income inequality

[eweissenbach]

Here is an excellent article authored by a billionaire, Nick Hanauer. Although I think his "pitchforks" analogy is overheated, his arguments make sense. I think he presents the problem and the solution in an apolitical manner. Read it and be your own judge.

The Pitchforks Are Coming (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.U9Z6M41OWUk)

[NottaVillager]

Read it. Don't buy it. We have "income inequality" because we have bred entire generations who are too lazy to get off their backsides and WORK.

[sunnyatlast]

I noticed that he did not complain about the minimum wage being too little to feed a family on when he was young and in the process of learning to work in the real world.

I noticed that he emphasized this about small-business makers and future tycoons:

"What sets me apart, I think, is a tolerance for risk and an intuition about what will happen in the future."

I remember small business starters being told "they didn't build that", as if they had risked nothing of what they had earned and saved and invested wisely.

I'd add that there is a lot of "effort inequality" and "inequality of taking advantage of public education opportunities" today. There really is little or no excuse for people who drop out of high school or for those who do not pursue even a one-year associate's degree in a trade/technologist field.

[Rags123]

I noticed that he did not complain about the minimum wage being too little to feed a family on when he was young and in the process of learning to work in the real world.

I noticed that he emphasized this about small-business makers and future tycoons:

"What sets me apart, I think, is a tolerance for risk and an intuition about what will happen in the future."

I remember small business starters being told "they didn't build that", as if they had risked nothing of what they had earned and saved and invested wisely.

I'd add that there is a lot of "effort inequality" and "inequality of taking advantage of public education opportunities" today. There really is little or no excuse for people who drop out of high school or for those who do not pursue even a one-year associate's degree in a trade/technologist field.

Read it.....and will simply say if TED, who is about as open as you can get, will not allow his speech he made to be aired on their network because it was the most partisan ever, then WOW.....it is a partisan viewpoint.
They did this on his 2012 talk he gave with much the same thread as this article.

Should read Forbes on this particular piece, but much too p.......l and partisan for me.

[buggyone]

Pretty interesting reading but I do not see much of it makes sense.

I really doubt if there would be the pitchforks happening.

As for the idea of a doubling of federal minimum wage getting people out of poverty, if wages go up for minimum wage, other wages will have to increase and when that happens - prices go up and basically everyone is back to their original place in the economy.

[Deseylou]

A minimum wage is just that...
Not intended to support a family
Heck, we could raise it to $100 an hour
Then milk would cost $400 and so on...
I see nothing wrong with being rich
No matter how you got that way
Lucky to be born into the family
Working your fanny off...
There is always going to be someone better off than me, and someone not as blessed as me
Debbie

[rubicon]

Consider this

Like the Shadow, this author knows what lurks in the hearts of men.

Put it another way its the Mafia mentality "You have all those politicians in your back pocket and yet you do not want to share them with us. Or, you must also give us a taste. The don gets his cut then the capo then all the rest of the earners. Civilizations throughout history have operated their version of income inequality solutions. :mmmm: Familiarity breeds contempt.

[Tennisnut]

A minimum wage is just that...
Not intended to support a family
Heck, we could raise it to $100 an hour
Then milk would cost $400 and so on...
I see nothing wrong with being rich
No matter how you got that way
Lucky to be born into the family
Working your fanny off...
There is always going to be someone better off than me, and someone not as blessed as me
Debbie

As a Duke Energy stock holder or subscriber, should one care how he got his?
This isn't someone abusing a few SNAP dollars, just a few million from the bottom line of a publicly owned company.

Despite his short-lived tenure, Mr. Johnson will receive exit payments worth as much as $44.4 million, according to Duke. That includes $7.4 million in severance, a nearly $1.4 million cash bonus, a special lump-sum payment worth up to $1.5 million and accelerated vesting of his stock awards, according to a Duke regulatory filing Tuesday night. Mr. Johnson gets the lump-sum payment as long as he cooperates with Duke and doesn’t disparage his former employer, the filing said.
Under his exit package, Mr. Johnson also will receive approximately $30,000 to reimburse him for relocation expenses.

[kittygilchrist]

Consider the source:
https://www.politicopro.com/login/

[eweissenbach]

Consider the source:
https://www.politicopro.com/login/

And what source would you deem reliable? Fox News?

[rubicon]

And what source would you deem reliable? Fox News?

Wall Street Journal

[eweissenbach]

Wall Street Journal

Agreed

[TexaninVA]

And what source would you deem reliable? Fox News?

I'm gonna guess you would recommend MSNBC as your preferred unbiased source?

[TexaninVA]

Agreed

Yes, I too can agree with that ... ie WSJ. Progress :)

[kittygilchrist]

And what source would you deem reliable? Fox News?

How bout his website, selling books, which you can buy on amazon, which lines his coffers?
http://nick-hanauer.com

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Pretty interesting reading but I do not see much of it makes sense.

I really doubt if there would be the pitchforks happening.

As for the idea of a doubling of federal minimum wage getting people out of poverty, if wages go up for minimum wage, other wages will have to increase and when that happens - prices go up and basically everyone is back to their original place in the economy.

Actually they're worse off because the government takes a bigger cut. Prices have to go up at a higher rate than wages in order for manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers to keep up with the taxes.

[TexaninVA]

Here is an excellent article authored by a billionaire, Nick Hanauer. Although I think his "pitchforks" analogy is overheated, his arguments make sense. I think he presents the problem and the solution in an apolitical manner. Read it and be your own judge.

The Pitchforks Are Coming (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.U9Z6M41OWUk)


The best book I have ever read, and still enjoy rereading now and then, is Will & Ariel Durant's "The Lessons of History." Here are several quotes from their classic which pertain to this topic and should offer us all something to think about.

---

“Since practical ability differs from person to person, the majority of such abilities, in nearly all societies, is gathered in a minority of men. The concentration of wealth is a natural result of this concentration of ability, and regularly recurs in history. The rate of concentration varies (other factors being equal) with the economic freedom permitted by morals and the laws. Despotism may for a time retard the concentration; democracy, allowing the most liberty, accelerates it.”
…
“In progressive societies the concentration may reach a point where the strength of number in the many poor rivals the strength of ability in the few rich; then the unstable equilibrium generates a critical situation, which history has diversely met by legislation redistributing wealth or by revolution distributing poverty.”
…
“We conclude that the concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and is periodically alleviated by violent or peaceable partial redistribution”
…
“The mechanics of capitalism have proven to the most effective system:
Capitalist gathers the savings of the people, finances the mechanizations of industry, and distributes the goods according to demand (not government decree).”

