policies is a cop out.
The 'Dixiecrats' existed awhile ago, but I remember George Wallace in his wheelchair adamantly resisting desegregation, so I get it. There was a reversal. There are Democrats in my state, like Richie Neal who takes money from big pharma. I am now in his district after the redrawing of the maps. It seems like voters have been promised 'pie in the sky' whenever any of our reps have made promises, some accuse them of making promises and voting for things they know will never pass. The money rules.
The whole system benefits the Repugs. Electoral College, Senate rules and more than there is room to type here, plus I'm getting older as it is with only so much time...I can still have a sense of humor though. Some day (I'm gonna sound like tRump here), it's gonna just be beautiful! , you know, the sun will come out, and most people will be hip, and the greed heads will just lose, or stop being part of the problem. Like magic.
Republicans ALSO "bow and scrape to the big money and give up their ethics as the cost of being allowed in." That's my point....all politicians are forced to do so in our system because we have allowed corporate money to dominate it. No, I am not a troll.
Meredith ; I am suggesting that voters look to candidates who want to get out of the mirage that they can get representation from bought out hacks. If we continue to vote for proxy 'representation' the game will continue. We can call them anything we want; progressive (as in forward leading ;progress), ethical, it is easier if there could be agreement on what they are called when in discussion. But centrist gives a bad taste in my mouth. Joe Manchin anyone?
Well, as a person who regularly votes Democrat (unless there was a Republican with good ideas), I am opposed to voting for anyone who takes corporate money. If there was a corporate entity that was ethical, (hahaha) I might consider it ok. But if your rep takes money, they work for the money they got, not for the constituent, not you. Republicans have mostly been the money. Democrats are the 'beasts of burden', the donkeys, lowly workers. the worst thing is the dark money from outside the country.
The more voters who know about the inflation myth, the better. I'm putting what little money I have on progressives who are not bought. Thank you, Robert Reich, for this information!
It is a serious mistake to assume the progressive left will solve monopoly power constitutionally. Socialists tend to be inherently totalitarian. The appropriate solution is aggressive anti-trust legislation to re-establish a highly competitive market.
Anti -trust was championed by one republican, Teddy Roosevelt, and basically eviscerated under another Republican R. Regan. In between, including during the new deal there was some attempt to limit obvious anti-competitive mergers. But massive corporations such as General Motors were allowed to grow via mergers..... all those GM brands were once separate companies.
But Teddy Roosevelt had the support of most of the people I think I read. That is a whole lot of power. Would be good if Americans can work together for a common good.
Tell that to Sweden, Norway and Denmark. They might take exception. It' impossible to keep a competitive market for long. Adam Smith and Cornelius Vanderbilt both talked about how when 3 or 4 business men in the same field get together, they immeditately form a monopoly. The government has to intervene with regulation.
Sweden, Norway and Denmark are welfare states, but are not socialist, they did not nationalize industry, did not create worker ownership of the means of production, encouraged high enterprise efficiency etc.
Yes, you need anti-monopoly regulation, but if you allow a regulatory agency to make those decisions it will likely be captured by the regulated. Therefor you need a simple law such as no firm can exceed one billion in assets, with appropriate felony penalties on the executives.
Kendrick W. Miller ; The United States of America is a Welfare state for the very wealthy. What was the first thing tRump did after getting into the Oval office? He invited Russian oligarchs over with no cameras or note taking or records of anything else allowed. He gave the wealthy a couple trillion (or more) in tax breaks. Elon Musk grew his Tesla empire using taxpayer money. He was the first one who pushed back on the idea of a 2% 'wealth tax' for the rich. Most of the very rich do not pay taxes because they have sophisticated 'instruments' and loopholes etc. etc. ad nauseam.
You are right that eventually the regulatory agencies do get captured by the regulated. All it takes is one charismatic leader like Reagan or a severe financial period and people either follow like sheep or reach out in desperation. I'm not sure how to stop that.
Yes a simple law would be good but with today's congress, it'd be impossible to pass and, with today's supreme court, it'd probably be ruled unconstitutional. Six of those appointees are there because they are strongly pro corporation.
I agree such a law could not pass today. The problem with the court is currently insurmountable. In my view the Citizens-United decision is clearly unconstitutional on two grounds. First, corporations are "fictional" persons only for the narrow purposes of owning, using and disposing of property, and to be sued and sue. (There also appears to be a mistaken belief that limited liability extends to management...it doesn't and shouldn't) Secondly, I believe using corporate funds for political purposes is an illegal "taking" (theft) of stockholder resources for non-business purposes .
I completely agree with you. I've been arguing those same points.
Also I don't know how anyone could read this and believe a corporation is a person.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
And these judges are interpreting the Constitution for us. They've been re-defining the Constitution.
but yet you equate our progressive left with socialists. Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist but isn't talking about nationalizing industry. I think you have to define your terms. If you believe our progressive left is socialist, I disagree.
I think you left out a big factor, Robert. Beyond being bad politics, alienating corporations threatens campaign finances. Because our elections are funded by the private sector, our leaders are held hostage. Sinema and Manchin?
Biden has a minimum of political capital with low approval ratings and a razor slim margin in Congress.
I am with you that this an example of the oligarchs winning again. But there is just one battle that MUST be won this year. The midterm elections.
@Bill. The professor writes a fact-based essay every week. He can point to the Council of Economic Advisors factually. What you said, however, rings true. I don't entirely fault Democrats in Congress, not entirely, because they need so much money to prosecute an effective campaign in the midterms. Even those who are not up before the people in this cycle are sympathetic to the needs of their fellow caucus members for donations. Nobody wants to beat on the lobbyists and corporations when the need for donations is so immediate. It's awful, it's humiliating and it is unfortunately necessary in the current context of money-driven elections. So I'm sad and I'm mad! But it is so important to return a majority of Democrats to the House and to increase the number of Democratic senators I am almost embarrassed to say that if I were in an election myself I might decide that THIS election cycle is not the time to push for much needed reform. I really hate this pragmatism, but I can't overlook reality for many Representatives. What I am doing about it is trying to work for Katie Porter and donating money to her and other worthies. Someday perhaps we can wean our elected officials off of corporate money, but that won't happen because of individual taxpayers donations - that will happen if there is a law regulating donations, limiting donations from corporations and other dark money sources. Good luck getting that law through a Congress that needs the money!!
There are some really good people out there who need financial support to even run for office or reelection. I used to be able to donate even the minimum amount to help. Thanks to all of the rising pricing of goods and necessary utilities, not to mention the rising cost of medical care needs, I can no longer donate any amount of $ to any contender. Only mentioning this as the slide of change in people's voting rights are also being hampered by lack of funds to run at all. The very rich people and Corporate power players have made a big dent in the voting process for the average citizens.
You will not get what you want as a working or 'avarage' income citizen if you support corporate 'representatives'. If you want to get big money out of politics, stop sending your money to those on the take.
It'll take more than that, like antitrust laws and abolishing 'Citizens United'...donations from individuals like us are *nothing* compared to corporate dollars.
Hey, look at what Bernie was able to put together! He could've won! without the corrupt DNC and the misinformation on mainstream media. They helped to install tRump! Remember the picture of Donald on the phone with "Breaking News" flashing on the screen? No other candidate got that freebie!
Meredith Lane Brown ; Had you ever gone to a Rally For Bernie Sanders and seen thousands of supporters of all ages? Have you ever listened to what he has to say? He ran on small donor money, and the Establishment in both parties were trembling in their boots! We have to start somewhere and getting people in who will not sell out will require progressives or ethical candidates who care about the common good.
