Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Frank Dajnowicz
37 Followers
rashomon999
46 Followers
Forever_Zero
139 Followers
P.R. Picklewhite
1916 Followers
Gary Helms
473 Followers
I think I am upnorthgirl
1610 Followers
frankd1949Mar 19, 2011Submitter
Why are the rich not being hit with a tax increase? Why does a non-millionaire back no tax increase to the rich?
rudegarMar 19, 2011
maybe he hope to be rich one day?
YachtRokrMar 19, 2011
The chance of becoming rich in the U.S. based upon the current state of our economy and redistribution of wealth (from middle class to top 2-5%) is slim to none.
The American dream has been gutted by the same people who now routinely grant themselves double digit bonus increases (i.e., 30%) during a recession. As such, it has become a pipe dream for most Americans.
donnyw1967Mar 19, 2011
It's unfortunate that those who have gained the most from the socio-economic ladder that was once part of the American fabric are so intent on tearing down that same ladder for others.
stubearMar 20, 2011
That's because they very same people have lost as much, if not more, from the actions of the top 1% of country. In layman's terms, the ultra wealthy are pissing off what was once the middle class and a day of reckoning will come.
donnyw1967Mar 20, 2011
Just to clarify. Those who gained the most=Wealthy
rudegarMar 20, 2011
but the people most into the American dream are for the most part ignorant of this development and there is the power the super rich wield
bcronosMar 20, 2011
Perhaps you should watch the movie 'The Social Network' and then think a little harder before you comment next time... He's the youngest billionaire in the world...
I have 5 good buddies I've known since grade school. 3 of us were millionaires by the time we were 30. Another one made it before 40. But we worked our asses off to get there....
Those people who were granted bonuses EARNED THEM. If they didn't make profits for their company, they wouldn't get any bonus.
BTW - When was the last time you worked hard enough to earn a bonus?
Thought so...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
how many jobs even think of giving out bonuses. with today's s**t economy most people are feeling lucky to even have a job and the employer knows that. that is why pensions are now a thing of the past. what ever happened to working for an employer for +20 and then retiring with a pension. Also, how hard are these CEO's really working. there is no way in hell you could compare what these guys call work to an average middle class workers 40hr(if he's lucky enough to get 40hrs.) Do they get to raise their bonus when they get par at the links? its ridiculous that ANYONE makes the kind of money these people bring in their sleep. the only thing this kind of BLATANT MONEY HOARDING does is kill the dream of the working stiff. they can grant themselves all the money they want but cant give out good benefits to the people who MAKE THEIR MONEY. its only a matter of time....
letherialMar 21, 2011
Its the cycle of a country. No matter what country, eventually the rich takes advantage of the poor and then the poor rise up and kills the rich.
America was the first country to appear to break he cycle, that is until the rich changed it. While i dont think that the poor need to rise up and kill the rich, there will be a political snap, it appeared in 2006, and 2008; republicans got 2010 to change there ways, but there not, if anything, they dug in more.
I suspect, and i could be wrong, but in 2012 the poor and middle class will follow the cycle, expect they dont need to kill the rich in a democracy, just keep trying to vote the right people in, eventually, someone will balance it out or...well, plan b i suppose, regardless, the rich cant keep taking...at least not safely anyways.
user500Mar 20, 2011
perhaps you should watch less movies. Digg and Kevin Rose was worth big bucks a few years back and now its near worthless thanks to his inept management of V4.0. Eventually the mighty fall.
invadercthulhuMar 20, 2011
Look at me im a rich kid... wah wah wah.
Shut up liar
luvkitMar 20, 2011
3 years ago I was working 3 jobs, 6 to 7 days a week. I didn't break $30k that year. I now work one job, and didn't break that barrier last year. I worked my ass off, thank you much.
But it's not just about how hard you work, but rather the opportunities you get. If you are around people that can put you in places for success, your chances for success are higher. If you work 3 bottom rung jobs, you don't run into anyone that can make your life better. I'm still working hard, but I've focused myself down to one job so I don't exhaust myself.
