SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
corporate welfare
Ocasio-Cortez Vindicated—Again—After Amazon HQ2 Added No Jobs in Virginia Last Year
The Amazon mega-facility has consistently failed to meet job creation expectations, reported a Virginia-based business publication.
Apr 03, 2026
Although Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took criticism from some mainstream media pundits after she helped rally public opinion against the construction of Amazon's HQ2 in Long Island City, new data revealed this week has seemingly vindicated her skepticism of the project.
Virginia Business reported on Thursday that a filing submitted to the Virginia Economic Development Partnership this week showed that Amazon created no jobs at its HQ2 in Arlington County last year, and thus "will not seek a state payment" under the state's workforce grant incentives.
Last year, reported Virginia Business, Amazon requested more than $6.4 million through the grant program for adding just under 293 jobs in 2024.
"The hiring slowdown follows earlier signs that Amazon’s HQ2 buildout has fallen short of initial expectations," Virginia Business explained. "The company originally projected it would create 10,000 jobs by 2024, but hiring totals fell well short of that mark. The company currently has nearly 8,500 employees who work out of HQ2."
In 2018, Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) joined with local activists to oppose the construction of HQ2 in Long Island City, and they pointed to the billions of dollars in tax incentives offered by New York City and New York state as an example of wasteful corporate welfare being given to one of the world's richest companies.
Amazon canceled its plans to build HQ2 in New York in February 2019, prompting Ocasio-Cortez to take a victory lap.
"Anything is possible," the then-freshman congresswoman wrote in a social media post. "Today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers and their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world."
Amazon would subsequently move construction of HQ2 to Virginia after being offered hundreds of millions in potential tax incentives, but it delayed construction of the facility in 2023, which again led Ocasio-Cortez to declare vindication.
"When I opposed this Amazon project coming to New York because it was a scam of public funds, the whole power establishment came after us," she wrote. "Billboards went up in Times Square denouncing me. Powerful pols promised revenge. Op-eds and CEOs insulted my intelligence. In the end, we were right."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Decades of Policy Failures' Confirmed as Elon Musk Net Worth Hits $500 Billion
"Our system isn’t broken," said one progressive critic. "It’s working exactly how billionaires want it to work."
Oct 02, 2025
Elon Musk became the first person in history with a net worth $500 billion as the Tesla and SpaceX CEO's fortune briefly topped the half-trillion dollar mark on Wednesday, according to Forbes' Real-Time Billionaires tracker.
According to this year's International Monetary Fund figures, that makes Musk's net worth higher than the gross domestic product of 165 of the world's 195 nations.
Rooted in apartheid South Africa, built on a foundation of unethical business practices, and boosted by staggering sums of corporate welfare, Musk's fortune soared to even greater heights after he played a key role in buying the 2024 election for President Donald Trump and other Republican candidates by pouring over a quarter billion dollars into their campaign coffers.
As Forbes noted:
Worth just $24.6 billion in March 2020, soaring Tesla shares made him the fifth person ever worth $100 billion, in August 2020. He became the world’s richest person for the first time in January 2021, with a nearly $190 billion net worth. Then, in September 2021, he became the third person ever worth $200 billion (after Amazon’s Jeff Bezos and Frenchman Bernard Arnault of luxury goods conglomerate LVMH). Musk went on to hit $300 billion in November 2021 and $400 billion in December 2024.
Musk was rewarded for his 2024 largesse by being named the de facto head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a job he has since left after overseeing the Project 2025-inspired evisceration of numerous federal agencies.
As progressives argue that the existence of billionaires is a public policy failure, Musk apparently no longer wants to be one. That's because he's seeking to leave the realm of mere multicentibillionaires behind and become the world's first trillionaire. Such an outcome is possible under a compensation package recently proposed by Tesla's board, and Forbes says it could happen by 2033.
Addressing this possibility, Musk—who has long warned about the existential threat posed by artificial intelligence, even as his companies pioneer such technology—said on his social media site X last year that “it’s not about ‘compensation’, but about me having enough influence over Tesla to ensure safety if we build millions of robots."
“If I can just get kicked out in the future by activist shareholder advisory firms who don’t even own Tesla shares themselves, I’m not comfortable with that future," he added.
Progressive observers expressed dismay at the news of Musk's latest money milestone.
44% of Americans are paid less than a living wage, while a union-buster who pays poverty wages, and buys elections to get more tax breaks hits $500 billion. Our system isn’t broken.It’s working exactly how billionaires want it to work.
[image or embed]
— Melanie D’Arrigo (@darrigomelanie.bsky.social) October 1, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Campaign for New York Health executive director Melanie D'Arrigo said Wednesday on social media that "Elon Musk hitting $500 billion while 60% of Americans can’t afford basic necessities is what it looks like when billionaires buy elections to get laws written to benefit themselves at the expense of everyone else."
"Elon Musk is a result of decades of policy failures," she added.
Podcaster Brian Allen alluded to United Nations World Food Program Director David Beasley's challenge to Musk to contribute toward the $6.6 trillion needed to combat world hunger.
