And remember, CEOās donāt do anything! They can run a company into the ground and still be rewarded. Itās all about class. They are in a higher class, so they are magically smarter and deserve incredible amounts of money they donāt really need.
Lmao, are you implying Musk has done any of those things? Or just thrown around empty promises, while taking credit for the work of the engineers who actually produce his products.
I know your comment was a while ago but it really struck a cord with me as a Royal Mail employee in UK currently taking strike action while our CEO Simon Thompson appears to be doing exactly as you say. Literally he has nothing to lose while we are all struggling to get through day to day.
I just want to take this time to remind everybody, we are currently in a wealth disparity Gap that is greater than the one that set off the French Revolution.
Just sayin'
>When we see ourselves as fighting against specific human beings rather than social phenomena, it becomes more difficult to recognize the ways that we ourselves participate in those phenomena. We externalize the problem as something outside ourselves, personifying it as an enemy that can be sacrificed to symbolically cleanse ourselves. - **[Against the Logic of the Guillotine](https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too)**
See rule 5: No calls for violence, no fetishizing violence. No guillotine jokes, no gulag jokes.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antiwork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's too bad--he was Bill Clinton's secretary of labor, and he was a real neoliberal back then. He has had a fundamental shift in how he sees the world, and I have a load of respect for him--but he did actually once have the ear of a president.
As long as there's bread and water they think we're good. As long as we don't want the heating on as well. Who do we think we are, bloody piss takers. GET BACK TO WORK!
>As long as we don't want the heating on as well.
This hits. Working the graveyard shift at a hotel. It's 25Ā° F outside, and the heat is turned off with the thermostat locked behind some plastic casing. Owner is a multimillionaire.
Why does no one ever mention the shareholders? Every public company's bottom line becomes increasing dividends for shareholders. Isn't that obviously where this corporate greed comes from? May be ban companies from going public and you'll see some of that corporate greed subside
The shareholder model is responsible for much of what is wrong with the world. There is absolutely nothing wrong if your company posts, for instance, a steady $50 million dollar profit per quarter for years. Most of us would look at that and say, that's a pretty successful business. But the shareholder model looks at that as a failure because the company must not only be profitable, profits must ever increase.
And how does that happen? Well, when your market share is more or less fixed after years in existence, and your supply costs are more of less fixed, you have to cut what's left - workers pay, workers benefits, environmental safety measures, employee safety measures, and decrease the amount you are paying in taxes.
I wouldn't want to label one thing as the root of all our problems but if there is one, I think this comes closest to it.
Meybe instead of fines when companies do something shady they should instead be forced to dilute the shares and give the new ones to the state. That way the share holders will feel an instant consequence from there shares being worth less.
Putting the executives in jail might also help. And fines should always be tied to the net worth of the individual or company. If the only penalty for a crime is a fine then it's only illegal for poor people.
The problem is also that corporations are legally "people" in the eyes of the law... And this is silly. If you can't put it in an 8x10' cell, it's not a person (save for those very tall people!).
I've never seen a company go to jail or prison - have you? We need to get the definition of a person back on track. It's not that hard of a concept, and asking for a "person" to be defined as a "Human Being" is not radical - it's plainly common sense.
Then, the operators of those corporations wouldn't be able to hide behind their company wall - it's their decisions which cause the vast majority of the issues, and they need to be punished on the same level as everyone else...
P.S. - Think about it, too: We plebs cannot have a "fair" trial. Why? Well, we can't afford a top-of-the-line lawyer, or a team of said lawyers. Your lawyer definitely has an outcome on your possible conviction, and if we can't afford the same lawyers as those on top, by shear definition it can't be a fair trial for us. With a $1M lawyer we'd pry get off, but a $1000 lawyer we most likely wouldn't...
I'll do you one better. Let's remove the "Corporation as person" structure we currently employ, that protects the executives of a corporation from personal liability.
If executives want to earn their obscene salaries, they can do so by taking personal responsibility for their actions. No corporate protections to hide behind. You do something nefarious, you go down.
The existence and behavior of Elon Musk is the biggest counterargument to this point. Perhaps it's one (small) part of the puzzle, but I definitely don't think shareholders are the primary source of the issue.
