SEN BERNIE SANDERS: We have a government of billionaires, by billionaires and for billionaires
All of us owe Donald Trump and Elon Musk a deep debt of gratitude.
For a very long time the big money interests, under Democratic and Republican administrations, have dominated our government and our politics. They did it through their campaign contributions, the work of their corporate lobbyists and the extravagant dinners where the rich and the powerful plotted their strategies. Much of their work was done quietly and out of public scrutiny. They had the power. They just didn't advertise it.
Not anymore.
Donald Trump invited the three wealthiest people in the country, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg to sit right behind him at his inauguration. And behind them were 13 other billionaires who Trump had nominated to run major government agencies. In other words, the power of big money was no longer something to be kept secret. Trump was showing the entire world that the billionaire class was running our government. It was there for all to see.
But it's not just Trump whom we should applaud for his openness. It's Elon Musk. Ever since the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision of 2010, billionaires and their super-PACs in both political parties have been controlling our political process and buying and selling politicians.
But no one has been as transparent about that as Musk. He donated over $270 million to Trump's campaign, and was rewarded by becoming the most powerful person in the government. Nothing complicated about that. You pay for what you get.
Further, he has made it clear that any member of Congress who votes against the Trump-Musk agenda will be opposed by him and his unlimited financial resources. Nothing subtle about that either. Money talks. You do as I say or my money ends your political career.
So, what does it all mean? What are the implications of having a government run by the billionaire class?
There are those who believe that Mr. Musk and the other billionaires in Trump's Cabinet, smart, hard-working and successful business people, are sacrificing their time and energy to make the government more efficient and effective – and that we should be very grateful for their efforts.
I don't agree.
Let's take a hard look at what's now happening all around us and see if "efficiency" is the major goal of these billionaires.
A good place to begin is with Social Security, the most popular and successful government program in American history.
For nearly 90 years, in good times and bad, Social Security has done exactly what it was designed to do – pay out every benefit owed to every eligible American on time and without delay. Last year, it kept over 27 million Americans out of poverty.
And yet today the Trump administration and Elon Musk have been launching an all-out and unprecedented attack on Social Security.
They are eliminating the ability of seniors and the disabled to apply for benefits over the phone, shutting down Social Security field offices throughout the country and planning to lay off up to half of Social Security's staff. These disastrous cuts are not making Social Security more efficient or reducing fraud. They are doing the exact opposite.
Since Trump has been in office, Social Security's website crashed four times in a recent 10-day period. Lines at Social Security field offices that remain open are getting longer and it's increasingly difficult for seniors and the disabled to talk to a live human being on Social Security's 1-800 number.
During his State of the Union, President Trump falsely suggested that "millions and millions" of Social Security checks are going out to people between the ages of 140 and 360. Not true. It is widely acknowledged, even by Trump's own nominee to lead the Social Security Administration, that well over 99% of Social Security checks are going out to people who earned those benefits.No one who is 150 or 200 or 300 years old is receiving Social Security benefits.
Several weeks ago, Mr. Musk falsely claimed that Social Security is "the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time." Really? This is a system that has been in effect since 1935 and has never once failed to provide benefits to those who have earned them. Some Ponzi scheme!
And it's not just Social Security that the Trump administration is attacking. They are also cutting back on the needs of our nation's veterans, the men and women who put their lives on the line defending our country.
At a time when the VA is facing a shortage of many thousands of doctors, nurses and other medical workers, President Trump is making a bad situation even worse by proposing to fire 83,000 employees at the VA. This will undoubtedly mean that the quality of healthcare provided there will decline and veterans will have to wait longer for the benefits they earned.
That's not just Bernie Sanders talking. That's what the VFW and other veterans organizations are saying. Can we make VA healthcare more efficient? Absolutely. But arbitrarily firing 83,000 employees is not the way to do it.
What else is our billionaire-led government in the process of doing? As we speak, President Trump, Mr. Musk and Republicans in Congress are laying the groundwork to pass legislation that would provide huge tax breaks for the wealthiest people in the country paid for by massive cuts to healthcare, education, nutrition, housing and other programs that working families and the most vulnerable rely on.
