用現代的方式來看,“讓他們吃蛋糕”這句話的意思就是,股東們不僅擁有整個蛋糕,還在吃掉它。董事會總是能超然物外,這并不意外,因為富有的董事會成員更有能力應對經濟衰退的沖擊。但事實證明,CEO和股東們獲取的利潤份額,可能超出了任何人的想象。
英國致力于消除貧困的非營利組織樂施會(Oxfam)的最新報告發現了這一結果。該報告分析了200多家美國公司,評估了它們的“不平等狀況”。大多數財富都進入了高層的口袋,在報告分析的公司共計1.25萬億美元的利潤中,有90%(1.1萬億美元)支付給了富有的股東。
高管們同樣收入豐厚。自疫情爆發以來,CEO薪酬大幅增長,從2018年至2022年增長了31%。報告顯示,“在疫情危機爆發以后,股東和CEO的薪酬屢創紀錄。”
在談到由于強大的公司游說力量而下降的公司稅負時,樂施會美國的私營部門高級總監艾里特·塔米爾表示:“規則正在被操縱,而公司正在幫助操縱規則。”
科技界為什么會如此大規模裁員?
過去一年,隨著許多CEO聲稱由于經濟困境需要精簡規模,金融、科技和傳媒行業進行了裁員。但公司的業績似乎比以往更出色。從2014年至2022年,《財富》美國500強公司的收入和利潤大幅增長,而在疫情爆發之后的幾年間增長幅度甚至更大。在馬克·扎克伯格以“效率之年”的名義宣布裁員10,000多名員工的同時,Meta公司公布了400億美元股份回購計劃。不到一年后,Meta宣布計劃再次回購500億美元的股份。
雖然有些人似乎手頭拮據,但對于身居高位的人而言,股份回購就像圣誕節一樣:據樂施會統計,2022年股份回購金額達到創紀錄的6,810億美元。
權力在高層的集中持續了數十年。塔米爾表示,股東至上理念在上世紀70年代開始盛行。她還表示,當公司開始優先考慮股東群體的利益時,對工人的保障卻隨著工會會員減少而逐漸消失。上世紀80年代,曾經作為股票操縱的一種形式而被禁止的股份回購開始變得合法;塔米爾稱,這種變化使公司能夠抬高股價。與此同時,經過里根時期以及特朗普執政時期的一系列減稅,公司稅率大幅下降,而公司直接影響政治的能力越來越強,這一切在2010年“聯合公民訴訟”的判決中達到頂峰。在這起案件中,美國最高法院允許公司和富人無限制地花錢用于選舉。
塔米爾說道:“在這些事件的共同作用下形成的完美風暴,使公司的規模不斷擴大,公司的權力增加,公司積累的利潤卻流向了少數人。”塔米爾還表示,作為利益相關者的員工“卻在失去利益”。
哪些因素正在加劇財富和收入的不平等?
目前已經出現了一些變化的跡象。經過一個夏天的罷工和一些高調的工人勝利——比如美國汽車工人聯合會(UAW)和最近的星巴克(Starbucks)工會,工會化正變得日益流行。
塔米爾表示:“有一些令人鼓舞的跡象,但如果我們不繼續沿著這條路走下去,我們實際上已經進入了一個新的鍍金時代。”這與美國總統喬·拜登關于加強公司監管的言論相呼應。
盡管員工的工資仍然相對停滯,或者只能勉強跟上通貨膨脹的步伐,但CEO們卻在給自己大幅加薪。根據樂施會對186家有具體數據的公司的分析,2022年的CEO總薪酬達到了41億美元。在樂施會分析的公司中,只有5%的公司公開表示支持生活工資。大公司的工資差距繼續擴大:例如,麥當勞(McDonald’s)的CEO與普通員工的薪酬差距為1,745比1。另一個典型的美國品牌可口可樂公司(Coca-Cola Company)的薪酬差距為1,594比1。
這種差距在零售業最為明顯。根據樂施會的數據,零售工人通常是有色人種和女性,而這些公司的高層領導往往是白人男性。盡管許多公司表示他們正在努力實現多元、公平和包容(DEI)目標,但在具體數據方面,許多公司卻交了白卷。
塔米爾表示:“他們說得天花亂墜,但在實際行動上,大多數公司并沒有做任何至少對公眾透明的事情。嚴格說來,所有這些事情都是合法的,但不幸的是,對我們其他人不利。”
塔米爾表示,從長遠來看,即使是最富有的人也會受到影響。根據塔米爾的說法,從性別和種族的角度來看,Dollar Tree可能是最不公平的公司之一,該公司最近關閉了1,000家門店。
塔米爾解釋稱:“歸根結底,這對商業不利,財富越集中,對經濟越不利。”(財富中文網)
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
用現代的方式來看,“讓他們吃蛋糕”這句話的意思就是,股東們不僅擁有整個蛋糕,還在吃掉它。董事會總是能超然物外,這并不意外,因為富有的董事會成員更有能力應對經濟衰退的沖擊。但事實證明,CEO和股東們獲取的利潤份額,可能超出了任何人的想象。
英國致力于消除貧困的非營利組織樂施會(Oxfam)的最新報告發現了這一結果。該報告分析了200多家美國公司,評估了它們的“不平等狀況”。大多數財富都進入了高層的口袋,在報告分析的公司共計1.25萬億美元的利潤中,有90%(1.1萬億美元)支付給了富有的股東。
高管們同樣收入豐厚。自疫情爆發以來,CEO薪酬大幅增長,從2018年至2022年增長了31%。報告顯示,“在疫情危機爆發以后,股東和CEO的薪酬屢創紀錄。”
在談到由于強大的公司游說力量而下降的公司稅負時,樂施會美國的私營部門高級總監艾里特·塔米爾表示:“規則正在被操縱,而公司正在幫助操縱規則。”
科技界為什么會如此大規模裁員?