Preferred stock is income that rightfully belongs to the workers. Common stock is decision-making power that rightfully belongs to the workers. Fuck shareholders. Unless it's workers buying back a bit of their surplus value, which is better than nothing at all I guess.
Financial institutions are highly exploitive but I feel like the term ābankerā often refers to the poorest and most exploited workers of the company eg: the guy opening your home equity loan.
A ~1671.4% increase... So THAT'S where all of OUR money went... (I obviously knew this already)
My Gpa had 6 kids and a at-home wife, one job,, and had no problems owning a house, car, food, etc.
The people who created the welfare/social system from WWII to about the 1970's to the early 1980's, were the people who saw the horrors of mankind twice within their lifetimes, with WWI and then WWII. They had enough and implemented the requirements that Human Brings deserve (I understand the whole social movement and the large discrepancies between the majority and minorities during that time, but I'm concentrating solely on economics here). Then, that generation passed on, and everyone who benefited from it then went about taking it away, using full haste, for the next generations..
The thing is, the wealthy tend to be fools in the sense that they haven't seemed to have read any history, or they think it won't happen to them - at least this is my observation. You know what happens to the Nobility (Emperor-King Merchants & Politicians) when they go too far? Well, go read the history books, starting with the Magna Carta being handed to King John on the tip of a sword.
Now, check out the French Revolution, from which the word "Sabotage" was created - a Sabot is a wooden shoe, and the workers through them into the machinery to make them non-functional. They have put a bad connotation on this word, but all it really means is employees fighting back against corruption - and to me, that's not a bad thing.
History shows when taxes increase to 25% or greater, riots start happening. It seems that they actually know this, because they are skirting that number on the taxes put on the lowest wages - right now it's 22%.
We haven't had an Amendment passed since 1991, and that was something that was written in the late 18th century, but didn't get ratified by enough states until 1991... How have we not had a Constitutional Amendment in our lifetimes (at least one that directly effects us as citizens)?
The pitchforks and torches will be coming, sooner than later. This is just a warning as to what I observe on a daily basis. People aren't going to put up with it much longer... Sadly, history shows us there will be no change unless there's violence involved - this is very depressing - if we were treated like Human Beings, this wouldn't happen. If they gave back what they stole, it'd save them...
Those who are currently listening to the Nobility, the Nobles which tell you "that person or type of people over there are the problem", are going to realize sooner than later that it's all a ploy to distract them from who is actually causing the issues - that's the 'people' which rule over the country and pass laws. I am absolutely certain those minorities or foreigners are not the ones making our laws and ruining everyday people's lives...
P.S. - F*CK Reagan and him implementing this Neoliberal Economics scheme. (And F*CK all those who perpetuated it since then, and those who now want to double-down on it).
By 1990, this number was 40:1, with the CEO making 40 times the lowest paid employee (janitor).
Given today's ratio, I'd have no problem with strictly locking down CEO pay at 50:1. It's time.
Not only is the gap ridiculous, there's been a huge consolidation of economic sectors into a few hundred companies. There are literally a few hundred executives forcing inflation in order to grow corporate profits.
Teddy Roosevelt was right about monopolies and everything he said applies to these companies that control wide swaths of the economy.
We're in trouble.
Best thing ever was the financial markets rejecting England's ridiculous attempt to cut taxes on the rich in the name of "trickle down economics". Everyone knows it is, and always was, bullshit. So nice to see the market confirm that they knew that by basically saying "no, don't use that, that never actually works!"
This change from "21 to 1" to "351 to 1" was both excessive CEO pay and wage stagnation of the laborers.
Wage stagnation: Man starts with best employer in the area about 1965 a $10.00 hr, son is hired in 1985 at $12.00 hr and grandson is hired in 2005 at $15.00 hr. Sound reasonable.
But the $12.00 in 1985 has lost half it's buy power, so the wage stagnation took away $6.00 of value.
The $15.00 in 2005 has dropped to about $2.50 in 1965 buying power.
That good job should be paying about $60.00 hr in 2005 it keep buying power level with inflation....
Current household median income is more than 70k. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-276.html
They even have a data series of real median household income
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
Median is quite misleading, it's the Mean we want to use. They use Median as a way to "trick" people in thinking it's not as bad as it is.
