The Social Credit Movement [Chicago To Try 1000x1000?]

Dressbarn to Close All 650 Stores, Shutter Entire Business
Dressbarn, a household name for over 50 years, has struggled to grow sales in a competitive market where it battles with online retailers like Amazon and off-price retailers like T.J. Maxx.

190521-dressbarn-mc-1206_514c680e7332572be1194e7c0f761081.fit-760w.JPG

A DressBarn retail store front in Hagerstown, Maryland on April 5, 2018.Kristoffer Tripplaar/Sipa USA / AP file

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/co...e-all-650-stores-close-down-business-n1008191

Ascena Retail Group said late Monday it would wind down its women's budget clothing chain, Dressbarn, shutting about 650 stores in the United States, as it sharpens its focus on profitable brands.

The company, which also houses fashion brands Ann Taylor and Lou & Grey, said the move would strengthen its overall financial performance.

"This decision was difficult, but necessary, as the Dressbarn chain has not been operating at an acceptable level of profitability in today's retail environment," Dressbarn Chief Financial Officer Steven Taylor said.

Dressbarn, a household name for over 50 years, has struggled to grow sales in a competitive market where it battles with online retailers like Amazon and off-price retailers like T.J. Maxx.

Ascena's shares, which have more than halved this year, were up about 3 percent in extended trading.
 
Outrage as Sears Cancels Life Insurance Benefits for Up to 90,000 Retirees


Retirees were in for a shock when they received letters informing them that their life insurance benefits had been canceled. (Photo: Getty Images)

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/outr...urance-benefits-90000-retirees-131132281.html

Sears announced this month that an undisclosed portion of the struggling department store chain’s 90,000 retirees would be losing their life insurance benefits.

The retailer sent letters to the retired employees informing them that their life insurance would be axed as of March 15, according to Ron Olbrysh, chairman of the National Association of Retired Sears Employees (NARSE) — and some allegedly didn’t receive their letter until after that date had passed.

The dreaded news came just a month after Sears chairman Eddie Lampert saved the department store from bankruptcy by having a $5.2 billion bid approved, allowing about 40,000 current Sears employees to keep their jobs.

Olbrysh doesn’t know exactly how many of the 90,000 former employees would be affected by the decision, but a recent benefits report detailed that the company had paid about $16.6 million in premiums for eligible retirees in 2017, according to the Chicago Tribune. According to the notice, retirees have the option to convert all or part of their group life insurance policies to individual whole life policies and pay the premiums.

One retiree, 76-year-old Tom Dowd of Delaware, had worked with the company for 30 years when he retired as a human resources manager in 1998. “I spent my adult life there,” he told the Chicago Tribune, “and if nothing else, that requires a little bit of dignity as opposed to a letter saying your benefits are gone, and here’s how much you can pay to get them back.”

Hints of the drastic move emerged in October, when Sears requested bankruptcy protection. At the time, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC) won a lawsuit to take over retirees’ two pension plans from the retailer. Life insurance was the last benefit retirees had with Sears, which offered its workers a coveted benefits package in its heyday.

The first cuts to life insurance policies started happening back in 1997. As of 2019, Sears was still covering policies worth at least $5,000 for eligible retirees, and most policies ranged from $8,000 to $10,000. Most of the people affected by the loss are in their 80s and 90s, according to CBS News.

But Olbrysh said Sears’s decision to rescind life insurance is more than just a major blow to former employees — he claims it’s also a violation of a 2001 settlement agreement that said retirees’ life insurance could only be taken away if the department store chain liquidated and went out of business. Because of of this agreement, Olbrysh and NARSE had not been expecting the policies to be dropped, so they’re considering taking legal action — but they’re not sure it makes sense to sue “a company that is dying.”

Yahoo Lifestyle has reached out to Sears for further comment.
 
Last edited:
MacKenzie Bezos Pledges at Least Half Her Wealth to Charity
Jeff Bezos’ former wife, known as world’s 22nd richest person with $36.6bn fortune, signs up to the Giving Pledge


MacKenzie Bezos, above, founder of the anti-bullying group Bystander Revolution, said: ‘I have a disproportionate amount of money to share.’ Photograph: Danny Moloshok/Reuters

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-pledges-more-than-half-her-wealth-to-charity

MacKenzie Bezos, who recently became the world’s fourth richest woman after her divorce from Jeff Bezos, founder and chief executive of Amazon,has promised to give away at least half her $36.6bn (£28.4bn) fortune.

