“I Cannot Afford To Live”: Americans Get Emotional As The U.S. Economy Goes Off The Rails

[Andylusion]

That is because by the last 2000s the top 1% had their wages growing faster than the rest.

Between 1979 and 2019 the top 1.0% saw their wages grow by 160% while those in the bottom 90% had annual wages grow by 26.0%

Again, so what? What's the problem with that?
The people building the economy should have their wages rise faster. They are creating more.

First of all, the rich guy being less rich, doesn't mean you will be more rich. Him having less, does not mean you will have more. Him having more, does not mean you will have less. Your income as an employees has absolutely not connection direct or indirect, with how much the CEO makes. None.

Let me illustrate. You can disagree, but at least give me a chance to explain it.

Let's say that you run a lemonade stand. The stand generates $100 of income. You need $15 to pay for upkeep and maintenance. And you pay me $80 to run the stand. You make $5 profit from the stand.

Pretty clear. Lemonade stand makes $100, pay me $80, $15 for upkeep, and you get $5 profit.

Now what do you as a business owner do? You open another stand. The new stand makes $100, $15 for upkeep, $5 profit, and you pay someone else $80 a day to run the stand.

Your income doubled. Does mine? No. My stand still makes still makes $100, and $15 for upkeep, and $5 profit for you, so I still get paid $80 a day.

So just because your income went up, does not mean my income can go up.

Now what do you as a business owner do? You keep opening more stands. Fast forward 5 years or something. You now have 1,000 stands. Your income is now $5,000 a day, which is almost $2 Million a year.

Your income is dramatically higher. Can you increase my pay that much? Well.... my stand, the stand that I'm running, still only brings in $100 a day, you still need $15 for upkeep. You still have to make a profit, or why operate the stand? So you can still only pay me out of the value I'm creating. I'm created $100 a day. That's it. Your income doesn't change how much value my stand is making. So you can't pay me $100 a day, because then you would be losing money on that stand. You would close the stand, and lay me off.

So how much money you make, has nothing to do with how much money I as the employee, make.

So back to your comment. How much money the 1% makes.... I don't care. Them earning less, does not mean any workers wages are going to increase by even a dollar.

Take Walmart. CEO of Walmart makes $26 Million (which is not actually true, but let's go with that). Walmart has 2.1 Million employees. If you take the entire CEO pay, and give it to the employees, that would be $12.37 a year. That's 23¢ a week, and 0.5¢ an hour.

The CEO earning less, will not change how much the employee makes. Ever. It has no effect.

 

[Andylusion]

Yes, I do.

I think it is the very nature of our system that both parties embrace and push when they are in power.

Did this gap get smaller once GW was in office?

No. I wouldn't want the gap to get smaller. I do not believe that the gap in pay is even a problem. The CEO making more, doesn't mean I make less. Nor does the CEO making less, mean that I will make more.

The only reason conservatives like us bring up that CEO pay increased under Democrats is because you keep pointing to CEO pay as a reason to vote democrat, and yet Democrats are dramatically more in the pockets of big business, than Republicans. When has any Democrat anywhere ever magically made employee pay higher and CEO pay lower? It's never happened.

But I never bring up CEO pay as a reason to vote for Republicans, because I don't see that as a goal to be accomplished. You do. Not me.

 

[sealybobo]

Send a thank you note to former President Bill Clinton for the explosion of pay packages for CEOs.

As you know, too, unions have outlived their purpose. Public service unions should never have been allowed. Even FDR knew that.

Please tell us specifically the source of each dollar a corporation pays in taxes.

Funny that Clinton gets the credit for that while at the same time you Republicans defended those pay packages.

It's laughable to say today unions outlived their purpose. 2023 was the fucking year of the fucking union. Perhaps your corporate media didn't tell you this. Oh yea. Writers, auto workers, healthcare workers, casino workers, ups drivers, starbuck workers, all got raises last year. With Biden's support.

Stop pretending big corporations pay taxes. Just stop.