"He could’ve solved it 83 times, but chose to buy Twitter, pump Dogecoin, and lay off workers instead," Allen said of Musk. "Welcome to late-stage capitalism."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Big Oil Doesn't Just Want to Get Rich Wrecking the Climate—They Want Lower Taxes Too
"If this polluter handout is snuck into the GOP tax bill, then cuts to Medicaid and food stamps could well pay for another giveaway to Big Oil," said the co-author of a new report. "That's obscene."
Mar 24, 2025
Having helped install the most fossil fuel-friendly administration of the climate awareness era, Big Oil and their Republican boosters in Congress are now setting their sights on undermining a tax enacted by during the tenure of former President Joe Biden as part of the landmark Inflation Reduction Act.
Alan Zibel, research director at the consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen, and Lukas Shankar-Ross, deputy director of Friends of the Earth's Climate and Energy Justice Program, noted in a report published Monday that Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who chairs the Senate Ethics Committee, earlier this year introduced industry-backed legislation, the Promoting Domestic Energy Production Act, for possible inclusion in Republicans' proposed $4.5 trillion tax giveaway to corporations and the ultrawealthy.
As Common Dreams reported in January, the fossil fuel industry spent an estimated $445 million during the 2024 election cycle to elect President Donald Trump and other GOP candidates who serve their climate-wrecking interests, and it expects much in return.
"Domestic oil and gas companies, including from Lankford's home state of Oklahoma, have warned their investors about the corporate alternative minimum tax," Zibel and Shankar-Ross wrote. "The industry could soon be rewarded with specially tailored tax relief courtesy of their Republican political allies."
As the report explains:
Here's how the tax scheme works: In August 2022, President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which made historic climate investments. To help pay for new spending, the bill included a set of corporate tax increases, the largest of which was the $222 billion corporate alternative minimum tax. This tax is meant to prevent corporations that deliver massive profits to investors from paying nothing or nearly nothing in taxes because of corporate-friendly tax loopholes. Under the corporate minimum tax, if a company reports an average of at least $1 billion in annual income over three years, then it must pay 15% of that reported income in taxes, minus certain deductions.
The report highlights Republican efforts to eliminate the minimum tax, including via legislation introduced by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and endorsed by the American Petroleum Institute, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, National Mining Association, Western Energy Alliance, and industry lobbyists.
The bill introduced by Lankford would enable fossil fuel companies to skirt the minimum tax by allowing them to deduct "intangible" drilling costs, a tactic used as an effective subsidy for more than 120 years. Zibel and Shankar-Ross described the tax dodge as "the oldest and the largest fossil fuel subsidy on the books," and one which "allows all of the costs for drilling an oil or gas well to be deducted immediately in the year they are incurred."
"If individual taxpayers understood the magnitude of the extreme subsidies for Big Oil, they would be shocked."
"It is simply outrageous that the GOP is using its trifecta to create yet another fossil fuel subsidy," Shankar-Ross said in a statement, referring to Republicans' control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. "If this polluter handout is snuck into the GOP tax bill, then cuts to Medicaid and food stamps could well pay for another giveaway to Big Oil. That's obscene."
Zibel asserted that "oil and gas companies are using the political influence they purchased to dodge paying even a minimal part of their fair share."
"If individual taxpayers understood the magnitude of the extreme subsidies for Big Oil, they would be shocked," he added. "The newest effort to bypass even the most modest of tax bills by the industry is shocking, but sadly not surprising."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Should Not Attend Trump’s State of the Union But With Fury in Their Hearts
Democrats should not signal to a nationally televised audience that what we’re living through is normal.
Mar 04, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump is killing the economy, reducing the U.S. government to rubble, and destroying our relationships with our allies. Russian President Vladimir Putin may love it, but it’s a catastrophe for us and much of the rest of the world.
Many of you ask me: Where’s the Democratic Party?
I wish I had a good answer. At a time when America needs a strong, bold, courageous opposition, the Democrats’ silence is deafening.
What the hell does it mean to be a “moderate” today anyway? When the choice we’re facing is between democracy and dictatorship, where’s the midpoint?
My old friend James Carville advises Democrats to “roll over and play dead.” With due respect to James, he’s full of sh*t.
Democrats have been rolling over and playing dead too long. That’s one reason the nation is in the trouble we’re in.
If Democrats had had the guts years ago to condemn big money in politics, fight corporate welfare, and unrig a market that’s been rigged in favor of big corporations and the rich, Trump’s absurd bogeymen (the deep state, immigrants, socialists, trans people, diversity-equity-inclusion) wouldn’t have stood a chance.
My simple advice to congressional Democrats: Wake the hell up!
Tonight, Trump will address both chambers of Congress. He has taken over the brains and intestines of Republican lawmakers, who will applaud his stream of lies.
Democrats will do—what? Sit on their hands? Applaud a few insipid things?
Ideally, Democrats should boycott the whole event. Even sitting in the well of the House as if this were just another president addressing just another Congress legitimizes Trump’s coup.
Democrats should not signal to a nationally televised audience that what we’re living through is normal.
