

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

U.S. Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris arrives to board Air Force Two as she departs LaGuardia Airport in Queens, New York, September 22, 2024. Kamala Harris returns to Washington after attending a campaign fundraiser in New York.
Whoops, too late.
The Harris campaign hauled in a staggering $24 million in one night of fundraising on Wall Street. Rather than bragging about it the campaign she should be pointing out that Wall Street has killed the jobs of millions of working-class voters, exactly the kind of voters who are needed to defeat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
During her talk to the financial barons, Harris said what they wanted to hear: That she would “encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors.”
Unfortunately, she failed to say anything about protecting the jobs of working people who have been virtually slaughtered by Wall Street’s financial maneuvers since the 1980s. Let us count the ways.
In total, 30 million workers have gone through mass layoffs since 1996. Add in their families and about half the working class have been impacted by Wall Street’s shenanigans. (See Wall Street’s War on Workers for how mass layoffs—not racism, sexism or homophobia—have moved workers away from the Democratic Party in key swing states.)
It’s not too late for Harris to show she cares more about worker jobs than Wall Street’s profits.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
The Harris campaign has an establishment problem: The Democrats look like they are the establishment. Of course, they see it all as win-win: You can let Wall Street profit wildly from AI and crypto-BS, and still protect the rest of us. But not many working-class voters believe that. They resent elites because corporate elites, Wall Street elites, and yes, Democratic Party elites, have been prospering while they have struggled.
It would be far better if Harris showed a willingness to challenge Wall Street, even if it cost her some of her campaign cash she has plenty of already. She could do it with one simple sentence that I’ve been harping about for months. All she has to do is focus on the $700 billion in tax payer money that now goes to corporations for goods, services, and subsidies: Here’s the line:
No taxpayer money shall go to corporations that lay off taxpayers or conduct stock buybacks.
To clarify the point, she should add
For those companies receiving taxpayer money, layoffs must be voluntary, not compulsory, as is already the case for many white-collar employees.
I am confident that such a message would be noticed and welcomed by working-class voters of all persuasions and colors. To be sure, Harris would be attacked as a Marxist, a socialistic flame thrower, but so what? All she would have to say in response is “my first loyalty is to protect the jobs of all Americans.” And then keep repeating, “I am not going to allow taxpayer dollars to go to corporations that are laying off taxpayers.”
Will voters believe her?
That depends in large part on what Harris actually believes. At least she is not burdened with taking personal donations, as was Hillary Clinton after she accepted $675,000 from Goldman Sacks for three speeches. Thank goodness.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
Today, polling shows that 70 percent of all workers are expecting job cuts in the near future. It is political malpractice not to address this tangible fear. The very fact that we’ve got to remind the Democratic Party to put jobs in the center of its messaging tells us why the race is so pathetically close.
Is Trump is filling the breach?
While Harris was playing footsie with Wall Street, Trump called for a 200 percent tariff on the John Deere company if it moves jobs to Mexico. A thousand jobs may be at stake. Back in June, I begged Joe Biden to intervene to stop this highly profitable company, which does billions in stock buybacks, from needlessly eliminating those jobs.
In a future column, I will explore how the Democrats’ failure to directly intervene may cost them the election. Why are Democrats so blind about job loss? Why are they leaving the working-class field wide-open to Trump?
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “The Billionaires Have Two Parties, We Need a Party of Our Own” (2026). His previous books include: “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It" (2024); "Runaway Inequality: An Activist's Guide to Economic Justice" (2015); and “The Man Who Hated Work and Loved Labor: The Life and Times of Tony Mazzocchi” (2007). Read more of his work on his substack here.
The Harris campaign hauled in a staggering $24 million in one night of fundraising on Wall Street. Rather than bragging about it the campaign she should be pointing out that Wall Street has killed the jobs of millions of working-class voters, exactly the kind of voters who are needed to defeat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
During her talk to the financial barons, Harris said what they wanted to hear: That she would “encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors.”
Unfortunately, she failed to say anything about protecting the jobs of working people who have been virtually slaughtered by Wall Street’s financial maneuvers since the 1980s. Let us count the ways.
In total, 30 million workers have gone through mass layoffs since 1996. Add in their families and about half the working class have been impacted by Wall Street’s shenanigans. (See Wall Street’s War on Workers for how mass layoffs—not racism, sexism or homophobia—have moved workers away from the Democratic Party in key swing states.)
It’s not too late for Harris to show she cares more about worker jobs than Wall Street’s profits.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
The Harris campaign has an establishment problem: The Democrats look like they are the establishment. Of course, they see it all as win-win: You can let Wall Street profit wildly from AI and crypto-BS, and still protect the rest of us. But not many working-class voters believe that. They resent elites because corporate elites, Wall Street elites, and yes, Democratic Party elites, have been prospering while they have struggled.
It would be far better if Harris showed a willingness to challenge Wall Street, even if it cost her some of her campaign cash she has plenty of already. She could do it with one simple sentence that I’ve been harping about for months. All she has to do is focus on the $700 billion in tax payer money that now goes to corporations for goods, services, and subsidies: Here’s the line:
No taxpayer money shall go to corporations that lay off taxpayers or conduct stock buybacks.
