SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
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.
Corporate greed in the form of stock buybacks piled on top of mass layoffs should be a laser focus of the Democratic Party if it wants to win back the nation's working class.
On the first night of the Democratic convention, United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain showed how to build working class support for the Harris-Walz ticket. And it wasn’t his “Donald Trump is a Scab” line and t-shirt.
It was his discussion of corporate power:
“Corporate greed turns blue-collar blood, sweat and tears into Wall Street stock buybacks and CEO jackpots.”
As far as I know, Fain was the only convention speaker who mentioned stock buybacks. He also zeroed in on job instability, as he called out Stellantis for refusing to honor its contract commitment to reopen a plant in Michigan.
And then he called out Trump for gloating over the firing of striking workers—a reference to Trump’s recent interview with Elon Musk, during which Trump said:
Well, you, you’re the greatest cutter. I mean, I look at what you do. You walk in and you just say, “You want to quit?” They go on strike. I won’t mention the name of the company, but they go on strike and you say, “That’s okay. You’re all gone. You’re all gone. So, every one of you is gone,” and you are the greatest. You would be very good.
Fain knows that Trump is not just praising Musk for illegally firing workers who want to organize a union. “Greatest cutter” also refers to the tens of thousands of workers Musk slashed from Twitter’s headcount to reduce costs to cover the debt service of his purchase. Trump showed his true affinity to corporate greed as he relished being with “the greatest cutter,” a man who knows how to get richer by slashing jobs.
Trump showed his true affinity to corporate greed as he relished being with “the greatest cutter,” a man who knows how to get richer by slashing jobs.
Fain also understands the intimate connection between stock buybacks and job insecurity. All too often mass layoffs are used to finance stock buybacks, the corporate method of choice for moving tax-free money into the coffers of Wall Street investors and CEOs. (A stock buyback is a form of stock manipulation. A corporation uses its revenues to buy back its own shares, reducing the number of shares available, thereby raising each share’s price. This increases the value of the stock incentives owed to corporate executives as compensation and to Wall Street investors, who own most of the corporate stock. The increased value is eventually subject to the capital gains tax, which is only owed when the stocks are sold, and is taxed at a lower rate than regular income, including dividends.)
The Democratic Party platform mildly addresses stock buybacks by proposing to raise the tax on them from one percent to four percent. It also comes very close to adopting a proposal I have been hawking over the past year: that tax-payer money awarded through federal contracts (about $700 billion per year) should not be used to lay off taxpayers and finance stock buybacks. The language in the platform states, “Taxpayer money should not be used to pay out dividends, fund stock buybacks, or give raises to executives,” (p 12). Unfortunately, the reference covers only past Covid-19 relief funds and not all federal contracts.
More importantly, the platform does not make the all-important connection between stock buybacks and mass layoffs. In fact, the 91-page platform avoids any mention at all of mass layoffs. Instead, it features “Building a Stronger, Fairer Economy,” which includes “Investing in the Engines of Job Creation.” That’s because it’s easier to talk about providing corporate incentives to create jobs in the future, rather than stopping corporations from slashing jobs to finance stock buybacks right now.
But Fain knows that the working class needs the Democrats to stop financialized mass layoffs. Hardly a day goes by without another corporation announcing layoffs while also engaging in stock buybacks. It’s a disease.
Hardly a day goes by without another corporation announcing layoffs while also engaging in stock buybacks. It’s a disease.
Most importantly Fain is telling the Democrats that job stability is the key to what “the economy” means to working people. In our society, if you don’t have a job, you have next to nothing. Studies show that losing your job is one of the most traumatic experiences anyone can experience. Sure, if you are highly skilled and plugged into elite networks, you can easily if not painlessly find new employment. But if you live in a rural area and a facility shuts down, you and a thousand of your neighbors will be scrambling to land the last jobs at the Dollar Store and Walmart.
It's not too late for the Democrats to attack Trump and Vance with one simple proposal—no compulsory layoffs at any corporation that conducts stock buybacks. If the corporation has the money to return to Wall Street and CEOs, then corporations have more than enough money to fund a program of non-compulsory layoffs. That means reductions in the workforce would only be achieved voluntarily through corporate offers of pay and benefit packages. No one would be forced to leave. In fact, many corporations already use non-compulsory buyouts for their higher-level employees.