[eweissenbach]

I'm gonna guess you would recommend MSNBC as your preferred unbiased source?

Your guess would be wrong, but thanks for playing.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

A minimum wage is just that...
Not intended to support a family
Heck, we could raise it to $100 an hour
Then milk would cost $400 and so on...
I see nothing wrong with being rich
No matter how you got that way
Lucky to be born into the family
Working your fanny off...
There is always going to be someone better off than me, and someone not as blessed as me
Debbie

Exactly! Minimum wage is what is paid to part timers and entry level employees with no education or skills. If a person has an education or a speciality they are going to make more than minimum wage.

A person can start with many companies at minimum wage and work their way up to the point where they have a job that can support a family. I did that straight out of high school. I was with a company for five years. I started in the supply department and worked my way up to supervisor by the time I left to pursuer another profession.

[eweissenbach]

Let's see how the Seattle experiment plays out, then we will have hard data to back or disprove our theories.

[Rags123]

As I mentioned earlier, this gentleman who penned this is much to political and if you read the piece, you would agree.

I am not sure than any source will satisfy the OP as objective but I offer TED and Forbes as just two folks who feel strongly about this.

TED is a fantastic, non political and just incredible site for learning and for anyone, whatever you think of this, their website is worth a visit. You will be amazed by the learned folks who speak there and how much information they impart.

This is from their website...

"TED is a nonprofit devoted to spreading ideas, usually in the form of short, powerful talks (18 minutes or less). TED began in 1984 as a conference where Technology, Entertainment and Design converged, and today covers almost all topics — from science to business to global issues — in more than 100 languages. Meanwhile, independently run TEDx events help share ideas in communities around the world."

TED: Ideas worth spreading (http://www.ted.com/)

I strongly suggest a visit there for anyone no matter what, BUT this is from the curator of TED...

"Chris Anderson, the curator of TED, wrote in a post on his website responding to the allegations that the organization is inundated with requests to post talks on its homepage and only features those that are "truly special." Anderson also claimed that once Hanauer found out the site would't be posting his talk, he hired a public relations firm to promote the talk to progressive organizations like MoveOn.org. Anderson also released a video of Hanauer's talk, providing a link to it in his post.

"The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue," Anderson wrote. "But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance."

Now Forbes is another story.....yes, Forbes is know to be a bit to the right, but their position on this was even stronger than usual...

"Nick Hanauer has gone public with another stage of his plan for the US economy. Essentially, raise wages for everyone and she’ll be fine. The problem with this is that Hanauer is simply factually wrong in a major example that he uses to bolster his case and then remarkably uninformed about the economics of the situation. So much so that it’s entirely fair of me to call this latest iteration of his plan “near insane”, as I did

Nick Hanauer's Latest Near Insane Economic Plan - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/06/30/nick-hanauers-latest-near-insane-economic-plan/)

The link given for Forbes will allow you to also read the REASON for the "near insane" and partisan comments.

There is so much more and folks should read about this man......very interesting but certainly EXTREMELY PARTISAN !

[eweissenbach]

Exactly! Minimum wage is what is paid to part timers and entry level employees with no education or skills. If a person has an education or a speciality they are going to make more than minimum wage.

A person can start with many companies at minimum wage and work their way up to the point where they have a job that can support a family. I did that straight out of high school. I was with a company for five years. I started in the supply department and worked my way up to supervisor by the time I left to pursuer another profession.

So how do you feel about paying for food stamps through your tax dollars, and subsidizing health care for Wal-Mart employees while the company makes billions?

[perrjojo]

We are not in the 1% but have a life long friend who is. He is a retired CEO of a Fortune 500 company and you would most likely reconize his name. Here is what I know about him. He paid his own way thru college. He worked his way up thru the ranks of the company. He worked 18 hours a day. He was constantly traveling the USA and the world. He had a beautiful home, expensive car and traveled in the company private jet.. He was rarely there to enjoy his amazing home, rarely drove anything but a rental car. While on the private jet he missed his son's little league games and his daughters dance recitals. He missed their birthdays and graduations. He also had several unsuccessful marriages. While those big salaries sound unfair, they come at a big personal price. Most men and women in those positions earn every unequal paycheck they receive. We just all have to decide how hard we are willing to work and how much personal life we choose to sacrifice. Oh, and I agree...we all do not have the talent needed to achieve that level.

[perrjojo]

So how do you feel about paying for food stamps through your tax dollars, and subsidizing health care for Wal-Mart employees while the company makes billions?
When I lived in Georgia 2/3 of children on Medicaid were children of Walmart employees. I do not shop Walmart...ever!

[kittygilchrist]

So how do you feel about paying for food stamps through your tax dollars, and subsidizing health care for Wal-Mart employees while the company makes billions?

What is your point?

[Rags123]

If anyone made it through the entire article one of the main thrusts was using Henry Ford as some sort of central piece...Forbes on that...

"One major error is that he uses Henry Ford’s $5 a day wages as a central plank of his insistence that higher wages will increase the sales of those who pay those higher wages:

The model for us rich guys here should be Henry Ford, who realized that all his autoworkers in Michigan weren’t only cheap labor to be exploited; they were consumers, too. Ford figured that if he raised their wages, to a then-exorbitant $5 a day, they’d be able to afford his Model Ts.

The problem is that that isn’t why Ford raised those wages. Rather, he wanted to reduce the turnover of staff and thus to reduce his training and recruitment bill. He was cycling through 50,000 odd people a year in order to keep a permanent establishment of some 14,000. Doubling wages pretty much stopped that turnover and thus made him money in that manner."

Nick Hanauer's Latest Near Insane Economic Plan - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/06/30/nick-hanauers-latest-near-insane-economic-plan/)

[eweissenbach]

We are not in the 1% but have a life long friend who is. He is a retired CEO of a Fortune 500 company and you would most likely reconize his name. Here is what I know about him. He paid his own way thru college. He worked his way up thru the ranks of the company. He worked 18 hours a day. He was constantly traveling the USA and the world. He had a beautiful home, expensive car and traveled in the company private jet.. He was rarely there to enjoy his amazing home, rarely drove anything but a rental car. While on the private jet he missed his son's little league games and his daughters dance recitals. He missed their birthdays and graduations. He also had several unsuccessful marriages. While those big salaries sound unfair, they come at a big personal price. Most men and women in those positions earn every unequal paycheck they receive. We just all have to decide how hard we are willing to work and how much personal life we choose to sacrifice. Oh, and I agree...we all do not have the talent needed to achieve that level.