過去一年,隨著許多CEO聲稱由于經濟困境需要精簡規模,金融、科技和傳媒行業進行了裁員。但公司的業績似乎比以往更出色。從2014年至2022年,《財富》美國500強公司的收入和利潤大幅增長,而在疫情爆發之后的幾年間增長幅度甚至更大。在馬克·扎克伯格以“效率之年”的名義宣布裁員10,000多名員工的同時,Meta公司公布了400億美元股份回購計劃。不到一年后,Meta宣布計劃再次回購500億美元的股份。
雖然有些人似乎手頭拮據,但對于身居高位的人而言,股份回購就像圣誕節一樣:據樂施會統計,2022年股份回購金額達到創紀錄的6,810億美元。
權力在高層的集中持續了數十年。塔米爾表示,股東至上理念在上世紀70年代開始盛行。她還表示,當公司開始優先考慮股東群體的利益時,對工人的保障卻隨著工會會員減少而逐漸消失。上世紀80年代,曾經作為股票操縱的一種形式而被禁止的股份回購開始變得合法;塔米爾稱,這種變化使公司能夠抬高股價。與此同時,經過里根時期以及特朗普執政時期的一系列減稅,公司稅率大幅下降,而公司直接影響政治的能力越來越強,這一切在2010年“聯合公民訴訟”的判決中達到頂峰。在這起案件中,美國最高法院允許公司和富人無限制地花錢用于選舉。
塔米爾說道:“在這些事件的共同作用下形成的完美風暴,使公司的規模不斷擴大,公司的權力增加,公司積累的利潤卻流向了少數人。”塔米爾還表示,作為利益相關者的員工“卻在失去利益”。
哪些因素正在加劇財富和收入的不平等?
目前已經出現了一些變化的跡象。經過一個夏天的罷工和一些高調的工人勝利——比如美國汽車工人聯合會(UAW)和最近的星巴克(Starbucks)工會,工會化正變得日益流行。
塔米爾表示:“有一些令人鼓舞的跡象,但如果我們不繼續沿著這條路走下去,我們實際上已經進入了一個新的鍍金時代。”這與美國總統喬·拜登關于加強公司監管的言論相呼應。
盡管員工的工資仍然相對停滯,或者只能勉強跟上通貨膨脹的步伐,但CEO們卻在給自己大幅加薪。根據樂施會對186家有具體數據的公司的分析,2022年的CEO總薪酬達到了41億美元。在樂施會分析的公司中,只有5%的公司公開表示支持生活工資。大公司的工資差距繼續擴大:例如,麥當勞(McDonald’s)的CEO與普通員工的薪酬差距為1,745比1。另一個典型的美國品牌可口可樂公司(Coca-Cola Company)的薪酬差距為1,594比1。
這種差距在零售業最為明顯。根據樂施會的數據,零售工人通常是有色人種和女性,而這些公司的高層領導往往是白人男性。盡管許多公司表示他們正在努力實現多元、公平和包容(DEI)目標,但在具體數據方面,許多公司卻交了白卷。
塔米爾表示:“他們說得天花亂墜,但在實際行動上,大多數公司并沒有做任何至少對公眾透明的事情。嚴格說來,所有這些事情都是合法的,但不幸的是,對我們其他人不利。”
塔米爾表示,從長遠來看,即使是最富有的人也會受到影響。根據塔米爾的說法,從性別和種族的角度來看,Dollar Tree可能是最不公平的公司之一,該公司最近關閉了1,000家門店。
塔米爾解釋稱:“歸根結底,這對商業不利,財富越集中,對經濟越不利。”(財富中文網)
譯者:劉進龍
審校:汪皓
Taking a modern-century spin on “Let them eat cake,” shareholders are having the whole cake, and eating it too. It’s no shock the boardroom is able to stay above the fray as wealthy members are more equipped to weather economic downturns. But it turns out CEOs and shareholders are walking away with an even greater slice of profits than one might think.