To clarify the point, she should add
For those companies receiving taxpayer money, layoffs must be voluntary, not compulsory, as is already the case for many white-collar employees.
I am confident that such a message would be noticed and welcomed by working-class voters of all persuasions and colors. To be sure, Harris would be attacked as a Marxist, a socialistic flame thrower, but so what? All she would have to say in response is “my first loyalty is to protect the jobs of all Americans.” And then keep repeating, “I am not going to allow taxpayer dollars to go to corporations that are laying off taxpayers.”
Will voters believe her?
That depends in large part on what Harris actually believes. At least she is not burdened with taking personal donations, as was Hillary Clinton after she accepted $675,000 from Goldman Sacks for three speeches. Thank goodness.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
Today, polling shows that 70 percent of all workers are expecting job cuts in the near future. It is political malpractice not to address this tangible fear. The very fact that we’ve got to remind the Democratic Party to put jobs in the center of its messaging tells us why the race is so pathetically close.
Is Trump is filling the breach?
While Harris was playing footsie with Wall Street, Trump called for a 200 percent tariff on the John Deere company if it moves jobs to Mexico. A thousand jobs may be at stake. Back in June, I begged Joe Biden to intervene to stop this highly profitable company, which does billions in stock buybacks, from needlessly eliminating those jobs.
In a future column, I will explore how the Democrats’ failure to directly intervene may cost them the election. Why are Democrats so blind about job loss? Why are they leaving the working-class field wide-open to Trump?
Les Leopold is the executive director of the Labor Institute and author of the new book, “The Billionaires Have Two Parties, We Need a Party of Our Own” (2026). His previous books include: “Wall Street’s War on Workers: How Mass Layoffs and Greed Are Destroying the Working Class and What to Do About It" (2024); "Runaway Inequality: An Activist's Guide to Economic Justice" (2015); and “The Man Who Hated Work and Loved Labor: The Life and Times of Tony Mazzocchi” (2007). Read more of his work on his substack here.
The Harris campaign hauled in a staggering $24 million in one night of fundraising on Wall Street. Rather than bragging about it the campaign she should be pointing out that Wall Street has killed the jobs of millions of working-class voters, exactly the kind of voters who are needed to defeat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
During her talk to the financial barons, Harris said what they wanted to hear: That she would “encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors.”
Unfortunately, she failed to say anything about protecting the jobs of working people who have been virtually slaughtered by Wall Street’s financial maneuvers since the 1980s. Let us count the ways.
In total, 30 million workers have gone through mass layoffs since 1996. Add in their families and about half the working class have been impacted by Wall Street’s shenanigans. (See Wall Street’s War on Workers for how mass layoffs—not racism, sexism or homophobia—have moved workers away from the Democratic Party in key swing states.)
It’s not too late for Harris to show she cares more about worker jobs than Wall Street’s profits.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
The Harris campaign has an establishment problem: The Democrats look like they are the establishment. Of course, they see it all as win-win: You can let Wall Street profit wildly from AI and crypto-BS, and still protect the rest of us. But not many working-class voters believe that. They resent elites because corporate elites, Wall Street elites, and yes, Democratic Party elites, have been prospering while they have struggled.
It would be far better if Harris showed a willingness to challenge Wall Street, even if it cost her some of her campaign cash she has plenty of already. She could do it with one simple sentence that I’ve been harping about for months. All she has to do is focus on the $700 billion in tax payer money that now goes to corporations for goods, services, and subsidies: Here’s the line:
No taxpayer money shall go to corporations that lay off taxpayers or conduct stock buybacks.
To clarify the point, she should add
For those companies receiving taxpayer money, layoffs must be voluntary, not compulsory, as is already the case for many white-collar employees.
I am confident that such a message would be noticed and welcomed by working-class voters of all persuasions and colors. To be sure, Harris would be attacked as a Marxist, a socialistic flame thrower, but so what? All she would have to say in response is “my first loyalty is to protect the jobs of all Americans.” And then keep repeating, “I am not going to allow taxpayer dollars to go to corporations that are laying off taxpayers.”
Will voters believe her?
That depends in large part on what Harris actually believes. At least she is not burdened with taking personal donations, as was Hillary Clinton after she accepted $675,000 from Goldman Sacks for three speeches. Thank goodness.
What Harris needs to do, and soon, is give a major prime-time address that does more than just talk about “the economy.” She needs to talk about job stability and how she will protect working people from being sacrificed on Wall Street’s insatiable profit pyre.
Today, polling shows that 70 percent of all workers are expecting job cuts in the near future. It is political malpractice not to address this tangible fear. The very fact that we’ve got to remind the Democratic Party to put jobs in the center of its messaging tells us why the race is so pathetically close.
Is Trump is filling the breach?
While Harris was playing footsie with Wall Street, Trump called for a 200 percent tariff on the John Deere company if it moves jobs to Mexico. A thousand jobs may be at stake. Back in June, I begged Joe Biden to intervene to stop this highly profitable company, which does billions in stock buybacks, from needlessly eliminating those jobs.
In a future column, I will explore how the Democrats’ failure to directly intervene may cost them the election. Why are Democrats so blind about job loss? Why are they leaving the working-class field wide-open to Trump?