Well I would agree that some earn every cent they make. The Morse's, for example have made their money by great vision and innovation, while risking their fortune on their belief in what they were doing, and providing a great product. However, many CEOs have stacked their BOD with cronies who vote them ridiculous salaries, bonuses and stock option while they run the company into the ground. And let's talk about those financial sector gurus who walked away with obscene riches while contributing to the near collapse of the economy, resulting in millions of Americans losing their jobs, their homes, and often their marriages. I don't envy the guy you describe - the price he paid for all that money and all those toys is way too high for me, I saw my kids play ball, graduate HS and College , took vacations, enjoyed my weekends and still managed to have a successful and rewarding career.

[Pointer]

When medical insurance premiums began to rise many full time jobs became part time jobs so the burden was sifted to the now part time employee. Where minimum wage with benefits would be manageable then simply isn't now. One can work two & three jobs and still not have medical insurance.

I think that everyone should be able to work for a livable wage regardless of anything other then an honest days work. How many would avoid the lure of gangs and selling drugs and guns etc.

Many collage students come out with so much debt, because gone are the days when one could work their way through and pay the rent. Today the promised jobs after collage are not there either. I have two children paying off collage debt, one is an engineer and one has a masters in applied math, both of whom had a long search before they could find jobs in their fields and who even with "professional salaries, have to have roommates to pay for the rent.

I think it's easy to think and say that people don't want to work rather then face the complicated issues facing todays youth and young families. It's not the same world as when we were young.

While it sounds reasonable to say that everything will just go up I don't think that is a proven fact. A redistribution of wealth needs to happen. The money trickles up but doesn't trickle down.

Follow the money and see where the problem lies. It may not be where you'd like to think it is.

[Rags123]

Well I would agree that some earn every cent they make. The Morse's, for example have made their money by great vision and innovation, while risking their fortune on their belief in what they were doing, and providing a great product. However, many CEOs have stacked their BOD with cronies who vote them ridiculous salaries, bonuses and stock option while they run the company into the ground. And let's talk about those financial sector gurus who walked away with obscene riches while contributing to the near collapse of the economy, resulting in millions of Americans losing their jobs, their homes, and often their marriages. I don't envy the guy you describe - the price he paid for all that money and all those toys is way too high for me, I saw my kids play ball, graduate HS and College , took vacations, enjoyed my weekends and still managed to have a successful and rewarding career.


It is interesting that you mention those who had responsibility for the "financial sector gurus who walked away with obscene riches while contributing to the near collapse of the economy, resulting in millions of Americans losing their jobs, their homes, and often their marriages. "

This from the New York Times in 2011 concerning those fellows you reference in discussing that none of them ever faced any prosecution

"But several years after the financial crisis, which was caused in large part by reckless lending and excessive risk taking by major financial institutions, no senior executives have been charged or imprisoned, and a collective government effort has not emerged. This stands in stark contrast to the failure of many savings and loan institutions in the late 1980s. In the wake of that debacle, special government task forces referred 1,100 cases to prosecutors, resulting in more than 800 bank officials going to jail. Among the best-known: Charles H. Keating Jr., of Lincoln Savings and Loan in Arizona, and David Paul, of Centrust Bank in Florida. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/business/14prosecute.html?pagewanted=all


Not defending them in anyway, just noting for the record that NONE of them were prosecuted by the US.

[Rags123]

And this from the Washington Post on the same bad guys......this in 2013

"This is a complete list of Wall Street CEOs prosecuted for their role in the financial crisis

So, yeah. Zero Wall Street CEOs are in jail. But we did promise you a list:

1. No one.

2. LOL.

3. Wall Street's lawyers are amazing.

4. Etc. Etc.

It's not that federal government tried to prosecute a bunch of them but lost the cases. There were no serious efforts at criminal prosecutions at all."

This is a complete list of Wall Street CEOs prosecuted for their role in the financial crisis - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/12/this-is-a-complete-list-of-wall-street-ceos-prosecuted-for-their-role-in-the-financial-crisis/)

This is one of the reasons for this linked piece by the OP (certainly not the main one) being called partisan.

[eweissenbach]

When medical insurance premiums began to rise many full time jobs became part time jobs so the burden was sifted to the now part time employee. Where minimum wage with benefits would be manageable then simply isn't now. One can work two & three jobs and still not have medical insurance.

I think that everyone should be able to work for a livable wage regardless of anything other then an honest days work. How many would avoid the lure of gangs and selling drugs and guns etc.

Many collage students come out with so much debt, because gone are the days when one could work their way through and pay the rent. Today the promised jobs after collage are not there either. I have two children paying off collage debt, one is an engineer and one has a masters in applied math, both of whom had a long search before they could find jobs in their fields and who even with "professional salaries, have to have roommates to pay for the rent.

I think it's easy to think and say that people don't want to work rather then face the complicated issues facing todays youth and young families. It's not the same world as when we were young.

While it sounds reasonable to say that everything will just go up I don't think that is a proven fact. A redistribution of wealth needs to happen.The money trickles up but doesn't trickle down.

Follow the money and see where the problem lies. It may not be where you'd like to think it is.

Your statement I have highlighted in red says a lot. I find it interesting how many people think that they have it figured out because they have gone through life without dealing with financial hardship. I have had an easy life and was never unemployed or in financial distress, but I recognize that it was a combination of work, education, and good fortune. I often look at others who are suffering, not because of lack of effort, and say "there, but for the grace of God go I".

[Rags123]

I see posts filled with sympathy and empathy for those less fortunate, but NOTHING to support a redistribution of wealth from an economic standpoint.

It seems this has been tried and failed in every case. I try not to mix up feeling bad for people versus an economic policy for the country.

I would prefer to see a redistribution of talent; that is perhaps not the best way to say it, but allowing young people to be able to expand their talent and thus their ability to make more money. If that makes me have less empathy, I am sorry, but just redistributing wealth has NEVER worked.

