Gallup poll: 67% of Americans dissatisfied with economic inequality

[IGotWorms 4,060]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166904/dissatisfied-income-wealth-distribution.aspx

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Two out of three Americans are dissatisfied with the way income and wealth are currently distributed in the U.S. This includes three-fourths of Democrats and 54% of Republicans.

 

...

 

The same poll updated a long-time Gallup trend, finding that 54% of Americans are satisfied, and 45% dissatisfied, with the opportunity for an American "to get ahead by working hard." This measure has remained roughly constant over the past three years, but Americans are much less optimistic about economic opportunity now than before the recession and financial crisis of 2008 unfolded. Prior to that, at least two in three Americans were satisfied, including a high of 77% in 2002.

That's a whole lot of wealthy envy, even from republicans

 

Income and wealth inequality will be the defining issue of the 2016 election imo. We're out of the weeds as far as economic disaster; now people want to take a long, hard look at who is and is not getting ahead in the economy.

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166904/dissatisfied-income-wealth-distribution.aspx

 

 

That's a whole lot of wealthy envy, even from republicans

 

Income and wealth inequality will be the defining issue of the 2016 election imo. We're out of the weeds as far as economic disaster; now people want to take a long, hard look at who is and is not getting ahead in the economy.

To me it's about equal or fair. I don't want equal, but I do want fair, or at least the attempt to be fair. I know it never will be.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

To me it's about equal or fair. I don't want equal, but I do want fair, or at least the attempt to be fair. I know it never will be.

 

I agree that "equality" is a bit misleading, in that the goal isn't that everyone have the same wealth and income. Just that the disparity not be so g0ddamned big between those at the top and the rest of us.

[Pecos Rattlers 5]

It is an interesting problem. Obviously wages will never be "equal" in a mostly capitalist economy (nor should they be!), but CEOs making 100+ times more than line workers does seem completely excessive and not at all fair. If someone founds a company and builds it to be worth billions over 10 years, then I don't think there is much merit in protesting them taking a significant chunk of that home with them. Likely that would be based on stock anyway ... which is going to be far more complex to regulate than raw salary.

 

However, once companies have gotten huge, it seems like very run of the mill (or worse) leadership often makes tens or hundreds of millions just keeping the company going ... or worse, running the company into the ground. Some leaders are even worse & are obviously devaluing the company for other/their own interests: see the slow agonizing death of Sears and how its CEO is profitting.

 

The Swiss had a bill in 2013 (which failed) to cap the top earners at a corporation at 12x what the lowest earner makes, which seems like a reasonable idea at first glance (you could argue, 10 vs 12 vs 20 whatever, but I mean the core concept seems pretty fair). Critics of the bill claimed that it would encourage multinational companies to move high paying jobs away from Switzerland & sadly they are probably right.

 

"If we even the playing field they will just leave our country!!" is what allows so many multinational corporations to get away with paying an amazingly small amount of taxes as well. The tax schemes are an even bigger issue than executive pay IMO - but the root of both problems is that multinational corporations have entirely too much power.

[cmh6476 1,045]

$25 minimum wage solves all the world's woes

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

$25 minimum wage solves all the world's woes

Money = power

[frank 2,316]

I'm all right, Jack, keep your hands off of my stack

[cmh6476 1,045]

Cash rules everything around me cream get the money dolla dolla bill yall

[penultimatestraw 473]

It is an interesting problem. Obviously wages will never be "equal" in a mostly capitalist economy (nor should they be!), but CEOs making 100+ times more than line workers does seem completely excessive and not at all fair. If someone founds a company and builds it to be worth billions over 10 years, then I don't think there is much merit in protesting them taking a significant chunk of that home with them. Likely that would be based on stock anyway ... which is going to be far more complex to regulate than raw salary.

 

However, once companies have gotten huge, it seems like very run of the mill (or worse) leadership often makes tens or hundreds of millions just keeping the company going ... or worse, running the company into the ground. Some leaders are even worse & are obviously devaluing the company for other/their own interests: see the slow agonizing death of Sears and how its CEO is profitting.

