Sorry, not doing your homework for you. You tell me what Bernie says and ties $15.00 minimum wage to and then you’ll understand your error in what you’ve said. I’m tired of selective hearing. And, I’m not trashing you, just pointing out you’re mistaken. This is not personal.
what I pointed out is that the $15/hr is totally INADEQUATE to the task of being a living wage --being about $6-$8/hr short of that goal–leading the worker to make their lives out of a wage that DOES NOT meet their basic needs–sorry to have to do YOUR homework for you-- talk about selective hearing–you can’t even see the reality that has been a part of the conversation for --oh say --a few years now–this is why I say we are being gas lit–because the "progressive " is as mean as the conservative when it comes to a living wage-neither party cares enough about the average worker to actually promote a wage that will do the job of meeting the basic human needs of the worker–only wages that will guarantee that the worker will be struggling-DO THE MATH–and I am tired to death of the blind obedience to lies, obfuscations and distortions that is the establishment Democratic party line -I also pointed out the reality of $15/hr and how it WOULD NOT come up to the basic living costs having not met the increases in inflation or productivity since the 1970s
and just to point out–when the Dems had the majorities in both Houses and the WH-they DID NOT pass a living wage-they instead bailed out Wall Street and left main street to twist in the winds of corporate power overseeing the eviction of millions of families to the streets(similar to what they did with the only relief package passed this year as millions face eviction and poverty)-what did they pass??only a profit protection plan for the health care parasites and even now are refusing universal health care to the American people(in a pandemic ) so their owners can continue to make their obscene profits on the pain and suffering of the American worker–just like with the wages–profits over people’s needs–that is the current system being promoted by BOTH our parties–who are paid handsomely for their perfidy–time to wake up
I don’t know who Ben and Jerry got for their CEO, and I’m sorry, and I have no idea what the pay rate was.
I just loved that story because being creative is so often overlooked by corporations.
We lost our jobs when the checks and balances against corporations and wall street were loosened by Reagan and god knows who else and by Clinton who signed the bill. I don’t have hope that Biden or anyone else who is electable will reinstate those checks and balances which took our manufacturing off shore. Jobs is the 2nd reason that people voted for Trump after the Wall. I am still pissed that the DNC gave Hillary the nomination over Sanders. But Yay for us for getting Trump out of there. I will take Biden but in my mind but I still see him as part of the problem. We will see if he fixes the damage done to the Environmental Protection Act which should be the first thing on his list. What he does with that is an indicator of where his alliance is regarding the common good over corporate America’s interests.
You talk a good line, Bernie. Maybe your “good friend” Joe Biden will listen - I turned you off in 2016. Money talks and your bullshit walks.
Well that’s never worked in the thousands of years of human experience, but who knows, maybe human nature changed this year. In your world would politicians, sports stars and entertainers also be limited to the $200K figure?
It is indeed a cool story, but the essay was probably not the deciding factor. If you were taking your company public as a multi-million dollar operation, would you rather have a Bill Gates or an Ernest Hemingway?
Who are you trying to kid “never worked”?!? It works EVERY year. The US is the only place on the planet apart from other kleptocracies such as Russia and the banana republics where “leaders” with giant egos get paid ever-increasing salaries and perqs for mediocre performance.
And no, I wouldn’t limit the incomes of those to whom we freely choose to give money so that we can watch them perform, read their books, listen to their music, etc.
Is ‘freely choosing’ to pay $25 to watch a movie or $50 for a concert ticket really any different than ‘freely choosing’ to pay $250 for a pair of Nikes that cost $5 to make? or a $1000 for a cell phone that cost $10 to make? All generate exorbitant profits for the 0.1% at the top - entertainers and sports figures included. Why shouldn’t Michael Jordan’s income be limited to 7 times the lowest paid worker at the Nike factories in China or Oprah Winfrey to 7 times the lowest paid employee of her many corporations. Is it OK for Obama to get 10s of millions for a ghost-written book when the money comes from laundered funds generated by corporations buying thousands of copies to give away? In fact, if the CEO gets only 7X pay, shouldn’t YOUR pay be limited to only twice what the lowest paid worker gets? Oh and if it works everywhere else, please tell me a couple multi-million dollar companies (not charities but someone who makes something) where the CEO only makes 200K.
I probably should have said that if there were endorsement income involved, then I’d put the total upper bound at 7X.
But as far as films, books, and other products of personal creativity, no, I wouldn’t usually bound that income because such products are unique, take a helluva lot of work to create, and will not necessarily pay off at all.
Selling cell phones for $1K would certainly limit the number a given company could sell, if we put a bound on the corporate profit too. I suspect that competition would drive the price down for such goods. Although perhaps not: Morgan cars are hand-made/-assembled, and sell for about $70K per each, which is right up there. The people who do the handwork get a good living from it.