The 49 year-old novelist and founder of the anti-bullying group Bystander Revolution said on Tuesday that she had “a disproportionate amount of money to share” and promised to work hard at giving it away “until the safe is empty”.

She made the declaration in a letter to the Giving Pledge, the philanthropic initiative created by the investor Warren Buffett and Microsoft’s principal founder, Bill Gates, to encourage the world’s richest people to commit to giving away at least half their wealth to charity.

MacKenzie, who married Jeff Bezos in 1993, a year before he started Amazonfrom his garage in Seattle, in the US, said: “There are lots of resources each of us can pull from our safes to share with others – time, attention, knowledge, patience, creativity, talent, effort, humour, compassion.

“In addition to whatever assets life has nurtured in me I have a disproportionate amount of money to share. My approach to philanthropy will continue to be thoughtful. It will take time and effort and care. But I won’t wait. And I will keep at it until the safe is empty.”



MacKenzie did not set out which causes she intended to donate to, but in the past she has supported marriage equality, action against homelessness, college scholarships for undocumented immigrants, as well as research on cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

Jeff Bezos, the world’s richest person with a $114bn fortune, has not signed up to the Giving Pledge. He has given $2bn, amounting to less than 2% of his wealth, to the Bezos Day One Fund to help address homelessness and improve education for children in low-income families.

He congratulated his former wife in a tweet linking to her Giving Pledge letter. “MacKenzie is going to be amazing and thoughtful and effective at philanthropy, and I’m proud of her,” he said. “Her letter is so beautiful. Go get ‘em MacKenzie.”

MacKenzie Bezos became the world’s 22nd richest person, according to Bloomberg Billionaires Index, when she collected 25% of her former husband’s shares in Amazon when their divorce was finalised in April. Jeff Bezos maintained full-ownership of The Washington Post and his space exploration company, Blue Origin.

She was one of 19 new Giving Pledge signatories announced on Tuesday. The others include the British hedge fund billionaire David Harding, Brian Acton, co-founder of WhatsApp, Paul Sciarra, co-founder of Pinterest, Brian Armstrong, chief executive of the cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase, and the US hedge fund billionaire Paul Tudor Jones.

It takes the total number of signatories to the pledge to 203 from 23 countries. Those already signed up include Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, the former Conservative party deputy chair Lord Ashcroft, easyJet’s Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou, Bloombergs founder Michael Bloomberg, Tesla’s Elon Musk, and the financiers Bill Ackman, Carl Icahn and Ray Dalio.
 
'Eye-Popping': Analysis Shows Top 1% Gained $21 Trillion in Wealth Since 1989 While Bottom Half Lost $900 Billion
"The top one percent owns nearly $30 trillion of assets while the bottom half owns less than nothing."

jeff_bezos.jpg

CEO and founder of Amazon Jeff Bezos participates in a discussion during a Milestone Celebration dinner September 13, 2018 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...ned-21-trillion-wealth-1989-while-bottom-half

Adding to the mountain of statistical evidence showing the severity of U.S. inequality, an analysis published Friday found that the top one percent of Americans gained $21 trillion in wealth since 1989 while the bottom 50 percent lost $900 billion.

"We have the worst inequality in this country since the 1920s."
—Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)

Matt Bruenig, founder of the left-wing think tank People's Policy Project, broke down the Federal Reserve's newly released "Distributive Financial Accounts" data series and found that, overall, "the top one percent owns nearly $30 trillion of assets while the bottom half owns less than nothing, meaning they have more debts than they have assets."

The growth of wealth inequality over the past 30 years, Bruenig found, is "eye-popping."

"Between 1989 and 2018, the top one percent increased its total net worth by $21 trillion," Bruenig wrote. "The bottom 50 percent actually saw its net worth decrease by $900 billion over the same period."

shadow.jpg


"Enormous crisis," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) tweeted in response to Bruenig's analysis.

"We have the worst inequality in this country since the 1920s," wrote Jayapal, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. "Three wealthiest people in America have as much wealth as the bottom 50 percent."
 
58% of Americans Have Less Than $1,000 in Savings, Survey Finds
family-friends-barbecuing-iStock-950891664.jpg

https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/finance/news/58-americans-less-1-000-090000503.html

Saving money continues to be a challenge for Americans. That’s the finding of GOBankingRates’ most recent savings survey.