 

The Swiss had a bill in 2013 (which failed) to cap the top earners at a corporation at 12x what the lowest earner makes, which seems like a reasonable idea at first glance (you could argue, 10 vs 12 vs 20 whatever, but I mean the core concept seems pretty fair). Critics of the bill claimed that it would encourage multinational companies to move high paying jobs away from Switzerland & sadly they are probably right.

 

"If we even the playing field they will just leave our country!!" is what allows so many multinational corporations to get away with paying an amazingly small amount of taxes as well. The tax schemes are an even bigger issue than executive pay IMO - but the root of both problems is that multinational corporations have entirely too much power.

Excellent post. It'd be great if we could penalize companies that exploit cheap labor/taxation etc. by setting up shop overseas, but there will always be other countries/customers willing to buy the cheapest stuff, despite the socioeconomic consequences.

[Mungwater 597]

Excellent post. It'd be great if we could penalize companies that exploit cheap labor/taxation etc. by setting up shop overseas, but there will always be other countries/customers willing to buy the cheapest stuff, despite the socioeconomic consequences.

How do you penalize them? Do you go after the shareholders?

[Frozenbeernuts 2,282]

I make a good living as a union pipefitter. It really sucks how much non union construction is encroaching on our work. They get treated like crap and have to just take it because there is no one to back them up. I know some people here hate unions, but if you saw how dangerous my job was you would agree that in order to make the danger worth it, a higher wage would be needed.

 

If non union got their way and completely eliminated union competition, wages would plummet allowing multi billion dollar companies like exon mobil to "save" a little more money. Half that money probably goes toward bonuses for saving more in the long run.

 

Its a tough position though. There has to be balance in any system. Too much power for the companies means less bargaining power and less wages for workers. Too much power for the workers and companies cant afford their demands.

[penultimatestraw 473]

How do you penalize them? Do you go after the shareholders?

Ideally, as consumers we shouldn't support companies that use such tactics. But who has the time to investigate the business ethics behind everything we purchase? I have a feeling we'd have nothing to spend our $ on.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

How do you penalize them? Do you go after the shareholders?

I think we should start some sort of trade association. U.S., Canada, Europe, South Korea, Japan, etc.

 

In order to join, certain wage and environmental standards must be met.

 

Free trade within the association. If you are outside, a tarrif will be levied that makes your product as expensive as a product manufactured within the association.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,282]

I think we should start some sort of trade association. U.S., Canada, Europe, South Korea, Japan, etc.

 

In order to join, certain wage and environmental standards must be met.

 

Free trade within the association. If you are outside, a tarrif will be levied that makes your product as expensive as a product manufactured within the association.

Good idea in theory, the problem is there are too many powerful wealthy companies that rely on countries with minimal labor laws. Most of our medical equipment comes from China. China makes so many low quality products, yet we still buy from them. We had a nice LED night light for the baby. It started flickering so i thought about changing the batteries. There was battery acid all over the inside of the light. China doesnt give a and unless some senators or celebrities kid gets messed up from it, no one is going to propose meaningful legislation to prevent future incidents.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Good idea in theory, the problem is there are too many powerful wealthy companies that rely on countries with minimal labor laws. Most of our medical equipment comes from China. China makes so many low quality products, yet we still buy from them. We had a nice LED night light for the baby. It started flickering so i thought about changing the batteries. There was battery acid all over the inside of the light. China doesnt give a ###### and unless some senators or celebrities kid gets messed up from it, no one is going to propose meaningful legislation to prevent future incidents.

Oh, I understand that our government won't to it, as they are merely the agent of our corporate overlords. That's why this country is focked.

[Strike 5,748]

Those of you who think our corporations are bending people over, answer me a few questions:

 

- How much does one have to make at said corporation before they can stop thinking they're being bent over?

 

- Do you think anyone at those corporations makes decent money? I mean, at McDonalds we know the people working the register don't make great money, but what about people a couple levels above them?

 

- If you're a college graduate with a marketable skill, do you think you make decent money at those evil corporations?

 

Just curious.....

[JTB 52]

I agree that "equality" is a bit misleading, in that the goal isn't that everyone have the same wealth and income. Just that the disparity not be so g0ddamned big between those at the top and the rest of us.

Are you saying the "gap" is too far between the average income earner and the poverty level or between the Presidents paltry $400,000 annual incone and Tom Brady's $31 million?