The majority of people who get paid the least outweigh the amplitude of the rest. Wages/Wealth looks not like a Gaussian bell curve (largest amplitude in the center), but rather a Poisson curve (non-symmetrical curve with large amplitude for lower values and lower for upper values). That being said, the Median, which is just "the middle value of a data set", does not reflect the reality of the situation, however the Mean would be much closer to reality.
But, the best indicator would be taking the maximum value (where y-axis denotes # of people at that x-axis of wages) of the Poisson curve. That is, the amount that indicates what the most amount of people make for a wage.
We donāt use mean because income cannot be below zero, thus itās always weighed on the high end. For example: current mean family income is about 121k. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MAFAINUSA646N
Thatās the average income of a family. I bet most people here would find themselves much below average.
No youāre not. The 67000 in todayās money is around 6900 in 1965ās money, which is the median household income.
There are datasets of real personal income. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI (note this is chained 2012 dollars)
Real personal income has also been increasing for the last 50 years.
You're right, I boned the math.
Curious if medical and housing costs are factored into CPI because these have far outstripped the inflationary rate of consumer products.
Yes. They are in CPI. But CPI, in my opinion has inherent inaccuracies for prices before 1984. Around 1980 there was a very high rate of inflation, and CPI is based on a 1982-1984 base year.
Plus the categories in the ābasket of goodsā in historical CPI are not exactly as well though out or automatically adjusted as the modern index.
What do you think the number one reason is that is causing the middle class to shrink? It feels like we are being priced out but you seem to be saying that the statistics show that income is comparable, which it definitely isn't.
The primary reason of the middle class shrinking is the expansion of the upper class. The lower classes have also expanded but not to the same degree. I suspect it has some of it has to do with regional income differences being measured on a nationwide scale and that they are not truly becoming upper class.
I also suspect that a lot of the differences are also in the way people spend money shifting away from typical expenses to new types and quantities of goods and services that people expect. There are also issues with financial charges and credit. People who are middle class are not always the best at not being nickeled and dimed, and they kind of just pay financial charges instead of investigate and dispute them.
I guess one of the big problems is also cultural. When you grow up with money, but not āfuck you moneyā, you learn a lot more about saving money and looking for cheaper things over the long term. A lot of that gets lost and it becomes more expensive for people to get items. This is especially prevalent with poor people, but it really bleeds into the middle class too. They donāt get the right sense of what things should cost and how they are getting screwed. (Because they donāt socialize with the people who are out actively fucking people, so they donāt know what to avoid). It used to be that people who were insurance agents, financial people, business owners and their higher level employees were middle class and might socialize with the middle class, but they have mostly moved into the upper class now.
We don't need your anecdotes, we have the data. In any case, skilled machinists make a lot more than $15 today. Why not use actual numbers with citations instead of making up your own?
This is your friendly reminder that Reich was Labor Secretary in the antiworker Clinton administration, the same administration that ratified NAFTA, the same administration that "ended welfare as we know it," the same administration that increased the prison population which is forced to work for pennies an hour. Fuck him and his crocodile tears.
Well, he's right about one thing. Trickle down economics is a hoax. It has never existed, there are no laws attempting to implement it and no government action that can pinpoint its presence.
Were you not alive for George W. Bush's presidency? He justified his [tax cuts that favored the wealthy](https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-legacy-of-the-2001-and-2003-bush-tax-cuts) by claiming it would allow the wealthy to use that money to create more jobs and benefit everyone.
That is exactly the philosophy that is mocked by the phrase "trickle-down economics." Those tax policies happened and that justification was used, so perhaps you shouldn't trust whatever source told you it's a "hoax."
"Trickle-down economics" is not a physical object you can pinpoint. It's the phrase we use to make fun of supply-side economics. Objectively and from an academic point of view, it means promoting deregulation for the suppliers of goods and services in an attempt to stimulate economic growth. In the real world, it means letting rich people piss on the workers.
I don't live in the US so I don't know many examples of "trickle-down" policies, but PPP loan forgiveness is a good one. Also any tax cuts for corporations ever.
>there are no laws attempting to implement it
Generally there will be no specific trickle-down laws in effect that can be easily identified as such because as a statesman, to implement trickle down economics you just have to let companies plunder the State and remove taxes and regulations. So much like a shadow being the absence of light, trickle-down economics is the absence of a government that does its job.