Since 2015, GOBankingRates has asked Americans how much they have in savings. Each year, the survey results have shown that a majority of adults don’t even have $1,000 in a savings account. That trend continues in 2018.

To find out why this year’s survey also asked respondents what obstacles are preventing them from saving and what they’d be willing to sacrifice to reach their savings goals. For those who are setting aside cash, the poll sought to find out what they are saving for and what resources have helped them manage their savings.

The Overall Savings Rate Isn’t Improving

This year, GOBankingRates asked more than 5,000 adults, “How much money do you have saved in your savings account?” Respondents could choose from one of seven options:

5835d0ef87f539d5cbc82448997dcb35

The survey found that 58 percent of respondents had less than $1,000 saved.

“It’s always concerning when a large part of the population is seemingly living paycheck to paycheck because when unexpected personal or financial hardships occur, it can be challenging to recover without adequate savings,” Jason Thacker, head of consumer deposits and payments at TD Bank, said.

For the most part, there was very little improvement from last year’s survey. In fact, the percentage of adults with less than $1,000 in savings increased slightly to 58 percent from 57 percent in 2017. The graphic below shows how much Americans have been saving over the years, beginning in 2014.

The percentage of Americans with absolutely nothing in a savings account did drop to 32 percent from 39 percent in 2017. While this is a positive sign, Thacker isn’t too encouraged. “The data indicates that more people are actually saving something so that’s definitely a positive sign,” he said. “However, a third of the population is living without any savings, which is concerning given life surprises that create financial challenges can emerge at any time and those without savings will find it more difficult to navigate through these challenges.”

Among those with more than $1,000 in savings, the survey results are mixed. This year, 22 percent of respondents said they have $1,000 to $9,999 compared with 18 percent in 2017. But the percentage with more than $10,000 in a savings account dropped to 21 percent from 25 percent in 2018. Perhaps it suggests that some Americans have had to raid savings to pay for emergencies or other expenses over the past year.

It’s Harder for Women to Save Than Men

Previous GOBankingRates surveys found that women were more frequently in a tough financial position. Women have less money saved in an emergency fund, for example. The savings survey confirmed that fact.

More women have less than $1,000 in savings — 62 percent of women compared to 53 percent of men. At the other end of the spectrum, a full 13 percent of men have more than $50,000 in savings, compared to just 6 percent of women.

Millennials Are Doing a Better Job of Saving Than Older Generations

When it comes to saving, older generations could learn a thing or two from millennials. Aside from adults 65 and older, millennials have the smallest percentage of respondents with less than $1,000 saved.

The survey found that 54 percent of young millennials ages 18 to 24 and 57 percent of older millennials ages 25 to 34 have less than $1,000 saved. Young millennials actually have the smallest percentage of respondents (along with adults 65 and older) with $0 saved — 26 percent. That’s a significant improvement over 2017, when 46 percent of young millennials said they had $0 saved.


On the flip side, Generation Xers ages 35 to 44 appear to be having the hardest time saving money. Among this age group, 37 percent have $0 in a savings account. And older Gen Xers ages 45 to 54 have the highest percentage of respondents of any age group with less than $1,000 saved — 62 percent.

“We all know the cost of living has increased over time, but this generation is also saddled with what I’ll call lifestyle debt — consumer debt, housing debt, school debt, etc.,” Thacker said. “We know that the cost of education has drastically increased and outpaced incomes over time, so I definitely think these and other factors are at play.”


Low Salaries and Living Paycheck to Paycheck Make It Hard to Save

To find out why the savings rate is low, the survey asked, “What obstacle(s) are keeping you from saving more money each month?” The top response — with 31 percent choosing it — was “I’m living paycheck to paycheck.” This isn’t surprising considering that another GOBankingRates survey found that always living paycheck to paycheck is Americans’ biggest money fear after never being able to retire. TD Bank’s Love & Money survey found nearly identical results: 34 percent of respondents said living paycheck to paycheck was keeping them from meeting their financial goals.

Gen Xers ages 45 to 54 and Baby Boomers ages 55 to 65 — adults who supposedly are in their prime earning years — were more likely than other age groups to claim that living paycheck to paycheck was their biggest obstacle to saving. And women were much more likely than men to say that they weren’t saving because they were living paycheck to paycheck — 35 percent versus 26 percent.