It has been estimated that the legislation the Republicans are writing would provide a $1.1 trillion tax break to the top 1%. Another study found that if all of Trump's so-called "America First" policies are enacted, including his tariffs, the bottom 95% of Americans will see their taxes go up, while the top 5% will see their taxes go down. Way down.
And what is the largest cut they are considering? It would be an up to $880 billion cut to Medicaid – a program that provides healthcare to tens of millions of children, two out of every three seniors in nursing homes, and 43% of the revenue for community health centers that deliver primary care to over 32 million Americans. A cut of this size would devastate our already broken healthcare system and increase healthcare costs for millions of Americans.
It is no secret that our country is deeply divided politically. In my view, however, there are very few people, whether they are conservative, progressive or moderate, who think that we should give tax breaks to billionaires and cut back on Medicaid, education and food for hungry children.
There are very few people who think we should take a chainsaw to Social Security and the VA – and threaten the well-being of our seniors and veterans.
The American people want a government and an economy that works for all, not just the wealthy few. It's about time Congress and the president listened to them.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
10 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Stephen Miller Triggers Los Angeles
During a lull in the chanting outside the federal building targeted by protesters in downtown Los Angeles this week, I walked up behind a hooded young man wearing a mask and carrying a can of spray paint. He began to deface the marble facade in big black letters. WHEN TYRANNY BECOMES LAW, REBELLION BECOMES DUTY—THOMAS JEFFERSON, he wrote, adding his tag, SMO, in smaller font. SMO told me that he is 21, Mexican American, an Angeleno, and a 'history buff' who thinks about the Founding Fathers more than the average tagger does. He said he wanted to write something that stood out from the hundreds of places where FUCK ICE now appears. 'I needed a better message that would inspire more people to remember that our history as Americans is deeply rooted in being resistant to the ones who oppress us,' he told me. 'Our Founding Fathers trusted that we the people would take it into our hands to fight back against a government who no longer serves the people.' (The quote, although spurious, captures some of the ideas that Jefferson put into the Declaration of Independence, according to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation.) Whether what's occurring in Los Angeles is a noble rebellion, a destructive riot, or a bit of both, the protests here have been the most intense demonstrations against President Donald Trump and his policies since he retook office. They were set off by a new, more aggressive phase of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids across the city last week. But it's important to keep some perspective on the size of the confrontations. Los Angeles County covers more than 4,000 square miles, with a population of 10 million, and across much of that sunny expanse, life has carried on as usual this week. Missy Ryan and Jonathan Lemire: The White House is delighted with events in Los Angeles The protesters' focal point has been the federal building in downtown Los Angeles where several Department of Homeland Security agencies, including ICE, have offices. Just across the 101 freeway is the El Pueblo de Los Angeles historic plaza, which marks the site where settlers of Native American, African, and European heritage first arrived in 1781. Nearly every city block in this part of town is taken up by a courthouse or some other stone edifice of law or government, including the Art Deco tower of Los Angeles City Hall. In a city built on shaky ground, these civic structures are meant to project stability and permanence. But L.A.'s layered, fraught history seemed very much on the minds of many demonstrators I spoke with, who told me that they felt like their right to belong—regardless of legal status—was under attack. Although the crowd of protesters has not been especially large, drawing at most a few thousand people, it has been a microcosm of Los Angeles and the deep-blue Democratic coalition that has dominated the city for decades. It's a mix of young Hispanic people—many the children of first-generation immigrants—and older liberals, college students, and left-wing activists; also present is a contingent of younger, more militant protesters, who have been eager to confront police and inflict damage on the city's buildings and institutions, and film themselves doing it. At one point on Monday, I watched a group of jumpy teen boys in hoods and masks who appeared no older than 15 or 16 approach one of the last unblemished surfaces on the federal building. One shook a spray can and began writing in large, looping letters. The nozzle wasn't working well, and his friends