Say what you will, but there's something wrong in the growing divide between rich and not-so rich. I wish there wouldn't need to be legal intervention, but the rich are now morally adrift in their wealth and control far too much with that financial influence. The poorer are disillusioned, tired, and frustrated. We shouldn't have more than half the population cycling bills in the richest nation on earth.
Oh, and if I were making a million a year, anything over $100k would go to making others' lives better. Probably to individuals and not charities. I would want to make others' lives as good as mine had become, and share the prosperity voluntarily. And if you're wondering why I need a $100k, I don't. Half would be going to retirement and making sure I didn't have bills on anything I owned. I might splurge a little, but with no debt, I'd be living off $50k. And if I ever make it there, I will. You can come back to this post and quote me on it if you ever see me in the news... which as many have pointed out, not likely to happen.
letherialMar 21, 2011
excepting 100k per year is not that bad of a expectation, i mean its a big reach for many many people, but its not greedy or unreasonable.
Asking for tax cuts after you gutted the economy and are taking home 300 to 400 a million a year is not only greedy, but displays a baffling amount of arrogance
YachtRokrMar 21, 2011
I've known quite a few internet millionaires over the years. Tragically, many of them once possessed the same overconfidence and fortunes you claim to have. After the dot com bust of 2000, they lost their shirts just as you're likely to do. You see, the economic model you're basing your good fortune on is as vapid as the ones they relied upon.
So tell me, oh sage one, why hasn't Facebook, Twitter or those other social media models produced significant revenue yet. Yes, I'm familiar with the projected valuations using recent Goldman Sachs investments, but how many times has THAT rosy picture proven to be pure BS.
Finally, with regard to your assumptions about my work ethic, I've always worked most people under the table. I'm sure you'd be no exception. I've also been making millionaires since before you knew what software code meant and I made some of my fortune by betting against half-baked morons, just like you. It's a shame you don't know as much about economics as software code. Now where have I seen this disaster before? Hmm...
As for earning a bonus, I've earned more than my fair share over the years and am quite familiar with what it takes to earn one. I also happen to be more than a little familiar with executive compensation. As such, I know it's virtually impossible to see these kinds of executive pay increases unless they are NOT tied to performance or their incentive plans have been rigged.
Finally, if money was the only measure of a man, you might amount to something in life. Sadly, you're just another self-absorbed blowhard who happens to have a healthy bank account (for now, it won't last). Think about that...
laborerMar 19, 2011
The hope to be rich does not justify the shurgging of ones responsibility to the system which provided you roads and educated employees.
The fact that they can get away with what they do now is absurd, and the fact that those in the American right are STILL fighting to lessen their responsibilty shows just how much a renewed left movement is needed.
Someones has to be the law and say when enough theft is enough.
Stealing is a crime even for banksters and corporate heads. No exceptions. Especially multi-billionaire exceptions.
norman619Mar 20, 2011
What bulls**t. So you should be forced to pay MORE than everyone else simply because you are successful? Everyone should be taxed at the same rate period. Anything else is wrong and theft.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
donnyw1967Mar 20, 2011
Yes, If you make more you should pay more, because that is the way the successful became successful. At one point in almost all American families they started at the very bottom. They worked hard and their children were educated at the expense of the wealthy, who got their start in much the same manner.. And so on and so on. The main problem now is that the ones who made it to the top have changed the system so they don't pay anymore and the whole country is paying for their greed.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
"whole country is paying for their greed".
Was with you until here. Greed gets you nothing. You could be the greediest bastard on earth and if you didn't provide something that people wanted you'd still be poor as hell.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
donnyw1967Mar 20, 2011
Not that the country is paying for their own greed, that the country is paying for the greed of the wealthy who have changed the system, and that payment is not only financial
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
i agree.
with the amount of money they can throw at their GOVERNMENT SPONSORS they can get just about anything passed these days. we will just keep hearing about how these depressed rich people will go crazy and quit their jobs if they dont get their 35 million bonus this quarter and we as americans better pay up or face a world collapse or something. "oh, you want to raise you bonus another 45%. well we better call fox for damage control." money=power and they are the one's with the most.
laborerMar 20, 2011
The runners of major business, those who profit most from all that commerce, need to pay their fair share.