A proposal to get young people better educated and thus have more oppurtunities to make money would be a start, and allowing that minimum wage to grow within companies when you advance yourself following some kind of criteria set when you join the company would be great.

Suppose this makes no sense but what is being touted by posters is NOT a redistribution of wealth in any economic sense at all. It offers no more chances for young folks or disadvantaged folks to make more money.

[kittygilchrist]

Your statement I have highlighted in red says a lot. I find it interesting how many people think that they have it figured out because they have gone through life without dealing with financial hardship. I have had an easy life and was never unemployed or in financial distress, but I recognize that it was a combination of work, education, and good fortune. I often look at others who are suffering, not because of lack of effort, and say "there, but for the grace of God go I".

And what do you do for the "less fortunate"?

[mickey100]

Exactly! Minimum wage is what is paid to part timers and entry level employees with no education or skills. If a person has an education or a speciality they are going to make more than minimum wage.

…..

Uh, I have to disagree. I have some relatives and friends who have at least 2 year college degrees, who are working for minimum wage or not much more than minimum wage. They are hard working people, but they live in a city where the manufacturers that used to hire people, have left or closed, and there just aren't a lot of jobs. I have a close relative with a good job history, references, etc., with a degree in computer technology, who makes $10 and hour driving a forklift. Things are tough for people out there. Many are unemployed or underemployed thru no fault of their own. I have a step brother who got laid off when he was in his 50's, too soon to collect his pension, and took a minimum wage job for 5 or 6 years, to tide his family over. It was all he could get. Thousands had been laid off from this company (Kodak) so jobs were scarce. He had worked 30 some years as a chemist.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

So how do you feel about paying for food stamps through your tax dollars, and subsidizing health care for Wal-Mart employees while the company makes billions?

What does that have to do with a discussion about raising the minimum wage?

Do you really think that food stamps will go away if we raise the minimum wage?

Like I said, all it will do, in the long run, is raise prices. No one will be better off.

Do you see something wrong with a company like Wal-Mart making billions of dollars? They are the largest retailer in the US and provide jobs for millions of people. Maybe it would be better if all of their executives and management staff made minimum wage. Who would that help?

As far as taxpayer dollars subsidizing their employees health care, doesn't that come from the new ACA law? Wouldn't those same people have subsidies for their health care if they worked elsewhere or didn't work at all? Why is it that some of us believe that it is the responsibility of an employer to provide health care insurance for it's employees? Should they provide food, clothing and housing for them as well?

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Uh, I have to disagree. I have some relatives and friends who have at least 2 year college degrees, who are working for minimum wage or not much more than minimum wage. They are hard working people, but they live in a city where the manufacturers that used to hire people, have left or closed, and there just aren't a lot of jobs. I have a close relative with a good job history, references, etc., with a degree in computer technology, who makes $10 and hour driving a forklift. Things are tough for people out there. Many are unemployed or underemployed thru no fault of their own. I have a step brother who got laid off when he was in his 50's, too soon to collect his pension, and took a minimum wage job for 5 or 6 years, to tide his family over. It was all he could get. Thousands had been laid off from this company (Kodak) so jobs were scarce. He had worked 30 some years as a chemist.

First of all, you can't base an argument on a few anecdotal examples. Yes, some kids just out of college are having trouble finding jobs. Some are doing minimum wage or close to minimum wage jobs temporarily until they find something in their field. This is certainly happening in places like Detroit where manufacturing has closed up and left.

But we have to ask ourselves why have so many manufacturers closed up and left? Maybe it's because the owners and upper management are greedy bastards and want to make more money for themselves. Or maybe it's because they can go elsewhere and have their products made for less money where labor costs are lower. Or maybe they feel a responsibility to their stockholders to increase profits so that their IRAs 401Ks and other investments will allow them to have a decent retirement. So they go to where there is cheap labor.

It always amazes me that US companies can actually do better by shipping parts overseas, having them assembled over there and then having them shipped back here than by keeping the whole process here. The shipping and handling cost have to be huge, yet they continue to do it. Something is wrong.

[graciegirl]

What does that have to do with a discussion about raising the minimum wage?

Do you really think that food stamps will go away if we raise the minimum wage?

Like I said, all it will do, in the long run, is raise prices. No one will be better off.

Do you see something wrong with a company like Wal-Mart making billions of dollars? They are the largest retailer in the US and provide jobs for millions of people. Maybe it would be better if all of their executives and management staff made minimum wage. Who would that help?

As far as taxpayer dollars subsidizing their employees health care, doesn't that come from the new ACA law? Wouldn't those same people have subsidies for their health care if they worked elsewhere or didn't work at all? Why is it that some of us believe that it is the responsibility of an employer to provide health care insurance for it's employees? Should they provide food, clothing and housing for them as well?

I agree.

I like Walmart. They save people a LOT of money with their business practices. I am sick of people bundling all of big business together and throwing them in the toilet. Do they all work for the government or in teaching institutions to be so out of touch with how economics works?????

And when some big business tank, like in Akron and Youngstown, Ohio, or where there is little opportunity to better yourself, like in rural Vermont, then you move to someplace that offers such an opportunity. We did and a lot of people we know did.

Life isn't easy. Some people work harder at making a life of crime then if they had a legitimate job. I feel great compassion for the truly disabled and those who cannot work. Some people always think we take care of too few. And some people always think we take care of too many.

One person who needs government assistance and doesn't get it is too many

And one person who defrauds the government by being able bodied and faking a disability is to many.

[Cedwards38]

I agree.

I like Walmart. They save people a LOT of money with their business practices. I am sick of people bundling all of big business together and throwing them in the toilet. Do they all work for the government or in teaching institutions to be so out of touch with how economics works?????

And when some big business tank, like in Akron and Youngstown, Ohio, or where there is little opportunity to better yourself, like in rural Vermont, then you move to someplace that offers such an opportunity. We did and a lot of people we know did.

Life isn't easy. Some people work harder at making a life of crime then if they had a legitimate job. I feel great compassion for the truly disabled and those who cannot work. Some people always think we take care of too few. And some people always think we take care of too many.

One person who needs government assistance and doesn't get it is too many

And one person who defrauds the government by being able bodied and faking a disability is to many.

Do they all work for the government or in teaching institutions to be so out of touch with how economics works?????

Good morning Gracie! As one who spent a career in public education, I'm curious what you mean by the statement I've highlighted above.

[graciegirl]

Do they all work for the government or in teaching institutions to be so out of touch with how economics works?????