began to rush him. Trump is a BICH, he wrote, and ran away. Observing the crowd and speaking with protesters over the past several days, I couldn't help but think of Stephen Miller, the top Trump aide who has ordered immigration officials to arrest and deport more and more people, encouraging them to do so in the most attention-grabbing of ways. The version of Los Angeles represented by the protesters is the one Miller deplores. The city has a voracious demand for workers that, for decades, has mostly looked past legal status and allowed newcomers from around the world to live and work without much risk of arrest and deportation. Trump and Miller have upended that in a way many people here describe as a punch in the face. Los Angeles, specifically the liberal, upper-middle-class enclave of Santa Monica, is Miller's hometown, and it became the foil for his archconservative political identity. He is often described as the 'architect' of Trump's immigration policy, but his role as a political strategist—and chief provocateur—is much bigger than that. It is no fluke that Los Angeles is where Miller could most aggressively assert the ideas he champions in Trump's MAGA movement: mass deportations and a maximal assertion of executive power. No matter if it means calling out U.S. troops to suppress a backlash triggered by those policies. 'Huge swaths of the city where I was born now resemble failed third world nations. A ruptured, balkanized society of strangers,' Miller wrote Monday on X. He was attacking Governor Gavin Newsom for suing to reverse the Trump administration's takeover of the California National Guard—the first time the government has federalized state forces since 1965. Trump has also called up 700 U.S. Marines. Miller was defending the use of force to subdue protesters, but he was really talking about something bigger in his hometown. This was a culture war, with real troops. What was the spark? On May 21, Miller and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem brought the heads of ICE's regional offices to Washington for a dressing-down. Trump had promised the largest mass-removal campaign in U.S. history and wanted 1 million deportations a year. ICE officers had been making far more arrests in American communities than under Joe Biden, but they were well short of Trump's desired pace. Miller demanded 3,000 arrests a day—a nearly fourfold increase—and demoted several top ICE officials who weren't hitting their targets. Miller's push is just a warm-up. The Republican funding bill Trump wants to sign into law by Independence Day would formalize his goal of 1 million deportations annually, and furnish more than $150 billion for immigration enforcement, including tens of billions for more ICE officers, contractors, detention facilities, and removal flights. If Los Angeles and other cities are recoiling now, how will they respond when ICE has the money to do everything Miller wants? Trump and his 'border czar,' the former ICE acting director Tom Homan, had been insisting for months that the deportation campaign would prioritize violent criminals and avoid indiscriminate roundups. Miller has told ICE officials to disregard that and to hit Home Depot parking lots. So they have. The number of arrests reported by ICE has soared past 2,000 a day in recent weeks. Backed by the Border Patrol, the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and other federal law-enforcement agencies pressed into helping ICE, officers are arresting people who show up for immigration-court appointments or periodic 'check-ins' to show that they have remained in compliance with court orders. Last week in Los Angeles, ICE teams began showing up at those Home Depot parking lots and work sites, including a downtown apparel factory. This was a redline for many Angelenos. Protesters told me that it was the moment Miller and Trump went from taunts and trolling to something more personal and threatening. About a third of the city's residents are foreign-born. Juliette Kayyem: Trump's gross misuse of the National Guard 'This is humiliating,' Hector Agredano, a 30-year-old community-college instructor who was demonstrating on Sunday outside a Pasadena hotel, told me. ICE officers were rumored to be staying at the location and two others nearby, drawing dozens of protesters who chanted and carried signs demanding ICE out of LA! 'They are tearing apart our families,' Agredano told me. 'We will not stand for this. They cannot sleep safely at night while our communities are being terrorized.' Some activists have been trying to track ICE vehicles and show up where officers make arrests to film and protest. More established activist groups are organizing vigils and marches while urging demonstrators to remain peaceful. They have struggled to contain the younger, angrier elements of the crowd downtown who lack their patience. On Sunday, I watched protesters block the southbound lanes of the 101 until police cleared them with tear gas. Some in the crowd hurled water bottles and debris down at officers and set off bottle rockets and cherry bombs. The police responded with flash-bangs, which detonate with a burst of light. There were so many explosions happening, it wasn't easy to tell if they belonged to the protesters or to law enforcement. I tried approaching a police line, and a boom sounded near my head, ringing my ears. One group of vandals summoned several Waymo self-driving cars to the street next to the plaza where the city was founded and set them ablaze. People in the crowd hooted and cheered at the leaping flames, and the cars' melting batteries and sensors sent plumes of oily black smoke toward police helicopters circling above. Firetrucks arrived and put out the last of the flames, leaving little piles of gnarled metal. City officials grew more alarmed the following evening, when smaller groups of masked teenagers rampaged through downtown and looted a CVS, an Apple Store, and several other businesses, prompting Mayor Karen Bass to set an 8 p.m. curfew in the area yesterday. The smoke and flames began shifting attention away from the administration's immigration imagery has been giddily watched by White House officials, and it's fueled speculation that it could create an opening for Miller to attempt to invoke the Insurrection Act. For years he has longingly discussed the wartime power, which would give troops a direct law-enforcement role on U.S. streets, potentially including immigration arrests. Yesterday, Trump said that he would not allow Los Angeles to be 'invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy,' and that he would 'liberate' the country's second-largest city. His send-in-the-Marines order underscored his apparent eagerness to deal with the demonstrators as combatants, rather than as civilians and American citizens. Since Trump's announcement, protesters have been on the lookout for the Marines, wondering if their arrival would signal a darker, more violent phase of the government's response. But military officials said today that the Marine units will need to receive more training in civilian deployments before they go to Los Angeles. Despite the attention on the federalized California National Guard troops, they have had a minimal role so far, standing guard at the entrance to the federal building where SMO and other taggers have left messages for Trump and ICE. Mayor Bass said that about 100 soldiers were stationed there as of today. Trump has activated 4,000, and there are signs that their role is already expanding: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted a photo yesterday of soldiers with rifles and full combat gear standing guard for ICE officers making street arrests. 'This We'll Defend,' he wrote. David Frum: For Trump, this is a dress rehearsal In downtown Los Angeles, though, the LAPD and the California Highway Patrol—which are under the control of the state and local Democratic leaders—have been left to handle violent protesters and looters. By insisting that Trump's troop deployment is unnecessary and provocative, Newsom and Bass are under more pressure to make sure that their forces, not Trump's, can keep a lid on the anger. Their officers have fired tear gas, flash-bang grenades, and a kind of less-than-lethal projectile known as a sponge grenade that leaves bruises and welts. One Australian television reporter was hit while doing a live report; many others have been shot at point-blank range. Over more than three days of street confrontations, there have been no deaths or reports of serious injuries. Some protesters gathered up the spent sponge munitions as souvenirs. With a hard foam nose and a thick plastic base, they resemble Nerf darts from hell. I met one protester, carrying a camera, who wore a bandage around his forearm where he'd been struck minutes earlier. Castro—he wouldn't give me his first name—told me that he was a 39-year-old security guard whose parents are from El Salvador. He likened the pain to a sprained ankle. 'I was born and raised in Los Angeles. I support, I love, I stand for America. I love the USA,' he told me. 'I'm here today to support our people of Los Angeles. That's it.' Some Democrats outside the state have chafed at the sight of protesters waving Mexican flags and those of other nations, which Trump officials have seized upon as evidence of anti-Americanism. Protesters told me the flags of their or their parents' home countries are not intended as a sign of loyalty to another nation. Quite a few protesters waved the Stars and Stripes too, or a hybrid of the American flag and their home country's. Hailey, a 23-year-old welder carrying a Guatemalan flag, told me she wanted to display her heritage at a protest that brought together people from all over. That was part of belonging to California, she said: 'I was born on American soil, but I just think it's appropriate to celebrate where my family is from. And America is supposed to be a celebration of that.' Dylan Littlefield, a bishop who joined a rally on Sunday led by union organizers, told me that he grew up in L.A. with Italian Americans displaying their flag. 'No one has ever made a single comment or had any objection to the Italian flag flying, so the people that are making the flag issue now really are trying to create a battle where there's no battle to be had,' he said. The protests against Trump in Los Angeles have picked up, to some extent, where those in Portland left off. In 2020, anti-ICE protesters targeted the federal courthouse in downtown Portland, and DHS sent federal agents and officers to defend the building and confront the crowds. The destructive standoff carried on for months, and the city's Democratic mayor and Oregon's Democratic governor eventually had to use escalating force against rioters. Newsom and Bass seem keen to avoid the price they would pay politically if that were to occur here, but for now they are caught between the need to suppress the violent elements of the protests and their desire to blame the White House for fanning the flames. Anne Applebaum: This is what Trump does when his revolution sputters Trump officials say they have delighted in the imagery of L.A. mayhem and foreign-flag waving, but they face a threat, too, if protests spread beyond blue California and become a nationwide movement. That would take pressure off Newsom and Bass. Doe Hain, a retired teacher I met in Pasadena this week holding a Save Democracy sign for passing motorists, told me that the ICE push into California symbolizes the worst fears of an authoritarian takeover by a president unfazed by the idea of turning troops against Americans. 'I don't really think I can protest the existence of ICE as a federal agency, but we can protest the way that they're doing things,' Hain said. 'They're bypassing people's rights and the laws, and that's not right.' Few people I spoke with said they thought the protests in Los Angeles would diminish, even if more troops arrive in the city. There have been fewer reports of ICE raids since the protests erupted, and one Home Depot I visited on Monday—south of Los Angeles, in Huntington Park—had had only a handful of arrests that day, bystanders told me. ICE teams had moved to other locations in Southern California and the Central Valley. They will surely be back. At a minimum, Miller and other Trump officials have come away from this round of confrontations with the imagery they wanted. Today, DHS released a none-too-subtle social-media ad with a dark, ominous filter, featuring the flaming Waymos, Mexican flags, looters, and rock throwers. 'RESTORE LAW AND ORDER NOW!' it said, with the number for an ICE tip line. It fades out on an image of a burning American flag.
Washington Post
14 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Fulbright board resigns over alleged Trump administration interference
The entire 12-person board tasked with overseeing the State Department's Fulbright Program resigned Wednesday, claiming political interference from the Trump administration. In a statement posted on the board's Substack, the congressionally mandated Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board said its members voted 'overwhelmingly' to resign from the board 'rather than endorse unprecedented actions that we believe are impermissible under the law, compromise U.S. national interests and integrity, and undermine the mission and mandates Congress established for the Fulbright program nearly 80 years ago.'
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Can Fashion's ‘Bridges' Overcome Its ‘Barriers'?
Even Queen Mary of Denmark had nothing to say at this year's Global Fashion Summit, perhaps the industry's most boldface of sustainability conclaves. The longtime patron of the Global Fashion Agenda typically delivers a brief speech to kick things off, usually along the lines of the need for collective action for transformation to occur. Or she might joke about her daughters stealing her shoes as a form of reuse. Somewhere between the opening smooth-jazz jam and a H&M Foundation-helmed panel on operationalizing circularity, however, the royal consort slipped away from her front seat at the Copenhagen Opera House, her exit barely announced by the fading click of her stilettos. More from Sourcing Journal Refiberd Wins Trailblazer 2025 With AI-Powered Textile Recycling Global Fashion Agenda's Innovation Incubator Returns, Opens Call for Solutions What Will a Second Trump Term Mean for Fashion's Sustainability Ambitions? It was a stealthy retreat that, inadvertently or not, reflected the muted mood of the two-day conference, which one attendee described as 'somber,' another as 'a bit flat' and a third as evocative of a 'palpable decline of interest.' Fewer high-level brands abounded, a consequence of throttled travel budgets, a fear of appearing overtly political—and potentially ticking off a certain White House inhabitant—and cannibalization by concurrent events such as SXSW's first London foray and, we were told, an especially buzzy textile recycling expo in Brussels where shoulders were slapped and hands shaken over business deals. For the thousand or so people who converged on Copenhagen, just a hair fewer than those who turned up for last year's 15th anniversary, there was very little to feel celebratory about. Geopolitical turmoil, tariff uncertainty and environmental deregulation hung heavily in the air. Even attempts to put a positive gloss on corporate efforts that were already lagging before the rightwing shift in both Europe and the United States, but could now be actively backsliding, felt more perfunctory than usual. The same week, a analysis of more than 40 apparel companies found that 40 percent increased their carbon footprint versus their baseline, outlapping those on a 1.5-degree Celsius trajectory by a nearly six-to-one margin. In the latest iteration of the International Trade Union Confederation's global rights index, data showed a 'sharp escalation' in violations of fundamental labor rights, including freedom of association and collective bargaining. 'Apparently more was happening in the roundtables,' one attendee said of the closed-to-press executive-level sessions, which had the likes of Kering diving into what a just transition means in the age of climate change, Target speaking about moving production closer to consumer markets and The Fashion Pact hosting a conversation about corporate financial engagement in decarbonization. The more accessible stages—the concert hall, 'action' and 'ignite'—stuck to broader, more anodyne issues such as fiber innovations, resale, regenerative materials and the gender pay gap. The biggest ripple in all that taut placidity was occasioned by Veja co-founder Sébastien Kopp, who described sustainability as a 'bag of vomit.' Kalpona Akter's heartfelt description of garment workers' struggles in Bangladesh produced little response and, by the time the 'celebration dinner' rolled around, no offers of help that might relieve her organization's loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID for short. Eileen Fisher's call for everyone to 'show up more and collaborate more' offered a burst of inspiration. Things flattened from there. 'Some feedback I heard is that some people feel the brands are too restrained and they prefer the speakers that are more candid and speak more openly,' an attendee said. But the event's dour note was hardly unexpected. There is simply no way to spin the current climate, whether political, environmental or otherwise, no matter how many times someone insists that there is no business on a dead planet. For brands grappling with the existential threat of tariffs, sustainability has dropped several rungs in priority. The Trump administration's crackdown on so-called 'woke' notions such as climate action or DEI in the United States isn't even the half of it. In Europe, the omnibus package, a series of amendments designed to simplify—and many say water down—the corporate sustainability due diligence directive, the corporate sustainability reporting directive and other legislative instruments, threatens to unravel years of progress holding corporations liable for their environmental and social impacts. It's still unclear how other forthcoming regulations involving extended producer responsibility, greener design requirements and traceability compliance will play out. 'There's a general backlash on sustainability in Brussels,' Lara Wolters, the Dutch politician who was the European Parliament's lead negotiator on the CSDD, said at a pre-game policy masterclass at the Danish Architecture Center. 'None of this is for a good reason, but maybe to take a step back. What the Commission has done is roll out a deregulatory agenda under pressure from a lot of large lobby groups in some of the member states. The intention, I think, is to give a political signal that we, too, are going to do things differently. I would even call it a sort of 'Trump Lite.'' She said that the result of this reversal would be more paperwork and less impact, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. For the politicians who have been clamoring for fewer guardrails, however, the 'intention is to do things as fast as possible, never mind the consequences.' Across the Atlantic, the Trump administration has pulled the United States out of the Paris Agreement (again), dismantled critical climate safeguards and obliterated other regulations governing clean water, toxic pollutants and wildlife. It has clawed back most forms of foreign assistance, including grants for programs that strengthened workers' rights and combated child and forced labor. 'I spent a good chunk of my flight over breaking through President Trump's proposed 2026 budget,' said Chelsea Murtha, senior director of sustainability at the American Apparel & Footwear Association. 'And, of course, USAID is completely eliminated, and a lot of the functions that it had are not even fully being transposed over to the State Department. The U.S., in particular, was a very large funder of the [International Labour Organization's] Better Work program, and all of that funding is gone now.' The outcome has been a 'sort of paralysis,' she said. Brands, squeezed by higher import costs, are hard-pressed to fill the breach. And while individual states could step up with rulemaking to counter the White House's actions, there's also only so much they can do. 