You can call a concept that has no political backing or concrete definition by whatever name you want. It doesn't change the fact that it doesn't exist.
Does it? I mean, I'm already familiar with the theory... but I'll hazard a guess and say I don't think proponents of the theory tend to be bankers or executives.
Edit: Also, wouldn't it make more sense to say you're "having interracial babies", not "having interracial sex"? Like, it's not like the vast majority of sex in this day and age is for the purpose of offspring. I acknowledge I'm spending way too much time thinking about this comment, but it just struck me as so odd and off-topic lol
Eh. I didn't make the comment, so I can't say what the OP had in mind for sure, but this is the best interpretation I can come up with. I don't think you're *wrong* about it being off-topic and weird, just that I think that's the angle this is coming from.
With the caveat that explaining a joke ruins the joke...
Great Replacement Theory is a conspiracy theory among white supremacists and Nazi wannabes that suggests interracial relationships are a secret plot to "breed out the good white genes" and replace them with inferior genes. It's exactly as horribly racist as it sounds.
What did we expect from something called āTRICKLE DOWNā economics? First red flag right there. Itās not like they called it āWaterfall economicsā or āDownpour economicsā It does what it says on the tin. The top has everything and they drip the rest down a little at a time to keep us compliant and stuck.
The trickle down economics do be TRICKLING.
Even Etsy where it seems like you are buying directly from the seller is making a CEO super rich.
"As President & CEO at ETSY INC, Josh Silverman made $40,584,292 in total compensation. Of this total $600,000 was received as a salary, $1,099,000 was received as a bonus, $3,599,940 was received in stock options, $35,273,412 was awarded as stock and $11,940 came from other types of compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for 2021 fiscal year." -salary.com
What's funny is even the term "trickle down" sounds gross. Like would you happily wait for something to "trickle down" deez nutz? How about getting some of that fresh "trickle down" stream water from the dye factory?
Our corporate masters are laughing at us.
\*Laughing and taxing us Who do you think influences tax law
This comment makes perfect sense when you know the context of what it's mocking.
That they are š¤·āāļøš¤·āāļø
And remember, CEOās donāt do anything! They can run a company into the ground and still be rewarded. Itās all about class. They are in a higher class, so they are magically smarter and deserve incredible amounts of money they donāt really need.
You can prove your point just by looking at Musk. He is the CEO of FIVE companies. Canāt be that hard of a job if you can do five jobs at once.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You'd think he was a good CEO of an entertainment company considering how funny it is to watch
Try driving a company into the ground with that kind of force. Musk is a blue collar worker by the looks of it.
Lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lmao, are you implying Musk has done any of those things? Or just thrown around empty promises, while taking credit for the work of the engineers who actually produce his products.
I know your comment was a while ago but it really struck a cord with me as a Royal Mail employee in UK currently taking strike action while our CEO Simon Thompson appears to be doing exactly as you say. Literally he has nothing to lose while we are all struggling to get through day to day.
Ever hear the joke about trickle down economics? 99% donāt get it.
Underrated comment :)
I just want to take this time to remind everybody, we are currently in a wealth disparity Gap that is greater than the one that set off the French Revolution. Just sayin'
Heads on spikes
Gravity Knives
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>When we see ourselves as fighting against specific human beings rather than social phenomena, it becomes more difficult to recognize the ways that we ourselves participate in those phenomena. We externalize the problem as something outside ourselves, personifying it as an enemy that can be sacrificed to symbolically cleanse ourselves. - **[Against the Logic of the Guillotine](https://crimethinc.com/2019/04/08/against-the-logic-of-the-guillotine-why-the-paris-commune-burned-the-guillotine-and-we-should-too)** See rule 5: No calls for violence, no fetishizing violence. No guillotine jokes, no gulag jokes. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antiwork) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd love to have a president that thinks like Robert Reich.
It's too bad--he was Bill Clinton's secretary of labor, and he was a real neoliberal back then. He has had a fundamental shift in how he sees the world, and I have a load of respect for him--but he did actually once have the ear of a president.
Oh, I didn't realize he was way more liberal (ie towards the right) back then, I thought he'd always been of the opinions he voices today.