If Democratic lawmakers feel they must be there, then make good and loud trouble. Disrupt Trump’s speech. Arrive in Revolutionary War costumes and hold signs proclaiming America is not a monarchy. Wave American flags and copies of the Constitution.
Every time he utters the word “tariff,” hold up a sign that says “It’s a tax.”
When Trump lies—about Ukraine, about DOGE, about immigration, about the tariffs he’s just put into effect, about his plan for robbing working people to give another huge tax cut to the rich—boo loudly. Hold up a “lie meter” for the cameras.
Then walk out en masse.
Show America there’s still life in the democratic opposition, even as America slides toward dictatorship.
The good news is most of America is firmly against Trump (and with Democrats) on the big things. According to polls:
- Most don’t want a Trump Republican budget that cuts almost $1 trillion out of Medicaid, food stamps, and child nutrition in order to make way for a $4.5 trillion tax cut mostly for the wealthy.
- Most don’t want the richest person in the world destroying departments and agencies that protect our health, safety, financial security, and environment.
- Most don’t side with Putin. Most don’t want us to abandon Ukraine. Most don’t want us to turn against our traditional allies that are democracies in favor of a bloodthirsty dictator.
- Most don’t want tariffs that drive up the prices they pay for food, gas, housing, and clothing. Most understand that tariffs are taxes paid by American consumers.
- Most don’t want a government of, by, and for billionaires.
- Most believe in democracy and the rule of law and don’t want Trump trampling on the Constitution, acts of Congress, and federal court orders.
Not only should Democrats be making noise (and hay) about all this, but Democrats should not rely on so-called “moderates” (such as Michigan’s Sen. Elissa Slotkin) to speak for them. Democrats selected Slotkin to deliver the Democrats’ “response” to Trump’s address tonight.
Democrats need Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), or anyone else with fight in their hearts and rage in their bellies who can make the case that Trump is bad for working people and terrible for America and the world.
What the hell does it mean to be a “moderate” today anyway? When the choice we’re facing is between democracy and dictatorship, where’s the midpoint?
We are in clear and present danger. Democrats must stand up for American ideals at a time when Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Elon Musk are riding roughshod over them.
The rest of you, my friends, should make a ruckus, too. Call your Democratic senators and Democratic representatives (if you have any) today, and tell them what I’ve just told you. Again, the Capitol switchboard is 202-224-3121.
During or after Trump’s speech tonight, call the White House and tell the operator that you disagree with what Trump has said. White House operators keep track of positive and negative responses. (The White House switchboard is 202-456-1414.)
Have no doubt that we are the true patriots of this nation. We are the voices of democracy, freedom, social justice, and the rule of law. We are the people.
Our lawmakers—including Trump and Vance (and even de facto lawmakers like Musk)—are supposed to be working for us.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Capitalism’s Free Speech Trap: Bezos Shows How Billionaires Set the Boundaries of Debate
The Washington Post’s shift toward free-market advocacy is not simply an editorial decision; it is a strategic move to reinforce the dominant ideological framework that benefits the billionaire class.
Feb 27, 2025
The recent directive by Jeff Bezos that The Washington Post editorial section should promote “personal liberties and free markets” is a stark reminder of how freedom under capitalism often boils down to the freedom of economic elites to dictate the parameters of public discourse. While Bezos has suggested that social media provides alternative perspectives, thus absolving his newspaper of the responsibility to represent diverse viewpoints, his decision is part of a broader trend of billionaire media ownership shaping acceptable discourse.
This phenomenon is visible across digital platforms as well. Elon Musk’s control over X (formerly Twitter) has demonstrated how ownership can shape public debate—both through direct interventions, such as the alleged suppression of progressive perspectives, and through more subtle changes to platform algorithms. Similarly, Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has faced repeated allegations of privileging certain political narratives while suppressing others, including ending its “fact checking” policy that could challenge far-right viewpoints.
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction in Bezos’ advocacy for free markets is the extent to which he, and other billionaires like him, have benefited from state intervention as part of an intentional strategy of “corporate welfare.”
In each case, the rhetoric of “free speech” is selectively applied. While these platforms and newspapers claim to support open debate, their policies ultimately reflect the ideological preferences of their owners. This demonstrates a fundamental truth: In capitalist societies, freedom of expression is often contingent on the interests of those who control the means of communication. The Washington Post’s shift toward free-market advocacy is not simply an editorial decision; it is a strategic move to reinforce the dominant ideological framework that benefits the billionaire class.
The Myth of Meritocracy and the Far-Right’s War on DEI
Bezos’ framing of free markets as inherently linked to personal liberties exposes a deeper ideological assumption—namely, that economic success is the result of individual talent and merit rather than systemic privilege. This assumption is not unique to Bezos but is foundational to the way many economic elites understand their own wealth and influence.
The logic behind Bezos’ editorial direction is similar to the arguments used by the contemporary far-right to attack Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The opposition to DEI is rooted in a desire to preserve the myth that success is determined purely by hard work and ability, rather than by racial, gender, or class privilege. By rejecting policies that acknowledge structural inequalities, The far-right seeks to uphold a narrative that justifies existing economic and social hierarchies.