'It's not like they can't step in and do things, but they're constricted in their authorities,' she said. 'They cannot negotiate trade deals, and they can't control imports. They can pass EPR programs, because EPR programs regulate products within their state, but what they can't do is institute something like an export ban.' On the first day of the Global Fashion Summit, themed 'Barriers and Bridges,' Federica Marchionni, CEO of Global Fashion Agenda, didn't mince words, either, calling this an 'extremely challenging time for sustainability' that is hampering fashion's ability to be a 'force for good.' At the same time, she said, the only certainty in an uncertain world is climate change. And a 'strong absence' of leadership requires 'collective courage' to build supply chain resilience. The few suppliers who spoke—their attendance likely, again, constrained by a lack of financial wherewithal—alluded to their struggles. 'The volumes are lower than they used to be a couple of years ago,' said Attila Kiss, CEO of Gruppo Florence, an integrated manufacturing hub in Italy. 'The brands are asking for lower prices because they have pressure on the margins. And from the other side, we have all the ethical issues, the social issues to manage.' In a panel that discussed Arvind Limited and Fashion for Good's plans for 'near-carbon-neutral' textile factory in India that would bring online tested and emergent solutions that could collective slash greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 93 percent, Abhishek Bansal, the former's head of sustainability, said that most of the industry's climate mitigation efforts either involve setting targets or pushing the supply chain to do so. 'Unfortunately, I have seen very little money going into helping build the hard assets that are going to actually reduce emissions,' he said. 'If you honestly ask how many industry stakeholders have set aside funds to build plants or invest in technologies to achieve those targets, I think you can count them on the fingers of one hand.' 'It's a big thing to say,' Bansal added quietly, 'but I don't think we are going to meet 2030 targets.' The dearth of representation—from suppliers, from economists, from investors—was noticeable, more than one attendee said. Speaking to an audience, Tara St. James, senior director of sustainability at the Canadian retailer Moose Knuckles, said that brands could take more responsibility for fostering inclusion by bringing their suppliers to conferences or having them speak on panels with them or in their stead. 'We talk about making changes in our supply chain, which is where most of the impact is, but then we don't invite suppliers into every conversation,' one attendee said. 'And when we do, it's usually farmers and manufacturers, which is great, but I want to hear from a mom-and-pop mill, a dye house. I want more doers on the panels. And that includes more brands.' Yayra Agbofah, founder and creative director of The Revival, an organization that tackles global textile waste in Ghana, including through the Global Change Award-winning Revival Circularity Hub, said there's a difference between being ready—say, for circularity—and showing readiness based on actions. Fulfilling the second part requires reexamining fashion's business model, which he described as a failure because it fails to recognize communities like Accra's secondhand Kantamanto Market as stakeholders. 'We are dealing with the waste we didn't create, and not having a decision on how to deal with this crisis is a big problem,' he said. 'We need to be part of the decision-making. We shouldn't be left out and be an afterthought.' It was during the Q&A portion of Agbofah's panel that Brooke Roberts-Islam, a sustainable fashion journalist and consultant, nearly leaped out of her chair. Just minutes before, Golnaz Armin, vice president of color and materials at Nike, was speaking about the footwear giant's efforts to 'imagine and create meaning' with post-consumer waste. She said that Nike's size was both its advantage and disadvantage. 'Kantamanto is the only example of a scaled circular economy,' Roberts-Islam said. 'It seems so strange to have this framing of 'Why can't we scale this up for Nike because we're such a large organization?' and, you know, a lot of Nike products end up in Accra. Kanatamanto has tens of thousands of businesses that do this. They know the answer, and Nike says you're trying to find the answer, so can you, Yayra, give Nike the answer?' One of the most incisive sentiments of the conference was uttered during the very first session, but it remains to be seen if it made an impression. 'Someone told me once that a wall lying down is actually a bridge,' said Christiane Dolva, head of innovation, research and demonstration at H&M Foundation. 'I think that some of the barriers that a lot of us feel that we're running into, which literally can be like running into the wall, can be part of the solution if we shift our perspective. We need to shift our perspective.'