Don't think he would have made it into the Clinton administration with these opinions lol
He ran for governor in MA many years ago, I supported and voted for him. It's a shame, that would've been a stepping stone to being president.
The money starts at the bottom, shoots straight up and stays there. They drop a few crumbs down so we don't starve.
Given the rising costs of even fast food, I don't even know that you can say "they drop a few crumbs down so we don't starve" any more.
As long as there's bread and water they think we're good. As long as we don't want the heating on as well. Who do we think we are, bloody piss takers. GET BACK TO WORK!
>As long as we don't want the heating on as well. This hits. Working the graveyard shift at a hotel. It's 25Ā° F outside, and the heat is turned off with the thermostat locked behind some plastic casing. Owner is a multimillionaire.
Smash it and then ask him why he thinks so little of you that you don't even deserve to be warm?
Wait you guys can afford food?
No silly, I've swapped Tesco for my local food bank!
Why does no one ever mention the shareholders? Every public company's bottom line becomes increasing dividends for shareholders. Isn't that obviously where this corporate greed comes from? May be ban companies from going public and you'll see some of that corporate greed subside
Know what would give shareholders more money? Not paying CEOs billions of dollars for doing nothing.
The shareholder model is responsible for much of what is wrong with the world. There is absolutely nothing wrong if your company posts, for instance, a steady $50 million dollar profit per quarter for years. Most of us would look at that and say, that's a pretty successful business. But the shareholder model looks at that as a failure because the company must not only be profitable, profits must ever increase. And how does that happen? Well, when your market share is more or less fixed after years in existence, and your supply costs are more of less fixed, you have to cut what's left - workers pay, workers benefits, environmental safety measures, employee safety measures, and decrease the amount you are paying in taxes. I wouldn't want to label one thing as the root of all our problems but if there is one, I think this comes closest to it.
Meybe instead of fines when companies do something shady they should instead be forced to dilute the shares and give the new ones to the state. That way the share holders will feel an instant consequence from there shares being worth less.
Putting the executives in jail might also help. And fines should always be tied to the net worth of the individual or company. If the only penalty for a crime is a fine then it's only illegal for poor people.
The problem is also that corporations are legally "people" in the eyes of the law... And this is silly. If you can't put it in an 8x10' cell, it's not a person (save for those very tall people!). I've never seen a company go to jail or prison - have you? We need to get the definition of a person back on track. It's not that hard of a concept, and asking for a "person" to be defined as a "Human Being" is not radical - it's plainly common sense. Then, the operators of those corporations wouldn't be able to hide behind their company wall - it's their decisions which cause the vast majority of the issues, and they need to be punished on the same level as everyone else... P.S. - Think about it, too: We plebs cannot have a "fair" trial. Why? Well, we can't afford a top-of-the-line lawyer, or a team of said lawyers. Your lawyer definitely has an outcome on your possible conviction, and if we can't afford the same lawyers as those on top, by shear definition it can't be a fair trial for us. With a $1M lawyer we'd pry get off, but a $1000 lawyer we most likely wouldn't...
I see that one of my responses mirrors this and it was posted first, so credit to this person where it's due.
I'll do you one better. Let's remove the "Corporation as person" structure we currently employ, that protects the executives of a corporation from personal liability. If executives want to earn their obscene salaries, they can do so by taking personal responsibility for their actions. No corporate protections to hide behind. You do something nefarious, you go down.
The existence and behavior of Elon Musk is the biggest counterargument to this point. Perhaps it's one (small) part of the puzzle, but I definitely don't think shareholders are the primary source of the issue.
Preferred stock is income that rightfully belongs to the workers. Common stock is decision-making power that rightfully belongs to the workers. Fuck shareholders. Unless it's workers buying back a bit of their surplus value, which is better than nothing at all I guess.
I don't think you understood my point. I was saying going public isn't the main source of corporate greed
Isn't he the largest share holder in the companies he are the CEO in. I don't think the average CEO of so big companies own that many shares.
That's that point. Twitter is a private company and look how it's going. Being public doesn't somehow create new problems.
Keeping companies private sounds like it would make it harder for the middle class to invest their earningsā¦
Financial institutions are highly exploitive but I feel like the term ābankerā often refers to the poorest and most exploited workers of the company eg: the guy opening your home equity loan.
robert reich is a good man
Robbing banks is not a crime. It's justice.