This worldview is deeply intertwined with the ideology of neoliberalism, which insists that markets are neutral mechanisms that reward the most capable individuals. However, history shows that markets are anything but neutral. The barriers faced by marginalized groups are not simply the result of individual shortcomings; they are the product of centuries of systemic exclusion. The far-right’s attack on DEI serves to obscure these realities, just as Bezos’ insistence on free markets seeks to erase the role of privilege and power in determining economic outcomes.
By positioning The Washington Post as a champion of free markets, Bezos is promoting the idea that capitalism functions as a pure meritocracy. This serves not only to legitimize his own position but also to delegitimize calls for policies that challenge structural inequality, whether in the form of DEI programs, labor protections, or wealth redistribution measures.
The Illusion of the Free Market and Its Political Implications
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction in Bezos’ advocacy for free markets is the extent to which he, and other billionaires like him, have benefited from state intervention as part of an intentional strategy of “corporate welfare.” The notion of a truly free market, where economic actors compete on equal footing without government interference, is a fantasy. In reality, corporations like Amazon have thrived not because of unregulated competition, but because of significant government support.
From tax incentives to government contracts, Amazon has received billions in subsidies that have allowed it to dominate the retail and logistics industries. Moreover, the U.S. government plays a critical role in enforcing corporate-friendly trade policies, suppressing labor movements, and protecting the interests of multinational corporations abroad. These interventions are rarely acknowledged in discussions of free markets, yet they are crucial to understanding the power dynamics of contemporary capitalism.
If freedom under capitalism ultimately means the freedom of the wealthy to dictate the terms of discourse, then the very concept of free speech is in jeopardy.
Politically, Bezos’ editorial directive at The Washington Post serves to strengthen a broader ideological alignment between neoliberal economics and far-right nationalism. By framing free-market capitalism as an essential component of personal liberty, Bezos is laying the groundwork for a political agenda that fuses economic libertarianism with nationalist conservatism. This is significant because it provides an ideological foundation for challenging emerging economic policies that deviate from neoliberal orthodoxy—such as the rise of protectionism in response to globalization.
This alignment between free-market ideology and far-right nationalism is not new. Historically, neoliberalism has often coexisted with reactionary politics, as seen in the economic policies of figures like former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Today, this synthesis is being revived as right-wing populists seek to defend corporate interests while simultaneously appealing to nationalist sentiments. Bezos’ intervention in The Washington Post should be understood within this broader context: It is not just about shaping editorial policy but about consolidating an ideological framework that benefits economic elites while limiting the scope of acceptable political debate.
The Dangers of Billionaire-Controlled Media
Bezos’ decision to impose a free-market ideology on The Washington Post is not an isolated event; it is part of a larger trend in which media ownership is used to shape public discourse in ways that serve elite interests. This phenomenon extends beyond traditional journalism to social media platforms, where billionaires like Musk and Zuckerberg wield immense power over the flow of information.
At its core, this issue is about more than just media bias—it is about the fundamental tension between democracy and concentrated economic power. A truly free and open society requires a diversity of perspectives, yet the dominance of billionaire-controlled media threatens to constrain the range of acceptable debate. If freedom under capitalism ultimately means the freedom of the wealthy to dictate the terms of discourse, then the very concept of free speech is in jeopardy.
The consolidation of media power in the hands of a few ultra-wealthy individuals raises urgent questions about the future of democratic debate. If we are to challenge the ideological hegemony of economic elites, we must first recognize the mechanisms through which they shape public discourse. Bezos’ editorial mandate is not just about The Washington Post—it is a reflection of the broader struggle over who gets to define the boundaries of political and economic debate in the 21st century.
Keep ReadingShow Less
We Must Rise Up to Stop This Corporate Coup—and Fast
Break with your routine, Americans. It’s your country they are seizing!
Feb 08, 2025
Rise up people and fast. Tyrant Trump and his Musk-driven gangsters are launching a fascistic coup d’état. Much of everything you like about federal/civil service for your health, safety, and economic well-being and protections is being targeted.
To feed Trump’s insatiable vengeance over being prosecuted, being defeated in the 2020 election, or now just being challenged, this megalomaniacal, self-described dictator is harming the lives of tens of millions of Americans in need and millions of Americans who are assisting them.
In his demented lawless arrogance, convicted felon Trump is nullifying the freedoms and protections of the American Revolution (King Donald is today’s King George III), and rejecting the Declaration of Independence (which listed the rights and abuses against the British Tyrant that Trump is shredding and entrenching). He is defiantly violating the U.S. Constitution, its controls over dictatorial government, and its powers exclusively given to Congress. The Constitution demands that we live under the rule of law, not the rule of one man.
While Trump enjoys Mar-a-Lago and his golfing, Madman Musk, a South African, is literally living in the Executive Office Building next to the White House, with his heel-clicking Musketeers, seven days a week (they brought in sleeping cots) guarded by a large private security detail.
