THE Super Ultra Wealthy Man can see the future, he sees horror ahead

[sle]

My point again is that these so called "winners" in the CEO game are few and far between. There are more highly paid professional athletes then CEO's.

I think the author uses "CEO" as a generic identifier of "a hired manager that get's paid too much". It could be a CEO proper (yes, a winner out of a large pack) or it could be a mid-level MD like myself bringing home a buck or two. My value added is, at times, questionable

Back to income inequality, i would rather see wealth redistribution via higher minimum wage then via taxation or expropriation.

 

[Martinghoul]

I thought the argument was about income equality. Arguing about senior corporate managers, especially the ones talked about in the media, I mean how many people are in that data set. They are not about Larry who is pulling down 800k at TI. They are talking about the Jack Welch's of the world pulling down tens of millions of dollars. And I ask again, in a country of 330 million people, how many Jack Welch's are there figuratively speaking? Maybe 100, 200? And how many people are in the data set of the so called poor working man, 100 million, 150 million? Sle, you can't take a data set of 50 or 100 people and compare the mean to that of 150 million people. Not saying "you" are doing that, but that is my argument against the article and those like it. If we are going to talk about the winners of long options, then let's include all those played and failed and all those who played and make no more then the avg working man. You can't leave those people out of your data set. This is not about whether Charles, your managing director is a value add to your firm. It's pointless to debate at the granular level. My point again is that these so called "winners" in the CEO game are few and far between. There are more highly paid professional athletes then CEO's.

I think you and sle are talking about slightly different issues...

I am in agreement with you in that there's a lot of really poorly thought out silly arguments bandied about in the media on the subject of executive compensation and income inequality. Arguments which ignore survivorship bias and neglect other basic concerns.

However, it is also the case, as sle says, that there is actual proper research out there that suggests that the increase in executive compensation, especially in finance, is at least one of the factors that contributed to the current levels of income inequality.

 

[blakpacman]

or it could be a mid-level MD like myself bringing home a buck or two. My value added is, at times, questionable

We are all "doing God's work."

 

[jem]

massive inflation... even conservatively at least 700 percent in the last 50 years, progressive income taxes, state taxes and a death taxed are designed to create income inequality. now obamacare just ripped another 5 grand a from tax payers.

unless you make it into the top .02 % or so... you and your heirs have a very difficult keeping any wealth. Every tried trading you way to wealth on your own and watch you capital get sucked away every time a federal and state tax bill come along.

the system is designed to stifle the competition. You either make it to crony level or the capital is quickly ripped away.

So who gets to the top .02%. Now... its people who interact with finance, leverage and wall street. (plus sports and entertainment)
When I was a kid growing up in Greenwich Ct. it was doctors lawyers guys who made the top management of companies but not necessarily all the way up and sort of a a sprinkling of finance guys.

 

[ElCubano]

How much do the PPT guys make?

 

[drcha]

.... I am not an anti-semitist whatsoever, quite the opposite, I have a deep respect for Judaism and the Jewish "race" and belief system (which hardly any American Jew nowadays practices by the way) but what I strongly dislike is that influential "entities" in media and politics have basically blocked an honest dialogue, media representation and research into the fact that Jewish financiers, bankers, business owners have been the worst to squeeze out their employees, business partners, and especially those who owed them.

If you are not an anti-Semite, you do an excellent imitation of one. I object. Some of my friends are Jews, and they would never dream of "squeezing" anyone.

 

[drcha]

The main problem is not the government, the CEOs, the Fed, or any of that. I am not defending any of those, mind you, but the main problem is us. As mentioned above, for most people, it takes effort and sacrifice to get ahead. One has to give up their comfortable evenings on the couch drinking beer and watching Dancing with the Stars or whatever people watch now, or going out with their friends. And most people are just not willing to do any of that. There will be no serious revolt as long as people can procreate (which keeps them tied to their crummy jobs or government payments), get high, and watch television. Anesthesia will trump ambition for most.

For those who are ambitious--well, they don't sit around bitching about CEOs, immigration, government incompetence, and so forth--they just get on with it and figure out how to better their own lives. Personally, at different times in my life I (and many people I know) have worked 2 jobs, worked and gone to school full time at the same time, studied till midnight, worked at a job and run a business on the side, worked for assholes, lived in crappy places with cockroaches, etc., all so that I would never have to do any of those things again. There is nothing unique or special in what I have done. Thousands of people have done these things, and pulled themselves up just the same way, some against much greater odds than I ever faced. There is no reason that others cannot do the same, except that reproducing, drinking, toking, watching sports, and sitcoms are maybe more fun.