Good morning Gracie! As one who spent a career in public education, I'm curious what you mean by the statement I've highlighted above.

Some who are not employed by a for profit business are not aware how it works. Or how business ethics work, or know what a sales campaign is or a sales goal, and don't know what it's like to NEVER be on vacation from your job or know that you can't take sick days even when you are sick. It is a different climate of life to work in an Academic setting and in a business setting. I have done both and learned a lot from each, but if I had done one and not the other I would not have been as aware of the difference. I was the same in each. I could not stop worrying about some kids I taught or ever stop trying to get through to them. But it is a different way to live and to make a living for sure. Business people often don't understand the academic setting either.

[TexaninVA]

Income inequality is natural and inevitable, because people are obviously not equal in all kinds of ways ... smarts, work ethic, morality, luck etc.

The question thus becomes how much income inequality is acceptable before a genuine societal problem becomes inevitable.

[Rags123]

An interesting take on this subject and one that I have espouse

"Income inequality is the public-policy topic of the moment, embraced as an issue across the political spectrum. Since the 1970s, the gap in incomes between those who earn the most and those who earn the least has increased markedly. Some have described this as a “hollowing out” of the middle class and everyone, it seems, agrees it’s a bad thing. But why is it occurring at all? The answer is that the US economy has been undergoing fundamental changes, changes that benefit workers with skills and smarts, but leave behind those with lesser educations."

The real reason for income inequality - Opinion - The Boston Globe (http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/07/22/the-real-reason-for-income-inequality/CBcwFreZkI6czjYmu9eBZN/story.html)

Also from that article....opinion piece....

"Jobs today require more education than they once did. According to US Census data, 66 percent of all jobs in 1975 were held by those with high school degrees or less, while just 34 percent required some postsecondary education. By 2012, those figures had almost completely reversed: 65 percent of all jobs required post-secondary education, while just 35 percent were available to those with high school or less. The upshot: If you don’t have skills, it’s tough to find work.

Indeed, the unemployment rate confirms that, tracking almost exactly to education. Those without a high school degree, for example, had an 11 percent unemployment rate in 2013. Those with BAs, meanwhile, had just a 4 percent unemployment rate."


NOW....LAY that alongside this article from today also....

"Senators have introduced two bills in the past few weeks that could make make it easier for students to pay for college and manage debt. Both bills would trim red tape from some frustrating features of the federal financial aid system. And both bills are bipartisan, with heavyweight Republican sponsors and interest from the House of Representatives.

It might seem like this could add up to something rare — real lawmaking! But don't get too excited. As much as members of Congress love to talk about helping students pay for college, these proposals are likely to get stuck, like everything else, in Congressional dysfunction, partisanship, and protocol.

That's even though the legislation is trying to solve what almost everyone agrees is a problem: the system of federal grants and loans for college is far too complicated."



Why two bipartisan bills to make college affordable are going nowhere in Congress - Vox (http://www.vox.com/2014/7/17/5910739/why-two-bipartisan-bills-to-make-college-affordable-are-going-nowhere)

I am not going to comment on the legislation since p.......l is not allowed but read the article. Seems many who want to raise the minimum wage, etc, oppose the offering of opportunity !

[Villages PL]

Here is an excellent article authored by a billionaire, Nick Hanauer. Although I think his "pitchforks" analogy is overheated, his arguments make sense. I think he presents the problem and the solution in an apolitical manner. Read it and be your own judge.

The Pitchforks Are Coming (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html#.U9Z6M41OWUk)

The article by Hanauer represents slick salesmanship but it's not capitalism. I think it's socialism when the government tries to transfer wealth from one person to another but any gain is bound to be short lived because it goes against basic economic realities.

Hanauer points to Seattle and San Francisco as success stories. But who among us would want to retire there? Who would be able to afford owning their own home or even renting? Your retirement savings wouldn't go very far in either of those places.

[manaboutown]

A large middle class supports stability in a country. They are its backbone: They do most of the work, pay most of the taxes and live reasonably comfortably. They are patriotic, law abiding and want better lives for their descendants. These are the "do"s" or "doers".

Among things that concern me today are the breathtaking compensation, private jets for personal use and other perks given the top dogs/cats in large publicly held companies these days. Many if not most of them have buddies on their company's boards and they are on their buddies' boards. They vote each other whopping pay packages. This comes from money due the stockholders. The board members are supposed to represent the interests of the stockholders, but....

Too many people are feeding at the taxpayer funded public trough these days. These are the "don'ts", "won't's" and "can'ts". I have no problems with the can'ts who not from their choice but from bad fortune suffer physically, mentally or otherwise and truly require some form of assistance, temporarily or permanently, to live. The don'ts and won'ts live off the efforts of those who work and pay taxes. Shame on them. Unfortunately our current welfare system accepts and even encourages them.

[graciegirl]

Income inequality is natural and inevitable, because people are obviously not equal in all kinds of ways ... smarts, work ethic, morality, luck etc.

The question thus becomes how much income inequality is acceptable before a genuine societal problem becomes inevitable.


THAT IS just the deepest thing I have read on here for a good while.

[Pointer]

What does that have to do with a discussion about raising the minimum wage?

Do you really think that food stamps will go away if we raise the minimum wage?

Like I said, all it will do, in the long run, is raise prices. No one will be better off.

Do you see something wrong with a company like Wal-Mart making billions of dollars? They are the largest retailer in the US and provide jobs for millions of people. Maybe it would be better if all of their executives and management staff made minimum wage. Who would that help?

As far as taxpayer dollars subsidizing their employees health care, doesn't that come from the new ACA law? Wouldn't those same people have subsidies for their health care if they worked elsewhere or didn't work at all? Why is it that some of us believe that it is the responsibility of an employer to provide health care insurance for it's employees? Should they provide food, clothing and housing for them as well?

Yes!!! Why does one work if not to provide Food , Shelter and Clothing???

I don't think that Walmart provides good jobs at all. CEO's in this country are paid so much more then in another countries and that takes from the hourly wage earners. Study after study has shown that when you take care of the employee you get better loyalty and output and in the end costs the company less.
Proctor and Gamble is one company who believes this and provides good jobs. When a job doesn't cover the basic's then you get disgruntled, depressed "why bother" employee's who get sick.

[Tennisnut]

[/U]

Yes!!! Why does one work if not to provide Food , Shelter and Clothing???