No poor that I know employ a fleet of semi's, tearing up the public roads, or pollute the _public_ environment. These costs are outsourced from the company to the people, and to top it all off they wont even throw in on it.
These elites rely on these systems and labor markets more than anyone.
Still they shirk the responsibilities that come with sustaining a society. Without a workforce, without teachers, without police, without doctors, this whole machine will not move an inch or produce a dollar.
miklkitMar 20, 2011
So now you are saying that everyone should be taxed at the same rate? Welcome to reality.
The average Joe pays around 32% taxes. Businesses average out at around 32% taxes. But the ELITES are only paying around 17% taxes. That is net,not gross.
What say we level the playing field?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
The corporate tax rate is 40 percent. Because of that, most multinational corporations shift profits to other countries. The effective tax rate is lower for the rich because most of their income comes from capital gains. Most of my income comes from capital gains and I'm poor. Capital gains is just a different thing and taxing it needs to be different. In order to make money, you have to put your money at risk and face the possibility of losing it. It's not like a regular income and if the taxes are too high, money gets shifted to less risky investments. That's generally not a good thing because new businesses are the highest risk.
shark72Mar 20, 2011
Yes, that's why it's called a progressive tax system. It's what the modernized world uses.
Countries which have flat tax systems are, with few exceptions, doing pretty poorly and aren't places that most of us would want to live:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Countries_that_have_flat_tax_systems
Remember that even with our progressive tax system, my total tax burden as a percentage of my income is less than yours, even though I make a lot more than you. It's already stacked to my advantage. Income tax is progressive; social security and various use/excise taxes are not.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
YES!!!!!!!
they had the CHANCE to make the money IN AMERICA. They MUST pay just like everyone else. they DONT get the same crutch as the poor (who NEED IT for food/housing). they made so much USING THE SYSTEM that BY LAW they have to pay more.
Also, if everyone was taxed the same, then what would the tax rate be? would the homeless and disenfranchised (you know the ones that the bankers screwed over to make the s**tton of money they are giving themselves as bonuses not to mention the government bailouts that went STRAIT TO THEIR POCKETS.) be killed of by high taxes. you also dont take into account the size of the gap between the "regular guy" and the mega-rich. i bet even YOU couldn't see across it.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
Why don't we just try National Socialism like Germany? I mean, then we can move out the corporate greed and bankers. After that we can enact our twenty-five points to empower the mother land. We'll start by making it illegal to earn money from anything but work, and require all companies to enact fair and equal profit sharing. We'll strengthen the state's social-welfare system, especially for the elderly. Oh and the middle class is the most important, we'll make it much much stronger. We won't have to worry about people evading taxes internationally, because in order to own or operate a business you'll have to be a citizen, which we'll define quite thoroughly. No war profiteering, that will be a capital offense so we don't have to worry about blackwater or anything similar.
/sc
How about not. You enjoy your little socialist world and I'll do what the IKEA founder and every other industrious person does and just move to the cheapest country for my personal taxes.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
surprisingly that sounds great. but with socialism the only downside is the people in charge. greed plays a HUGE role in any type of government and in socialism it goes unchecked. why cant we keep our three branches, ya know for checks and balances, and adopt more of the socialist ideals. we are Americans, we need to take ALL approaches to making our country great. why not strengthen the middle class? they produce the goods, they make the home purchases, they support the rich. yet we try to kill it off? IKEA can keep their crap furniture in Scandinavia. they are a poor exampled. but you seem to like the state of things here. do you enjoy whats happening to 90% of Americans. did you laugh at the TV when they told of backwater's doings or the war profiteering. we send our troops over there to be shot by our own guns that WE SOLD THEM. if you want to move then fine renounce your citizenship and MOVE. then you wont have to pay US taxes, you can move to a third world country and be raped by drug lords, the police protection you currently pay for with taxes dont apply here though.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
invadercthulhuMar 20, 2011
Silly child
amaoicanMar 20, 2011
I agree, but only to a point. Everyone should pay the same tax rate on the money they earn over a certain amount, under which they should pay no tax at all and perhaps even receive money.