Consider, people, that the world’s richest man, with billions of dollars of federal contracts, is unleashing his henchmen to wreck the daily work of public servants committed to providing critical services that have long and bi-partisan support. Assistance to children, emergency workers, the sick and elderly, public school students, and people ripped off by business crooks. He is firing the federal cops on the corporate crime beat – whether at the FBI, the EPA, or the key Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which Trump/Musk are gutting.
Some headlines: “Laws? What Laws? Trump’s Brazen Grab for Executive Power” by the great reporter Charlie Savage (New York Times, February 6, 2025). Outlaws taking charge, driven by greed for the government’s honeypots of corporate welfare, and near-zero taxes for the rich and big corporations.
When the forces of law and order reassert themselves, Elon Musk may become known as felon Musk.
Or “Searching for Motive to Musk Team’s Focus on ‘Checkbook’ of U.S.” by Alan Rappeport, February 6, 2025, New York Times.
Or “White House Billionaires Take on the World’s Poorest Kids” by the super-reporter Nicholas Kristof (February 6, 2025. New York Times) shutting down The Agency for International Development’s distribution of AIDS medicines, and crucially stopping U.S. health agencies from countering rising, deadly pandemics in Africa that could come here quickly without U.S. defensive actions abroad. Already the devastating effects on children missing healthcare and food are erupting.
Kristof concludes that all this (and the dollar amounts are very small compared to their benefits) may seem like a game for Trump/Musk, but “… it’s about children’s lives and our own security, and what’s unfolding is sickening.” It is also criminal!
When the forces of law and order reassert themselves, Elon Musk may become known as felon Musk. He is not a properly appointed federal official. He has no authority to send his wrecking crews into one agency after another, demanding private information about Americans, pushing people out, and shutting down operations.
Musk, whose next target is the federal auto safety agency that has been enforcing the safety laws against Tesla and has not surrendered its regulation of self-driving cars (Musk’s next big project). Musk refuses to disclose his sweetheart contracts with the federal agencies nor has he disclosed his tax returns. Demand them.
What is very clear in the first 20 days of Trump’s lawless madness is that he is moving fast for a police state along with deepening the corporate state with and for Big Business. His prime victims are not the vast military budget at the Department of Defense, nor the big budgets of the Spy Agencies or of Musk’s lucrative fiefdom – NASA, the Space Agency. No, like the bullies they are, Trump/Musk are smashing people’s programs. They hate Medicaid (provided to over 80 million Americans) or the food programs for millions of children. Crazed Trump is pushing to shut down many clean wind power projects and cut credits to homeowners installing solar panels while booming the omnicidal oil, gas, and coal industries. He wants many more giant exporting natural gas facilities near U.S. ports which could accidentally blow up entire cities.
Outlaws taking charge, driven by greed for the government’s honeypots of corporate welfare, and near-zero taxes for the rich and big corporations.
Musk’s poisoned Tusks have even reached Laos, Cambodia, and parts of Vietnam where mine-clearing efforts have been cut off. These are the U.S.’s Vietnam War era unexploded ordinances and bomblets that have killed tens of thousands of innocent residents, mostly children, in the past fifty years.
The Washington Post headline on February 6th, “Musk Team Taking Over Public Operations” understates the carnage. They are brazenly shutting down agencies, taking down thousands of government websites helpful to all Americans, and telling conscientious civil servants to obey or be driven out.
The Republicans in Congress, to their future shame and guilt, are surrendering their constitutional powers in the very branch of government our Founders assigned to check any rising monarchy in the White House.
The Democrats in the minority are just starting to protest, some in front of shuttered federal buildings. But they have not yet initiated unofficial public hearings in Congress to give voice to the surging anger of Americans (now flooding their switchboards) whose narrow majority of Trump voters are sensing betrayal big time. Demand unofficialhearings now! Federal judges are starting to uphold the violated laws.
The media, itself threatened by Trump’s attacks, censorship, and who knows what is next from this venomous liar (see the Washington Post’s Glen Kessler’s January 26, 2025 piece “The White House’s wildly inaccurate claims about USAID spending” or “Trump’s gusher of misleading economic statistics at Davos”) will cover protests and testimony by people all over the country. The rallies and marches have begun and will only get larger as Trump and Musk sink lower with their tyrannical abuses.
The career military does not relish the reckless buffoon that Trump put over them as Secretary of Defense. American business cannot tolerate the chaos, the uncertainty, the tumult. Thirty-nine million small businesses are already feeling the oncoming Trump tsunami.
Break with your routine, Americans. It’s your country they are seizing with this burgeoning coup. Take it back fast, is what our original patriots of 1776 would be saying.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump-Aligned Project 2025 Would Mean Higher Taxes for Workers, 'Corporate Welfare' for the Rich
"The ultra-wealthy would get hefty handout while families suffer. We can't let that happen," said Sen. Martin Heinrich, the chair of the Joint Economic Committee.
Aug 01, 2024
An economic analysis of the far-right Project 2025 agenda crafted by at least 140 former Trump administration officials shows that the plan would result in higher taxes on working-class Americans and "corporate welfare" for the rich and large businesses.