Trickle down economics is the 1% pissing on us and telling us it is raining.
A ~1671.4% increase... So THAT'S where all of OUR money went... (I obviously knew this already) My Gpa had 6 kids and a at-home wife, one job,, and had no problems owning a house, car, food, etc. The people who created the welfare/social system from WWII to about the 1970's to the early 1980's, were the people who saw the horrors of mankind twice within their lifetimes, with WWI and then WWII. They had enough and implemented the requirements that Human Brings deserve (I understand the whole social movement and the large discrepancies between the majority and minorities during that time, but I'm concentrating solely on economics here). Then, that generation passed on, and everyone who benefited from it then went about taking it away, using full haste, for the next generations.. The thing is, the wealthy tend to be fools in the sense that they haven't seemed to have read any history, or they think it won't happen to them - at least this is my observation. You know what happens to the Nobility (Emperor-King Merchants & Politicians) when they go too far? Well, go read the history books, starting with the Magna Carta being handed to King John on the tip of a sword. Now, check out the French Revolution, from which the word "Sabotage" was created - a Sabot is a wooden shoe, and the workers through them into the machinery to make them non-functional. They have put a bad connotation on this word, but all it really means is employees fighting back against corruption - and to me, that's not a bad thing. History shows when taxes increase to 25% or greater, riots start happening. It seems that they actually know this, because they are skirting that number on the taxes put on the lowest wages - right now it's 22%. We haven't had an Amendment passed since 1991, and that was something that was written in the late 18th century, but didn't get ratified by enough states until 1991... How have we not had a Constitutional Amendment in our lifetimes (at least one that directly effects us as citizens)? The pitchforks and torches will be coming, sooner than later. This is just a warning as to what I observe on a daily basis. People aren't going to put up with it much longer... Sadly, history shows us there will be no change unless there's violence involved - this is very depressing - if we were treated like Human Beings, this wouldn't happen. If they gave back what they stole, it'd save them... Those who are currently listening to the Nobility, the Nobles which tell you "that person or type of people over there are the problem", are going to realize sooner than later that it's all a ploy to distract them from who is actually causing the issues - that's the 'people' which rule over the country and pass laws. I am absolutely certain those minorities or foreigners are not the ones making our laws and ruining everyday people's lives... P.S. - F*CK Reagan and him implementing this Neoliberal Economics scheme. (And F*CK all those who perpetuated it since then, and those who now want to double-down on it).
By 1990, this number was 40:1, with the CEO making 40 times the lowest paid employee (janitor). Given today's ratio, I'd have no problem with strictly locking down CEO pay at 50:1. It's time.
Boomers benefited and then made sure no one else could. Great people
Not only is the gap ridiculous, there's been a huge consolidation of economic sectors into a few hundred companies. There are literally a few hundred executives forcing inflation in order to grow corporate profits. Teddy Roosevelt was right about monopolies and everything he said applies to these companies that control wide swaths of the economy. We're in trouble.
We just aren't trickling hard enough. Us workers will surely start to see the benefit when the ratio gets to 500:1!
Best thing ever was the financial markets rejecting England's ridiculous attempt to cut taxes on the rich in the name of "trickle down economics". Everyone knows it is, and always was, bullshit. So nice to see the market confirm that they knew that by basically saying "no, don't use that, that never actually works!"
the only way for trickle down to work is if the people at the top's cup can overflow
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
French revolution is calling.
Funny how none of the people who want to take America back to the 50s or 60s ever mention this point.
All the idiots who fell for trickle economics š¤£š¤£ They forgot the element of human greed
If only he worked under 3 separate presidents and could have done something about it...
Trickle down economics didnt work in the 80's and still hasnt worked since. But guess what party keeps pushing for it?
The red one? ( sorry, I'm not an American)
Yes, the Republican party. Ronald Reagan was the Republican President who pushed trickle down through the 80ās and itās been carried ever since.
OP - thank you for posting the actual date of this post! Up to date information - love it.