The second-most-common savings obstacle respondents named was a low salary, which can go hand in hand with living paycheck to paycheck. Not surprisingly, millennials — who are just starting out in their careers — were more likely than older generations to claim that a low salary was preventing them from saving more.

Retirement Is the Most Common Savings Goal

Among Americans who are saving, the survey found that the most common thing they are saving for is retirement. However, only 29 percent chose this response, which suggests that saving for retirement isn’t a priority for a majority of Americans. While it might not be a priority, retirement is still something people worry about paying for. According to TD Bank’s survey, retirement is one of the greatest fears couples have related to money.

Fortunately, saving for retirement seems to be more of a priority for adults who are closer to retirement age. The survey found that 51 percent of adults ages 55 to 64 said that they are primarily saving for retirement. Millennials ages 18 to 24 are the least likely to be saving for retirement, with just 6 percent naming it as their primary savings goal.

If you’re approaching retirement and haven’t started saving, don’t worry: Follow this do-or-die retirement plan if you have nothing saved.

The second most common reason Americans are setting money aside is to save up to buy a home, followed by cars and vacations. Millennials ages 25 to 34 are much more likely than other age groups to saving for a home — 43 percent versus 27 percent overall.

Americans Turn to Friends and Family for Help Managing Savings

When asked who or what has been most helpful for managing savings, 42 percent of respondents said friends and family. While Thacker recommends getting advice from people you trust, he said it’s worth it to take the time to do your own research online. And don’t discount professional advice.

“I always recommend talking to a financial professional like a banker or financial advisor for valuable counsel as you think through some of your own financial decisions,” he said. Thirty percent of people met with a financial advisor in the past year, the TD Bank survey found.

Americans aren’t nearly as likely to seek professional help as they are to use DIY methods or rely on advice from family and friends. According to the survey, just 10 percent of adults said they use financial advisors to manage their savings.

The survey found that the second-most-common thing that helps Americans save is budgeting. More than a quarter of adults say they use budgeting to reach savings goals. And another 8 percent said they use a mobile budgeting app to help manage savings.

Saving Money Needs to Become a Habit for More Americans

Only 7 percent of respondents said that they’re not saving more because they forget to put money in savings. Ironically, though, 29 percent of respondents said they don’t know or don’t keep track of how often they stash cash in savings. That was the most common response among respondents when asked how often they deposit money in savings.

It’s not surprising that Gen Xers ages 35 to 44 were the most likely of any age group — 32 percent — to say they don’t know how often they save, considering that they have the highest percentage of respondents with no savings.

It’s encouraging, though, that 23 percent of respondents said they deposit money in savings every paycheck and another 22 percent save monthly. But with nearly 1 in 3 adults not aware of how often they’re setting money aside, it’s clear that more Americans need to make saving a habit.


Sometimes, Saving Takes Sacrifice

It might seem impossible to save money when you’re living paycheck to paycheck or not making much money. But Thacker said it’s doable, you just need to make a spending inventory. “Too few people actually have outlined their personal budget and really understand how much money is coming and the cost of expenses flowing out of their households,” he said. “Exploring whether there’s an opportunity to increase income — by improving your skills or taking on a new challenge — is always beneficial. Then ask yourself whether your expenses are essentials or if there are opportunities to save on things like eating out, monthly memberships and subscription services.”

Considering that many see living paycheck to paycheck as an obstacle to saving, it’s encouraging that 37 percent of respondents said they would cut out discretionary spending to reach savings goals. And 19 percent said they would be willing to take on a second job to save more. However, only 11 percent would be willing to switch careers to achieve savings goals.

An easy way to cut out discretionary spending is to make the money unavailable. You can do this by paying yourself first, which Thacker said is the most efficient way to create a saving habit.

“Paying yourself first when the money is coming in and taking a little off the top to set aside for retirement is the best practice,” he said. “You should consider setting up automatic transfers to your retirement savings account to support your future financial needs and goals.”
 
Episode 6: ‘The End of the Line’
Producer/Director Alyse Shorland

With its focus on a future of self-driving cars and renewable fuels, General Motors is leaving some manufacturing plants like the one in Lordstown, Ohio, in its rearview. Workers who spent a lifetime at the plant — and constructed their lives around G.M. as they built the company’s cars — are losing their jobs. But this round of layoffs is different from the decades-old shifts in the auto industry. Competition from Silicon Valley, pressure from Wall Street and fundamental changes in how we get around are forcing the company to transform itself. It may be easy to say it’s not fair, but the American economy may not have room for fairness anymore.