Think for a second about how that might work. Some workers, especially those nearing retirement or who have sufficient savings, might jump at the offers. So might those who already were eyeing new careers. But workers in more difficult economic situations would still have their jobs and avoid the painful hardships associated with mass layoffs. This proposal is more than affordable considering the hundreds of billions of dollars that go to stock buybacks each year—$773 billion in 2023 alone. Let’s see some of that go into the pockets of workers, rather than exclusively to executives and shareholders.
This proposal is more than affordable considering the hundreds of billions of dollars that go to stock buybacks each year—$773 billion in 2023 alone.
Trump and Vance, for all their talk about supporting working people, could never support such a program. Their Wall Street backers and corporate sponsors would go bonkers. Their unimaginable wealth was built stripping money out of the system, not investing in it. That leaves the door wide open for the Democrats to follow Fain into the heart of the working class, especially in the all-important states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
But it won’t be easy for many Democrats to break free from the debilitating fatalism that layoffs are just a natural part of capitalism, more like a law of nature that cannot be controlled. It means breaking away from the notion that the unstoppable march of new technologies like AI and trade are the real job killers. They are not. It means waking up to acknowledge what we all sense—corporate greed is destroying job stability, and it’s got to stop.
One-hundred S&P 500 firms with the lowest median wages, a group we’ve dubbed the “Low-Wage 100,” blew $522 billion over the past five years on stock buybacks.
The Lowe’s home improvement store spent $43 billion on stock buybacks over the past five years. With that sum, the big box chain could’ve given each of its 285,000 employees a $30,000 bonus every year between 2019 and 2023.
The extra cash would’ve meant a lot to Lowe’s workers—half of whom make less than $33,000 per year. Meanwhile, the retailer’s CEO, Marvin Ellison, raked in $18 million in 2023.
The evidence is stark. CEOs of leading U.S. corporations are focused on short-term windfalls for themselves and wealthy shareholders rather than on long-term prosperity for their workers—or their companies.
Another sign of Lowe’s skewed priorities? The company plowed nearly five times as much cash into buybacks as it invested in long-term capital expenditures like store improvements and technology upgrades over the past five years.
Lowe’s ranks as an extreme example of a corporate model focused on pumping up CEO pay at the expense of workers and long-term investment. But such skewed priorities are actually the norm among America’s leading low-wage corporations.
This year’s edition of the annual Institute for Policy Studies Executive Excess report finds that the 100 S&P 500 firms with the lowest median wages, a group we’ve dubbed the “Low-Wage 100,” blew $522 billion over the past five years on stock buybacks. Nearly half of these companies spent more on this once-illegal financial maneuver than they spent on capital investment vital to long-term competitiveness.
Why the fixation on buybacks? This is a CEO pay-inflating financial scam, pure and simple. When companies repurchase their own shares, they artificially boost share prices and the value of the stock-based compensation that makes up about 80% of CEO pay. An SEC investigation confirmed that CEOs regularly time the sale of their personal stock holdings to cash in on the price surge that typically follows a buyback announcement.
Our Executive Excess report also looks at low-wage corporations’ expenditures on employee retirement security. The answer? Peanuts, compared to their buyback outlays.
The country’s 20 largest low-wage employers spent nine times as much on stock buybacks as on worker retirement plan contributions over the past five years. Many of these firms boast of their “generous” matching benefits, typically a dollar-for-dollar match of 401(k) contributions up to 4% of salary. But matching is meaningless for workers who earn so little they can’t afford to set aside anything for what should be their “golden years.”
Take Chipotle, for instance. The Mexican fast food chain spent over $2 billion on stock buybacks over the past five years—48 times as much as the firm contributed to employee retirement plans. Meanwhile, 92% of Chipotle workers who are eligible to participate in the company’s 401(k) have zero balances. That’s hardly surprising, since the chain’s median annual pay is just $16,595.
The evidence is stark. CEOs of leading U.S. corporations are focused on short-term windfalls for themselves and wealthy shareholders rather than on long-term prosperity for their workers—or their companies.
As UAW President Shawn Fain put it in his primetime DNC convention speech: “Corporate greed turns blue-collar blood, sweat, and tears into Wall Street stock buybacks and CEO jackpots.”
Public outrage over CEO shakedowns helped the UAW win strong new contracts last year with the Big Three automakers. Support for policy solutions is growing as well. The Democratic Party platform calls for quadrupling a new tax on stock buybacks. And a recent poll shows huge majority support among Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike for proposed tax hikes on corporations with huge CEO-worker pay gaps. The Executive Excess 2024 report offers an extensive menu of additional commonsense CEO pay reforms.
It’s important to remember that it hasn’t always been this way. Forty years ago, big company CEO pay was only about 40 times higher than worker pay—not several hundreds of times higher, as is typical today. And just 20 years ago, most big companies spent very little on stock buybacks. At Lowe’s, for example, buyback outlays between 2000 and 2004 were exactly zero.
Corporate America’s perverse fixation on enriching those at the top is bad for workers and bad for the economy. With pressure from below, we can change that.
Regardless of the sums that the ultra rich drop into the process, whether transparently or as dark money, the election, ultimately, will be decided by voters.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump was “interviewed” this week on the X social media platform formerly known as Twitter. The interviewer was none other than X owner Elon Musk. Musk’s questions to Trump were so deferential that End Citizens United, an election watchdog group, quickly filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission, calling the two-hour-plus livestream “a flagrant corporate in-kind contribution that violated campaign finance laws.”
This event represents just one moment in a highly charged national presidential election, and highlights the increasing power of billionaires attempting to hijack the political process for their own ends.
Elon Musk is the wealthiest person on the planet. The Wall Street Journal has published some of the most revelatory reporting on his increased political activity, especially his newly revealed commitment to helping Trump win in November.
The Harris-Walz campaign is hoping that a reinvigorated base, with major support from organized labor, will propel them to victory in November.
The Journal’s Dana Mattioli and colleagues wrote an article published in mid-July, exposing Musk’s plans to donate a whopping $45 million per month to elect Trump, or $180 million in all. “Formed in June, America PAC is focused on registering voters and persuading constituents to vote early and request mail-in ballots in swing states,” they reported.
Mattioli’s latest article, headlined “Inside Elon Musk’s Hands-On Push to Win 800,000 Voters for Trump,” details Musk’s direct involvement in the super PAC’s operations. The article opens, “Beginning in the spring, Elon Musk quietly blocked out an hour on Fridays for a new pursuit: national politics.”
“As early as a few months ago, Elon Musk said he would not be contributing any money to either presidential candidate. What we’ve seen is a complete 180,” Dana Mattioli said on the Democracy Now! news hour. “Not only did he start this super PAC with lots of money to help Donald Trump win, he is really taking on the get-out-the-vote aspect of the Trump campaign. He also had a big endorsement for Donald Trump after the assassination attempt. So he’s become a very big political player this presidential cycle.”
She continued, “The super PAC is looking to get 800,000 low-propensity voters in swing states to the polls for Donald Trump. Elon also wants his workers in those states to register new voters to get them to the polls.”
But, as Mattioli’s latest reporting suggests, Musk’s personal involvement has sparked chaos at the super PAC. With only months until election day, key vendors were abruptly fired and replaced with others drawn largely from the failed presidential campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Since the outcome of the U.S. presidential election hinges on just a handful of swing states, the infusion of so much cash with a focus on grassroots voter mobilization in those states could prove decisive. America PAC’s efforts are up against renewed enthusiasm in the Democratic Party and the presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.
Democrats have their own billionaires contributing to PACs and super PACs. Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and current Microsoft board member, has already given $10 million to help Harris. He has also stated that he hopes a future President Harris would fire Federal Trade Commission chairperson Lina Khan. A Biden-appointed regulator, Khan has aggressively pursued antitrust cases. As The Lever reports, antitrust action might hinder Microsoft’s acquisition of an AI company in which Hoffman is heavily invested.
Regardless of the sums that billionaires and millionaires drop into the process, whether transparently or as dark money, the election, ultimately, will be decided by voters. The Harris-Walz campaign is hoping that a reinvigorated base, with major support from organized labor, will propel them to victory in November.
One of the nation’s largest and most powerful unions, the United Auto Workers, has endorsed Harris and is actively organizing its membership to ensure her victory.
Following the Trump/Musk livestreamed conversation on X, the UAW filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, accusing Trump and Musk of “illegal attempts to threaten and intimidate workers.” Musk laughed as Trump praised his willingness to slash jobs:
DONALD TRUMP: “You’re the greatest cutter. I mean, I look at what you do. You walk in, and you just say, ‘You want to quit?’”
Elon Musk: “Yeah.”
DONALD TRUMP: “They go on strike. I won’t mention the name of the company, but they go on strike. And you say, ‘That’s OK. You’re all gone. You’re all gone. So, every one of you is gone.’ And you are the greatest.”
The UAW alleged the threat to fire striking workers was directed at Musk’s non-union workforce at Tesla. The UAW has more than a million members nationally, many in Michigan, a critical swing state. Come November, it may be the workers, not the billionaires, who get the last laugh.