Which economic system serves the most people?
On one side of the economic debate are those who believe in largely unfettered markets, in which companies are allowed to agglomerate market power or pollute or exploit. They believe firms should maximize shareholder value, doing whatever they can get away with, because bigger profits serve the common good.
[…]
Neoliberalism expanded the freedom of corporations and billionaires to do as they will and amass huge fortunes, but it also exacted a steep price: the well-being and freedom of the rest of society.
| Joseph Stiglitz, Time Is Up For Neoliberals1
A few paragraphs later, he wrote:
The road to authoritarianism is not paved by government doing too much but too little.
Stiglitz is a Nobel Laureate in Economics, so take notes.
Of Course They Will
Jesse Drucker reports2 on one of the many ways large companies are cutting their taxes through tax dodges:
The New York Times reported in August that big companies are setting up subsidiaries in Malta, often in empty offices, to shield their profits from taxes around the world. Companies including Crocs, Victoria’s Secret, Abbott Laboratories and Thermo Fisher have used the tiny archipelago to exploit its near-zero effective corporate tax rate, shifting taxable profits away from countries where they have actual employees and customers.
The Big Four accounting firms — KPMG, Deloitte, EY and PwC — have advised companies on the arrangements, engineering schemes to cut their clients’ tax bills by navigating the differences in tax laws of various countries.
KPMG declined to comment. Deloitte, EY and PwC did not respond to requests for comment.
What a bunch of assholes: the companies and their advisors. Just remember, the companies’ boards had to approve this, including their CEOs.
Put this on the 2027 congressional agenda: close the loopholes. Oh, and raise corporate tax rates and taxes on the 10% by undoing the Trump One Big Beautiful Bill.
From Wikipedia [emphasis mine]:
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the law will increase the budget deficit by $2.8 trillion by 2034 and cause 10.9 million Americans to lose health insurance coverage. Further CBO analysis estimated the highest 10% of earners would see incomes rise by 2.7% by 2034 mainly due to tax cuts, while the lowest 10% would see incomes fall by 3.1% mainly due to cuts to programs such as Medicaid and food aid. Several think tanks, experts, and opponents criticized the bill over its regressive tax structure, described many of its policies as gimmicks, and argued the bill would create the largest upward transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in American history, exacerbating inequality among the American population. It has also drawn controversy for rolling back clean energy incentives and increasing funding for immigration enforcement and deportations. According to multiple polls, a majority of Americans oppose the law.
Work Stress Is Not Always About Workload
According to recent research3 by Gargi Sawhney and Mallory McCord, stress at work is growing:
In Gallup’s latest State of the Global Workplace report, 40% of employees worldwide said they had experienced “a lot of stress” the previous day, and 56% said they were struggling.
The knee-jerk response? It must be workload. But [emphasis mine]:
Work overload is only one stressor—and not necessarily the most damaging one. The research identifies three distinct culprits, each with different consequences: role ambiguity (unclear expectations) most erodes job satisfaction and performance; role conflict (incompatible demands) drives burnout and turnover; and role overload (overwork) produces emotional and physical symptoms.
Role ambiguity might be the worst.
Among all the factors we studied, role ambiguity emerged as the most detrimental stressor across many organizationally relevant outcomes, such as lower job satisfaction, work engagement, organizational commitment, perceptions of fairness, task performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors, such as sharing information, showing courtesy, or helping colleagues complete a task.
One reason ambiguity may be especially harmful is that it undermines employees’ basic sense of direction at work.
It may be difficult, but clarifying people’s roles — for example, at the start of a new project or initiative, but also through regular one-on-one check-ins — is essential.
Role conflict comes from competing demands.
Remember in the movie Office Space, when Peter Gibbons tells some organizational consultants he has eight bosses? Each of which might steer him to do different things? That’s a problem of management, not Gibbons. And like Gibbons, even though workers may be able to stay on task despite role conflict, it can lead to burnout and a desire to leave.
The researchers boil this down:
The goal is to keep unresolved leadership disagreements from landing on employees.
Sometimes, though, people just have too much to do.
Overwork seems like a time management problem, but it is more comples than that. One problem arises from not managing how new work enters the system, and little may be done to reassess what work should be stopped or not taken on in the first place.
An additional problem is the paradox of overwork and engagement:
Additionally, our study found that overwork was positively associated with employee engagement, perhaps because employees view heavy workloads as a challenge that rewards sustained effort or because heavy workloads demand high engagement just so workers can keep their heads above water. This engagement may mask the substantial emotional and physical strain that overwork produces over time.
It’s all bad management, at core.
The researchers soft-pedal it, but these are three flavors of bad management:
Workplace stress is not one problem. Rather, it often reflects three distinct challenges: unclear expectations, incompatible demands, and excessive workload. Each has different consequences. Each requires a different leadership response.
For senior leaders, the implication is clear: Well-being cannot be delegated entirely to wellness programs, HR initiatives, or individual resilience. It must be built into how work is designed and managed. Organizations that make progress will be those that treat clear expectations, competing demands, and workload as central leadership responsibilities.
Please support my work with a paid subscription, which I have made as marginal as possible.
If you can’t afford yet-one-more-subscription, please help me by restacking this post to spread the word, or buy me a baguette.