 

[leftwinger]

Stop pretending big corporations pay taxes. Just stop.

Corporations hire 100million Americans and they pay taxes. Corporate matches SS contributions. Provides them with cheaper Health insurance in most cases. Improves the areas where they are located. A rising tide raises all boats.

 

[sealybobo]

Corporations hire 100million Americans and they pay taxes. Corporate matches SS contributions. Provides them with cheaper Health insurance in most cases. Improves the areas where they are located. A rising tide raises all boats.

Great points. I love good corporations. Not all corporations are as socially responsible. For example, during the 2000's, the highest paid CEO's from the biggest companies, all sent THE MOST jobs overseas. Because it increased profits. So the CEO of course got PAID. I don't blame them. You want to bring jobs back homeand make those CEO's pay American wages? How much?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Again, so what? What's the problem with that?

Did I say it was a problem?

I merely pointed out why they were paying a higher percent of the taxes

 

[Markle]

Funny that Clinton gets the credit for that while at the same time you Republicans defended those pay packages.

It's laughable to say today unions outlived their purpose. 2023 was the fucking year of the fucking union. Perhaps your corporate media didn't tell you this. Oh yea. Writers, auto workers, healthcare workers, casino workers, ups drivers, starbuck workers, all got raises last year. With Biden's support.

Stop pretending big corporations pay taxes. Just stop.

First, you denied the massive pay packages for CEOs existed, now it's but, but, but, the Republicans...

What percent of private workers belong to a union?

I asked you the SOURCE of each dollar paid by a corporation in taxes. Why do you always keep dodging the questions?

 

[sealybobo]

First, you denied the massive pay packages for CEOs existed, now it's but, but, but, the Republicans...

What percent of private workers belong to a union?

I asked you the SOURCE of each dollar paid by a corporation in taxes. Why do you always keep dodging the questions?
a

I denied massive pay packages exist? My brother is VP. He just got one. Golden Pachachutes exist. 1 year salary. $1.7 million. And the black guy who replaced him makes 4 x that. Suck on that.

5% belong to unions. Used to be 35%. In the years membership went from 35% down to 5%, CEO pay has gone up 1322% and workers only 18%. That's because we lost our seat at the table.

You asked me a question I can't answer. The source is profits?

 

[Andylusion]

Funny that Clinton gets the credit for that while at the same time you Republicans defended those pay packages.

It's laughable to say today unions outlived their purpose. 2023 was the fucking year of the fucking union. Perhaps your corporate media didn't tell you this. Oh yea. Writers, auto workers, healthcare workers, casino workers, ups drivers, starbuck workers, all got raises last year. With Biden's support.

Stop pretending big corporations pay taxes. Just stop.

Name one that you think doesn't pay taxes.
And no, unions are still declining.

 

[Markle]

I denied massive pay packages exist? My brother is VP. He just got one. Golden Pachachutes exist. 1 year salary. $1.7 million. And the black guy who replaced him makes 4 x that. Suck on that.

5% belong to unions. Used to be 35%. In the years membership went from 35% down to 5%, CEO pay has gone up 1322% and workers only 18%. That's because we lost our seat at the table.

You asked me a question I can't answer. The source is profits?

As you know, you would rather take a sharp stick in the eye than, say, the customers, not profits pay the taxes.

Companies must maintain competitive operations, wages, prices, and profit margins. If they do not make a profit, investors will sell that stock and buy another, making a profit.

 

[Andylusion]

Did I say it was a problem?

I merely pointed out why they were paying a higher percent of the taxes

Gotcha. Okay.

 

[Andylusion]

I denied massive pay packages exist? My brother is VP. He just got one. Golden Pachachutes exist. 1 year salary. $1.7 million. And the black guy who replaced him makes 4 x that. Suck on that.

5% belong to unions. Used to be 35%. In the years membership went from 35% down to 5%, CEO pay has gone up 1322% and workers only 18%. That's because we lost our seat at the table.