Conducted by the Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), the new analysis notes that Project 2025's sprawling "Mandate for Leadership" would establish a "two-rate individual tax system of 15% and 30% that eliminates most deductions, credits, and exclusions."
Such a system, according to the JEC, "would force many middle-class families to pay thousands of dollars more in tax payments."
"Together, these changes to tax rates would mean that a family of four earning $90,000 per year would have paid roughly $2,300 more in taxes last year," the JEC found. "If the Child Tax Credit was also eliminated, this family would have paid roughly $6,300 more. Meanwhile, millionaires would pay a lower top tax rate."
The analysis also points to Project 2025's push for a "national sales tax," a highly regressive proposal endorsed by dozens of Republican lawmakers in the House of Representatives.
A national sales tax would "force working families to pay more at the grocery store, gas pump, and any other place they buy
goods or services," JEC said Thursday, noting that past GOP proposals "would have hiked the cost of essentials like groceries and housing—usually exempt from state and local sales taxes—by 30%."
Meanwhile, Project 2025 calls for reducing the U.S. corporate tax rate from 21% to 18%. According to The Washington Post, GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump's advisers have discussed slashing the tax rate to as low as 15%, and the president himself has told leading executives and his wealthy campaign donors that he intends to push for additional tax cuts if he wins another four years in the White House.
"It would force Americans to pay more at the grocery store, strip workers of overtime pay, and raise taxes on working families."
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), chair of the JEC, said in a statement that "Republicans' Project 2025 is bad for America," as "it would force Americans to pay more at the grocery store, strip workers of overtime pay, and raise taxes on working families."
"The ultra-wealthy would get hefty handout while families suffer," Heinrich added. "We can't let that happen."
The JEC analysis also highlights Project 2025's proposed assault on worker protections, noting that the far-right plan would make "fewer workers eligible for time-and-a-half overtime pay"; allow "children to work in hazardous occupations such as factories, meatpacking plants, and sawmills"; and gut National Labor Relations Board enforcement.
Other broad, potentially destructive reforms advocated by Project 2025—which is spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation—are eliminating the Federal Reserve's mandate to pursue full employment and abolishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, long a target of corporate America and their Republican allies in Congress.
Recent polling data indicates that Project 2025 is unpopular with U.S. voters and becomes even more so once they are informed about the far-right initiative's proposals.
That could explain why Trump has sought to distance himself from Project 2025 in recent weeks, claiming he has "no idea who is behind it" despite the close involvement of a number of prominent figures who served in his administration, including former Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought.
An unnamed former senior adviser to Trump told New York magazine last month that "it's totally false he doesn't know what P25 is."
"Privately, he is of course talking to Heritage, and [Heritage president] Kevin Roberts has reportedly even met with Trump on P25," the ex-adviser said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Chip Firms Poised to Rake In Taxpayer Subsidies Spend Big on Stock Buybacks
Companies in line to receive CHIPS Act subsidies spent a combined $41 billion on share repurchases between 2019 and 2023, a new report shows.
Jul 11, 2024
An analysis published Thursday estimates that semiconductor firms positioned to receive billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies thanks to a 2022 U.S. law have spent big on investor-enriching stock buybacks in recent years, a finding that amplified calls for meaningful restrictions on companies benefiting from public money.
The new report released by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) shows that between 2019 and 2023, the first 11 corporations to reach preliminary CHIPS and Science Act agreements with the U.S. Department of Commerce collectively poured more than $41 billion into stock buybacks—a sum that would have been enough to finance a $27,541 raise for 300,000 employees annually for five years.
Intel, the company set to receive more CHIPS Act money than any other semiconductor firm, spent the most on buybacks: a staggering $30.2 billion between 2019 and 2023.
"We found no evidence that any of the companies with preliminary agreements have publicly committed to suspend their existing share repurchase plans—or to refrain from authorizing new plans—during the grant period," reads the report. "In fact, when members of Congress asked BAE Systems executives if the firm would commit to pausing stock buybacks or to not engage in future ones while receiving a taxpayer-funded CHIPS grant, they declined to answer."
The Biden White House, which worked hard to get the CHIPS Act across the finish line in 2022, has insisted that the law contains "strong guardrails" to prevent the misuse of taxpayer money, including on share repurchases.
But Sarah Anderson of IPS and Natalia Renta of the Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund, the co-authors of the new report, noted Thursday that the statute only prohibits CHIPS Act subsidy recipients from spending the taxpayer money directly on buybacks.
"Since money is fungible, this is not a strong guardrail," the pair argued.
"Congress passed the CHIPS and Science Act and President Biden signed it into law to bolster semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S.—not to waste public dollars on stock buybacks."
Critics of stock buybacks and sky-high executive compensation warned prior to the CHIPS Act's passage that the measure would amount to large-scale corporate welfare unless lawmakers placed serious constraints on how companies could spend the money.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) tried unsuccessfully to attach an amendment to the measure that would have barred subsidy recipients from buying back their own stock, outsourcing jobs, or attempting to sabotage unionization efforts.