 

What "gap" am I supposed to be upset about?

[Frozenbeernuts 2,282]

Those of you who think our corporations are bending people over, answer me a few questions:

 

- How much does one have to make at said corporation before they can stop thinking they're being bent over?

 

- Do you think anyone at those corporations makes decent money? I mean, at McDonalds we know the people working the register don't make great money, but what about people a couple levels above them?

 

- If you're a college graduate with a marketable skill, do you think you make decent money at those evil corporations?

 

Just curious.....

Im not saying they are evil, though im sure you could classify some as such (Sears). Its just that a lot of their goals are short sighted with consequences for the middle class. The gap between wealthy and not wealthy is growing. It shouldnt be percentage wise.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

It is an interesting problem. Obviously wages will never be "equal" in a mostly capitalist economy (nor should they be!), but CEOs making 100+ times more than line workers does seem completely excessive and not at all fair. If someone founds a company and builds it to be worth billions over 10 years, then I don't think there is much merit in protesting them taking a significant chunk of that home with them. Likely that would be based on stock anyway ... which is going to be far more complex to regulate than raw salary.

 

However, once companies have gotten huge, it seems like very run of the mill (or worse) leadership often makes tens or hundreds of millions just keeping the company going ... or worse, running the company into the ground. Some leaders are even worse & are obviously devaluing the company for other/their own interests: see the slow agonizing death of Sears and how its CEO is profitting.

 

The Swiss had a bill in 2013 (which failed) to cap the top earners at a corporation at 12x what the lowest earner makes, which seems like a reasonable idea at first glance (you could argue, 10 vs 12 vs 20 whatever, but I mean the core concept seems pretty fair). Critics of the bill claimed that it would encourage multinational companies to move high paying jobs away from Switzerland & sadly they are probably right.

 

"If we even the playing field they will just leave our country!!" is what allows so many multinational corporations to get away with paying an amazingly small amount of taxes as well. The tax schemes are an even bigger issue than executive pay IMO - but the root of both problems is that multinational corporations have entirely too much power.

This guy gets it

[Strike 5,748]

Im not saying they are evil, though im sure you could classify some as such (Sears). Its just that a lot of their goals are short sighted with consequences for the middle class. The gap between wealthy and not wealthy is growing. It shouldnt be percentage wise.

 

I asked for answers to specific questions. Weird how in these political discussions it's almost impossible to get the other side to do such a thing. I always wonder why that is. I mean, was my post ambiguous in some way?

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

I asked for answers to specific questions. Weird how in these political discussions it's almost impossible to get the other side to do such a thing. I always wonder why that is. I mean, was my post ambiguous in some way?

[Frozenbeernuts 2,282]

 

I asked for answers to specific questions. Weird how in these political discussions it's almost impossible to get the other side to do such a thing. I always wonder why that is. I mean, was my post ambiguous in some way?

I do not work in a corporate environment so i dont know what positions there are and what is a fair wage. I do know that corporations are outsourcing a lot of work to people who demand far less money. As of now, i assume most people make a reasonable wage for what they do at these companies.

 

My perspective is from a construction point of view. With the infrastructure of this country falling apart there is a need for skilled labor. Unfortunately as unions disappear the work force becomes less skilled. Its the mentality of people in this country, pay less for an item even though the quality is inferior.

 

A good example is a unit at the refinery i work at was recently built. Whoever purchased the material thought they could save some money and buy the valves from Mexico. 6 years later most of those valves are broken. We all knew the cheap quality was going to be an issue in the future.

 

The Exon Mobil refinery just made all unions take a 7.5% pay cut to work at their plant. The largest company in the world can no longer afford the prevailing wage for quality work? Its a joke.

[Strike 5,748]

I do not work in a corporate environment so i dont know what positions there are and what is a fair wage. I do know that corporations are outsourcing a lot of work to people who demand far less money. As of now, i assume most people make a reasonable wage for what they do at these companies.

 

My perspective is from a construction point of view. With the infrastructure of this country falling apart there is a need for skilled labor. Unfortunately as unions disappear the work force becomes less skilled. Its the mentality of people in this country, pay less for an item even though the quality is inferior.