“The Weekly” visits Lordstown to talk to some workers before their last shift, and our correspondent sits down with G.M.’s chief executive, Mary Barra, who says she’s trying to save the car company.

Complete coverage
  • The closing of the Lordstown plant has disrupted thousands of lives and upended politics in a county that flipped from Democrat to Republican in the 2016 presidential race, and where candidates are making their pitches for 2020. Read Sabrina’s article about Lordstown voters’ ambivalence toward President Trump.

  • The president tried to throw Lordstown a lifeline in May when he announced that a small, little-known manufacturer of electric vehicles would buy the G.M. plant. It isn’t a done deal, and few people had much faith it would replace many of the lost jobs.

  • When the plant made its last car in March, it marked the end of a way of life that Lordstown had known for a half-century, when almost everything in town revolved around the G.M. plant.

  • G.M.’s announcement in November 2018that it was shuttering the Lordstown plant and four others caught many people by surprise. Wall Street responded enthusiastically to the news, sending the carmaker’s stock up nearly 5 percent that day.

  • Listen to Sabrina talk about the political fallout of the G.M. plant shutdown on “The Daily” podcast.
 
Hillicon Valley: FTC Reportedly Settles With Facebook for $5B Fine | Trump Calls to Regulate Facebook's Crypto Project

zuckerbergmark_041118gn9_lead.jpg

© Greg Nash

https://thehill.com/policy/technolo...c-reportedly-with-facebook-for-5-billion-fine

DEVELOPING:

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has reportedly approved a roughly $5 billion settlement with Facebook following its investigation into the company's handling of the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

The Wall Street Journal, citing a person familiar with the matter, reported Friday that the FTC voted along party lines this week to approve the settlement, closing the investigation into the Cambridge Analytica incident.

The vote was 3-2, with Republicans in the majority approving the deal, according to the Journal.

The investigation was launched in March 2018 after reports that data from tens of millions of Facebook users was shared with the outside firm Cambridge Analytica. The agency had focused on whether Facebook violated a 2011 consent agreement with the FTC requiring greater privacy protections and transparency for users.

The FTC and Facebook both declined to comment. According to the Journal, the settlement now heads to the Department of Justice for review.

Why the settlement could bring more controversy: Facebook told investors earlier this year that it expected to pay between $3 billion and $5 billion to settle the investigation.

That admission worried the company's biggest critics, including members of Congress, who argued that any sum in that range would hardly make a dent in Facebook's bottom line and that the agency needed to impose severe penalties in order to change its behavior.

Though the fine would be the largest the FTC has ever imposed for privacy violations, it amounts to a fraction of the $55 billion in revenue Facebook generated last year.

In May, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) wrote to the FTC saying that the sum Facebook expected to pay would be a "bargain" for the nearly $600 billion company and that the agency should consider holding individual executives responsible.

"Even a fine in the billions is simply a write-down for the company, and large penalties have done little to deter large tech firms," the bipartisan duo wrote. "If the FTC is seen as traffic police handing out speeding tickets companies profiting off breaking the law, then Facebook and other will continue to push the boundaries."

The Journal reported that the settlement will include "government restrictions on how Facebook treats user privacy" but it's unclear what that would entail.

Facebook was also fined £500,000 last year by the UK Information Commissioner's Office over the scandal, the largest penalty the office was authorized to levy.

TRUMP'S NO BITCOIN BRO:

President Trump denounced various cryptocurrencies, including Facebook's newly announced Libra, on Thursday as lawmakers and regulators express deep concern about the social media giant's financial services ambitions.

In a series of tweets, Trump said he was "not a fan" of digital ledger-based currencies such as bitcoin, insisting they could be used easily to conduct criminal transactions.

"I am not a fan of Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies, which are not money, and whose value is highly volatile and based on thin air. Unregulated Crypto Assets can facilitate unlawful behavior, including drug trade and other illegal activity," Trump tweeted Thursday night.

Special criticism for Facebook's Libra: Trump also ripped Facebook for its plan to launch a payments system next year, in which users exchange money through a proprietary cryptocurrency called Libra.