I don't think that Walmart provides good jobs at all. CEO's in this country are paid so much more then in another countries and that takes from the hourly wage earners. Study after study has shown that when you take care of the employee you get better loyalty and output and in the end costs the company less.
Proctor and Gamble is one company who believes this and provides good jobs. When a job doesn't cover the basic's then you get disgruntled, depressed "why bother" employee's who get sick.

Well said Pointer. All some people think about is short term gains and fail to realize that the most accomplishments are are born from good teamwork in solving problems and, subsequently, all share in the profits. However, when you have some working for $10/hr and others getting $44 million for nine months of work, who wouldn't feel some animosity?

[TexaninVA]

Well said Pointer. All some people think about is short term gains and fail to realize that the most accomplishments are are born from good teamwork in solving problems and, subsequently, all share in the profits. However, when you have some working for $10/hr and others getting $44 million for nine months of work, who wouldn't feel some animosity?

Out of curiosity, do you think Steve Jobs for example, was paid too much per the same line of logic you cite?

[Rags123]

I assume then that nobody sees the relationship between education and unemployment and thus wages ?

As I pointed out earlier and there is a direct relationship, why is this all about GIVING out money or not GIVING our money.

Why is this not about giving the opportunity to get money and jobs ?

[Tennisnut]

A large middle class supports stability in a country. They are its backbone: They do most of the work, pay most of the taxes and live reasonably comfortably. They are patriotic, law abiding and want better lives for their descendants. These are the "do"s" or "doers".

Among things that concern me today are the breathtaking compensation, private jets for personal use and other perks given the top dogs/cats in large publicly held companies these days. Many if not most of them have buddies on their company's boards and they are on their buddies' boards. They vote each other whopping pay packages. This comes from money due the stockholders. The board members are supposed to represent the interests of the stockholders, but....

Too many people are feeding at the taxpayer funded public trough these days. These are the "don'ts", "won't's" and "can'ts". I have no problems with the can'ts who not from their choice but from bad fortune suffer physically, mentally or otherwise and truly require some form of assistance, temporarily or permanently, to live. The don'ts and won'ts live off the efforts of those who work and pay taxes. Shame on them. Unfortunately our current welfare system accepts and even encourages them.

Yes there are abusers of the system on both ends of the spectrum. The "don'ts" and "won'ts" just have fewer zeros on their compensation than ones with the board room buddies.

[graciegirl]

Class envy.

[Tennisnut]

Unenlightened.

[graciegirl]

Income inequality is natural and inevitable, because people are obviously not equal in all kinds of ways ... smarts, work ethic, morality, luck etc.

The question thus becomes how much income inequality is acceptable before a genuine societal problem becomes inevitable.

This explains it very well.

We are also not equal in athletic ability, or in common sense to save our money and not impulse spend . No matter how hard some of us try, we do not have the tools to be extremely wealthy, but some people do.

That is just life.

[Tennisnut]

Out of curiosity, do you think Steve Jobs for example, was paid too much per the same line of logic you cite?

He was paid a dollar a year. A tremendous difference from his predecessor. He became a very rich man along with his co-founders and brought tremendous wealth to those who invested with him. He wasn't hired and fired a less than year later and walked away with stockholders millions.Two different examples.

[eweissenbach]

Class envy.

I find that very offensive Gracie. I do not begrudge those who have earned their wealth by providing a unique service or product and risk their money to succeed. I think the Morse family falls into that definition as they have earned their wealth because they provided a uniquely quality product and put their money to work to back up their belief that the product was outstanding. Not all wealthy people have earned their wealth in such a positive way. Do your research.

[mickey100]

Agree.

[Polar Bear]

...Not all wealthy people have earned their wealth in such a positive way...

If it's legal and doesn't hurt anybody is that not good enough? Does their "way" have to meet certain standards to be acceptable?

[graciegirl]

Who gets to judge how people earn their wealth and whether it's fair? I know this, it isn't just I.Q. points that cause people to be wealthy. If you watch Jeopardy , the contestants are pretty smart folks,BUT they don't usually have high paying jobs. Class Valedictorians are usually not as successful as people might think.

I say that it has to be jealousy to make people say that someone, somehow should redistribute the wealth or say how much is too much for other people to earn.. I don't like the fact that the Drug Lords are extremely wealthy but I don't CARE that other people are a lot wealthier than I am in money. People of a certain bent are always saying that businesses shouldn't be granted tax breaks, but that is a common practice to try to get business to come to an area. The state of New York has a national ad advertising tax breaks for business. Business brings jobs and big business causes small businesses to be successful by writing the paycheck to give people money to spend at a boutique or a veterinarian.

I personally think that Athletes are paid too much but I sure as hell can't do what they do no matter if I tried and tried and tried. I am not smart enough to be an M.D. or smart enough to be a college professor, who some people think are overpaid. I didn't think up the good ideas behind the tech industry, nor did I know enough to build a grocery store chain. I certainly am not as smart as those great scientists at Proctor and Gamble. I am grateful that someone else knows how to do it and I don't begrudge them their big salary.

Just what is wrong with people making a lot of money and when does it get to be too much?

[quirky3]

I think it's compassion that motivates some people to say that sort of thing.

[TexaninVA]

He was paid a dollar a year. A tremendous difference from his predecessor. He became a very rich man along with his co-founders and brought tremendous wealth to those who invested with him. He wasn't hired and fired a less than year later and walked away with stockholders millions.Two different examples.

If you view the total wealth he accumulated, I'm gonna take that as you're ok with Steve making a few gazillions dollars ... correct?

[graciegirl]

I think it's compassion that motivates some people to say that sort of thing.

Compassion to whom? The financially successful people are livin', breathin, humans too and didn't just fall into it in most cases. Most financially successful people didn't do it with some sort of strange fluke. They WORKED for it.

I think that rich people should be compassionate to the poor, And poor people should be compassionate to the rich and that those in the middle should be compassionate to those who earn less and more.

I know when I see a posters name what the rhetoric will be. They banned political but this is political and it's bringing out the worst in me.

When Helene was born, I was jealous of all the moms who had kids who didn't have disabilities, but as I grew older, I found that was wrong. We aren't born equal. We all have different crosses to bear. Most of us won't be super wealthy but some people are. That doesn't make them BAD.