People are making their own choices. As long as they are content to keep watching TV and complaining about everything, the TV will be deciding who wins the elections. And the people who fund the TV will make sure that Facebook, TV, booze, dope, and making babies remain cheap and easy, and that getting an education, saving money, and succeeding in business remain difficult. They will make sure that all restless, angry young people with no education and few good prospects have an opportunity to join the military, or at least maybe go to prison, so they can't bother the 0.1%.

 

[volpunter]

so, you are telling us that my pointing out that the article reflects a very distorted view by the author in that he

* Has a very questionable track record of giving, volunteering, basically caring for those in need and providing opportunities for the needy and those who lack opportunities (he in fact focused his entire life on providing opportunities to the top tier rather than the needy)

* makes a pretty dumb argument saying that his adversaries claim the top 1% are good for America because they consume more than the average person, while nobody actually ever built a core argument on top of such assumption while he completely omits why in actuality the top 1% benefit the average American consumer through providing employment and through higher absolute tax payments

* provides zero backup for his assumption that increasing minimum wage by 50%+ will not drive away more blue collar jobs, completely ignoring that the wage gap between the US and China was the PRECISE reason why Detroit is what it is today, and ignoring the fact that not every American is educated enough and ambitious enough (and neither is everyone in any nation) to pursue a white collar career

and

* stating the fact that the historical reasons for anti-semitism are completely distorted by powerful Jewish factions in media, politics, finance, education in that they attack anyone who dares to look at faults and behaviour by Jewish individuals, families, conglomerates that for centuries disadvantaged those around them in any civilization they chose to live and benefit from, while all cannot spend enough efforts to time and again emphasize the Holocaust (which I fully acknowledge along with all other crimes committed against Jewish communities in many parts of the world); pointing out that there is a very distorted picture drawn in history books, movies, documentaries, articles in journals, educational literature, TV, internet about the origin of anti-semitism

and

* that I linked up this article and the open admission of the author's Jewish roots with the fact that statistically those in the top 1% bracket in the US who claim Jewish roots are the least generous givers who have very little intent to give back to society what they benefitted from relative to other racial groups

If you think that is bizarre then I cannot help it. If you merely were startled at someone daring to use the term "jewish/jew/judaism" then just ignore and move on, but just accusing someone to be bizarre and having nothing to add of value does not reflect too well on your discourse qualities or ability to accept others hold views you may not value or appreciate much.

That much is abundantly clear, let me assure you...

 

[volpunter]

well, hold on, did I claim every Jew "squeezes" everyone else? I claimed that the Rothschilds and countless other financiers, politicians, media moguls centuries ago and all the way until today apply favoritism and created an empire that benefits themselves while many of them are very fast to postulate others to give and they themselves are very uneager to take the first step. If the author of the article was so eager to provide opportunities for those living under the poverty line then there are ample opportunities, yet, he stands on the roof top to share with the world his jet-set-life? Have you seen or heard of similar accounts by Bill Gates and the various others who actually just start something to change the world? But what I DO claim is the truth of statistics that point to the fact that among the top 1% Americans, Jews place in the lower deciles of giving. (I know what comes next and I am prepared to deliver it, you just need to ask ;-)

I am claiming that there are some striking unbalanced nuances relating Jews to wealth and Jews and benevolents of society

a) fact is that Jews are highly overrepresenting the top 1% of wealthiest Americans (fact), they are hugely over represented in politics, finance, media.
b) however, Jews place in the lower ranks among the same top 1% when it comes to donations, general giving, voluntary work, peacekeeping (have you heard of Israeli soldiers participating in any peacekeeping missions every? Not that they do not have their hands full of work on their own,but...)
c) Jews are hugely underrepresented to chair and head non-profit organization that put on their agenda the intent to provide opportunities to others, help others in need.
d) Jews are also hugely underrepresented in Basic jobs that serve others, nursing, sanitary cleaning, ... (now why would that be the case given the scientific evidence that Jews on average do not possess a higher IQ than others)

I rest my case, all I am saying is that there is a lack of balance, getting and giving is just hugely out of balance within this racial group.

If you are not an anti-Semite, you do an excellent imitation of one. I object. Some of my friends are Jews, and they would never dream of "squeezing" anyone.

 

[drcha]

There is no way you can know who donates to what. When I donate money, no one asks me about my ethnic background.