 

A good example is a unit at the refinery i work at was recently built. Whoever purchased the material thought they could save some money and buy the valves from Mexico. 6 years later most of those valves are broken. We all knew the cheap quality was going to be an issue in the future.

 

The Exon Mobil refinery just made all unions take a 7.5% pay cut to work at their plant. The largest company in the world can no longer afford the prevailing wage for quality work? Its a joke.

 

You don't work in a corporate environment but you feel qualified to judge corporations? Ok. How come you aren't railing against our government for eliminating things like shop classes where people learned skills? And for suggesting that everyone should go to college when a good portion of our kids probably should learn a trade? Why aren't you railing against our government for it's role in the skyrocketing cost of college, and subsequent student loan debt so many kids have after graduation?

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

You don't work in a corporate environment but you feel qualified to judge corporations? Ok. How come you aren't railing against our government for eliminating things like shop classes where people learned skills? And for suggesting that everyone should go to college when a good portion of our kids probably should learn a trade? Why aren't you railing against our government for it's role in the skyrocketing cost of college, and subsequent student loan debt so many kids have after graduation?

This is why nobody bothers to respond to you

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

You don't work in a corporate environment but you feel qualified to judge corporations? Ok. How come you aren't railing against our government for eliminating things like shop classes where people learned skills? And for suggesting that everyone should go to college when a good portion of our kids probably should learn a trade? Why aren't you railing against our government for it's role in the skyrocketing cost of college, and subsequent student loan debt so many kids have after graduation?

The student loan situation is a republican thang. On behalf of their gangster banker sponsors.

[Strike 5,748]

This is why nobody bothers to respond to you

 

You just did. Not that you bring anything to the conversation. Everything I mentioned is absolutely valid. You resort to a personal attack instead of addressing the topic. That's ok though Howard.

 

[Strike 5,748]

http://www.salary.com/11-high-paying-blue-collar-jobs-with-mike-rowe/

 

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

You just did. Not that you bring anything to the conversation. Everything I mentioned is absolutely valid. You resort to a personal attack instead of addressing the topic. That's ok though Howard.

 

You're an assh0le who just wants to pick a fight. Which is fine, but don't sob like a b1tch when no one engages

[Strike 5,748]

You're an assh0le who just wants to pick a fight. Which is fine, but don't sob like a b1tch when no one engages

 

Who am I picking a fight with Howard? I asked specific questions that should be easily answerable by anyone truly educated about this topic. I brought up real, specific issues that we should be discussing instead of the generalities idiots such as you like to talk about. And again you resort to persona attacks.

 

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

You don't work in a corporate environment but you feel qualified to judge corporations? Ok. How come you aren't railing against our government for eliminating things like shop classes where people learned skills? And for suggesting that everyone should go to college when a good portion of our kids probably should learn a trade? Why aren't you railing against our government for it's role in the skyrocketing cost of college, and subsequent student loan debt so many kids have after graduation?

Nobody gives a shiot about shop classes because anyone that actually took one knows it's a joke. I'm not looking to pay 100k plus + benefits to teach something that an apprentice learns in the first 2 days on the job

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

Who am I picking a fight with Howard? I asked specific questions that should be easily answerable by anyone truly educated about this topic. I brought up real, specific issues that we should be discussing instead of the generalities idiots such as you like to talk about. And again you resort to persona attacks.

 

 

Go drunk Strike, you're home

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

You just did. Not that you bring anything to the conversation. Everything I mentioned is absolutely valid. You resort to a personal attack instead of addressing the topic. That's ok though Howard.

 

[Strike 5,748]

Nobody gives a shiot about shop classes because anyone that actually took one knows it's a joke. I'm not looking to pay 100k plus + benefits to teach something that an apprentice learns in the first 2 days on the job

 

BS. Taken in conjunction with the notion that "everyone" should go to college this is a big reason for the issues we're discussing here. One of the purposes of school is for people to learn what they want to do with their lives. Wood workers, Mechanics, etc, used to do this in shop class. One of my best friends from H.S. makes a 6 figure living because of wood shop. How the fock do kids decide they want to go in to that now instead of college? But hey I'm sorry I tried to liven up this thread of corporation hate with real alternatives and issues. I'll bow out now and go talk beer with Shotsup.