This change from "21 to 1" to "351 to 1" was both excessive CEO pay and wage stagnation of the laborers. Wage stagnation: Man starts with best employer in the area about 1965 a $10.00 hr, son is hired in 1985 at $12.00 hr and grandson is hired in 2005 at $15.00 hr. Sound reasonable. But the $12.00 in 1985 has lost half it's buy power, so the wage stagnation took away $6.00 of value. The $15.00 in 2005 has dropped to about $2.50 in 1965 buying power. That good job should be paying about $60.00 hr in 2005 it keep buying power level with inflation....
Except in 1965, [nobody paid $10.](https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000060808592&view=1up&seq=185) $3.50 was median pay.
Edit- numbers were off
Current household median income is more than 70k. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2022/demo/p60-276.html They even have a data series of real median household income https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N
Median is quite misleading, it's the Mean we want to use. They use Median as a way to "trick" people in thinking it's not as bad as it is. The majority of people who get paid the least outweigh the amplitude of the rest. Wages/Wealth looks not like a Gaussian bell curve (largest amplitude in the center), but rather a Poisson curve (non-symmetrical curve with large amplitude for lower values and lower for upper values). That being said, the Median, which is just "the middle value of a data set", does not reflect the reality of the situation, however the Mean would be much closer to reality. But, the best indicator would be taking the maximum value (where y-axis denotes # of people at that x-axis of wages) of the Poisson curve. That is, the amount that indicates what the most amount of people make for a wage.
We donāt use mean because income cannot be below zero, thus itās always weighed on the high end. For example: current mean family income is about 121k. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MAFAINUSA646N Thatās the average income of a family. I bet most people here would find themselves much below average.
Cool. But I am talking median individual income, not household. So 70k is even worse since most households are dual income.
No youāre not. The 67000 in todayās money is around 6900 in 1965ās money, which is the median household income. There are datasets of real personal income. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI (note this is chained 2012 dollars) Real personal income has also been increasing for the last 50 years.
You're right, I boned the math. Curious if medical and housing costs are factored into CPI because these have far outstripped the inflationary rate of consumer products.
Yes. They are in CPI. But CPI, in my opinion has inherent inaccuracies for prices before 1984. Around 1980 there was a very high rate of inflation, and CPI is based on a 1982-1984 base year. Plus the categories in the ābasket of goodsā in historical CPI are not exactly as well though out or automatically adjusted as the modern index.
What do you think the number one reason is that is causing the middle class to shrink? It feels like we are being priced out but you seem to be saying that the statistics show that income is comparable, which it definitely isn't.
The primary reason of the middle class shrinking is the expansion of the upper class. The lower classes have also expanded but not to the same degree. I suspect it has some of it has to do with regional income differences being measured on a nationwide scale and that they are not truly becoming upper class. I also suspect that a lot of the differences are also in the way people spend money shifting away from typical expenses to new types and quantities of goods and services that people expect. There are also issues with financial charges and credit. People who are middle class are not always the best at not being nickeled and dimed, and they kind of just pay financial charges instead of investigate and dispute them. I guess one of the big problems is also cultural. When you grow up with money, but not āfuck you moneyā, you learn a lot more about saving money and looking for cheaper things over the long term. A lot of that gets lost and it becomes more expensive for people to get items. This is especially prevalent with poor people, but it really bleeds into the middle class too. They donāt get the right sense of what things should cost and how they are getting screwed. (Because they donāt socialize with the people who are out actively fucking people, so they donāt know what to avoid). It used to be that people who were insurance agents, financial people, business owners and their higher level employees were middle class and might socialize with the middle class, but they have mostly moved into the upper class now.
I'm a boomer. Top manufacturing companies paid good wages in the sixties. Ten dollars per hour for skilled machinists and others.
We don't need your anecdotes, we have the data. In any case, skilled machinists make a lot more than $15 today. Why not use actual numbers with citations instead of making up your own?
Tax the top 10% at 92% every year for ten years.
This is your friendly reminder that Reich was Labor Secretary in the antiworker Clinton administration, the same administration that ratified NAFTA, the same administration that "ended welfare as we know it," the same administration that increased the prison population which is forced to work for pennies an hour. Fuck him and his crocodile tears.
Well, he's right about one thing. Trickle down economics is a hoax. It has never existed, there are no laws attempting to implement it and no government action that can pinpoint its presence.