No, I have never gone to a Bernie Sanders rally (or any rally for any politician, for that matter)....I think they are pointless. Yes, I have listened to what he has to say; more importantly, I have read it....which gives one more time to contemplate its meanings. I have also lived in a Socialist-Democrat country (Denmark) for six years, and pretty much recognize where Bernie would like to take the USA. Just because I am not as far left on the spectrum as Bernie, or apparently you, doesn't mean that I deserve to be called names or be accused of being un-American.
Meredith ; If I called you a troll, it's because I can't believe any centrist position could be a solution. It may have to do with semantics. Similarly, you seem to consider being 'far left on the spectrum' to be unflattering. it's all a question of degree. Today, if a working person wants anything from the treasury, they are looking for a handout. Meanwhile billionaires don't pay anything in taxes! So who is extreme? It is all relative, apparently.
Sorry for name calling; this forum is, for me an upgrade from the free for all that is Facebook. So, I have read that people in Denmark and Sweden are some of the happiest in the world. If Bernie seems to be leaning in a direction of Socialist-Democrat country like that, it might not be so bad. But in another post you mentioned totalitarianism? That does not sound good.
Seems like this pragmatic argument comes around every election cycle, because things get worse and worse. It's never a good time to do the 'Impossible', especially when we give away the store. Support Unions! and Progressives!
I've said this many times over the past few years: "There is too much money in our politics, and too much politics in our government!" Get the big money out of our elections, level the playing field and remind our Senators and Representatives that they are there to REPRESENT US. Some get it, others, sadly, are bought.
Benjamin ; Passing laws should not cost money! Voters should be able to let their representatives know what they want, and representatives should do their jobs to pass legislation that their constituents demand. It should be as illegal as it is unethical to do otherwise for profit! As long as we 'hold our noses and allow what is going on and let our representatives sell us put we will never get what we need.
Benjamin ; This was my thought about the 'poll tax' that is our voting apparatus today. We need to pour more money into getting our candidate through the primary process in order to even have a chance to vote for the laws they will vote on for us. So we are essentially saying the same thing. Just keeping those we support in the seat after we get them there costs more and more and more.
No, at least I could not afford to keep paying more and more. I suspect I'm not alone. I guess that's why the greedheads want more and more money. Gives 'em a big advantage!
Look Biden can beat on the Saudis and no one except the Koch bros will squeak. He can open the Iranian oil spigot. Bring oil back down from92 a barrel to 70 and you stop fueling inflation.
Trouble is, war requires massive spending and the people who profit from it have or can buy their own legislators. And as long as their own family members are far from the action they have no incentive not to take advantage of the $ituation. Even -from behind the curtain--foment it.
Don't forget the Squad. They are a group of six Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives. It was initially composed of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. They have since been joined by Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri following the 2020 United States House of Representatives elections.
He doesn't take corporate money, he thinks science is a good thing, and works to better things for all citizens. He just doesn't happen to be a "progressive"....he leans left of center (like me). Therefore, he is similar to Katie Porter of California and Katie Hobbs in Arizona, as Benjamin R. Stockton noted. It was to him that I meant to reply.
Both can contribute to the common good, but I know tRump 'did not take corporate money'. (And I'm Aunt Jemima!!). Of course he took all the money he could from wherever he could! There are important differences that distinguish candidates besides funding sources and political approaches. One does not need an advanced degree in political science to see the difference in a candidate like tRump! But even he tricked people into voting for him by lying.
Bernie Sanders was doing very well: We need an educated electorate! Support Progressives with small dollar donations! Unless you want to continue to be ruled by the corporate greedheads. Ignore the lies of corporate media! Their paid pundits will convince you that Socialists and even Communists are trying to ruin the country! That was a tRump talking point!
Bernie was knocking it out of the park with small donations! I don't know how much per day he got. He started very small up in Vermont, and built his following slowly. He took a red state and won over a significant number of Republicans as well as Democrats. I read a couple of books about his background in politics. In College, I think it was the University of Chicago, he was involved with Civil rights. Wanted to integrate his dorm. There are pictures of a young Bernie Sanders getting his butt kicked by Chicago Police for his efforts. Years later, as the Mayor of Burlington, VT., he built a new police station. He did a good job and was popular. Still is.
I sure get the question. If I gave just $3.00 every single day to every single progressive politician who sends me multiple emails daily, I’d have been completely bankrupt 15 years ago. It’s beyond ridiculous. Stacy Abrams alone now asks me for $5.00 5-6 times a DAY. Come on. The people who are already getting shafted by corporate greed now have to be taken to the cleaners by the people who claim that they want to get us out of this mess?? Give us a break!!!!
I agree with you completely, although I think we should recognize that the pleas for $5 x 5/d are in fact automatically generated texts or emails, and you can opt out of them. I finally did, and it is a great relief to go to ActBlue and give some $$ when I feel like it and have a little extra.
So in San Francisco there is lots of competition among coffee sellers and yes Starbucks and Peets have raised their prices very significantly but from casual observation their stores are as full with customers as always. One can even make coffee at home. So what’s up?
You have raised a deeply relevant question. What will it take for the Starbuck’s patrons to go elsewhere? There are budding attempts among frontline workers to unionize that are getting corporate attention; where are the consumer boycotts in support of their efforts? How can a coalition among workers and consumers (who are actually the same people) be energized and activated? If the commonality of interests between these two groups can be tapped we would see a more balanced tension between supply and demand.
Wake up and smell the coffee brewing in your kitchen!
There should be no consumer boycotts of Starbucks in support of union efforts, unless requested by the union organizers. Boycotts hurt workers and support the company's argument that unionization hurts workers. As a tactic, boycotts are a "last resort" item.
But a little while ago you wrote “ Eat less meat, stop going to McDonalds, cancel your Amazon Prime membership, make your own coffee. I believe that corporations are very sensitive to consumer demand. If they see less customers, they will lower prices to try and bring them back.” Isn’t that boycotting?
Putting people in nominal categories like “workers” or “consumers” ends up getting us to miss the bigger picture. I think you and I have similar goals.
My bad. I was trying to apply a "lessons learned" about boycotts from the attempt to unionize an Amazon warehouse to the attempt to unionize Starbucks, but blew it. Thanks for pointing it out. My first comment is valid IMHO.
@Victor. What it takes for Starbucks patrons to go elsewhere is for Starbuck patrons to decide to go elsewhere! LOL. Good news though, in this context, they have been closing stores (at least in California) so maybe patronage is down?
Come on, friends. 1)Starbucks and McDonalds are NOT important sources of inflation. 2) BUT they are major agents of illegal anti-unionism and unfair low ages.
For RR and the rest: Do we stay on one track or do we make a major move and examine intersecting factors. Can we balance at least two balls at one time? And put them in historical and comparative perspective perspective?
Send us your syllabus for that course. I wouldn’t know where to begin, but I am all for recognizing the complexity and examining more options to address the issues.
I can afford Starbucks coffee, and I even like it, and I like that they do some CRS type activities. But I make coffee at home which costs 39 cents per cup.
Typically, between your BART stop and your office there is one cafe stop on the way and it's your habit to do it. Such was the case when I did that commute. Habit.
Congress no longer represents the interests of the people but the interests of their donors i.e. corporations. How is this ever going to change when the people responsible for doing the right thing by voting in responsible legislation are the same pigs at the trough of the corporate feedsack?