So finds a new report from Oxfam, a British nonprofit focused on eradicating poverty, which analyzed more than 200 U.S. corporations to assess their “inequality footprint.” Most money ends up funneling into the mouths of those at the top, as 90% (or $1.1 trillion) of the combined $1.25 trillion in net profits for those companies analyzed went to paying wealthy shareholders.
Executives are doing quite all right as well. CEO pay has ballooned since the pandemic hit, increasing by 31% from 2018 to 2022. “Shareholders and CEO pay have risen to record levels in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis,” according to the report.
“The rules are being rigged and the companies are helping to rig them,” Irit Tamir, senior director of Oxfam America’s private sector department, tells Fortune, speaking of company taxation that has gone down due to a strong corporate-lobbying presence.
Why have there been so many tech layoffs?
This past year has been marked by layoffs in the finance, tech, and media sectors as many CEOs claim to need to downsize in light of economic strain. But it seems as if corporations are doing better than ever. Revenue and profits at Fortune 500 companies grew significantly between 2014 and 2022, hiking even more in the years after the pandemic hit. In the same breath that Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg announced layoffs for more than 10,000 workers in the name of a “year of efficiency,” the company announced a fresh $40 billion stock-buyback option. Less than a year later, Meta announced plans to buy back another $50 billion.
While money was seemingly tight for some, it was an equivalent of Christmas for those at the top: Stock buybacks in 2022 hit a record of $681 billion, per Oxfam.
The consolidation of power at the top has been a decades-long process. The concept of shareholder primacy started to take hold in the 1970s, per Tamir, who added that while companies started to prioritize this group, safeguards for workers were fading as union membership ebbed. In the 1980s, stock buybacks, once banned as a form of stock manipulation, became legal; Tamir says this change, specifically, allowed companies to inflate their stock prices. At the same time, corporate tax rates fell dramatically thanks to a series of tax cuts, first in the Reagan era and again during the Trump administration, while corporations gained more and more ability to directly influence politics, capped off with the 2010 Citizens United decision, in which the Supreme Court gave companies and wealthy individuals carte blanche to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections.
“All of those things together have created sort of this perfect storm by which companies have gotten bigger, corporate power is on the rise, and the benefits that they’ve accrued in profit they are funneling to a smaller number of people,” Tamir says, adding that the other stakeholders—the workers—“are losing out.”
What is causing growing wealth and income inequality?
There are some signs of change. Unionization is growing in popularity after a summer of strikes and some high-profile wins on behalf of workers—like the UAW and, recently, the Starbucks union.
“There are some promising signs, but if we don’t continue down that path, we are already essentially in a new Gilded Age,” says Tamir, echoing President Joe Biden’s rhetoric on checking corporations more.
While wages remain fairly stagnant, or barely high enough to compete with the pace of inflation, CEOs have given themselves a hefty raise. CEOs were paid a combined $4.1 billion in 2022, per Oxfam’s analysis of the 186 companies that had hard data. Only 5% of the companies examined publicly said they support a living wage. The wage gap continues to widen among larger companies: McDonald’s, for instance, has a CEO-to-worker pay gap of 1,745 to one. Another prototypical American brand, the Coca-Cola Company, has a pay gap of 1,594 to one.
The divide is most apparent in the retail sector. Retail workers are often people of color and women, though the top leaders at these companies are often white men, according to Oxfam. While many companies said they were looking to make DEI targets, many came up empty-handed when it came to hard data.
“They are talking a good game, but when it comes to actually doing something about it, most are not doing anything that is at least transparent to the public,” Tamir says. “All of these things are technically legal and unfortunately to the detriment of the rest of us.”
Tamir says in the long term, even the most wealthy will suffer. Dollar Tree might be the least equitable of the companies from a gender and racial perspective, according to Tamir, and the company recently shut down 1,000 of its stores.
“At the end of the day, this is bad for business,” Tamir explains. “Having wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people is not good for an economy.”