by Robert Reich:

[elleng]

'Mark Schmitt argues in an oped in today’s Times that Bernie’s agenda won’t shape the future of progressivism in America because his proposals are out of keeping with the thinking of new progressive think tanks – which are looking at how to build incrementally on the Affordable Care Act rather than substitute a single-payer healthcare system, increase capital requirements at big banks rather than break them up or restore Glass-Steagall, give workers more security in the gig economy rather than raise the minimum wage, and push companies toward sharing more of their profits with their workers rather than redistribute income and wealth through the federal government.

In reality, the future of progressivism lies in Bernie’s ideas and all these others. They’re not mutually exclusive. But none of them has a snowball’s chance unless we reverse the increasing concentration of income, wealth, and political influence at the top. Wealth and power are inextricably connected. That’s Bernie’s central message. Progressives will get nowhere unless they attack head on the disproportionate political power of big corporations, Wall Street, and billionaires (a few of whom finance the new progressive think tanks), and the diminishing countervailing power in the rest of America.

What do you think?'

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/?fref=nf

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/opinion/campaign-stops/is-the-sanders-agenda-out-of-date.html

[seabeckind]

1. Who are these "progressive think tanks"?

Third way tanks?

"build incrementally on the Affordable Care Act rather than substitute a single-payer healthcare system"

The only way to make substantive changes in the ACA is by a major push using the bully pulpit to build an upswell of popular support. To try to do an incremental in a congress, is just a fool's errand. The only way they'll act is by repealing it (which they will support) and then trying a replacement (which they will never agree to).

Stupid idea. One no doubt an appeal to the conservative wing of the democratic party.

BTW, much of what FDR got thru to rein in wall street and increase revenue was thru a republican congress.

"increase capital requirements at big banks rather than break them up or restore Glass-Steagall"

Waste of time. Lip service to pretend to do something. I'm sure part of it will be to gut Dodd-Frank. 2 steps back, none forward. We desperately need our gov't to break up the oligopolies and get control back to the people.

"give workers more security in the gig economy rather than raise the minimum wage"

Oh boy, slogan. What? Pretend that we've got a NLRB again?

"push companies toward sharing more of their profits with their workers rather than redistribute income and wealth through the federal government"

This is an absolute lie. There is NO movement to redistribute wealth thru the federal gov't and never has been. That's a right wing talking point and boogeyman.

Income for mgmt is set by the Directors. They cannot be dictated to without nationalizing the company. Good luck with that. The current charters mandate that the profits be maximized to the shareholders. Unless you give labor an implicit ownership in the company, it's another fool's errand. The corporations will never let such a thing get thru congress.