**To those praising overpaid CEO’s and justifying their extravagant paychecks - I’d love to see even one of you work a minimum wage job and try to raise a family. Your tax dollars are already subsidizing many of these minimum wage workers who are receiving Medicaid, food stamps, etc., because they are below the poverty level and need assistance just to get by. And yet, you praise the filthy rich CEO’s who are actually responsible for keeping these people in poverty - the poverty you are paying to help perpetuate!
BUT: This argument ($15hr minimum wage) has been news since the early 2000’s (2003 to be exact).
So, what is $15 worth 17 years later?!!!
Hi Senior_ Citizen:
I would rather have Sojourner Truth!
LOL, I think Ben and Jerry were letting people know that they were not searchIng for the traditional CEO model. In fact, they might choose a writer— like------ a -Dr. Seuss type----- as in "LOOK what cool names Dr, Seuss would create WITH the names of those ice cream flavors! : )
fFrom the Baltimore Sun, May 15, 2005: “Ben & Jerry’s, the Vermont ice cream maker, had a rule during the early 1980s that no employee could make more than five times what the lowest-paid worker was paid. That capped CEO pay at $81,000.”
Ben & Jerry’s abandoned that rule in 1994 when the company couldn’t find anyone to replace Ben Cohen upon his retirement.During the 1990s, the 5 to 1 rule became a 7 to 1 rule, lifting the CEO’s salary to $150,000.
By 2000, the CEO’s pay rose to 17 to 1 $504,848, not including stock options. At that point it was acquired by Unilever (for $326 million) who choose to no longer publish B&J CEO salary data. In 2017 however the CEO of UniLever had a total compensation of a little over 13-million dollars.
So maybe 30 or 40 years ago you might find a CEO for a 5 or 7 times multiple but I wager not so much now.
All work is a product of personal creativity; from a bricklayer to an accountant - so why not even to a CEO? Billionaire recording artists corrupt those they bribe just like billionaire oil executives. I read an article a few months ago that Matthew McConaughey was considering a run for governor somewhere. Almost immediately news stores began to surface and articles on Yahoo and Facebook about McConaughey’s views on various subjects; TV interviews suddenly labeled him an ‘influencer’ and devoted time to questioning him on everything from COVID to social media’s impact on society- co-incidence? a sudden overwhelming demand to know this particular movie star’s opinion on issues? or maybe bribes to the ‘journalists’ and their editors? Which is more likely?
A sudden overwhelming demand to pander to the readers of People et al.
And no, not all work is a product of personal creativity. If you really think so then you don’t actually know what creativity is. Or you don’t know what most jobs involve.
Clearly you have never worked at a real job that you enjoyed. To have the hubris to think the construction worker or the house cleaner has no creativity, and that talent is relegated to those few who the music or acting industries choose to glorify is to choose ignorance. If you think creativity is limited to your self styled artists, you have never watched a man tie a trout fly, or build a vehicle from scrap, watched a farmer planting or even a cabinetmaker at his craft. The denigration of anyone who actually produces something, someone who works with their hands, willing to get down & dirty is the bane of modern Western society. The real crushing of creativity exists in societies like you advocate where everyone is forced into some sort of artificial equality-of-outcome; where only the favored jobs, e.g. ‘artistes’ and sports figures, are allowed to have anything barely above subsistence. I suspect your support of the Creative Class does not extend to those members who disagree with you politically.
I can’t find anything in what you say that leads me to believe you’ve ever been truly creative. And I’m not sneering at you: I am not creative either.
Look up the categories given in career-counseling handbooks, or even the Department of Labor list of careers. You’ll find that “creative” requires certain skills that are not found in suits.
A cabinetmaker practices, as you say, a craft. It is one of the crafts, along with weaving, bookbinding, jewellery making, calligraphy, etc. that have been considered “artistic” since about 1860. But it is not a truly creative craft. I know, because that’s one of several crafts I practice. The difference is analogous to the difference between science and engineering: science identifies or clarifies natural rules; engineers apply them in practical ways. Creative people stretch the boundaries; craftspeople work within the boundaries.
Tying a fly is another craft, occasionally artistic when the practitioner creates, out of his/her understanding of fish, a novel and useful fly.
Building a vehicle from scrap is a craft, but it is not generally creative or artistic nor does it even rise to the level of engineering. It’s putting together existing pieces, which is the same thing people on an assembly line do. The only differences are: no assembly line, and no reservoir of parts.
A farmer planting crops is following well-understood practice information about what to plant when and where and how to manage the growth so that a crop eventually ensues. There is no creativity there unless the farmer is someone who can get a crop when no one else can, in which case he/she is practicing something akin to an artistic craft. I have lots of respect for farmers because I have a hard time keeping most houseplants alive. But that doesn’t mean I’m failing at a creative endeavor, it means I don’t know much about growing plants!