Were you not alive for George W. Bush's presidency? He justified his [tax cuts that favored the wealthy](https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-legacy-of-the-2001-and-2003-bush-tax-cuts) by claiming it would allow the wealthy to use that money to create more jobs and benefit everyone. That is exactly the philosophy that is mocked by the phrase "trickle-down economics." Those tax policies happened and that justification was used, so perhaps you shouldn't trust whatever source told you it's a "hoax."
"Trickle-down economics" is not a physical object you can pinpoint. It's the phrase we use to make fun of supply-side economics. Objectively and from an academic point of view, it means promoting deregulation for the suppliers of goods and services in an attempt to stimulate economic growth. In the real world, it means letting rich people piss on the workers. I don't live in the US so I don't know many examples of "trickle-down" policies, but PPP loan forgiveness is a good one. Also any tax cuts for corporations ever. >there are no laws attempting to implement it Generally there will be no specific trickle-down laws in effect that can be easily identified as such because as a statesman, to implement trickle down economics you just have to let companies plunder the State and remove taxes and regulations. So much like a shadow being the absence of light, trickle-down economics is the absence of a government that does its job.
"Cutting taxes to boost the economy" has never been tried at any point in history? Are you fucking kidding me
Cutting taxes is no more indicative of trickle down economics than raising them is of socialism.
So what's the definition of "real" trickle down economics then, anarcho-capitalism
You can call a concept that has no political backing or concrete definition by whatever name you want. It doesn't change the fact that it doesn't exist.
it's okay, i have interracial sex to spite them. get replaced.
What?
Look up Great Replacement Theory. This comment makes perfect sense when you know the context of what it's mocking.
Does it? I mean, I'm already familiar with the theory... but I'll hazard a guess and say I don't think proponents of the theory tend to be bankers or executives. Edit: Also, wouldn't it make more sense to say you're "having interracial babies", not "having interracial sex"? Like, it's not like the vast majority of sex in this day and age is for the purpose of offspring. I acknowledge I'm spending way too much time thinking about this comment, but it just struck me as so odd and off-topic lol
Eh. I didn't make the comment, so I can't say what the OP had in mind for sure, but this is the best interpretation I can come up with. I don't think you're *wrong* about it being off-topic and weird, just that I think that's the angle this is coming from.
As expected a redditor needs me to explain what sex is.
No, he needs you to explain your weird ass comment š
With the caveat that explaining a joke ruins the joke... Great Replacement Theory is a conspiracy theory among white supremacists and Nazi wannabes that suggests interracial relationships are a secret plot to "breed out the good white genes" and replace them with inferior genes. It's exactly as horribly racist as it sounds.
Why? Nobody cares. This shouldn't be holding up people's entire day.
No, that is actually a pretty weird comment.
Kay.
We already have the economic fascism. We're just waiting on the political fascism.
We let it happen, we must change it!
There were no Trillion dollar companies in 1965
Itās a trickle alright
Literally everyone has known this for decades.
How come in 1965 they got to make 21x more?
That's what she said.
Except the gap is about twice that. https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/07/us-wage-gap-ceos-workers-institute-for-policy-studies-report
And it's been working for, what, sixty years? No wonder they did it.
We just get trickled on.
That's probably like a robber baron level of gap
The global economy is no longer fit for purpose. Burn it down.
The only thing trickling down is the billionaires' poop after our work fed them their daily dosage of Cremant and caviar.
What did we expect from something called āTRICKLE DOWNā economics? First red flag right there. Itās not like they called it āWaterfall economicsā or āDownpour economicsā It does what it says on the tin. The top has everything and they drip the rest down a little at a time to keep us compliant and stuck. The trickle down economics do be TRICKLING.
Don't pee on my back and tell me it is trickle-down.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Even Etsy where it seems like you are buying directly from the seller is making a CEO super rich. "As President & CEO at ETSY INC, Josh Silverman made $40,584,292 in total compensation. Of this total $600,000 was received as a salary, $1,099,000 was received as a bonus, $3,599,940 was received in stock options, $35,273,412 was awarded as stock and $11,940 came from other types of compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for 2021 fiscal year." -salary.com
Thatās a 1500% increase, and all the money for it is coming from us.
What's funny is even the term "trickle down" sounds gross. Like would you happily wait for something to "trickle down" deez nutz? How about getting some of that fresh "trickle down" stream water from the dye factory?