Why should anyone get more back than they paid in to tax? Because it's a good pretense for getting rid of all other welfare programs, thus getting rid of the disincentive to earn more money. Whether you are making $5/yr or $50,000 per year, making $1 more will increase your tax expense (or decrease your tax income) by the same amount.
I know a girl right now. She has no job, she has two kids, and she refuses to look for work because she _needs_ the free healthcare and other government aid. If she got a job, she would make enough to exclude herself from those programs but not enough to pay for her necessities (ahem, childcare). So she works (or tries to work) under the table. But of course, under the table jobs don't contribute much to a resume, so she's not even ON the ladder toward success. She's stuck.
(then again, unless she got a _very_ high paying job she would be eligible for heavily-subsidized health care and childcare. I tried to explain this to her but she's dense.)
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
if only everyone could listen to your advise. get a very high paying job is not a reality in her or most peoples lives. nice thought though.
gransaterMar 20, 2011
Yes, BS indeed.
How come most ultra wealthy pay only 16% of their income, while many working stiffs pay a higher % on their taxes, and before you ooh and ahh, check out a wealthy person that has integrity and tells it like it is, i.e, Warren Buffet.
In your idea wealthy pay more in dollars, its true, but they also "earn" a whole lot more dollars, so in numbers they pay more. In percentage they pay less, and still complain.
Yeah, B.S. indeed, just not from the quarter you think.
YachtRokrMar 21, 2011
Norm,
You're so caught up in your selfishness that you fail to recognize the REASON we have a progressive tax system. It's virtually impossible to have ANY social infrastructure in a capitalist society without a progressive tax system. Pitch it you say? Well, considering that the ability to sustain a healthy economy disappears in the absence of a social infrastructure, we'd only cut your own economic throats by replacing a progressive tax system with a flat tax or consumption tax based system.
NO THANKS!
If you prefer a flat tax system, move to Russia. I hear it produces an awesome economy for them...NOT!
bcronosMar 20, 2011
On what planet do people not deserve to reap the fruits of their labor? Certainty not the one I live on...
I heard a famous Russian news anchor talking about the old days of socialism. He said that back then, he made exactly as much money as the woman who served him lunch in the cafeteria.
Is this the type of world that you want? If it is, leave me the hell out of it...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
laborerMar 20, 2011
Your whole world consists entirely of FOX News-esque misconceptions and outright fabrications, doesnt it? 400 key individuals in the US possess as much wealth as nearly ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE MILLIION Americans -combined-!
How is it possible for your brain to actually perceive that things are somehow more or less equal right now. Conditions arent. The system which allows these men to become mini-gods in the first place are much more important than the neo-deities themselves.
It is a delusion of grandeur. No human is important enough to justify what is going on in the third world, or even now here in the United States of America.
What labor are they producing that could possibly be worth that much? It is these thiefs of appropriation of wealth that reap more than their share.
Of course different professions should make different wages, just as a hard worker should earn more than a lazy one. To think that this reality did not exist before European capitalism is not only erroneous, but ridiculous.
bcronosMar 20, 2011
"400 key individuals in the US possess as much wealth as nearly ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE MILLIION Americans -combined-!"
Yep, and you've voluntarily given most of them some of YOUR money almost every day of your adult life for the products and services they offer.
If you don't want them to be rich, stop giving them your money!
"What labor are they producing that could possibly be worth that much?" ---
They are producing money, with their brains and their hard work, of which they get a cut...
What do you produce btw?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
user500Mar 20, 2011
that isn't so bad? What hospital could run without doctors? Nurses? Janitors or maintenance? How about billing clerks?
