Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

elleng

(130,732 posts)
Fri May 2, 2014, 01:17 AM May 2014

by Robert Reich

'My optimism that we're reaching a tipping point on inequality, and that within the next few years Washington will respond with bold policies, was reinforced a few days ago when the CEO of one of the largest firms in America came to my office at Berkeley to talk about the issue. When I asked him why he was concerned, he said, simply, "We want our customers to be able to afford our products. But if almost all the income and wealth flow to the top, we won't have the customer base we need. So we have to reverse this trend."'

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
by Robert Reich (Original Post) elleng May 2014 OP
Hey, it's a start. pacalo May 2014 #1
"Reverse this trend" JohnnyRingo May 2014 #2
I wonder if the guy was wearing a Rolex. Spitfire of ATJ May 2014 #3
It's part of the uniform. Enthusiast May 2014 #4
Only if you're James Bond.... Spitfire of ATJ May 2014 #7
Well, dawn breaks over Marblehead Warpy May 2014 #5
It is a culture seabeckind May 2014 #6

JohnnyRingo

(18,618 posts)
2. "Reverse this trend"
Fri May 2, 2014, 03:22 AM
May 2014

If there was ever an oversimplification of a term, this is it.

Corporate America has focused dollars and effort over the last 30 years stacking the deck, and we're hopeful to reverse that trend by next year?

There are people I call "Barstool Republicans". They're the guys who live paycheck to paycheck, get off work at the end of a long day, and go out and suddenly start channeling Steve Forbes.

Unless some people can look down on someone begging to shine their shoes, they can't tell they're really middle class. These days middle class is defined as owning a Smart Phone, and that's sad.

K&R
Thanx for posting.

Warpy

(111,141 posts)
5. Well, dawn breaks over Marblehead
Fri May 2, 2014, 04:21 AM
May 2014

The hoarding class won't stop grabbing everything on their own, they have to be stopped.

It's coming, too, the only choice in the matter is nonviolent or violent.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
6. It is a culture
Fri May 2, 2014, 10:28 AM
May 2014

I would bet that just down the hall from Dr Reich's office there is an MBA class going on which emphasizes success in terms of profits and that decisions should be made that maximize current profits. The results of that class are the decisions that are made within the company on a day to day basis.

The CEO has little to say about it. If he tries to buck the trend, the stockholders and board will send him packing. Because their income is dependent on the current profits. Doesn't mean anything to them if there'll be a long term decline in the company -- they will have pulled their investments long before the collapse. As far as the day-to-day decisions, there is little chance that he would have any say (or even knowlege) when a mid-level manager decides on a supplier from an outsourcer. Hel, that manager might not even know.

It's the common folk who will lose a livelihood and stare at an empty husk of the place that nurtured their town. It is the common folk who will suffer thru stagnant wages and staff cuts.

And all of our rules for operation insist that this is the preferred method. In order to change the result we need to change the culture. An example is what happened when Obama sought to correct the jobs situation and turn the economy around. Why would he look to Immelt? He was very successful at increasing profits, not increasing employment. Why did Obama look to Geithner to fix the economic culture? He was knee deep in that culture. Even after seeing the collapse of an economy that Bernanke was so much a part of, he kept him on, and then appointed a replacement that was also a part of that culture. And I don't even want to think about a corporate attorney as AG.

It is next to impossible to change behavior if there is no belief that the behavior is wrong. And little chance of recognising bad behavior if there is no one to slap fingers.

We desperately need a change in the corporate charter...one that recognises the value of those who labor and gives them an implicit ownership in the company. We need to change the charter of the corporation that directs that it should maximize return, except when that maximization is in direct opposition to the longterm health of the company or detrimental to the implicit ownership or in opposition to the national interests. Note, national interest, not state or regional interest.

No more beggar thy neighbor. No more competition between states.

Lastly, the corporations must recognise that they must invest in our country, not their profits.

And our educational system must quit looking to the "experts" in current culture to teach a new culture.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»by Robert Reich