leftwinger, I was thrilled to discover this morning that people are very angry about income inequality. Even the normally right-leaning Daily Mail and Sun have published stories – whipping up outrage about an elite class earning more than five times the average UK salary of ?27,600. The focus is on workers at the BBC, which has published a report today on some of its employees’ salaries, but presumably the main points can be generalised: it’s simply not fair that a small minority of people earn so much more than the rest of us. Arguments about preventing talent being poached by competitors don’t cut it. Nobody is worth these sorts of amounts. There should be less of a gap between the highest and lowest earners within an organisation – and between the rich and poor more generally. BBC accused of discrimination as salaries reveal gender pay gap - as it happened Follow the reaction to the publication of the salaries of the BBC’s highest earners Read more Or perhaps I’ve misunderstood. Both the Sun and the Daily Mail, you see, have some
Authentic Corey Perry Womens Jersey extremely highly paid employees themselves. Both Rupert Murdoch and chief executive Robert Thompson receive several million each year from News Corp, and Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre took home ?1.5m in 2016. Though full data isn’t available, it’s estimated that top-paid columnists at those papers are paid salaries roughly in line with those of high-earning BBC talent. In media, as in most all other industries, gross income inequality is the norm. There’s one reason the BBC is receiving all of this attention: it’s part of the public sector. This means the government has the power to dictate what information is made public. Forcing the BBC to reveal the names of employees earning over ?150,000 has been justified on the grounds it makes the broadcaster “more open and transparent about its operations while making sure the public broadcaster continues to thrive in the future”. In the context of sustained attacks on the public sector by the Conservative government, though, it’s hard not to feel a little cynical. With the public sector pay cap eroding the real incomes of prison officers, paramedics and nurses by more than ?3,000 annually – forcing some to borrow money and use food banks just to survive – it perhaps helps to identify an alternative scapegoat. Highly paid TV stars who have spoken out about the consequences of government policy – such as Gary Lineker, who is earning up to ?1.8m from the BBC, the report says – will no doubt be dismissed as hypocrites. The truth is we absolutely should be angry about the gross economic inequality in our country. Basic moral reasoning tells us it’s perverse that billionaire investors buy up homes and leave them empty, while other people sleep in the streets. That the wealth of the 1% continues to accumulate, while minimum wage employees work gruelling hours on insecure contracts and still struggle to make rent. That
http://www.authenticducksstore.com/frederik-andersen-jersey_c-426.html the UK’s per capita GDP is among the highest in the world, but children are going to school hungry and with holes in their shoes. Taking a broader view, the salaries of TV stars like Graham Norton and Fiona Bruce should really be the least of our worries. The world’s eight richest men own as much wealth as half the world’s population. In the UK, billionaires buy up media outlets and donate to political parties (most commonly, the Conservatives) in an attempt to influence our democracyonald Trump is one of the least popular politicians in the history of the United States. Yet, Trump is still more popular than Hillary Clinton. Let that sink in. According to the latest Bloomberg National Poll, Trump has a net favorability of 41% whereas Clinton has a net favorability of 39%. If Democrats are to escape the political wilderness, they will have to leave Clinton and her brand of politics in the woodsNow, there is no doubt that Clinton has suffered sexist double standards just as Barack Obama encountered racist double standards. Trump labeled her “Crooked Hillary” and his supporters rallied around the chant “Lock her up”. Rich in hypocrisy, Trump has continued to attack Clinton for her emails even though his son has proven to have done much worse. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to pin all of Clinton’s unpopularity on sexism and the conspiracies of the extreme right. The Bloomberg poll demonstrates that more than one-fifth of Clinton supporters say they now have an unfavorable view of her. Based on follow-up interviews with poll participants, many Clinton voters expressed that their negative feelings were not simply due to her losing but were about the Democratic party’s positioning for the futureEven though Clinton has blamed everyone but herself, it is clear that her campaign’s failure to galvanize voter turnout was one of the biggest reasons why Trump won. Her checkered record on progressive policies, bland centrist message and the Democrats’ presumption that Trump’s nomination sealed their victory probably did not help. Advertisement Clinton has largely kept a low profile since the election, occasionally sending Twitter barbs in Trump’s direction. The best case scenario for Democrats is for Clinton – and her family – to stay away. The wise thing for the party to do is to abandon the failed “Third Way” centrist politics that she and her husband have come to exemplify. Even so, the
http://www.nflbengalsofficialshop.com/Nike-Kevin-Huber-Jersey.html Democratic establishment appears to not be learning any lessons. Kamala Harris, the first-term California senator rumored to be a frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, recently mingled with top Clinton donors and supporters in the Hamptons. Apparently tying rising talent to the infrastructure of a politician less popular than Trump is the game plan for moving forward. Playing mostly defense against Trump and talking a lot about Russia, the Democratic establishment has struggled to develop an alternative message that Americans find attractive. According to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, only 37% of the country believes Democrats “stand for something”. Even the new sticker options for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are depressingly shallow. Some of the slogans read: “Make Congress Blue Again” and “I Mean, Have You Seen The Other Guys?” Although the establishment comes across as unimaginative and clueless, it is not as if Democrats lack other options. Bernie Sanders has become and remains the most popular politician in the whole country. His bold and progressive populist campaign may have lost out to Clinton in the primaries, but it may reflect a more viable blueprint for the future. The question is whether Clinton loyalists will put aside their purity politics and be pragmatic enough to change the direction of the party. Play VideoPlay Current Time 0:00 / Duration Time 1:29 Loaded: 0% Progress: 0% FullscreenMute Facebook Twitter Pinterest Bernie Sanders applauds Corbyn: ‘I don’t think he needs my advice’ Looking across the pond, Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party provides another example to learn from. Dismissed by Blairite centrists in his own
Authentic Michael Johnson Youth Jerseyparty, Corbyn not only over-performed in the general election, he rewrote British politics. As Matthew Yglesias argued in Vox, Corbyn’s electoral map looks a lot like Clinton’s; not only did he inspire young voters in a similar way to how Sanders did here, Corbyn ran on a bold policy agenda. In an age in which voters are characterized as irrational creatures who don’t vote because of policy, YouGov found that the top reason supporters backed Labour was because of the party’s social democratic manifesto. Democrats have become a tale of two wings. If the Clintonite establishment wing comes across as hopelessly uninspiring, the Berniecrat progressive wing has appeared energetic and full of ideas. Consider the #PeoplesPlatform sponsored this week by Sanders’ Our Revolution alongside other organizations, such as Democratic Socialists of America, Women’s March and Fight for 15. This platform – which Americans can sign a petition for – urges Democrats in Congress to support bills, such as Medicare for All, Free College Tuition, Voting Rights and Criminal Justice and Immigrant Rights. Certainly, Democrats might not win all of these progressive measures in Congress. But fighting for these measures would not only shift the political terrain, it would attract Americans desperately looking for a positive alternative to the Republicans. Clinton did not provide a true alternative to the status quo. Democrats should look elsewhere for a blueprint forward and leave her politics far behind. Remaining attached to her would be political madness. The majority of Americans know it