The Swiss nonprofit set up to control Libra is not a chartered bank, but Trump insisted that Facebook must seek a formal federal approval to become one if it seeks to enter the financial services industry.

"Similarly, Facebook Libra's 'virtual currency' will have little standing or dependability. If Facebook and other companies want to become a bank, they must seek a new Banking Charter and become subject to all Banking Regulations, just like other Banks, both National and International," he tweeted.

"We have only one real currency in the USA, and it is stronger than ever, both dependable and reliable," Trump continued. "It is by far the most dominant currency anywhere in the World, and it will always stay that way. It is called the United States Dollar!"

Congress agrees: Trump's skepticism of cryptocurrencies and Libra specifically reflects concerns of many lawmakers and regulators across the ideological spectrum.

Lawmakers insist that Facebook's massive reach and history of privacy breaches could make its foray into financial services a dangerous gambit. The Democratic-controlled House Financial Services Committee and GOP-controlled Senate Banking Committee are set to grill Libra chief David Marcus in hearings next week.

And the Fed: And Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell warned in congressional testimony Wednesday and Thursday that Libra poses "serious concerns" for the global economy.

"It cannot go forward without there being broad satisfaction with the way the company has addressed" privacy, money laundering, consumer protection and financial stability, Powell said Wednesday.

"All of those things will need to be addressed very thoroughly and carefully."

Powell added that regulators may label Libra as a systemically important financial institution. That designation would subject Libra to strict capital and liquidity standards the Fed applies to megabanks.

There is also wide bipartisan concern in Washington that cryptocurrencies are not adequately policed for illicit financing. Regulators have homed in on the surge of financial schemes based on cryptocurrencies, though many consumers exchange legitimate digital coins without incident.
 
Booming Jobs Market is Leaving the Retail Industry Behind
105452468-1536956104484gettyimages-180384556.jpeg


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/05/booming-jobs-market-is-leaving-the-retail-industry-behind.html

KEY POINTS
  • Despite strength in jobs from manufacturing to medicine, retail is one of just two sectors that have lost jobs over the last few years.
  • Since January 2017, retail has lost more than 140,000 jobs; the sector added to those losses in March 2019, according to Labor Department data.
  • “Retail is a sector where automation has been particularly present,” said PGIM’s Nathan Sheets. “U.S. consumers have manifest over many years that they want low prices, even if that means less help from workers on the floor.”

Though many American industries have ramped up hiring in recent years amid a strong economy and easier regulations under President Donald Trump, one sector in particular has lagged the rest: retail.

Since January 2017, retail has lost more than 140,000 jobs; the sector added to that in March 2019 with a loss of more than 11,000, according to Labor Department data. The sector is one of just two industries that have lost jobs over the last few years, according to data tracked by CNBC.

For example, an aging baby boomer population has fueled employment in the health-care industry, while the post-crisis business sector has supported the addition of tens of thousands of jobs per month. The government’s Friday report on the employment situation showed the health care sector alone added 61,000 jobs in March, while the business industry tacked on another 37,000.

Despite strength in jobs from manufacturing to medicine, retail is one of just two sectors that have lost jobs over the last few years. Since January 2017, retail has lost more than 140,000 jobs; the sector added to those losses in March 2019 with a loss of more than 11,000, according to Labor Department data.

The lukewarm performance in the retail sector have come despite a broader economic groundswell, with Trump’s corporate tax cuts giving businesses a balance sheet boost, goosing GDP growth above the rate many economists feel is sustainable.

The utilities sector, the only other to have seen a net decline in jobs since 2016, employs less than 1 million people. Retail employs more than 15 million.

Automation Effect

Theories on the employment softness range from analyst to analyst, most agree that the downtick in the number of people working at big-box retail locations has to do with the rise of e-commerce and technology.

“Broadly speaking, retail is a sector where automation has been particularly present. Self-checkouts are now common. If you’re not sure about a price, you scan the bar code rather than asking a worker,” Nathan Sheets, chief economist at PGIM Fixed Income.

As an example the thriving shift toward automation at retailers nationwide, Walmart announced earlier this year that it is expanding its “Scan & Go” technology to an additional 100 locations across the U.S. For consumer staples like groceries that customers still don’t feel comfortable purchasing online, Kroger’s new “Scan, Bag, Go” platform will allow shoppers to scan their items themselves and allow the chain to cut cashiers at 400 locations.