This is why it is necessary to lobby the lobbyists and their corporate masters, not their leashed dogs in Congress. As I see it, the USA is not a nation. It's a hedge fund.
Dee ; Great question! I think people like us who look to leaders like Dr Reich are representative of good trend. Good, progressive leadership who do not worship the almighty dollar are what will help turn things around. I mean, just look at our former 'leader' and his despicable helpers! Losers all!
On Amazon - Goodwill of Southern California has a copy for only $1.71 - I like supporting goodwill when buying books because it helps keep people employed. But the library is also a good bet - support your local libes!
Corporations have an entire party at their beck and call. Forbes published data about enormous profits during the pandemic. Media including The Washington Post insisted that Dems elect and appoint centrists. America is so top heavy that centrists seem like annoying fleas. Dems can only pass what the GOP allows. 6 trillion in rescue funds went pouf and cannot be traced. America is in the hands of these powerful corporations who do not find any value in humanitarian endeavors. How shortsighted are they to hurt their own consumers. Good article Mr. Reich.
You are correct as usual. The Biden administration is probably picking their battles as there are so many atrocities to point out! They probably do not want to rub the most powerful the wrong way! Us social democrats have a huge plate of bitter roots to eat. Turning an enormous ship on a dime may sink it or at least capsize the monster.
I was just about to write a similar comment. As president of Harvard, he opined that women are innately less competent in math and science than men. Despite all of his credentials, I have little respect for him. I wish the news media would stop giving his opinions so much attention.
He is being featured in a debate with Krugman on Bentheim. A year ago Krugman predicted that there would be no inflation. Summers stated that US economic policies (fiscal and monetary) were the worst in 50 years and yes we would face significant inflation. He was spot on as we see now. Krugman was dead wrong.
Can you provide a reference to his statement on math and science?
It's in the Wikipedia article about him, but I also personally remember it, because, unsurprisingly, there was an uproar in response. Summers is wrong about the causes of inflation. I agree with Professor Reich's explanation. And Paul Krugman didn't predict there would be no inflation, he thought it would be temporary.
It could be argued that prominent economists predicting significant inflation cause significant inflation: Corporate CEOs then feel free to raise their prices and shrug their shoulders, saying, "The economists predicted this. I had nothing to do with it."
Are there examples of big-name corporations that ARE using their profits to counter higher supply-chain costs (rather than passing these costs onto the consumer)? I wonder if giving them (if there are any!) a high-profile shout-out would help any?
Also, the cynic in me wonders if some of what's behind this is just some we're-doing-what-we-can-to-make-Biden-look-bad tactics. If they bloat their profits in the meantime, it's a (sick) win-win. To hell with the consumers.
Thomas Bushaw ; It would be good to know (and promote/patronize) a business that is not gouging unethical. It goes against the greed business model taught everywhere, no doubt, but what a neat idea!.
One way, maybe the best way, to fight back is to stop doing business with these corporations. Eat less meat, stop going to McDonalds, cancel your Amazon Prime membership, make your own coffee. I believe that corporations are very sensitive to consumer demand. If they see less customers, they will lower prices to try and bring them back..
Consumer solidarity would be extremely effective — a powerful response to corporate unity, a.k.a. monopoly. Energizing consumers to take the steps you list, however, means tuning out the endless drone of media (even MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post and other outlets that are contrasted with FOX and company) that amplify the corporate line on inflation and so many other essential issues. How to motivate action for the common good becomes the sticking point.
When I hear the same story on MSNBC that inflation is the big bad wolf (no doubt made worse by Biden and the Democrats) I realize that Corporate media is Corporate Media. They are on message on show after show from pre-dawn through well after sunset, the message of INFLATION is repeated constantly. It is bu!!$#it cannot be repeated enough, at least to this old lady!
It is ironic that two economists who may decry 'business bashing' are Democrats, and most Democrat voters will be harmed by the sole 'remedy' of the Fed that is raising interest rates. Gasoline on the fire under most working people and elders. My grown kids are just getting on their feet. My daughter is expecting a baby, and she. And her Navy husband will have to move to another state soon. My son and his bride are going to be looking for a house. I need a car at some point, we have been a one car unit. Interest rates going up will not help anyone but the wealthy.
Thank you for your continued advocacy for the little guy.
We have been indoctrinated with the idea that when demand exceeds supply, prices somehow organically must increase. Of course, as you said, it is humans who decide to raise prices. Members of the Council of Economic Advisors are knowledgeable and capable, but they are not infallible. Moreover, they were hired for their economic, not their political expertise. Biden doesn't have to take their advice on everything. He should again be beating the drums that prices are increasing at least in part due to corporate greed. If he doesn't, he will end up shouldering all the blame.
I saw a Biden speech a few days ago where he said most of the gains in the economy went to the top. He said the BBB ideas to help lower paid workers would improve things for more people.
What I find so disheartening is we have a great opportunity at this time in history, after this great upheaval of a pandemic, to set our country back on a course toward real equality akin to what FDR started in the 40’s. But we do not seem to be able to slip the bonds of this great corporate control and greed. I remember learning in high school about monopolies and busting them up. It struck my young mind how amazing that was. These big big businesses were not allowed to control so much of a sector of the economy! And when our government accomplished this, it would never be able to happen again! More and more I KNOW that we must be the change we want to see. This is our time to change the outcome of the major inequality we are stuck in at this time, in our history. We can and must change what seems inevitable. Biden seems to have the courage, but politics and big money is in the way.
If things don't change soon, the very wealthy will pay more than a big tax cut or windfall tax. Climate destruction can topple the largest buildings and cause $multitrillions in damage, and that is just human made infrastructure. Silent Spring with no buds or plant life along with tainted water caused by floods, and fires .... we have seen previews.
Why do you say you are sorry, Robert? You aren't sorry at all. You are mad as Hell and you aren't gonna take any more of this, right? Me, too.
I'm sorry that the Biden White House appears to be swayed by the same sort of neoliberal rubbish that swayed the Obama and Clinton White Houses, often emanating from the same people.
THIS IS WHY I LEFT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!
So where are you going to go? There are some very good people in the democratic party and the democrats, at least, push for programs that are good for the people. We need Build Back Better but the republicans, Manchin and Sinema block it. Biden had cut child poverty in half but couldn't get enough votes because of that same block to continue it.
No other party is going to help you. I was a Green for awhile but found them to be an intolerant group. They won't compromise and they are not always right, so they are impotent. Don't forget Sinema came out of the Green party and, once she got into the big time and could sell her vote, she sold out quickly.
Oh, I know no other party will "help" me. I'm not looking. I care deeply about what's happening in this country but I no longer believe that anything I do will change the trajectory of where the plutocratic class will take this country. We don't have leaders to intervene on behalf of citizens.
I once asked my congressman what is the backbone of the American economy and he snapped out without hesitation "small business". I respectfully said he was wrong. He got all huffy with me and said who is the backbone of America. I replied that the American consumer was because without us, the American consumer, small business fail. Covid-19 proved that.
If we want to change this country start buying from local small businesses and stop buying from large corporate. There is some things we have to buy from corp's like TP. Don't buy from Wal-Mart. Buy from a locally owned store, if possible. What I propose is to stop buy frivolous items. Stop using extra gas just running around. Stay home and become a family unit again. We do not need all the latest electronics. I still have iPhone 5S. A 21 year old pickup. I could afford them if I wanted to, but why. Try watching a video by Naom Chomsky "Requiem for the American Dream". It will go well with Professor Reich courses.
I wasn't sure until now if anyone out there was thinking the same thoughts as I am. You just confirmed that there is. You are absolutely right when you say "We don't have leaders to intervene on behalf of the citizens of our country". And I don't see any hope in sight for that to change anytime soon!!!
Try the Forward Party, whose goal is to break the two-party duopoly that allows domination of special interests, partisan rancor, unresponsiveness to the people. One of the ways to do this is to promote open primaries. https://www.forwardparty.com/
Leaving the Party isn't going to fix the situation. Being an Independent merely means you don't get to vote in ANY primary (in a lot of states, if not all), which means that you are stuck with whoever the two parties nominate (and you won't have had a voice in that choice). The Party needs people to work within it to pick better candidates and form better platforms.
That is true in my state. We only get to vote for the party that you are registered under, which I think should be illegal. IMHO.
I would almost always vote Democrat, but in MA can be unenrolled. I vote in the primaries every time without an issue. I wonder how many parties are in Sweden?
If being an Independent means you can't Vote in the Primaries, then I have been mislead. It is my understanding that the Primaries will be open to the Independent votes starting this year. I am not sure if all states are allowing this, but there was an article I read that said the Independent's were stronger in voting numbers than either of the two "Accepted Parties" and they would need those Independent votes more than ever. Guess we will have to wait and see.
In some states, but not all, Independents may vote in a primary (one or the other, not both). If this is changing to all states, it's the first I've heard of it. The statements about the Parties needing Independent votes are regarding general elections, not primary elections.
Call your local city or town clerk. they should be able to give that information or refer you to the correct person to ask about election rules.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! Support Democrats who are progressive and not bought by big money.
Or Democrats who are sensible, smart, centrist, and not bought by big money, like Mark Kelly of Arizona. "Progressive" is a term that is misunderstood by too many, and used wrongly by many more. Equating "Progressive" and "doesn't take corporate money" is one of those errors.
Meredith Lane Brown ; I like Mark Kelly, but am unfamiliar with his work. This is a big country. It used to be that people contributed to their own representatives, but the money machines of the rich has caused this crazy frenzy of targeting people on the other side of the country to win the seat at all costs, because everyone is up against big money. It should be people working for their own districts, states etc. Might be more manageable the way it was originally set up.
I agree. I am an Arizonan, so that's what I am doing.
I guess I have never seen a definition of 'Progressive', but generally, it seems the times I have seen it used it was for describing those who supported the Green New Deal, like Ed Markey and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Bernie Sanders.
You've made me make sure I was understanding terms I was using. Here are some definitions copied from Wikipedia:
"The meaning of progressivism has varied over time and differs depending on perspective. … In the 21st century, a movement that identifies as progressive is "a social or political movement that aims to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions"."
"The Congressional Progressive Caucus advocates "a universal, high-quality, Medicare for All health care system for all", living wage laws, reductions in military expenditure, a crackdown on corporate greed, putting an end to mass incarceration, supporting and implementing swift measures to start reversing climate change, immigration policies that are humane, and reparations."
If you are a centrist you are republican lite. If you take big, dark money, you are a sell out. the greed heads will mess it up.
Political Columnist and author John Avlon wrote in his 2005 book "Independent Nation" that centrism is ... an antidote to the politics of divisiveness, providing principled opposition to political extremes.
I love that expression greed heads.”
Not anywhere close. Please refer to Dr. Reich's article from a day or so ago about the political spectrum and how it has shifted in the post-Gingrich years.
I look at those who were mentored by Bernie Sanders who do not take corporate money and have track records that are impressive in what they have done and attempted to do.
I agree Laurie. There are indeed some really good ones, Ro Khanna (sp?) for one, a great guy, also Pocan out of Wisconsin..and many more.
The Democratic Party is Republican Lite...they totally sold out to their rich donors, and they still are.
My comment below is about Bernie Sanders, who was able to get large numbers of small donors to be able to run. Our media and Establishment on both sides were able to mislead the voters. When you think of it, Bernie represents the desire to support the common good. Everyone getting corporate money is just the opposite.
Laurie, the evidence does not support your thesis. The majority of Americans are not Progressives. According to the Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/progressive-left/, the Progressive Left are 6% of the public. 7% of registered voters. 12% of Democrats. Further, these numbers are down from 2020.
According to Gallup in July 2020, only 26% of Americans identify themselves as liberal, compared with conservative (34%) or moderate (40%).
Not only are progressives a minority of American voters, they are also a minority of Democratic voters. According to Pew, in 2020 only 47% of Democrats described themselves as “liberal” or “very liberal”. The majority of Democrats are “moderate” (45%) or “conservative” (14%).
Voters of color are mostly Democratic, but that does not mean they are leftwing, as black support for Joe Biden over Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary proved. Only 28% of black Americans and 30% of Hispanic Americans identify themselves as liberal.
So in order to have rational discourse we need to all agree on the facts. If people are acting on the basis of wishful thinking again, we know the outcome.
Martha, it is not a thesis. There are myriad semantic problems with some of the labels and categories. Gallup is not God, either. I am a 20th century person who lived through the sixties and have seen what the people (humans) can do.
I would like to know where they do their research for the polls. What are the cross sections of groups? Where (geographically )are the cross sections of groups? What are the income levels of the groups being polled? Just little things like that. Somehow I just don't trust polls. Especially when they rig the questions.
Alas, victims of a warped political construct that we are. True social humanitarians such as Senator Sanders marching along with the weight of labels and innuendo slowing their progress and convoluting their message stand little chance against the machine. The corptocracy's overthrow of our fragile society I'm afraid complete. They control the average American's information sources, cash flow and food on the table. While we sit back and banter back and forth over hollow labels such as democrat and Republican. While both are so deep in corporate pockets all we see are the soles of their feet ! WAKE UP AMERICA ! !
Not so fast, Mark. Bernie is still in the Senate and he has some people he mentors that are young. He still avoids corporate donors, and now there is a growing number of forward looking people getting in to office who also avoid the trap of corporate money. As another person on this forum pointed out an estimated 20% of people who do get corporate money are true to their constituents. It's a start.
Agreed
Claire ; true! money is powerful! But look at the campaign he put together with single donor contributions. The DNC and corporate media did him in. But he is still in the Senate and can do some good. He nudged the Dem party to the left. Too bad about Manchin and Synema though. What they did should be illegal! The vows representatives take must be improved and real.
Correction Claire. It's 'my' fault, it's your fault, it's all our faults; we were too busy with 'other stuff', and left out the car keys and hoped for the best. The signs were all there in the early '80's - not just apparent as a single party fault, but quite obviously both parties. The problem is that the party labels also hide those concealing their true and first blood alliance.
D4n ; Many voters are so misinformed by even mainstream media that they think it's covered in the 'news'. Information that is wrong or misleading gets the monied interests what they want. People working lots of hours or multiple jobs to get by while trying to raise kids and actually stay healthy are at a disadvantage at keeping up with politics.
Absolutely Laurie; it's part and parcel of our larger problems. Knowing just how true that is, helps me to be patient and kind as I can be and cut most folks an awful lot of slack. Even most media pros are awfully challenged given the internet and the dynamics of the 24/7 news cycle.
Claire -- Left for WHAT? The Republican Party? Sadly we in America live in a binomial world politically, and your action is benefiting vastly more odious forces than those you find unworthy in the Democratic Party. Abandoning the Democratic Party due to its progressive imperfections is what gave us four years of President Trump. I rest my case.
Our 'Supreme' Court giving us Citizens United made money in politics worse then ever. The greed heads went nuts and we are on the brink of ruin in almost every way, seemingly. Existential peril looms?! But The Darkest Hour is always just before the dawn.... Let's keep trying and not lose hope or determination.
Yes, for What? Granted, I don't vote for Republicans even though I consider myself an independent. But I stopped financially supporting the party. For instance, Al Franken solicits me for Midwest Pac. I have no idea who the "democrats" are that they want to support. I won't support it because I don't want moderates running the party further into the ground. So I stay away.
I am ready to do the same thing. I was raised to believe that the Democrats had a better grip on dealing with the overall population needed and was equiped to see that the people's needs came first. Somewhere down the road of life, the Dem's have taken the wrong turn and don't seem to want to get back on track. I refuse to support that kind of thinking. I will join my other friends and join the Independent's group. Maybe the People's Party some day if they get up and running.
Please don’t call it the “People’s Party”. The term is a very close similarity to the People’s Republic of China’s communist party. Perhaps The American Party would be more appropriate. People like MTG and Bobert and their ilk would be hollering ‘communist’ louder than Joseph McCarthy.
Ladybug. MTG and Boebert will yell whatever anyone does for the common good. they should be fired. Ironic that their 'boss' was famous on TV for saying 'your fired' like Ronald Reagan was an actor too. Bedtime for Bonzo was Reagan's 'Greatest role'. Birds of a feather!
I have always found the independents to be the least knowledgeable and most easily persuaded group.
I'm not aware of that. But I know I'm not "the least knowledgeable." I am cynical. I have for decades whole heartedly supported the Democratic Party but I'm sick of doing that, and pardon this, getting the same shitty results. I can hardly believe what has happened to this country today and I DO hold the Democrats complicit.
I must add, the Democrats, for the moment, have all three branches of government by a razor thin margin, yes. It is unconscionable that Americans, of all colors, are going to lose their voting rights under a Democratic administration. I hope that doesn't happen but right now, the outlook is grim.
Oh, and this is what the Democrats do, they punt on the big stuff but throw a bone to the masses like putting a black woman on the SC. (which I fully support!) But it's low hanging fruit. They need to do the HARD STUFF, fight the Republicans on all those voting laws!
I say that because in every election there is always a big block of independents who still don't know which way they are going to vote right up to the last minute. The question in my mind is always, don't they follow the issues? Don't they know that one party is threatening to run the country into the ground? And then a sizable portion of them actually vote for the party threatening to run the country into the ground.
Bernie always said that "It blows my mind how people vote for the same people who betray them over and over" and expect better results". Forget the Establishment DNC.
!!! What's up with that?! I can only think they can't get off this hamster wheel because the rich own the Dems. What else is it? The Democratic Party has lost the masses because they won't represent them, they need the plutocratic class to keep them in power, THEY THINK. They could change their whole way of politics but they're totally stuck in the mud.
"Swayed" ?
It seems like the Democrats are an 'under class' and must bow and scrape to the big money and give up their ethics as the cost of being allowed in.
As if the Republicans aren't and don't? Puhleez.
Republicans have no platforms, it seems.
One of the reasons they can flip-flop on positions and repeat what they want to be the truth (instead of the truth) ad infinitum. Unfortunately, the Democrats do have a platform, and most of its planks are pie-in-the-sky "progressive" wishful thinking. It's why I refer to myself as a "centrist" --- not that I am "in the center" between Dems and Reps, but because my opinions and beliefs are not so far left as the planks of the Democratic platform. I cannot bring myself to even mention the word "right" in terms of my position because I am in no way "rightist" as it has come to be exemplified by people who storm the Capitol or vote for an amoral, narcissistic, would-be dictator. Sigh. If the Republican party of today were the same as Abraham Lincoln's Republican party (a party FOR the common people), I would be a Republican---because the Democrats of that day were White supremacist slave-holders. But the positions of the parties over the years have changed to the point that they have completely switched positions, but the Republicans don't want to admit it...so they just avoid putting together a platform at all because if they did, the planks would be things like "Corporations rule" and "po' people just outta stay po' an' be happy abowd it" and "we reserve the right to declare what is a fact and what is not" (apparently including the laws of gravity, thermodynamics, and Malthus).
Meredith Lane Brown ; I don't think it unfortunate that Democrats do have a platform, and I do not believe that the party should just 'give up' on 'pie in the sky' ideas like increasing childcare subsidies or improving access to affordable housing or healthcare. I may be less 'leftie' than some, because I don't think we should have wide open borders; people should be allowed to apply for asylum if they have credible claims to qualify for it. One should actually be a citizen to vote. Not having a platform just to allow people to fudge or hedge on commitments to pursue policies is a cop out.
The 'Dixiecrats' existed awhile ago, but I remember George Wallace in his wheelchair adamantly resisting desegregation, so I get it. There was a reversal. There are Democrats in my state, like Richie Neal who takes money from big pharma. I am now in his district after the redrawing of the maps. It seems like voters have been promised 'pie in the sky' whenever any of our reps have made promises, some accuse them of making promises and voting for things they know will never pass. The money rules.
The whole system benefits the Repugs. Electoral College, Senate rules and more than there is room to type here, plus I'm getting older as it is with only so much time...I can still have a sense of humor though. Some day (I'm gonna sound like tRump here), it's gonna just be beautiful! , you know, the sun will come out, and most people will be hip, and the greed heads will just lose, or stop being part of the problem. Like magic.
The Republicans stand for something and have ethics? Are you a troll?
Republicans ALSO "bow and scrape to the big money and give up their ethics as the cost of being allowed in." That's my point....all politicians are forced to do so in our system because we have allowed corporate money to dominate it. No, I am not a troll.
Meredith ; I am suggesting that voters look to candidates who want to get out of the mirage that they can get representation from bought out hacks. If we continue to vote for proxy 'representation' the game will continue. We can call them anything we want; progressive (as in forward leading ;progress), ethical, it is easier if there could be agreement on what they are called when in discussion. But centrist gives a bad taste in my mouth. Joe Manchin anyone?
Well, as a person who regularly votes Democrat (unless there was a Republican with good ideas), I am opposed to voting for anyone who takes corporate money. If there was a corporate entity that was ethical, (hahaha) I might consider it ok. But if your rep takes money, they work for the money they got, not for the constituent, not you. Republicans have mostly been the money. Democrats are the 'beasts of burden', the donkeys, lowly workers. the worst thing is the dark money from outside the country.
All the Establishment types on both sides of the aisle are taking money from corporate and wealthy donors and doing the bidding like slaves.
The more voters who know about the inflation myth, the better. I'm putting what little money I have on progressives who are not bought. Thank you, Robert Reich, for this information!
Voters who actually *know* anything is better than voters who only *believe* something.
That makes sense in a world of so much nonsense. I believe in science. There is 'hard' science and political science, I guess.
It is a serious mistake to assume the progressive left will solve monopoly power constitutionally. Socialists tend to be inherently totalitarian. The appropriate solution is aggressive anti-trust legislation to re-establish a highly competitive market.
We will teach pigs to fly before then. But what about the new deal? How were monopolies broken up then? They were, weren't they/
Anti -trust was championed by one republican, Teddy Roosevelt, and basically eviscerated under another Republican R. Regan. In between, including during the new deal there was some attempt to limit obvious anti-competitive mergers. But massive corporations such as General Motors were allowed to grow via mergers..... all those GM brands were once separate companies.
But Teddy Roosevelt had the support of most of the people I think I read. That is a whole lot of power. Would be good if Americans can work together for a common good.
Tell that to Sweden, Norway and Denmark. They might take exception. It' impossible to keep a competitive market for long. Adam Smith and Cornelius Vanderbilt both talked about how when 3 or 4 business men in the same field get together, they immeditately form a monopoly. The government has to intervene with regulation.
Sweden, Norway and Denmark are welfare states, but are not socialist, they did not nationalize industry, did not create worker ownership of the means of production, encouraged high enterprise efficiency etc.
Yes, you need anti-monopoly regulation, but if you allow a regulatory agency to make those decisions it will likely be captured by the regulated. Therefor you need a simple law such as no firm can exceed one billion in assets, with appropriate felony penalties on the executives.
Kendrick W. Miller ; The United States of America is a Welfare state for the very wealthy. What was the first thing tRump did after getting into the Oval office? He invited Russian oligarchs over with no cameras or note taking or records of anything else allowed. He gave the wealthy a couple trillion (or more) in tax breaks. Elon Musk grew his Tesla empire using taxpayer money. He was the first one who pushed back on the idea of a 2% 'wealth tax' for the rich. Most of the very rich do not pay taxes because they have sophisticated 'instruments' and loopholes etc. etc. ad nauseam.
Well said Laurie
You are right that eventually the regulatory agencies do get captured by the regulated. All it takes is one charismatic leader like Reagan or a severe financial period and people either follow like sheep or reach out in desperation. I'm not sure how to stop that.
Yes a simple law would be good but with today's congress, it'd be impossible to pass and, with today's supreme court, it'd probably be ruled unconstitutional. Six of those appointees are there because they are strongly pro corporation.
I agree such a law could not pass today. The problem with the court is currently insurmountable. In my view the Citizens-United decision is clearly unconstitutional on two grounds. First, corporations are "fictional" persons only for the narrow purposes of owning, using and disposing of property, and to be sued and sue. (There also appears to be a mistaken belief that limited liability extends to management...it doesn't and shouldn't) Secondly, I believe using corporate funds for political purposes is an illegal "taking" (theft) of stockholder resources for non-business purposes .
I completely agree with you. I've been arguing those same points.
Also I don't know how anyone could read this and believe a corporation is a person.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
And these judges are interpreting the Constitution for us. They've been re-defining the Constitution.
Just imagine the response of the billionaire firms to that idea. Those guys can outspend thefts in advertising and campaigning w/o even trying hard.
but yet you equate our progressive left with socialists. Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist but isn't talking about nationalizing industry. I think you have to define your terms. If you believe our progressive left is socialist, I disagree.
I think you left out a big factor, Robert. Beyond being bad politics, alienating corporations threatens campaign finances. Because our elections are funded by the private sector, our leaders are held hostage. Sinema and Manchin?
Biden has a minimum of political capital with low approval ratings and a razor slim margin in Congress.
I am with you that this an example of the oligarchs winning again. But there is just one battle that MUST be won this year. The midterm elections.
@Bill. The professor writes a fact-based essay every week. He can point to the Council of Economic Advisors factually. What you said, however, rings true. I don't entirely fault Democrats in Congress, not entirely, because they need so much money to prosecute an effective campaign in the midterms. Even those who are not up before the people in this cycle are sympathetic to the needs of their fellow caucus members for donations. Nobody wants to beat on the lobbyists and corporations when the need for donations is so immediate. It's awful, it's humiliating and it is unfortunately necessary in the current context of money-driven elections. So I'm sad and I'm mad! But it is so important to return a majority of Democrats to the House and to increase the number of Democratic senators I am almost embarrassed to say that if I were in an election myself I might decide that THIS election cycle is not the time to push for much needed reform. I really hate this pragmatism, but I can't overlook reality for many Representatives. What I am doing about it is trying to work for Katie Porter and donating money to her and other worthies. Someday perhaps we can wean our elected officials off of corporate money, but that won't happen because of individual taxpayers donations - that will happen if there is a law regulating donations, limiting donations from corporations and other dark money sources. Good luck getting that law through a Congress that needs the money!!
Do not fund the corporate interests!
Corporations and their secret plots are what voters are ignorant of.
Are you a Russian or Corporate Troll?
But the real reason is our political system is corrupt and the voters are stupid.
Ignorant, not stupid.
Thanks, Meredith!
There are some really good people out there who need financial support to even run for office or reelection. I used to be able to donate even the minimum amount to help. Thanks to all of the rising pricing of goods and necessary utilities, not to mention the rising cost of medical care needs, I can no longer donate any amount of $ to any contender. Only mentioning this as the slide of change in people's voting rights are also being hampered by lack of funds to run at all. The very rich people and Corporate power players have made a big dent in the voting process for the average citizens.
You will not get what you want as a working or 'avarage' income citizen if you support corporate 'representatives'. If you want to get big money out of politics, stop sending your money to those on the take.
It'll take more than that, like antitrust laws and abolishing 'Citizens United'...donations from individuals like us are *nothing* compared to corporate dollars.
Hey, look at what Bernie was able to put together! He could've won! without the corrupt DNC and the misinformation on mainstream media. They helped to install tRump! Remember the picture of Donald on the phone with "Breaking News" flashing on the screen? No other candidate got that freebie!
Meredith Lane Brown ; Had you ever gone to a Rally For Bernie Sanders and seen thousands of supporters of all ages? Have you ever listened to what he has to say? He ran on small donor money, and the Establishment in both parties were trembling in their boots! We have to start somewhere and getting people in who will not sell out will require progressives or ethical candidates who care about the common good.
No, I have never gone to a Bernie Sanders rally (or any rally for any politician, for that matter)....I think they are pointless. Yes, I have listened to what he has to say; more importantly, I have read it....which gives one more time to contemplate its meanings. I have also lived in a Socialist-Democrat country (Denmark) for six years, and pretty much recognize where Bernie would like to take the USA. Just because I am not as far left on the spectrum as Bernie, or apparently you, doesn't mean that I deserve to be called names or be accused of being un-American.
Meredith ; If I called you a troll, it's because I can't believe any centrist position could be a solution. It may have to do with semantics. Similarly, you seem to consider being 'far left on the spectrum' to be unflattering. it's all a question of degree. Today, if a working person wants anything from the treasury, they are looking for a handout. Meanwhile billionaires don't pay anything in taxes! So who is extreme? It is all relative, apparently.
Sorry for name calling; this forum is, for me an upgrade from the free for all that is Facebook. So, I have read that people in Denmark and Sweden are some of the happiest in the world. If Bernie seems to be leaning in a direction of Socialist-Democrat country like that, it might not be so bad. But in another post you mentioned totalitarianism? That does not sound good.
Gotta start somewhere!
Average
Seems like this pragmatic argument comes around every election cycle, because things get worse and worse. It's never a good time to do the 'Impossible', especially when we give away the store. Support Unions! and Progressives!
I've said this many times over the past few years: "There is too much money in our politics, and too much politics in our government!" Get the big money out of our elections, level the playing field and remind our Senators and Representatives that they are there to REPRESENT US. Some get it, others, sadly, are bought.
One astute govt observer said that 20% of the congress people are on the up and up. The rest? Represent their donors.
Benjamin ; Passing laws should not cost money! Voters should be able to let their representatives know what they want, and representatives should do their jobs to pass legislation that their constituents demand. It should be as illegal as it is unethical to do otherwise for profit! As long as we 'hold our noses and allow what is going on and let our representatives sell us put we will never get what we need.
I didn't say passing laws puts our reps on the take - getting elected and re-elected does.
Yes, it's the ultimate poll tax.
Benjamin ; This was my thought about the 'poll tax' that is our voting apparatus today. We need to pour more money into getting our candidate through the primary process in order to even have a chance to vote for the laws they will vote on for us. So we are essentially saying the same thing. Just keeping those we support in the seat after we get them there costs more and more and more.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
No, at least I could not afford to keep paying more and more. I suspect I'm not alone. I guess that's why the greedheads want more and more money. Gives 'em a big advantage!
Look Biden can beat on the Saudis and no one except the Koch bros will squeak. He can open the Iranian oil spigot. Bring oil back down from92 a barrel to 70 and you stop fueling inflation.
Trouble is, war requires massive spending and the people who profit from it have or can buy their own legislators. And as long as their own family members are far from the action they have no incentive not to take advantage of the $ituation. Even -from behind the curtain--foment it.
It's not *all* about oil.
He could open the Venezuelan oil spigot. There are options but keep letting the Saudis run the show.
Support progressives who avoid taking corporate money!
Katie Porter in California and Katie Hobbs in Arizona!
Don't forget the Squad. They are a group of six Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives. It was initially composed of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. They have since been joined by Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri following the 2020 United States House of Representatives elections.
!!! I love them!!!
they are Progressives!
And Mark Kelly of Arizona.
What about Mark Kelly of Arizona?
He doesn't take corporate money, he thinks science is a good thing, and works to better things for all citizens. He just doesn't happen to be a "progressive"....he leans left of center (like me). Therefore, he is similar to Katie Porter of California and Katie Hobbs in Arizona, as Benjamin R. Stockton noted. It was to him that I meant to reply.
I just gave to Katie Porter, and even bought a t-shirt.
You bet!
See my previous comment re equating "don't take corporate money" with "progressive". They are not the same thing.
Both can contribute to the common good, but I know tRump 'did not take corporate money'. (And I'm Aunt Jemima!!). Of course he took all the money he could from wherever he could! There are important differences that distinguish candidates besides funding sources and political approaches. One does not need an advanced degree in political science to see the difference in a candidate like tRump! But even he tricked people into voting for him by lying.
Laurie, how much money can a congress member raise per day from individuals? How much money is a congress member required to raise daily?
Bernie Sanders was doing very well: We need an educated electorate! Support Progressives with small dollar donations! Unless you want to continue to be ruled by the corporate greedheads. Ignore the lies of corporate media! Their paid pundits will convince you that Socialists and even Communists are trying to ruin the country! That was a tRump talking point!
Well, we have a problem, eh? Most people are time poor.
Martha, there are far more of us than there are the few really wealthy 'people'.
Bernie was knocking it out of the park with small donations! I don't know how much per day he got. He started very small up in Vermont, and built his following slowly. He took a red state and won over a significant number of Republicans as well as Democrats. I read a couple of books about his background in politics. In College, I think it was the University of Chicago, he was involved with Civil rights. Wanted to integrate his dorm. There are pictures of a young Bernie Sanders getting his butt kicked by Chicago Police for his efforts. Years later, as the Mayor of Burlington, VT., he built a new police station. He did a good job and was popular. Still is.
I sure get the question. If I gave just $3.00 every single day to every single progressive politician who sends me multiple emails daily, I’d have been completely bankrupt 15 years ago. It’s beyond ridiculous. Stacy Abrams alone now asks me for $5.00 5-6 times a DAY. Come on. The people who are already getting shafted by corporate greed now have to be taken to the cleaners by the people who claim that they want to get us out of this mess?? Give us a break!!!!
I agree with you completely, although I think we should recognize that the pleas for $5 x 5/d are in fact automatically generated texts or emails, and you can opt out of them. I finally did, and it is a great relief to go to ActBlue and give some $$ when I feel like it and have a little extra.
That is exactly what I do.
Mitzi ; In order for a thing to be ridiculous it must first be ridiculed!
Larry Summers is just another old white guy who has been anointed with gravitas that is totally undeserved and he needs to be ignored by the media.
So in San Francisco there is lots of competition among coffee sellers and yes Starbucks and Peets have raised their prices very significantly but from casual observation their stores are as full with customers as always. One can even make coffee at home. So what’s up?
You have raised a deeply relevant question. What will it take for the Starbuck’s patrons to go elsewhere? There are budding attempts among frontline workers to unionize that are getting corporate attention; where are the consumer boycotts in support of their efforts? How can a coalition among workers and consumers (who are actually the same people) be energized and activated? If the commonality of interests between these two groups can be tapped we would see a more balanced tension between supply and demand.
Wake up and smell the coffee brewing in your kitchen!
There should be no consumer boycotts of Starbucks in support of union efforts, unless requested by the union organizers. Boycotts hurt workers and support the company's argument that unionization hurts workers. As a tactic, boycotts are a "last resort" item.
But a little while ago you wrote “ Eat less meat, stop going to McDonalds, cancel your Amazon Prime membership, make your own coffee. I believe that corporations are very sensitive to consumer demand. If they see less customers, they will lower prices to try and bring them back.” Isn’t that boycotting?
Putting people in nominal categories like “workers” or “consumers” ends up getting us to miss the bigger picture. I think you and I have similar goals.
I don't think it's boycotting - it's making wise customer choices. It's the free market.
So is a better approach consumer education? I’m just searching for something I can do to have even the slightest bit of impact.
Yes, consumer education, but also lobbying our leaders for laws that prevent price gouging, insider trading by our "leaders," etc.
My bad. I was trying to apply a "lessons learned" about boycotts from the attempt to unionize an Amazon warehouse to the attempt to unionize Starbucks, but blew it. Thanks for pointing it out. My first comment is valid IMHO.
Plus there are many of us who do not go to Starbucks because it is too rich for our blood. That is, expensive, not to mention 'hoity'. (snobbish).
But if prices are too high that will keep some people out, like students.
@Victor. What it takes for Starbucks patrons to go elsewhere is for Starbuck patrons to decide to go elsewhere! LOL. Good news though, in this context, they have been closing stores (at least in California) so maybe patronage is down?
Come on, friends. 1)Starbucks and McDonalds are NOT important sources of inflation. 2) BUT they are major agents of illegal anti-unionism and unfair low ages.
For RR and the rest: Do we stay on one track or do we make a major move and examine intersecting factors. Can we balance at least two balls at one time? And put them in historical and comparative perspective perspective?
Now that would be a course!
Maybe you should teach it Graff.
Send us your syllabus for that course. I wouldn’t know where to begin, but I am all for recognizing the complexity and examining more options to address the issues.
But those Starbucks cups are so cool 😎
McDonald’s still has their $1 coffee
Disgusting. One would no more go into McDonald's than one would rub dirt in one's hair.
Poor folks do lots of disgusting things like eating cheap hamburgers?
Yes, if you're hungry enough, the hamburgers taste good!
Correct.
I have been known to have their cheap breakfasts when travelling. Maybe once per year
Mud packs are offered at the costliest spas. But there is a vastly smarter way to eat than McD's, for sure.
San Francisco is an expensive place to live and do business. One must be well to do to go to Starbucks in the first place. Peets too, no doubt.
Relatively wealthy customers?
Maybe some folks want that daily cuppacoffee and are willing to give up something else to afford it?
I can afford Starbucks coffee, and I even like it, and I like that they do some CRS type activities. But I make coffee at home which costs 39 cents per cup.
CRS? Isn't that can't remember $#!t? 🤔
Typically, between your BART stop and your office there is one cafe stop on the way and it's your habit to do it. Such was the case when I did that commute. Habit.
Congress no longer represents the interests of the people but the interests of their donors i.e. corporations. How is this ever going to change when the people responsible for doing the right thing by voting in responsible legislation are the same pigs at the trough of the corporate feedsack?
This is why it is necessary to lobby the lobbyists and their corporate masters, not their leashed dogs in Congress. As I see it, the USA is not a nation. It's a hedge fund.
And a sinking ship of sorts after the last 'administration'.
Dee ; Great question! I think people like us who look to leaders like Dr Reich are representative of good trend. Good, progressive leadership who do not worship the almighty dollar are what will help turn things around. I mean, just look at our former 'leader' and his despicable helpers! Losers all!
Just finished reading "Disloyal" by Michael Cohen - VERY chilling!!
I will see if the library has it. Bet it's interesting.
On Amazon - Goodwill of Southern California has a copy for only $1.71 - I like supporting goodwill when buying books because it helps keep people employed. But the library is also a good bet - support your local libes!
Yes, let's keep them open.
Corporations have an entire party at their beck and call. Forbes published data about enormous profits during the pandemic. Media including The Washington Post insisted that Dems elect and appoint centrists. America is so top heavy that centrists seem like annoying fleas. Dems can only pass what the GOP allows. 6 trillion in rescue funds went pouf and cannot be traced. America is in the hands of these powerful corporations who do not find any value in humanitarian endeavors. How shortsighted are they to hurt their own consumers. Good article Mr. Reich.
I love that: annoying fleas. 👏👏👏
You are correct as usual. The Biden administration is probably picking their battles as there are so many atrocities to point out! They probably do not want to rub the most powerful the wrong way! Us social democrats have a huge plate of bitter roots to eat. Turning an enormous ship on a dime may sink it or at least capsize the monster.
It seems that every time he opens his mouth Larry Summers does a lot of damage.
I was just about to write a similar comment. As president of Harvard, he opined that women are innately less competent in math and science than men. Despite all of his credentials, I have little respect for him. I wish the news media would stop giving his opinions so much attention.
Carolyn Herz ; probably his corporate media friends like his message because it justifies their greed.
He is being featured in a debate with Krugman on Bentheim. A year ago Krugman predicted that there would be no inflation. Summers stated that US economic policies (fiscal and monetary) were the worst in 50 years and yes we would face significant inflation. He was spot on as we see now. Krugman was dead wrong.
Can you provide a reference to his statement on math and science?
It's in the Wikipedia article about him, but I also personally remember it, because, unsurprisingly, there was an uproar in response. Summers is wrong about the causes of inflation. I agree with Professor Reich's explanation. And Paul Krugman didn't predict there would be no inflation, he thought it would be temporary.
Krugman has always said the inflation would be temporary and still does but he does admit it went higher than he thought it would.
It could be argued that prominent economists predicting significant inflation cause significant inflation: Corporate CEOs then feel free to raise their prices and shrug their shoulders, saying, "The economists predicted this. I had nothing to do with it."
He is still dead wrong.
Summers, that is
Are there examples of big-name corporations that ARE using their profits to counter higher supply-chain costs (rather than passing these costs onto the consumer)? I wonder if giving them (if there are any!) a high-profile shout-out would help any?
Also, the cynic in me wonders if some of what's behind this is just some we're-doing-what-we-can-to-make-Biden-look-bad tactics. If they bloat their profits in the meantime, it's a (sick) win-win. To hell with the consumers.
Thomas Bushaw ; It would be good to know (and promote/patronize) a business that is not gouging unethical. It goes against the greed business model taught everywhere, no doubt, but what a neat idea!.
One way, maybe the best way, to fight back is to stop doing business with these corporations. Eat less meat, stop going to McDonalds, cancel your Amazon Prime membership, make your own coffee. I believe that corporations are very sensitive to consumer demand. If they see less customers, they will lower prices to try and bring them back..
Consumer solidarity would be extremely effective — a powerful response to corporate unity, a.k.a. monopoly. Energizing consumers to take the steps you list, however, means tuning out the endless drone of media (even MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post and other outlets that are contrasted with FOX and company) that amplify the corporate line on inflation and so many other essential issues. How to motivate action for the common good becomes the sticking point.
We have done all of the above and are better for it.
Tim, we are better off eating less meat and brewing our coffee at home, avoiding Amazon prime and McDonald's.
When I hear the same story on MSNBC that inflation is the big bad wolf (no doubt made worse by Biden and the Democrats) I realize that Corporate media is Corporate Media. They are on message on show after show from pre-dawn through well after sunset, the message of INFLATION is repeated constantly. It is bu!!$#it cannot be repeated enough, at least to this old lady!
Might want check out this page from Harvard. Here is the link that tells who owns what.
https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/futureofmedia/index-us-mainstream-media-ownership
It is ironic that two economists who may decry 'business bashing' are Democrats, and most Democrat voters will be harmed by the sole 'remedy' of the Fed that is raising interest rates. Gasoline on the fire under most working people and elders. My grown kids are just getting on their feet. My daughter is expecting a baby, and she. And her Navy husband will have to move to another state soon. My son and his bride are going to be looking for a house. I need a car at some point, we have been a one car unit. Interest rates going up will not help anyone but the wealthy.
Thank you for your continued advocacy for the little guy.
We have been indoctrinated with the idea that when demand exceeds supply, prices somehow organically must increase. Of course, as you said, it is humans who decide to raise prices. Members of the Council of Economic Advisors are knowledgeable and capable, but they are not infallible. Moreover, they were hired for their economic, not their political expertise. Biden doesn't have to take their advice on everything. He should again be beating the drums that prices are increasing at least in part due to corporate greed. If he doesn't, he will end up shouldering all the blame.
I saw a Biden speech a few days ago where he said most of the gains in the economy went to the top. He said the BBB ideas to help lower paid workers would improve things for more people.
I have been recording some news shows so that I can verify what I heard. Things that do not support what corporations like are not repeated.
What I find so disheartening is we have a great opportunity at this time in history, after this great upheaval of a pandemic, to set our country back on a course toward real equality akin to what FDR started in the 40’s. But we do not seem to be able to slip the bonds of this great corporate control and greed. I remember learning in high school about monopolies and busting them up. It struck my young mind how amazing that was. These big big businesses were not allowed to control so much of a sector of the economy! And when our government accomplished this, it would never be able to happen again! More and more I KNOW that we must be the change we want to see. This is our time to change the outcome of the major inequality we are stuck in at this time, in our history. We can and must change what seems inevitable. Biden seems to have the courage, but politics and big money is in the way.
If things don't change soon, the very wealthy will pay more than a big tax cut or windfall tax. Climate destruction can topple the largest buildings and cause $multitrillions in damage, and that is just human made infrastructure. Silent Spring with no buds or plant life along with tainted water caused by floods, and fires .... we have seen previews.
Don’t apologize for telling the truth!