You asked me a question I can't answer. The source is profits?

No it's not because of that.
It's because the value created by the employee is remained largely flat, while the value created by the CEO has increased.
Both are paid out of the value they create.

 

[sealybobo]

Name one that you think doesn't pay taxes.
And no, unions are still declining.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In its first year, the number of companies paying no taxes went from 30 to 60.

They've reported they owe absolutely nothing on the billions of dollars in profits they earned last year.


At least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero, or even less than zero, on income earned on U.S. operations

So Uncle Sam gets nothing.

The number is more than twice as many as ITEP found roughly, per year, on average in an earlier, multi-year analysis before the new tax law went into effect.

Amazon.com Inc. and entertainment streaming service Netflix Inc., in addition to global oil giant Chevron Corp., pharmaceutical manufacturer Eli Lilly and Co., and farming and commercial equipment manufacturer Deere & Co.

The identified companies were "able to zero out their federal income taxes on $79 billion in U.S. pretax income," according to the ITEP report, which was released today. "Instead of paying $16.4 billion in taxes, as the new 21 percent corporate tax rate requires, these companies enjoyed a net corporate tax rebate of $4.3 billion, blowing a $20.7 billion hole in the federal budget last year." To compile the list, ITEP analyzed the 2018 financial filings of the country's largest 560 publicly-held companies.

The controversial Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed by President Donald Trump in December 2017, lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, among other cuts. That's partly to blame for giving corporations an easier way out of paying taxes

Twice as many companies paying zero taxes under Trump tax bill

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In its first year, the number of companies paying no taxes went from 30 to 60.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[sealybobo]

No it's not because of that.
It's because the value created by the employee is remained largely flat, while the value created by the CEO has increased.
Both are paid out of the value they create.

Ok then don't complain that their pay went up 1322% and you're a broke ass bitch who can't afford to retire.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It's because the value created by the employee is remained largely flat, while the value created by the CEO has increased.

I am not sure you can back up the value of a CEO increasing that much.

What value has David Calhoun brought to Boeing?

 

[Andylusion]

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In its first year, the number of companies paying no taxes went from 30 to 60.

They've reported they owe absolutely nothing on the billions of dollars in profits they earned last year.


At least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero, or even less than zero, on income earned on U.S. operations

So Uncle Sam gets nothing.

The number is more than twice as many as ITEP found roughly, per year, on average in an earlier, multi-year analysis before the new tax law went into effect.

Amazon.com Inc. and entertainment streaming service Netflix Inc., in addition to global oil giant Chevron Corp., pharmaceutical manufacturer Eli Lilly and Co., and farming and commercial equipment manufacturer Deere & Co.

The identified companies were "able to zero out their federal income taxes on $79 billion in U.S. pretax income," according to the ITEP report, which was released today. "Instead of paying $16.4 billion in taxes, as the new 21 percent corporate tax rate requires, these companies enjoyed a net corporate tax rebate of $4.3 billion, blowing a $20.7 billion hole in the federal budget last year." To compile the list, ITEP analyzed the 2018 financial filings of the country's largest 560 publicly-held companies.

The controversial Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed by President Donald Trump in December 2017, lowered the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, among other cuts. That's partly to blame for giving corporations an easier way out of paying taxes

Twice as many companies paying zero taxes under Trump tax bill

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowered the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In its first year, the number of companies paying no taxes went from 30 to 60.

www.nbcnews.com

So your own article contradicts you.

Instead of paying $16.4 billion...rebate of $4.3 billion

"rebate"
Rebate - "a partial refund to someone who has paid too much money for tax, rent, or a utility."

Because the income tax rate fell from 35% to 21%.

I don't know what your tax rate is, but let's say that your tax rate is the 37% rate. So all year long you are having tax withholding according to the 37% tax rate.

Now lets say that at the end of the year, they pass a bill to reduce the top marginal rate from 37% to 30% or whatever. Well you have been paying in 37% of your income all year. You would get a "rebate" at the end of the year. The government would cut you a check.