[TexaninVA]

I find that very offensive Gracie. I do not begrudge those who have earned their wealth by providing a unique service or product and risk their money to succeed. I think the Morse family falls into that definition as they have earned their wealth because they provided a uniquely quality product and put their money to work to back up their belief that the product was outstanding. Not all wealthy people have earned their wealth in such a positive way. Do your research.

I'm always a bit leery of the "...I'm offended" rejoinder. What Gracie said is clearly at least part of the explanation (and I'm not saying this applies to you by the way). Let's face it ... envy is part of human nature. Not saying it's necessarily bad, and no doubt not good, but it exists. Public figures of various persuasions knows this and make a career of exploiting it.

[mickey100]

The problem with CEOs salaries is that oftentimes they are not set in a fair way, they are set by corporate boards rigged with their cronies. Former Attorney General Spitzer called it a rigged marketplace. Since the salaries are determined by close associates with an interest in seeing CEO salaries rise, there are no checks and balances. For example, in 1982, CEOs made 42 times what the average worker made. In 2003 it was 300 times the average worker. These salaries generally are not tied to any type of company performance. The CEO can expect their salary to rise even if their company performs poorly.

A better way, IMHO, is the way Whole Foods caps their CEO pay at a 14/1 ratio, rather than the 300/1 ratio mentioned above, and still is a very successful company. Someone has to pay for the inflated salaries of the many overpaid CEOs, and of course in the long run, it ends up being the consumer.

[Tennisnut]

If you view the total wealth he accumulated, I'm gonna take that as you're ok with Steve making a few gazillions dollars ... correct?

Yes I am OK with that because he made money for his publicly owned company and its stockholders and provided a product that people wanted. However, as this article written by bank chairman and CEO notes, there are CEO's that that make $79 million a year which has yet to make a profit. That is money which is being taken from the publicly owned stockholders and hurts their income. That is abusive.

Why Excessive CEO Pay Is Bad for the Economy - Bank Think Article - American Banker (http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/why-excessive-ceo-pay-is-bad-for-the-economy-1066239-1.html)

[Tennisnut]

The problem with CEOs salaries is that oftentimes they are not set in a fair way, they are set by corporate boards rigged with their cronies. Former Attorney General Spitzer called it a rigged marketplace. Since the salaries are determined by close associates with an interest in seeing CEO salaries rise, there are no checks and balances. For example, in 1982, CEOs made 42 times what the average worker made. In 2003 it was 300 times the average worker. These salaries generally are not tied to any type of company performance. The CEO can expect their salary to rise even if their company performs poorly.

A better way, IMHO, is the way Whole Foods caps their CEO pay at a 14/1 ratio, rather than the 300/1 ratio mentioned above, and still is a very successful company. Someone has to pay for the inflated salaries of the many overpaid CEOs, and of course in the long run, it ends up being the consumer.

Concur! Another way to say it is a CEO's day worth more than a year of work of an employee to the company. Yes, if you can get the Board to agree.

[claricecolin]

I think that one thing being missed in this conversation is that many of the solid middle class jobs no longer exist. We have moved from manufacturing to service jobs. Service jobs do not pay the same. In over 20 years of retail management the last 10 there was a push for part time workers as to not have to offer benefits. Part time can work provided you have a set schedule and can then fit in a second job. My last 5 years we were not allowed to do that. Our part time people had to have open availability. That makes it rather hard to get another job. Things just are not as simple as they once were.

I am a strong believer in a great education. My career had nothing to do with my degree. Luckily my son has a good job in a field related to what his degree is in. However, not everyone is cut out for college. Nor is everyone cut out for a trade. I do feel that every person that is willing to work (I think that is the majority of able bodied adults) should make a wage they can live on. Will some live better than others? Of course and the majority accepts that. I think the frustration sets in as the under 30 college educated people are feeling that a middle class life is not attainable.

[mickey100]

I think that one thing being missed in this conversation is that many of the solid middle class jobs no longer exist. We have moved from manufacturing to service jobs. Service jobs do not pay the same. In over 20 years of retail management the last 10 there was a push for part time workers as to not have to offer benefits. Part time can work provided you have a set schedule and can then fit in a second job. My last 5 years we were not allowed to do that. Our part time people had to have open availability. That makes it rather hard to get another job. Things just are not as simple as they once were.

I am a strong believer in a great education. My career had nothing to do with my degree. Luckily my son has a good job in a field related to what his degree is in. However, not everyone is cut out for college. Nor is everyone cut out for a trade. I do feel that every person that is willing to work (I think that is the majority of able bodied adults) should make a wage they can live on. Will some live better than others? Of course and the majority accepts that. I think the frustration sets in as the under 30 college educated people are feeling that a middle class life is not attainable.

I agree. They do everything they're supposed to do - get a college education, good grades, but can't land a job that pays enough. And many are saddled with student loans they need to pay off. It's a shame.

[perrjojo]

So CEOs are paid unfairly? How should they be paid? Who gets to decide? What is the success or failure of a company worth? Not being argumentative, just wondering what people think.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

[/U]

Yes!!! Why does one work if not to provide Food , Shelter and Clothing???

I don't think that Walmart provides good jobs at all. CEO's in this country are paid so much more then in another countries and that takes from the hourly wage earners. Study after study has shown that when you take care of the employee you get better loyalty and output and in the end costs the company less.
Proctor and Gamble is one company who believes this and provides good jobs. When a job doesn't cover the basic's then you get disgruntled, depressed "why bother" employee's who get sick.

I guess I should have been more specific. Should employers provide food clothing and shelter over and above what they pay in wages?

Why do we expect employers to provide health care coverage over and above what they pay in wages? Why is that their responsibility?

Many or most employers are paying for health care over and above salaries. Why not just pay everyone a little more and allow the to buy their own health insurance.

And the idea that huge CEO salaries are taking away from the hourly wages of the lowest paid employees is a myth. Companies where the CEO is making tens or hundreds of millions of dollars generally have millions of employees. If you were to cut the CEOs salary by 80% and give that to the millions of employees, it would be a mere pittance to each one.

As an example, if a company with one million employees pays their CEO $100 million and you cut him back to $20 million you would distribute $80 million among one million employees. If you distribute it evenly, which is highly unlikely, they'd get $80.00 per year each.
What's more likely is that upper management would get a bit more then middle management and supervisors would get a bit less then that and the people at the bottom of the pay scale would get the least.