A little over a month after President Joe Biden signed the CHIPS Act into law, a group of Democratic legislators warned U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo that while the statute "specifically prohibits the use of CHIPS funds for stock buybacks and dividend payments, these restrictions do not explicitly prohibit award recipients from using CHIPS funds to free up their own funds, which they can then use for those purposes."
The new IPS report notes that four semiconductor firms that have reached CHIPS Act agreements with the Biden administration have "board-approved share repurchase plans that would allow an additional $14.3 billion in buyback spending," with Intel accounting for more than half of that total.
The analysis also found that annual CEO compensation between 2019 and 2023 averaged close to $14 million at firms in line for CHIPS Act funding, while median pay at the companies was $73,046.
"Congress passed the CHIPS and Science Act and President Biden signed it into law to bolster semiconductor manufacturing in the U.S.—not to waste public dollars on stock buybacks that make rich executives richer and exacerbate economic and racial inequality," said Renta, senior policy counsel for corporate governance and power at the Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund.
"Commerce Secretary Raimondo must finalize CHIPS contracts with strong stock buyback restrictions to make sure public money serves the public good, as intended, not narrow, private interests," Renta added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pillaging by the Super-Rich Will Continue Until the Working Class Revolts
American workers are not stupid. They're getting fleeced and they know it. But until we rebuild large scale working-class power, it’s going to be a very rough ride.
Jun 24, 2024
They'll stone you when you're at the breakfast table.
They'll stone you when you are young and able.
They'll stone you when you're tryin' to make a buck.
They'll stone you and then they'll say good luck.
—Bob Dylan, from “Rainy Day Women #12 and 35”
There comes a time in the history of a nation when extreme inequality turns into pillage. If economic power is concentrated so is political power, and the wealthy are able to do whatever they damn well please. They can lie, cheat, and steal because they know they won’t be held to account.
Have the super-rich now taken control of our political and economic systems? Some current news makes me worry.
Let’s start with the food industry, the food cartel that includes General Mills, PepsiCo, and Tyson, which has been jacking up prices non-stop since 2020. Why are food prices up 25 percent since then?
These giants blame supply chains, the rising costs of labor, and the rising prices of other inputs required to produce and distribute their products. It’s not their fault, they say. But the real culprit, upon closer examination, is stock buybacks, another word for stock manipulation. These firms are fleecing shoppers by raising prices and then using the cash to buy back their own stocks, thereby increasing the market value of each share. Stock buybacks do not increase the value of a company, but they move money effortlessly to the largest Wall Street shareowners and to a company's top executives, who receive most of their compensation via stock incentives.
Since the deregulation of Wall Street, corporations have been on a job killing spree.
As food prices shot up by 25 percent, “the ten largest grocery and restaurant brands have together returned or pledged to return more than $77 billion to shareholders,” reports Veronica Riccobene in her excellent article “Big Food, Big Profits, Big Lies.”
In related news, California fast-good giants have claimed that the state’s 2023 minimum wage law, which raised wages from $16 to $20 per hour, killed 10,000 jobs. A closer look, picked up by the Los Angeles Times, showed that the industry cooked the numbers by comparing employment in September with December. But every year, September is within the peak dining out season, and in December people dine out least. When adjusted for seasonal variation or compared with the employment levels exactly one year earlier (both standard ways of measuring employment levels) the number of jobs actually increased by 7,000 after the minimum wage law was enacted.
Boeing recently crashed into the news again, when company CEO Dave Calhoun was roasted by a couple of congressional committees about its shoddy production processes. There were plenty of outraged performances, but none of the oh-so-self-righteous lawmakers had the cajónes to ask about the impact on safety of Boeing’s $61 billion in stock buybacks or about how about Calhoun hauled in $30 million in stock incentives while Boeing lost $1.6 billion in 2023. Is it possible that maybe, just maybe, Boeing financed those buybacks by laying off workers, moving work to lower-wage sub-contractors, and cutting safety corners? Radio silence from Congress. (See “Did Stock Buybacks Knock the Bolts Out of Boeing?”)
Then there’s the way Wall Street squeezes out new home buyers by gobbling up houses and turning them into rentals. (See “Wall Street to Working-Class Homebuyers: Fuggeddaboutdit!”)
Let’s not forget that John Deere recently announced moving jobs from the U.S. to Mexico while feasting on government contracts and, of course, using job cuts to finance stock buybacks.
There is no organized mass of working-class folks with enough power to stop corporate looting.
Do we have to even mention how Big Pharma is charging us more than it does Canadians, or how health insurance companies collude to fix prices, or how giant hospital chains over-charge us with impunity?
They rip us off to feed their profits, which then gets shipped to the richest of the rich via stock buybacks. Of the $3 trillion in after tax U.S. corporate profits in 2022, about $1.31 trillion went to stock buybacks. In 1980 there were 13 US billionaires. Now there are 748.
None of this is accidental. Stock buybacks were deregulated in 1982. That’s when Wall Street began its financial war on workers and got filthy rich. (See my new book for the gory details.)
Corporate Welfare
Just hearing that phrase makes me nauseous because it’s a stark reminder of how feeble we are. Progressives have been complaining about government giveaways to large corporations at least since the 1970s and the practice has only grown worse.