Not because you paid zero tax. If you paid zero tax, there would be no rebate. You just paid too much tax. You are getting back an over payment. You still paid taxes. You just paid too much taxes, because they lowered the tax rate.

So even your own article that you posted, basically proves your claim wrong. A rebate means they paid taxes. They paid so much taxes, that they were owed a rebate.

 

[Andylusion]

Ok then don't complain that their pay went up 1322% and you're a broke ass bitch who can't afford to retire.

My investments are doing great. My income is higher today that at any time in the past. I would never complain that they are making more money, because them making more, does not mean I make less.
It never has. It never will. CEO pay has zero effect on wages. Zero.

 

[Andylusion]

I am not sure you can back up the value of a CEO increasing that much.

What value has David Calhoun brought to Boeing?

Well if I hire you to run my company for me, the only person who really needs to justify your wage is me. It's my company. If I determine you are worth this much, then that's how much you are worth to me.

As for what value he brought? He guided the entire company into recovery.
So in 2018 the company had a revenue of $100 billion. In 2019 it had a revenue of $76 billion.
In 2020 they had a revenue of $58 Billion.
In 2020 with Covid, Calhoun replaced CEO Dennis Muilenburg.
So David Calhoun stepped into a sinking ship, that was sinking before Covid, and then Covid hit driving down sales since flights and vacations were horribly restricted.
Stock price of Boeing fell from $400 a share, to $90.

So very dire situation. You know most people who are CEOs don't want to step up to that, and take over a company that is struggling. You don't generally say "Oh look at this train wreck. Put me in charge".

But Calhoun did that. And under his leadership, the company revenues increased every single year, and the stock price is back up to $170 a share, up from $90.

The profit margin in 2020 was -20%. They lost 20%. Now they still haven't hit a profit just yet, but now the profit margin is -2%. Meaning that they will undoubtedly (unless the company really screws up), turn profit this year.

Now if you have any shares in Boeing at all... Is that not worth something to you? That's worth quite a bit I think. This guy saved the company.

And about his pay. He made only $1.4 Million cash, right?
And the other $30 Million is all stocks he can't sell. He has to hold them for a number of years, I think five years.
So, if he does something that tanks the company, that $30 Million is stock turns to toilet paper. He only gets that money, if the company does well.

Is $1.4 Million in cash, worth saving the company?

Well... the owners of the company and board of directors thinks so. And I think you would too if you owned a bunch of stock in Boeing.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

But Calhoun did that. And under his leadership, the company revenues increased every single year, and the stock price is back up to $170 a share, up from $90.

The profit margin in 2020 was -20%. They lost 20%. Now they still haven't hit a profit just yet, but now the profit margin is -2%. Meaning that they will undoubtedly (unless the company really screws up), turn profit this year.

Now if you have any shares in Boeing at all... Is that not worth something to you? That's worth quite a bit I think. This guy saved the company.

And about his pay. He made only $1.4 Million cash, right?
And the other $30 Million is all stocks he can't sell. He has to hold them for a number of years, I think five years.
So, if he does something that tanks the company, that $30 Million is stock turns to toilet paper. He only gets that money, if the company does well.

Is $1.4 Million in cash, worth saving the company?

Well... the owners of the company and board of directors thinks so. And I think you would too if you owned a bunch of stock in Boeing.

Yep, and know we all know those profits and stock going up was at the expense of safety and quality control.

Under him they spent more money buying back stocks to pump up the shares than they did developing new planes.

The stock is down 30% since Dec when cutting safety corners caught up to the company.

So yeah, he did a great job in the short term to make sure shareholders got richer.

Seems that should not be the only concern for a CEO....but we seem to differ on that

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The profit margin in 2020 was -20%. They lost 20%. Now they still haven't hit a profit just yet, but now the profit margin is -2%. Meaning that they will undoubtedly (unless the company really screws up), turn profit this year.

You mean like having doors fall off of planes in mid-flight due to shitty design?