Gap, Victoria’s Secret, J.C. Penney, Tesla and Abercrombie & Fitch have all announced that they’ll be closing locations in 2019; 4,810 store closures had been announced by retailers by March 2019, according to Coresight Research.

The push toward automation checkouts comes as major retailers and supermarkets come under pressure to generate even more profit out of a razor-thin margin business while offering customers a unique shopping experience.

“As a related point, the ongoing shift in retail from bricks and mortar to online very much reinforces this trend. For online sales, you largely eliminate customer-facing employment,” Sheets added. “U.S. consumers have manifest over many years that they want low prices, even if that means less help from workers on the floor.”

Perhaps emblematic of the struggles of some retailers to keep up in the modern era, the October bankruptcy filing of Sears Holdings represented for many economists a key moment in the shift toward a leaner business model.

Others, like National Retail Federation chief economist Jack Kleinhenz suggested that the government data may not suggest a decline in retail business, but rather a shift in the types of people they employ.

“You could now have a major retailer that owns a warehousing and distribution center, and products never go through a store,” Kleinhenz said. “There has been improvement in productivity and the use of technology. I caution us to be unnerved by these numbers at this point in time.”

“The retail industry is actually in sync with the economy and is growing at a pace that is appropriate, but we have to broaden our scope” of how we measure it, he added.

Instead of employees lining up at brick-and-mortar store locations, the rise of e-commerce is driving demand for transportation and warehousing staff. A current driver shortage beleaguers the trucking industry thanks to a combination of low compensation, burdensome schedules and conditions of the job.

But amid a new generation of consumers accustomed to smartphone shopping and two-day shipping, retail demand for storage square footage is soaring. Some savvy investors, such as Blackstone’s Jonathan Gray, have actually poured money into the warehousing business in an effort to preempt the broader trend and capitalize off the scaling need for space.

Gray told CNBC in July that the firm had purchased more than 550 million square feet of warehousing since 2010.

“As you think about investing, you’re trying to think about sort of where the puck’s going to, what’s happening. We came to a simple view that online sales were going to grow,” Gray said from the Delivering Alpha Conference in New York in 2018. “As a result, we’ve seen this pickup in demand for warehouse space, which traditionally was a pretty boring business.”

“In an environment where it’s hard to invest, finding things you have high conviction in, where you think there’s going to be growth – that’s a pretty good strategy,” he added.
 
UBI is coming... It's a part of the UNs plan. Once AI and robots get going 2030 and beyond. We will have to do something in order to keep the money flowing


Cryptocurrencies will be a huge part of the future and UBI will be necessary for the plan to be complete. What's this plan? The new world order dummies..
 
'I Was So Livid': Disney Heiress Visits Theme Park to See Worker Conditions

258093d0-a416-11e9-bd9d-2bb4322cb50b


https://news.yahoo.com/i-was-so-liv...tions-093000722.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab

As an heiress to the Disney fortune, anything Abigail Disney says about the brand beloved by millions worldwide garners attention. And she’s calling out Walt Disney Co. CEO Bob Iger for his nearly $66 million yearly salary, saying he isn’t doing enough to rectify the huge gap between his own earnings and those of other Disney workers.

“Bob needs to understand he's an employee, just the same as the people scrubbing gum off the sidewalk are employees,” Disney said during an interview with the Yahoo News show “Through Her Eyes.” “And they're entitled to all the same dignity and human rights that he is.”

Iger’s paycheck last year was more than 1,000 times what the median Disney employee made in 2018, according to Equilar.

To understand the grievances of Walt Disney Co. employees, Abigail Disney said she went to Disneyland after receiving a Facebook message from a distressed worker.

“I went to Anaheim, and I wanted to be sure I understood the situation and the context really, really well,” Disney said.

She said what she found at “The Happiest Place on Earth” was a façade that was about to crack from the pressure of making ends meet.

“Every single one of these people I talked to were saying, ‘I don't know how I can maintain this face of joy and warmth when I have to go home and forage for food in other people's garbage,’” she recalled, adding that this was not the work environment her grandfather Roy O. Disney sought out to create.

“I was so livid when I came out of there because, you know, my grandfather taught me to revere these people that take your tickets, that pour your soda,” she continued.

“Those people are much of the recipe for success.”