[eweissenbach]

I guess I should have been more specific. Should employers provide food clothing and shelter over and above what they pay in wages?

Why do we expect employers to provide health care coverage over and above what they pay in wages? Why is that their responsibility?

Many or most employers are paying for health care over and above salaries. Why not just pay everyone a little more and allow the to buy their own health insurance.

And the idea that huge CEO salaries are taking away from the hourly wages of the lowest paid employees is a myth. Companies where the CEO is making tens or hundreds of millions of dollars generally have millions of employees. If you were to cut the CEOs salary by 80% and give that to the millions of employees, it would be a mere pittance to each one.

As an example, if a company with one million employees pays their CEO $100 million and you cut him back to $20 million you would distribute $80 million among one million employees. If you distribute it evenly, which is highly unlikely, they'd get $80.00 per year each.
What's more likely is that upper management would get a bit more then middle management and supervisors would get a bit less then that and the people at the bottom of the pay scale would get the least.

Not even close doc.
Top five CEO compensation according to Forbes:
John Hammergrer, McKesson. $139m. 42,800 EEs
Ralph Lauren, Ralph Lauren. $66.6m. , 23,000 EEs
MichaelFascitelli, Vornado Realty. $64.4m, 4,369 EEs
Richard Kinder, Kinder Morgan, 60.9m, 11,080 EEs
George Paz, Express Scripts, 51.5m, 30,000 EEs

One company in the world with more than a million employees, Wal Mart. Next largest US Postal Service with 826,000 employees.

[JBarracks]

Will and Ariel Durant, brilliant people. I've been reading 'The Story of Civilization' for a couple of years, now up to book six. For anyone that's curious as to how civilization arrived at what it is today. Insightful!

[JBarracks]

The best book I have ever read, and still enjoy rereading now and then, is Will & Ariel Durant's "The Lessons of History." Here are several quotes from their classic which pertain to this topic and should offer us all something to think about.

---

“Since practical ability differs from person to person, the majority of such abilities, in nearly all societies, is gathered in a minority of men. The concentration of wealth is a natural result of this concentration of ability, and regularly recurs in history. The rate of concentration varies (other factors being equal) with the economic freedom permitted by morals and the laws. Despotism may for a time retard the concentration; democracy, allowing the most liberty, accelerates it.”
…
“In progressive societies the concentration may reach a point where the strength of number in the many poor rivals the strength of ability in the few rich; then the unstable equilibrium generates a critical situation, which history has diversely met by legislation redistributing wealth or by revolution distributing poverty.”
…
“We conclude that the concentration of wealth is natural and inevitable, and is periodically alleviated by violent or peaceable partial redistribution”
…
“The mechanics of capitalism have proven to the most effective system:
Capitalist gathers the savings of the people, finances the mechanizations of industry, and distributes the goods according to demand (not government decree).”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Will and Ariel Durant, brilliant people. I've been reading 'The Story of Civilization' for a couple of years, now up to book six. For anyone that's curious as to how civilization arrived at what it is today. Insightful!

[mickey100]

Not even close doc.
Top five CEO compensation according to Forbes:
John Hammergrer, McKesson. $139m. 42,800 EEs
Ralph Lauren, Ralph Lauren. $66.6m. , 23,000 EEs
MichaelFascitelli, Vornado Realty. $64.4m, 4,369 EEs
Richard Kinder, Kinder Morgan, 60.9m, 11,080 EEs
George Paz, Express Scripts, 51.5m, 30,000 EEs

One company in the world with more than a million employees, Wal Mart. Next largest US Postal Service with 826,000 employees.

Thanks for digging up the facts.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Not even close doc.
Top five CEO compensation according to Forbes:
John Hammergrer, McKesson. $139m. 42,800 EEs
Ralph Lauren, Ralph Lauren. $66.6m. , 23,000 EEs
MichaelFascitelli, Vornado Realty. $64.4m, 4,369 EEs
Richard Kinder, Kinder Morgan, 60.9m, 11,080 EEs
George Paz, Express Scripts, 51.5m, 30,000 EEs

One company in the world with more than a million employees, Wal Mart. Next largest US Postal Service with 826,000 employees.

OK, take your first example. Take away 80% of that CEOs income and distribute it evenly among the employees and it about $2600 per employee. Not a bad increase for minimum wage earners but not life changing. It's about $1.30 per hour increase for a forty hour a week worker.

And again consider that that money is not going to be distributed evenly. The people closest to the top would get more and the people on the bottom would get less. If Vornado Reality has increased it's profits by a billion dollars under Fascitelli then he's worth every penny that they pay him.

Bt the bottom line is that taking from the rich and giving to the poor will not solve any problems. The wealthy in this country are not the problem.

If you want to argue about the other examples that you have posted please show evidence that the people involved are not worth what they are getting paid.

Although I agree that many of these CEOs make more than their worth and their compensation should be tied to the performance of the companies reducing their salaries does not change anything.

[eweissenbach]

OK, take your first example. Take away 80% of that CEOs income and distribute it evenly among the employees and it about $2600 per employee. Not a bad increase for minimum wage earners but not life changing. It's about $1.30 per hour increase for a forty hour a week worker.

And again consider that that money is not going to be distributed evenly. The people closest to the top would get more and the people on the bottom would get less. If Vornado Reality has increased it's profits by a billion dollars under Fascitelli then he's worth every penny that they pay him.

Bt the bottom line is that taking from the rich and giving to the poor will not solve any problems. The wealthy in this country are not the problem.

If you want to argue about the other examples that you have posted please show evidence that the people involved are not worth what they are getting paid.

Although I agree that many of these CEOs make more than their worth and their compensation should be tied to the performance of the companies reducing their salaries does not change anything.

Please show me where I stated or implied that any of these CEOs were not worth what they are getting paid. I was simply pointing out that the statement you made that most of the companies with highly paid CEOs had a million or more employees was wildly eggagerated. If you are going to use arithmetic to prove your point you need to get the numbers at least close to correct.

[mickey100]

OK, take your first example. Take away 80% of that CEOs income and distribute it evenly among the employees and it about $2600 per employee. Not a bad increase for minimum wage earners but not life changing. It's about $1.30 per hour increase for a forty hour a week .

At the risk of being nit picky, an increase of $1.30 an hour comes out to something like 17 a 18% increase. That's peanuts to us, but to someone who makes minimum wage, that's huge! Just sayin...