All are expected to work together and all are important except in the payroll office. I believe there needs to be more undercover boss situations as I don't think most even have a clue about who does what and for how much. The "let them eat cake" mentality is way too strong.
laborerMar 20, 2011
Your world is small. The rest of the planet has subsidized your way of life with slave labor. Or do you not understand the relation that south american wokers has with north american companies? Or any third world country for that matter.
People all over the world starve so that Nike can pay workers a fraction of what their labor will sell for. Not that Nike is unique. This is the way of the corporation. Now it is happening here in your own country, and still you submit to these economic tyrants.
Or maybe you are just a shill. You will claim how you know so many wealthy people. That anyone can do it, but that 95% of the world not having done it is a sympton of their laziness, not a flaw in the system.
You live in a fantasy of self-worth. The system which you uphold starves children in far off lands, causes blood shed in violent rebellions, and usurps the value created by many millions of humans labor.
amaoicanMar 20, 2011
"People all over the world starve so that Nike can pay workers a fraction of what their labor will sell for."
Bull. They sell their labor cheaply because they don't have many opportunities. They'd rather work hard for a little money than not work at all for no money.
If Nike decided to close their "sweat shops" and replace the "poor exploited humans" with factory machines, the poor humans would be even worse off.
donnyw1967Mar 20, 2011
I had to reread this thread a couple of times, and nobody said a person does not deserve to keep the fruits of their labor. Think of it this way a community starts an abundant garden, a few members show up early and harvest the majority of the food, so much that it would go to waste if they kept it all, would it not be only fair for them to give some back to the community that helped grow it.
bcronosMar 20, 2011
Does Nature work that way? No. The early bird gets the worm. Those that work hardest and the longest reap the rewards.
Those that want to sleep in, and still reap the rewards, fail.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
brathorMar 20, 2011
@brcronos Behold the return of social Darwinism.
bcronosMar 20, 2011
@brathor --- Survival of the fittest... good luck...
brathorMar 20, 2011
Seems more like survival of the most opportunistic and greedy.
donnyw1967Mar 20, 2011
In nature it is not uncommon for them to eat their young, so by your logic we should eat children.
DasBeukeMar 19, 2011
Not 100% sure but I think that the tax bracket is $375k and up. It doesn't distinguish between really well-to-do bottom of rich and ridiculously I-bought-a-yacht-for-my-dog rich.
melthornalMar 19, 2011
375k is 10 times the average income of an American.
DasBeukeMar 19, 2011
True, and the people that make THAT amount are pretty well to do. They aren't the ones raping the economy, though. You can spend that much money a year in reasonable, albeit high-quality, purchases (Hockaday private school here is $40k per year, per child).
There is nothing reasonable in spending or needing $500 million. Anything you could buy with that much money is just to show off that you have that money.
Don't fault everyone who is rich, some earn your ire, and some don't.
entroperMar 20, 2011
All of the above is true, but we could certainly have another bracket starting at $2m, and another still at $10m. As recently as 1980, the top rate was 70% for incomes above $215k. That's $552k in 2009 dollars, which is not very far above our current top bracket. Is 70% too much on $550k and up? Maybe. Is it too much on $10m and up? I don't see how anyone making 8 digits could possibly complain.
apr400Mar 20, 2011
The problem is that even if you implement higher tiers of higher taxation, people on these kinds of earnings can afford accountants and tax specialists to get around paying what they should.
In order to prevent this the obvious solution would be a massive simplification of the tax system. One or two taxes (eg one income and one sales) with one or two tiers, and that's it. Remove the complexity and you will remove the loopholes. Treat business and people the same. Tax income where it is generated, rather than allowing companies to offshore profits. Treat all income regardless of source (or type, ie not just monetary income) the same. Make penalties for evasion draconian.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
no, then we rely on the IRS to do THEIR job. take out the loopholes and let them throw their money away tring to get around it. then, if they DO find a way, stop it next year. i cant get mad at someone doing their job(ie. tax specialist) but i can get mad at THE GOVERNMENT ALLOWING the tax breaks/loopholes in the first place. as humans we will ALWAYS try but there has to be someone there to say NO. they are like a fat kid in a closed candy store while the starving are looking through the window. just DISGRACEFUL and UNETHICAL and they are trying like hell to keep it that way.
martoqMar 20, 2011
Have you looked at the net worth and incomes of the people who would actually have to put this into affect?