After this article was published, a spokesperson for the Walt Disney Co. reached out to say the company generally avoids responding to such "baseless" accusations, "but this one is particularly egregious, and we won’t let this stand."

The spokesperson continued: "We strongly disagree with this characterization of our employees and their experience at Disney. This widely reported stunt is a gross and unfair exaggeration of the facts that is not only a misrepresentation but also an insult to the thousands of employees who are part of the Disney community. We continually strive to enhance the employment experience of our more than 200,000 employees through a variety of benefits and programs that provide them opportunity, mobility and well-being."

The Walt Disney Co.’s full statement can be found here.

Abigail Disney says her efforts are part of preserving a work culture of respect that originated with her grandfather and that she says has gradually declined at the Walt Disney Co. “When my grandfather worked there, he hired people there to have a job for life,” she said.

The company has also been accused of sexist pay practices. Earlier this month, four new women joined a major pay-gap case against it, according to the Guardian. They are part of a larger class-action lawsuit, filed in April, alleging that the company systematically underpays its female employees. Disney denied the allegations.

A filmmaker and philanthropist, Abigail Disney does not have an active role in the company her grandfather co-founded. But she says she recently wrote to Iger expressing her concerns.

“I wrote Bob Iger a very long email, and one of the things I said to him was, ‘You know, you're a great CEO by any measure, perhaps even the greatest CEO in the country right now. You know, your legacy is that you're a great manager. And if I were you, I would want something better than that. I would want to be known as the guy who led to a better place, because that is what you have the power to do.’”

But Disney said that in response to her email, she got “nothing.”

“There was no answer,” she said.

According to the Financial Times, Iger referred Disney to the company’s human resources department, “who cited initiatives such as its $150m funding for employee education,” motivating her to reach out to Iger again. She told the outlet: “That never got an answer, so I had my answer.”

When asked about the pay disparity between Iger and his staff, a Walt Disney Co. spokesperson touted its education initiative, Disney Aspire, which covers 100 percent of all tuition costs, books and fees. The spokesperson said more than 40 percent of Disney’s 88,000-plus hourly employees have signed up to participate so far.

“Disney is at the forefront of providing workforce education, which is widely recognized as the best way to create economic opportunity for employees and empower upward mobility,” the spokesperson said.

The company added: “American workers need meaningful change; they deserve smart policies and practical programs, like Disney Aspire, that empower them to achieve their goals and ensure they are part of the most competitive workforce in the world.”

This isn’t the first time Abigail Disney has called out Iger for his income. She wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in April, criticizing the “naked indecency” of his salary. And in May she spoke on Capitol Hill, imploring members of the House Financial Services Committee to rethink the system that allows CEOs to make so much more than other workers.

“The system is the problem, and the people inside of the system who are perfectly comfortable with the system are the problem,” Disney told “Through Her Eyes.” “I don't think any president of the United States has as much power as some CEOs in this country.”

To help jump-start change, Disney says she wants to be taxed more. She and more than a dozen other wealthy Americans recently penned an open letter to 2020 presidential candidates calling for a raise in federal wealth taxes to “substantially fund” things like clean energy, infrastructure and universal childcare.

“I have more than enough,” Disney told “Through Her Eyes.” “And if you've got $1 billion, there's not a thing on this earth you can't afford.”

Disney has gained a lot from her famous grandfather and the fairy-tale world he helped create, but she says she is also cognizant of her family’s darker legacies and how they have hurt people, too. Her great-uncle, Walt Disney, has been accused of anti-Semitism, sexism and racism.

“Sadly, it happens to be the case that there are very nice people who are also racists,” Abigail Disney recalled.

She cited movies like “Song of the South” and characters like Jim Crow in the 1941 film “Dumbo” as examples of her great-uncle Walt’s racist history. Although these films were created before the civil rights movement, Disney says time is no excuse for bigotry.

“We cannot simply say, ‘Oh, everybody was a racist back then,’” she explained. “Many people chose to not be what everyone else was. It takes courage. It takes integrity. It’s a very hard thing to do.

“But if you decide to be a person who creates culture, then you have to take on all the responsibility of that.”

Editors’ note: An earlier version of the story used the word “undercover” to describe Abigail Disney’s visit to Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif. During the interview, Disney told Yahoo News that she “went to Anaheim” — the updated story removes the word “undercover.”
 
Back
Top Bottom