 

[Magnificent Bastard 191]

 

BS. Taken in conjunction with the notion that "everyone" should go to college this is a big reason for the issues we're discussing here. One of the purposes of school is for people to learn what they want to do with their lives. Wood workers, Mechanics, etc, used to do this in shop class. One of my best friends from H.S. makes a 6 figure living because of wood shop. How the fock do kids decide they want to go in to that now instead of college? But hey I'm sorry I tried to liven up this thread of corporation hate with real alternatives and issues. I'll bow out now and go talk beer with Shotsup.

 

Good. I won then. Shop class is canceled. I bet I can still get a new deck next year.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

BS. Taken in conjunction with the notion that "everyone" should go to college this is a big reason for the issues we're discussing here. One of the purposes of school is for people to learn what they want to do with their lives. Wood workers, Mechanics, etc, used to do this in shop class. One of my best friends from H.S. makes a 6 figure living because of wood shop. How the fock do kids decide they want to go in to that now instead of college? But hey I'm sorry I tried to liven up this thread of corporation hate with real alternatives and issues. I'll bow out now and go talk beer with Shotsup.

 

This thread isn't about hating on corporations. It's about real wages stagnating for decades while productivity shoots through the roof. It's about those at the top getting further and further ahead while the rest of the country struggles to stay afloat. Its about the fact that pretty much any gains that have occurred in the last decade were realized exclusivrly by the top 1-2% of Americans.

 

Is it the corporations' fault? That's far too simplistic a question to ask. To the extent that they factor in its that a corporation is a soulless entity whose only raison d'être is to maximize profits for the shareholders. That doesn't make them "bad" since, again, it's a soulless entity that is neither bad or good, but it sure as hell explains the constant devaluation of labor.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

And I'm not even sure what you're arguing about, Strike. The problem is real, there is no denying it. So the question is what do you do about it. And whichever party or candidate appears to have the best ideas will probably be the winner in 2016.

So you could say "we need to make sure the 'job creators' at the top get even more money so they'll invest in american workers", but it sure seems like that idea isn't working for most people. Where the corporations come in is you can give them all the tax breaks you want, fact is they have no moral imperative to higher more people or give their employees better wages and benefits. Their only function is to maximize profit for the shareholders - in fact they would be breaching their duty to the shareholders if they DIDN'T do so. The race to the bottom benefits corporations (in the short term, which is a different conversation...lack of foresight in killing off your consumer base), so they will play it to their maximum advantage to the detriment of most people in society.

And I suppose it's fine that corporations are driven only by shareholder profit - we're a capitalist society and it should stay that way. However you need to recognize where the corporations and the uber-wealthy have failed society and figure out how to mitigate or fix that issue.

[Strike 5,748]

And I'm not even sure what you're arguing about, Strike. The problem is real, there is no denying it. So the question is what do you do about it. And whichever party or candidate appears to have the best ideas will probably be the winner in 2016.

 

So you could say "we need to make sure the 'job creators' at the top get even more money so they'll invest in american workers", but it sure seems like that idea isn't working for most people. Where the corporations come in is you can give them all the tax breaks you want, fact is they have no moral imperative to higher more people or give their employees better wages and benefits. Their only function is to maximize profit for the shareholders - in fact they would be breaching their duty to the shareholders if they DIDN'T do so.

 

Which is fine, we're a capitalist society and it should stay that way. However you need to recognize where the corporations and the uber-wealthy have failed society and figure out how to mitigate or fix that issue.

 

I was going to be done with this thread but I'll give YOU one more shot. First you have to DEFINE the problem. Are you actually saying that the existence of corporations is the problem? Or the fact that their CEO's make 1000 times their lowest workers salary? If so, cite some stats. If Steve Ballmer made 20 times his lowest paid workers at Microsoft during his tenure as CEO would that have made even the slightest difference? Show me something. I asked some simple questions that I wanted people such as yourself to answer that might help me understand your problem with corporations, but all you did was call me an a-hole and a drunk. Help me understand what you believe the problem is with corporations that makes them so evil. If you can't define the problem how can we talk about solutions?

