Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
One of the main arguments of the Liberal Establishment is that all the money and control is flowing to the top executives while the little man gets crapped on with barely survivable wages.
It makes for good politics, and even better propaganda, but it does not square up with the data.
Note your little chart states: "They work for both large and small organizations, ranging from one-person businesses to firms with thousands of employees."
In many small businesses the top executive may also well be the one who cleans the toilet before shutting out the lights for the day. How does that square up with the point you think you're making?
Oh brother..Wage labor or salary isn't the problem. Its "capital gains" which is often not even capital.
Capital gains are hilarious there are so many legal ways not to pay taxes on them if you are not brain dead, but so many people whine about how capital gains tax is too high.
In addition to salaries, total compensation for corporate executives often includes stock options and other performance bonuses. Workers also may enjoy benefits, such as access to expense allowances, use of company-owned aircraft and cars, club memberships, and company-paid insurance premiums. Nonprofit and government executives usually receive fewer benefits.
None of which were calculated in that figure for "top executives". Not CEO's whose income was a median $165k.
However, let's look at that figure in what MOST people are talking about shall we?
The annual reporting season for executive pay is in high gear. So far, the tally shows the median CEO pay in 2011 rose 2% to $9.6 million, based on 138 Standard & Poor's 500 companies that have reported CEO pay this year and that had the same CEO for all of 2010 and 2011, according to the USA TODAY analysis of data from GMI Ratings on proxies that have already been filed.
Quote:
CEO pay continues its escalating trajectory. CEOs' 2% raise in 2011 follows a 27% increase in 2010, based on pay of CEOs analyzed by USA TODAY last year.
Note your little chart states: "They work for both large and small organizations, ranging from one-person businesses to firms with thousands of employees."
In many small businesses the top executive may also well be the one who cleans the toilet before shutting out the lights for the day. How does that square up with the point you think you're making?
Sure it does. Why do you insist on not knowing the entire picture? When small businesses employ the vast majority of American workers, why do you only want to know about the salaries of Wall Street Bankers and Big CEO's? Is that because the message is starkly different when we actually pay attention to the salaries of those executives who are actually employing (and setting wages of) most of our people?
The CEO pay argument relative to employee pay is a house of cards.
Why do you insist on not knowing the entire picture? When small businesses employ the vast majority of American workers, why do you only want to know about the salaries of Wall Street Bankers and Big CEO's? Is that because the message is starkly different when we actually pay attention to the salaries of those small business executives who are actually employing (and setting the wages of) our people?
How does Wall Street compensation dictate the average American workers' wage? The angst against CEO salaries....even if specifically directed at Wall Street.......seems to be misguided. How does a $20M total salary compensation prevent Jim The Mechanic from making $20/hour?
All I see is a hatred for rich people....not a data-backed reason for the hatred.
When the CEO of a failing company gets a huge payout after laying off thousands of workers that pisses people off. If the company was doing so poorly that it couldn't afford to keep employees then why does an executive deserve a bonus? I wish I could fail at my job and still get a bonus. That's what pisses people off. Everyone has to perform except those in leadership roles?
When a company lays off people and then turns around and hands out hundreds of millions of dollars that effects people.
The hatred isn't for the rich as opposed to what a lot of them stand for and how they conduct themselves as humans. Not all of them but enough to **** people off. Is it all justified? No it's not but in order to quiet the other side an equal comparison and argument needs to be made.
Then who on God's Green Earth are you talking about if you're not talking about the Fortune 500 executives or the "operations manager of the candle factory?" What data are you cherry picking from now?
I haven't cherry-picked anything.
I have merely stated that the definition that the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses to define "top executive" is so broad that it includes well over 2 million workers. I and the majority of Americans do not think that top executives number in the millions in this country, so a definition that translates to over 2 million "top executives" would be overly broad.
Therefore, your assertion that liberals are arguing that over 2 million workers are overpaid is a false assertion. Liberals would not include over 2 million workers as "top executives."
Which means that YOUR argument is the DEAD argument.
I have merely stated that the definition that the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses to define "top executive" is so broad that it includes well over 2 million workers. I and the majority of Americans do not think that top executives number in the millions in this country, so a definition that translates to over 2 million "top executives" would be overly broad.
Therefore, your assertion that liberals are arguing that over 2 million workers are overpaid is a false assertion. Liberals would not include over 2 million workers as "top executives."
Which means that YOUR argument is the DEAD argument.
Actually, it makes my argument for me. When comprehensive data is analyzed by the BLS, it concludes that the median pay for top executives and CEO's is quite low. This is precisely why the liberal argument hones in only on the CEO and executive pay that it believes is the most egregious. What class warfare point can be made when the median pay is $101K and the mean is $250K? NONE. So what do liberals do? They pay attention to a select few who have hardly any bearing whatsoever on the wages of the American workforce to try to pursuade us that "evil CEO's" are getting filthy rich while the rest of America is being kicked in the groin. I'll point out that BLS data does not support this argument. (Median CEO pay is $165K according to 2010 data)
An overly broad definition is not irrelevant in the slightest. It actually paintes the whole picture. The whole picture is inconvenient to the "rich are evil" declaration the liberal left pushes forth. Considering that small businesses employ the vast majority of American workers, it's downright disingenuous to automatically exclude small business executive pay when trying to paint CEO's as the reason America's workforce is underpaid. Which is EXACTLY what Liberals are trying to do when they hee and haw over executive compensation.
Actually, it makes my argument for me. When comprehensive data is analyzed by the BLS, it concludes that the median pay for top executives and CEO's is quite low. This is precisely why the liberal argument hones in only on the CEO and executive pay that it believes is the most egregious. What class warfare point can be made when the median pay is $101K and the mean is $250K? NONE. So what do liberals do? They pay attention to a select few who have hardly any bearing whatsoever on the wages of the American workforce to try to pursuade us that "evil CEO's" are getting filthy rich while the rest of America is being kicked in the groin. I'll point out that BLS data does not support this argument. (Median CEO pay is $165K according to 2010 data)
An overly broad definition is not irrelevant in the slightest. It actually paintes the whole picture. The whole picture is inconvenient to the "rich are evil" declaration the liberal left pushes forth. Considering that small businesses employ the vast majority of American workers, it's downright disingenuous to automatically exclude small business executive pay when trying to paint CEO's as the reason America's workforce is underpaid. Which is EXACTLY what Liberals are trying to do when they hee and haw over executive compensation.
If you get paid 101K a year, you are not rich by most people's standards. Nobody is complaining about any of these salaries. This thread really has no point. The bigger concern is the over compensated executives in large companies who tend to make more more irrespective of how well the company actually performs and then pay less as a percentage of taxes because they receive most of their compensation in capital gains increases. If anyone should be upset, it is the person that is making 101K a year who is paying a higher percentage of taxes than a senior executive in a company who is now in bankruptcy, but is making millions in bonuses.
I never thought the liberals were out to get "top executives". It was my perception that the liberals were going after billionaires. Where is the idea coming from that government is going after all CEOs? The lawn care guy down the street is a top executive/CEO of his own company. I don't think anyone is after his pay.
Last edited by ChristineVA; 04-10-2012 at 10:36 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