I’ll bet you already know how bad it is. We taxpayers give the oil industry about $20 billion a year in subsidies while BP, Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobile and TotalEnergies plow $104 billion in dividends and stock buybacks into the pockets of their shareholders (2022). Wall Street may be getting as much as $800 million a day via the Federal Reserve, according to one report. I have yet to find a credible source that adds it all up. I’m guessing it’s well over a trillion dollars a year in direct subsidies, tax breaks, and financial market supports. To rub it in, the richest corporations have successfully lobbied for so many tax loopholes that they pay little or nothing at all. (See here and here.)
“But wait,” they tell us, “Tax cuts and subsidies create jobs.”
That’s the biggest and most painful lie of all. Since the deregulation of Wall Street, corporations have been on a job killing spree. Stock buybacks are financed with job cuts. More than 30 million of us have suffered through mass layoffs (defined as 50 or more workers let go at one time) since 1996. Kill the jobs, save some money, buy back your stocks, put the money in your pocket, rinse and repeat.
Working Class Revolt?
We’re nowhere near any kind of organized mass uprising. But American workers are not stupid. They may not be able to spell out in detail how they are getting ripped off, but they know it’s happening. Most importantly, they understand that the government works for the rich and not for them. That’s why so many are willing to support train-wrecking outsiders who attack the government, even when they are anti-worker billionaire buffoons. In 1964, 77 percent of Americans had trust in the federal government. Now it’s 16 percent.
We’re living with the results of the collapse of countervailing working-class power. In 1955, 35 percent of the private sector workers were in labor unions. Today it’s only 6 percent. That means there is no organized mass of working-class folks with enough power to stop corporate looting.
Somehow, somewhere, a new working-class movement has to emerge.
I hate to be alarmist, but we’re really in bad shape and it is likely to get worse. Power is so tilted towards the rich that more and more people are giving up on politics, leaving the field open to the modern-day robber barons. This corrupt environment is a petri dish for conspiracy theories and hate.
Somehow, somewhere, a new working-class movement has to emerge. I’ve been begging progressive labor leaders to start a new organization that would fight against mass layoffs and for workers who are not in unions. (How about Workers United for Justice?)
While labor unions must organize shop by shop, they should also acknowledge that labor law is so tilted against workers, that it will be very difficult to make major inroads into the 94 percent with no union protection. We need a new parallel path to connect with these workers that doesn’t involve years and years of costly combat within a rigged labor law system.
Victims of mass layoffs are everywhere. They need a voice. They need an organization that will fight for them. If leaders like Shawn Fain of the United Auto Workers (UAW) and Sara Nelson from the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA) reached out to non-union workers who are getting crushed by Wall Street stock buybacks, those workers just might come running.
Until we rebuild large scale working-class power, it’s going to be a very rough ride. If we have learned anything at all since 1980, it’s that greed begets greed. The super-rich always want more and they’re not shy about grabbing it, even if democracy crumbles all around them—and us.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Slam Amazon's Billion-Dollar 'Corporate Welfare' for Oregon Data Centers
"No other retailer in U.S. history has come anywhere close to such enrichment at public expense," asserted one opponent of the nine-figure subsidy.
May 19, 2023
Opponents of a contentious $1 billion subsidy for online retail behemoth Amazon's data centers in Oregon on Friday decried what one critic called "corporate welfare" for a company that raked in more than a half a trillion dollars in revenue last year.
Amazon already has four data centers in Morrow County, Oregon and plans on building six more Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud-computing facilities there. Earlier this month, Port of Morrow commissioners approved tax breaks for Amazon with an estimated value of $1 billion.
"With this new award, we now know of $6.1 billion in subsidies given to Amazon in the United States alone," said Kasia Tarczynska, a senior analyst at the public interest watchdog Good Jobs First. "No other retailer in U.S. history has come anywhere close to such enrichment at public expense."
While local officials hope the incentives will secure $12 in billion new investment by Amazon in the remote county on the Columbia River about 185 miles east of Portland, opponents bristled when residents were given just one day's notice before the final commission vote.
Oregonians are also angered by Amazon's efforts to fight proposed state legislation that would compel data centers to use clean energy.
In a statement following the commission's vote, Amazon said that "we've been an active member of eastern Oregon communities since 2011, investing more than $15.6 billion while supporting thousands of local jobs."
"Investments like these create and support high-paying, highly skilled jobs in local communities, and projects that benefit local education, healthcare, public services, and more," the company added.
Common Dreams reported last year that Amazon dodged $5.2 billion in federal corporate taxes in 2021 while paying an effective tax rate of 6%, far lower than the statutory 21%.
Good Jobs First executive director Greg LeRoy said Friday that "in a 2016 study looking at major internet companies and their data center subsidies, we found a cost per job of almost $2 million."
"The AWS grab in Morrow could be several times that," he added. "At these obscene costs, the only clear outcome is a massive transfer of wealth from Oregon taxpayers to Amazon shareholders."
As Good Jobs First argued: "Oregonians should not pay Amazon to do what it would do anyway."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy