What do Starbucks, Home Depot, Walmart, Lowe's and Amazon have in common?

CEOs Are Getting Richer. Everyone Else Is Falling Behind.

By Sarah Anderson 

The gap between CEO compensation and median worker pay at Starbucks hit 6,666 to 1 last year.

In other words, to make as much money as their CEO made in 2024, typical baristas would’ve had to start brewing macchiatos around the time humans first invented the wheel.

Starbucks is the worst offender, but jaw-dropping gaps are the norm among America’s leading low-wage corporations. CEOs of the 100 S&P 500 firms with the lowest median wages — a group I call the “Low-Wage 100” — have enjoyed skyrocketing pay over the past six years.

As a group, these CEOs now earn 632 times more than their median employees, I found in a new report for the Institute for Policy Studies. Their pay has risen nearly 35 percent since 2019 in absolute terms, while their median worker pay hasn’t even kept up with the U.S. inflation rate.

CEOs are in effect getting richer while their workers fall further and further behind.

Trump puts professional tax-dodging consultant in charge of tax policy

Lobbyist Who Helped Ultra-Rich Dodge Taxes Now Heads Trump Tax Office

Jake Johnson for Common Dreams

A corporate lobbyist who for decades has helped major companies and rich Americans dodge taxes is now serving as the U.S. Treasury Department's top tax policy official, a position in which he will write rules implementing the newly passed Republican budget law.

That role is "enormously powerful," The New York Times' Jesse Drucker wrote in a Monday profile of Ken Kies, whom the GOP-controlled U.S. Senate confirmed as assistant treasury secretary for tax policy in a party-line vote last month. President Donald Trump selected Kies for the position in January.

The Republican budget measure, which Donald Trump signed into law earlier this month, contains around $4.5 trillion in tax cuts that will flow disproportionately to the wealthiest Americans over the next decade, according to nonpartisan analysts.

"By putting a professional tax-dodging consultant in charge of their tax law, Republicans are continuing to make their intentions crystal clear—this law is a gift to billionaires and huge corporations like those Ken Kies has spent his career looking out for," Leor Tal, campaign director for the progressive advocacy group Unrig Our Economy, said in a statement Monday.

Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirms what we knew about Trump's MAGA bill

Republican mega-law helps earners with high and middle incomes, hurts poorest, CBO says

By Jacob Fischler, Rhode Island Current

About 10 million people, mostly Medicaid recipients, will lose access to health insurance and 2.4 million fewer people per month will participate in a federal food aid program under Republicans’ massive tax cut and spending law, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Monday.

Median-income U.S. households will see a small overall gain in resources from Donald Trump and the GOP’s “big, beautiful” law, CBO said.

But major changes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, mean Americans at the bottom of the income distribution will see a net loss of benefits, CBO said.

The law, which both chambers of Congress passed without any Democratic votes and Trump signed July 4, significantly narrows eligibility for Medicaid and SNAP.

Those changes, even combined with federal tax cuts, will lead to a roughly 3% drop in resources over the next nine years for households in the bottom tenth of earners, the CBO analysis said.

Bootstraps

Elon Musk's New Far-Right Nazi Party for America

Trump is interested only in building a vehicle for his own self-advancement. Musk is far more dangerous.

John Feffer, Foreign Policy In Focus

There are always worse political figures waiting in the wings.

In Israel, for instance, Benjamin Netanyahu is a relative moderate compared to some members of his cabinet, like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who believes that letting two million Palestinians die of hunger in Gaza is “justified and moral.” In Russia, ultranationalists to the right of Putin espouse racist and anti-immigrant views, while the country’s Communist Party recently declared that Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin was “a mistake.”

And then there’s Donald Trump, whom scholars consistently rank as the worst president in U.S. history. Even here, in a country of only two main parties and a blanderizing political discourse, worse options abound.

Imagine if Trump’s successor actually believed in something other than his own enrichment and self-aggrandizement? What if Trump is simply preparing the ground for an authentically far-right leader to take over, someone even more extreme than Vice President J.D. Vance or Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR)?

Elon Musk is prepared to use a lot of his considerable fortune to test that proposition.

What Musk Believes

It’s tempting to believe that Elon Musk decided to create a new political party in a fit of pique because of his personal falling-out with Donald Trump. In public, however, Musk links his decision to the recent passage of Trump’s legislative package and the several trillion dollars that the measure will add to the national debt. After bonding with Trump over eviscerating government, Musk was no doubt appalled to discover that the president, in the end, turned out to a more conventional tax-less-and-spend-more Republican.

Either way, Musk announced last week the creation of his new America Party. The details of the party platform are scant, as you might guess from a party created by tweet. Musk has naturally emphasized “responsible spending,” debt reduction, and deregulation. He has also added pro-gun and pro-crypto planks to his expanding platform along with “free speech” and “pro-natalist” positions.

Strengthening collective labor rights can help reduce economic inequality

Unions are our best bet to rebuild the American Dream

Skip Mark, University of Rhode Island and Stephen Bagwell, University of Missouri-St. Louis

Despite the strength of the U.S. economy, the gap between rich and poor Americans is increasing.

The wealthiest 1% of Americans have more than five times as much wealth as the bottom 50%, according to the U.S. Federal Reserve. That’s up from four times as much in the year 2000. In 2024 alone, the wealthiest 19 families got a total of US$1 trillion richer – the largest one-year increase on record.

And yet 59% of Americans don’t have enough money saved up to cover an unexpected $1,000 expense.

We are political scientists who study human rights and political economy.

In a 2023 study, our team looked at 145 countries, including the U.S., to understand the link between labor rights and inequality. We found evidence that strengthening collective labor rights may reduce economic inequality.

Empowering workers

Collective labor rights include the rights to form and join a union, bargain collectively for higher pay and better working conditions, go on strike, and get justice if employers punish workers who exercise these rights.

In the U.S., where less than 10% of workers belong to unions, union members typically earn higher wages than their nonunion counterparts.

Through negotiations on behalf of their members, unions can pressure employers to provide fair wages and benefits. If negotiations break down, the union can call for a strike – sometimes winning better benefits and higher wages as a result.

Some U.S. unions don’t have the right to strike, including air traffic controllers, teachers and those working on national security issues. But most unions have some ability to implement work stoppages and impose costs on employers to negotiate for raises and better benefits and conditions.

The $50 Million Venetian Wedding of Robber Baron Jeff Bezos

Today's robber barons revel in a new Gilded Age

Elliott Negin for Common Dreams

With all the fawning coverage of Jeff Bezos’ storybook $50 million Venetian wedding, the news media lost sight of fact that Bezos—the third-richest person in the world—is hardly worthy of veneration. He’s been exploiting Amazon workers for years.

Historians have drawn parallels between the Gilded Age of the late 19th century and what we are experiencing today. Like the first Gilded Age, Gilded Age 2.0 is marked by increasing economic inequality, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, and a rise in populism and social unrest.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Jeff Bezos fits the profile of a latter-day robber baron to a T. Like the ruthless tycoons of yore, his business practices are unethical, he has amassed a vast fortune on the backs of his workers, and he has brutally stifled competition and controlled markets.

Amazon terrorizes its workers

With their manifestly unsafe working conditions, Amazon warehouses are a 21st-century version of a Gilded Age sweatshop. Despite the company’s claims that it protects its workforce, an 18-month investigation released last December by a Senate committee led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) found that the nation’s second-largest private-sector employer risks its workers’ health and safety by prioritizing speed and profit, and it is doing quite well on that score. Last year, the company outpaced Walmart, the largest private-sector employer, by netting $59.2 billion—a 95 percent increase from 2023.

What’s the Real Reason Elon Musk Wants a Third Party?

He's not doing it for you

Robert Reich 

“The America Party is needed to fight the Republican/Democrat Uniparty,” Elon Musk posted on X, announcing that he’s forming a third party.

Does America need a third party? Possibly, for a reason I’ll get to in a moment.

But America doesn’t need a third party financed by the richest person in the world, who sank a quarter of a billion dollars into making Trump president and was also among the most prolific Republican donors in 2024 (Trump officials are still awaiting $100 million in pledges Musk made this year).

We need a third party dedicated to just the opposite — getting big money out of politics.

Both major parties are far too dependent on big corporations and the ultra-wealthy, although the GOP is far more dependent than are the Democrats.

Just 100 extremely wealthy families invested $2.6 billion in the 2024 election that put Trump back in the White House and Republican majorities in both the House and Senate.

Even if you subtract Musk’s contribution, that’s more than double what billionaire donors contributed just four years ago.

Fully 70 percent of the bounty from the top 100 contributing billionaire families went to Republicans.

Billionaires accounted for almost three-quarters (71 percent) of the total amount used by outside spending groups to attack Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, and over three-fifths (61 percent) of all outside dollars spent praising Trump.

In the three Senate races that gave Republicans control of the Senate, billionaires supplied most Republican outside spending: in Montana, 58.1 percent. Pennsylvania 56.8 percent. Ohio 44.5 percent.

Soon, the billionaires who invested in Trump will get a giant return on their investment, courtesy of Trump’s Big Ugly budget bill.

The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that by 2027, the richest 0.1 percent of taxpayers (of which the country’s estimated roughly 900 billionaires are a subset) will collectively save $60 billion in federal taxes, due to the Big Ugly.

Clearly, Musk’s purpose in creating a third party has nothing whatever to do with ending this deepening corruption.

He says he wants to unseat Republican lawmakers who backed Trump’s Big Ugly because it will add trillions to the national debt.

“What the heck was the point of @DOGE if he’s just going to increase the debt by $5 trillion??” Musk wrote on X, referring to his so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

Oh, please.

If Musk is really worried about the federal debt, the easiest way to shrink it would be to raise taxes on the wealthy — including himself.

Near-record levels of income and wealth are now concentrated at the very top, yet the rich don’t pay nearly their fair share in taxes.

Consider this: Musk’s 2024 campaign contributions were four times more than what he paid in annual federal income taxes between 2013 and 2018.

In fact, Musk — the richest person in the world — pays a lower tax rate than average Americans.

Sounds of Hope from a small state

We're in trouble, but not without hope

BRIAN C. JONES, DANGEROUS TIMES

ARE YOU FEELING AS OVERWHELMED as I am by Donald Trump’s string of “successes” in his hideous crusade to destroy our country – drowning the rest of us in his sewer of misery and shame?

At the same time, because I live in the nation’s smallest state, I'm inspired that such a tiny place has a loud and eloquent voice, encouraged, perhaps by the state's motto, “Hope." More about this later.

First, let me acknowledge that the nation is at a truly awful place, and that it’s possible that we are actually doomed.

For example, Trump today gets to play Robin Hood in reverse, with the Republican Congress passing his hideous mega-bill that will take away food and health care from millions of Americans, while tossing a few extra bucks to the ultrawealthy.

Trump had wanted – and got – the legislation enacted just in time for this year’s Fourth of July – turning the holiday into perverse betrayal of its noble founding principles.

You’d think the president’s enablers would have been wary of the timing, since somebody might actually read the Declaration, and discover the contrast between its eloquent vision of democracy and Trump’s racist, cruel and authoritarian agenda.

Trump’s just getting started: pardoning the January 6th insurrectionists, along with a bunch of other criminals; sending masked thugs to round up immigrants and tossing them into a growing gulag of detention centers; bullying universities, law firms, media companies and other countries; accelerating the destruction of the environment; betraying Ukraine freedom fighters and declaring war on scientists.

Congressional Budget Office shows how Trump-GOP budget bill will benefit the richest at everyone else's expense

This is what "Class War" really looks like and we're losing

Wealth of Global 1% Has Skyrocketed by Over $33 Trillion Since 2015

As the saying goes, "the rich get richer," a LOT richer

Jake Johnson

For guys like Jeff Bezos, it's good to be alive

An Oxfam report published June 25 estimates that the richest 1% globally have seen their wealth surge by more than $33.9 trillion over the past decade, with just 3,000 billionaires accounting for $6.5 trillion of that increase.

The report, released ahead of June 30 development financing talks in Seville, Spain, argues that the international community's plan to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals agreed upon in 2015 has failed utterly as global inequality has continued to expand, efforts to end poverty have stagnated, and the climate crisis has spiraled further out of control.

Rhode Island Democratic Leaders blast Trump’s Big, Beautiful Boondoggle

Trump and His Mean-Spirited Republican Congress Destroy Sixty Years of Progress

Statement from U.S. Senator Jack Reed

“Republicans knew this bill is a bad deal for their constituents and passed it anyway.  This bill goes against the self-interest of average Americans in favor of the ultra-wealthy and corporations.  It slashes the safety net out from under hardworking families – taking away health care from millions -- in order to give special interests bigger tax benefits.  Republicans structured the bill so the ultra-wealthy can cash out right away while the little guy and average taxpayers will get stuck paying the bill for years to come.

“During this unprecedented time of chaos and dysfunction, it’s easy to get overwhelmed and miss the latest developments. But the negative impacts of this bill must cut through the noise. Americans must be informed about the consequences of this legislation and they deserve to hear plainly from their elected representatives about how this bill is going to impact their families.

“Republicans are shifting a heavier financial burden onto families, communities, hospitals, and states.  Taking away people’s health coverage doesn’t mean they stop getting sick or can’t see a doctor.  Health costs for everyone will rise.  And it takes away over one trillion dollars in federal funding that states and localities rely on to provide vital services like schools, transit, nutrition assistance and aid to families in crisis.

“This fiscally irresponsible giveaway to the wealthy and well-connected is a debt-busting disaster.  It will cost U.S. taxpayers trillions of dollars in interest payments and Republicans unilaterally approved a record-breaking $5 trillion dollar debt limit increase.  But that’s just debt already incurred – this bill will add trillions of dollars in future debt when it’s all said and done, with little to no long-term benefit for middle- and working-class families. 

“Whatever short-term economic benefits this bill may offer, it will do lasting destructive damage to U.S. finances and young Americans will be forced to pay for it long after Donald Trump is gone.”

Statement from U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

“Trump’s Big, Beautiful-for-Billionaires Bill is one massively destructive piece of legislation.  Cooked in back rooms, dropped at midnight, and fraudulently scored, it increases costs for everyone by walloping the health care system, making families go hungry, and sending utility bills through the roof.  It saddles our children and grandchildren with trillions and trillions of dollars in debt – all to serve giant corporations, fossil fuel polluters, and billionaire Republican megadonors who are already among the richest people on the planet.”

Statement from Congressman Seth Magaziner

“Republicans in Congress have jammed through a bill that guts programs working people rely on to hand out tax breaks to the wealthiest people on the planet.

“The final version will cause millions of people to lose their health insurance, and will increase costs for millions more by slashing Medicaid, Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act. It also cuts over $100 billion from SNAP, which helps 40 million Americans put food on the table, and will eliminate good-paying clean energy jobs in Rhode Island and across the country.

“This bill represents the largest transfer of wealth from working people to the ultra-wealthy in U.S. history, and is a shameful betrayal of the basic promise that the government should work for everyone, not just those at the top.

“Today, I voted ‘no’ and I will keep fighting back against cruel attacks on working Rhode Islanders. Despite today’s setback, our fight to lower costs and improve quality of life for working people will continue.”

Consolation

A bargain!

"Feed me!"

Who gets what

General Assembly gives Charlestown authorization to create a Homestead Tax break

Goes to Governor for signature

By Will Collette

Thank you to our State Rep. Tina Spears (D) for getting H6247 passed in the House and Sen. Victoria Gu (D) for shepherding it through the Senate. And thank you, Council President Deb Carney for getting the ball rolling. All the bill needs now is the Governor’s signature and there’s no doubt he will sign it.

This bill gives the Charlestown Town Council the authority to craft an ordinance so those of us who make Charlestown our home can get a break on our property taxes in what’s called a “Homestead Exemption.” The legislation allows the town to exempt up to 10% of your assessed value.

For a house assessed at $500,000, that would knock the assessment down by $50,000. At the anticipated July 1 tax rate of $5.93, that would save around $300.

Many coastal communities offer permanent residents this tax break because we pay year-round for an infrastructure that can accommodate absentee landowners and other summer people.

Summer people also take their toll on our nerves through increased traffic, trash and noise. Other than their taxes, they contribute little to Charlestown’s economy other than the occasional meal at our few local restaurants and grocery shopping at Rippy’s and the Mini-Super.

Out of state landowners have been buying up Charlestown beach properties at unheard prices. Most recently, 18 Ninigret Avenue just sold for $5.5 million to a buyer who lives on Park Avenue in Manhattan. They paid more than $2.2 million above the home’s assessed value of $3,292,600.

So far this year, almost a dozen posh homes have sold to non-residents all at premium prices well over their assessed value. While none match the $2.2 million premium paid for 18 Ninigret Avenue, all but two of the other high-rollers paid more than $350,000 above assessed value. In second place after Ninigret Avenue are the Massachusetts buyers of 14 Highland Road who paid $718,900 above assessed value.

These folks seem to have money to burn.

Here’s the complete list of $1 million+ Charlestown sales in 2025 from our Tax Assessor’s office. Note that Starett Road is a duplicate entry:

Eight buyers live in Massachusetts and Connecticut (4 each). New York, New Jersey and Florida each had one.

During the years the Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) ruled Charlestown, they stifled any notion of giving local homeowners any tax break that would come at the expense of non-resident landowners.

The issue crested in December 2011 and ended in what I dubbed “The Riot of the Rich.” Town Hall was packed with rich non-residents, CCA devotees, right-wing nuts like Jim Mageau and Harry Staley and a few sadly misinformed locals who denounced the Charlestown Democratic Committee proposal for a Homestead Tax Credit as the opening salvo in a class war.

It was unfair to the wealthy, they said, and claimed that raising their taxes would drive them to move out, make them boycott local businesses and not give to local charities. They said all this with a straight face.

Since absentee landowners provide a substantial portion of the CCA’s election fund, there was no way the CCA leadership would support the idea. They stomped the homestead credit to death for the duration of their reign.

Then the CCA was finally beaten by Charlestown Residents United (CRU) in 2022 and in 2024 when an all-CRU Town Council slate was elected. That made it safe to talk about issues banned by the CCA.

The Council is currently chaired by Deb Carney (D) who was one of the few brave voices to speak out for the homestead credit in 2011. It was after her Council resolution that state Representative Tina Spears (D) introduced a bill modelled on the recently passed South Kingstown legislation.

Here’s the official timeline for the bill’s quick passage:

House Bill No. 6247

BY Tina Spears

ENTITLED, AN ACT RELATING TO TAXATION -- LEVY AND ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL TAXES (Grants the town council of the town of Charlestown the authority to enact a homestead exemption ordinance.)

04/23/2025 Introduced, referred to House Municipal Government & Housing

04/25/2025 Scheduled for hearing and/or consideration (05/01/2025)

05/01/2025 Committee recommended measure be held for further study

06/06/2025 Scheduled for consideration (06/10/2025)

06/10/2025 Committee recommends passage

06/13/2025 Placed on House Calendar (06/16/2025)

06/16/2025 House read and passed

06/16/2025 Placed on the Senate Consent Calendar (06/18/2025)

06/18/2025 Senate passed in concurrence

06/18/2025 Transmitted to Governor

Once McKee signs, the action shifts back to the Town Council who must craft and present a new ordinance for public hearing. They will need to decide whether to do it (and I hope they will) and if so, at what percentage of assessed value. If they act quickly, we could have an ordinance in place when the legislation kicks in on December 31, plenty of time for applying the exemption to next year's tax bills.

The legislation details what properties are eligible.

Here’s the text of the bill:

AN ACT RELATING TO TAXATION -- LEVY AND ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL TAXES

Introduced By: Representative Tina L. Spears

Date Introduced: April 23, 2025

Referred To: House Municipal Government & Housing

It is enacted by the General Assembly as follows:

SECTION 1. Chapter 44-5 of the General Laws entitled "Levy and Assessment of Local Taxes" is hereby amended by adding thereto the following section:

44-5-89. Charlestown homestead exemption.

(a) The town council of the town of Charlestown is authorized to annually fix the amount, if any, of a homestead exemption, with respect to assessed value, from local taxation on taxable real property used for residential purposes or mixed purposes, defined as a combination of residential and commercial uses, in the town of Charlestown, and to grant homestead exemptions to the owner, or owners, of residential real estate, or combination residential and commercial real estate, in an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the assessed value. The exemption shall apply to property used exclusively for residential purposes, and improved with a dwelling containing less than five (5) units, or real property used for a combination of residential and commercial uses. When real property is used for mixed purposes, the percentage of the assessed value shall be a prorated amount. The prorated amount shall be the percentage of square feet of the parcel used for residential purposes, multiplied by the percentage of the homestead exemption. In order to determine compliance with the homestead exemption as outlined in this section, the town council shall provide, by resolution or ordinance, rules and regulations governing eligibility for the exemption established by this section.

(b) In the event property granted an exemption under this section is sold or transferred during the year for which the exemption is claimed, the town council of the town of Charlestown, 19 1 upon approval of the town council, may provide for a proration of the homestead exemption in 2 3 4 cases where title to property passes from those not entitled to claim an exemption to those who are entitled to claim an exemption.

SECTION 2. This act shall take effect on December 31, 2025.

Makin' it

Cuts to school lunch and food bank funding mean less fresh produce for children and families

In one fell swoop, Trump screws families, farmers and kids to fund tax cuts for the rich

Marlene B. Schwartz, University of Connecticut

The U.S. government recently cut more than US$1 billion in funding to two long-running programs that helped schools and food banks feed children and families in need. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says the reductions are a “return to long-term, fiscally responsible initiatives.” But advocacy groups say the cuts will hurt millions of Americans.

The reductions came just days before the release of the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again report, an analysis of the factors causing chronic disease in children. One of those factors, the report says, is poor diet.

Dr. Marlene Schwartz, a professor of human development and family sciences and director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Health at the University of Connecticut, discusses why cutting the Local Food for Schools and the Local Food Purchase Assistance programs means less fresh food will be available to children and families – and could hurt local farmers and ranchers too.

Dr. Marlene Schwartz discusses why these programs were cut.

The Conversation has collaborated with SciLine to bring you highlights from the discussion, edited here for brevity and clarity.

Could you explain the two programs that were cut?

Marlene Schwartz: Most schools were eligible for Local Food for Schools, a $660 million program, which has now been cut. The funds for Local Food for Schools were on top of the reimbursement that schools get for meals and would have allowed them to buy more local, fresh food.

The Local Food Purchase Assistance program was designed primarily for food banks. Again, the idea was to provide federal money, about $500 million, so food banks could buy from local farmers and support local agriculture. But that too was cut.

How will these cuts affect families and schoolchildren?

Schwartz: Many children eat two of their meals, five days a week, at school. During the 2022-2023 school year, about 28 million kids ate lunch at school. More than 14 million had breakfast there.

Having fresh, local produce in the school cafeteria provides the opportunity to introduce children to more fruits and vegetables and teach them about the food grown in their own communities. Think about how powerful a lesson about nutrition and local agriculture can be when you not only hear and read about it but can taste it too.

How will these cuts affect farmers and ranchers?

Schwartz: When the funding was there, the farmers and ranchers knew they had guaranteed buyers for their products. So the loss of these funds, especially so quickly, will have a very negative effect on them. Suddenly, the buyers they counted on don’t have the money to buy from them.

See you at the mid-terms all right