[rholio 339]

 

I was going to be done with this thread but I'll give YOU one more shot. First you have to DEFINE the problem. Are you actually saying that the existence of corporations is the problem? Or the fact that their CEO's make 1000 times their lowest workers salary? If so, cite some stats. If Steve Ballmer made 20 times his lowest paid workers at Microsoft during his tenure as CEO would that have made even the slightest difference? Show me something. I asked some simple questions that I wanted people such as yourself to answer that might help me understand your problem with corporations, but all you did was call me an a-hole and a drunk. Help me understand what you believe the problem is with corporations that makes them so evil. If you can't define the problem how can we talk about solutions?

 

I can tell you one of the main problems with corporations... short term profits are valued far more than long term goals. That's great short term and keeps shareholders happy, but it's not healthy for a company.

Add in that most of the top executives receive stock or stock options as a big part of their pay, and you've got a system where the people that are supposed to lead your company are only looking for the big payday, and a golden parachute as they move on to the next company.

 

Leadership in a corporation has different goals and priorities than a real owner would have. Owners want their companies to grow and thrive, corporations want maximum short term profits despite any future problems that can cause.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

 

I was going to be done with this thread but I'll give YOU one more shot. First you have to DEFINE the problem. Are you actually saying that the existence of corporations is the problem? Or the fact that their CEO's make 1000 times their lowest workers salary? If so, cite some stats. If Steve Ballmer made 20 times his lowest paid workers at Microsoft during his tenure as CEO would that have made even the slightest difference? Show me something. I asked some simple questions that I wanted people such as yourself to answer that might help me understand your problem with corporations, but all you did was call me an a-hole and a drunk. Help me understand what you believe the problem is with corporations that makes them so evil. If you can't define the problem how can we talk about solutions?

 

You have entirely missed the point of my posts.

 

The problem is ever-increasing gap in income and wealth between those at the very top and everyone else. Also stagnating real wages, which haven't risen in decades (similar issue, obviously).

 

The existence of corporations aren't the problem and I never said they were "so evil." Please bother to actually read what I am typing. They are neither evil nor good. They just are. However the one and only duty of a corporation is to maximize profit for the shareholders. So when many people in this country are dependent on corporations for their livelihood, that becomes problematic when the short-term interests of corporations means driving down the cost of labor, cutting jobs that are no longer necessary due to advances in technology and productivity, and shipping jobs overseas. Corporations don't do this because they're "evil," they do it because that's what maximizes shareholder profit (in the short term).

 

Personally I agree with you that the focus on executive pay is misplaced. It's an easy rhetorical point so I think that's why you see it mentioned a lot. But fact is that if some fatcat CEO made less money that wouldn't make much of a dent for everyone else at the corporation.

 

So anyway the corporate structure is part of the issue but it isn't all of it. The fundamental problem is that we have a system that is breaking down for most Americans. How do we fix that system while retaining the capitalist structure that is important to freedom? That is the tough question and I don't have the answer, unfortunately. It'd be nice if we had more of a focus on long-term stability because, after all, corporations won't have anyone to sell their sh1t too when they've beaten down everyone through the race to the bottom. But you can't MAKE the boards of directors think in longer or more holistic terms, so I don't know how to achieve that.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

 

I can tell you one of the main problems with corporations... short term profits are valued far more than long term goals. That's great short term and keeps shareholders happy, but it's not healthy for a company.

Add in that most of the top executives receive stock or stock options as a big part of their pay, and you've got a system where the people that are supposed to lead your company are only looking for the big payday, and a golden parachute as they move on to the next company.

 

Leadership in a corporation has different goals and priorities than a real owner would have. Owners want their companies to grow and thrive, corporations want maximum short term profits despite any future problems that can cause.

Bingo.

 

Back in the heyday of American industry, corporations were owned by the man that started them, and we're then family businesses. The officers cared about the long term view. They built "company towns" for the workers to live in, and actually cared about the well being of their employees.

 

Today, corporations are owned largely by absentee investors who only care about stock price and dividends, and run by some MBA owning cokehead who cares more about where his next yacht payment is coming from than the future of the company long term. And the workers? Fock them, they are a commodity like the paper clips in the supply closet.