If not take a gander...and you will quickly realize why we will never see this. It would require them to essentially vote to tax more of their own money because they would fall into these new tiers.
apr400Mar 20, 2011
I agree - in fact I imagine this is why it is the way it is. I don't expect anything to change - just suggesting what I think would work if it ever happened.
aserer511Mar 20, 2011
Well it's the concept of it. I.e., yes they have a lot to give but that is not an indefatigable reason to take MORE THAN HALF from em. That said, a higher bracken for 10m+ is reasonable-just not a ridiculous one. 45% mebeh
dirtyfriesMar 19, 2011
The myth that heavier taxes on the rich hurt job creation.
yurmutha412Mar 19, 2011
Right, because if we tax the crud out of millionaires, they will flock to this country to start new businesses. Anyone knows that.
apr400Mar 20, 2011
Remember to lube up as you bend over.
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
I don't get anything from anyone except what I make in the stock market and I'm definitely not wealthy, but I've always worked and made my own way. I don't need to rip anyone off or kiss anyone's butt. You just want to bend over for the government boys.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
most new businesses are started buy the upper-middle class. i doubt that any one of these multimillionaires start up a small business. they make the money and save it.
shwaavayMar 20, 2011
They make money and INVEST it.
That's what creates the jobs...fool.
rjoplingMar 20, 2011
i dont see how investing in an already established business creates jobs. and if they are creating sooo many jobs investing then why is the economy so crappy?your logic seems flawed when compared to the real world. you are lost in the fantasy that these mega rich give one s**t about the USA or its economy. they already have their power and are not even thinking of sharing it with anyone below them. for you not to realize this makes you the fool... ass!
shwaavayMar 20, 2011
You are the fool for thinking that rich people save money under a mattress. Whatever money a "rich" person has is invested and will either be lost or will grow with the company or companies that the money is invested in.
I only called you a fool because your comment didn't seem to reflect any understanding of this.
markusfarkusMar 20, 2011
No. Demand creates jobs.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
Nope income tax doesn't affect job creation. However it barely affects revenue either... go figure they manage to get out of paying.
jmaisMar 19, 2011
"Watching television is like taking black spray paint to your third eye."
— Bill Hicks
laborerMar 19, 2011
And the internet is like Visine.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
so you can squirt it into someone's drink when you want to give them diarrhea?
armedrebelMar 19, 2011
Because most Americans are stupid.
BTW, I'm an American.
yurmutha412Mar 19, 2011
Speaking as one non-millionaire, you want to tax capital gains, which affects non-millionaires who make money in a businesslike way, like selling stocks, selling a house, or selling basically anything. Also, I personally feel that no one should pay more than 30 percent of their income in taxes because they lose the incentive to actually make money, or they find ways to disguise it or transfer it to a country that doesn't charge as high of taxes, so it's basically useless and the country ends up with less money here and more abroad. The top 10 percent already pays about 60 percent of income tax. The only way we can actually do better in this country is by having more businesses. That small amount you get by trying to soak the rich will just discourage business.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
youareretardedMar 20, 2011
They lose the incentive to make money? That's the biggest piece of horse s**t I have ever heard!
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
Well, I meant in the US. They will find ways to make money in other countries and show losses in the US. No one will pay the majority of what they make in taxes, especially if they are rich and able to hire lawyers and show profit in other countries.
miklkitMar 20, 2011
And that is something that needs to be addressed.
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
There's no way that can be addressed. They can also just move their headquarters.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
I mean on the margin it would be true. In reality what it does is increase the incentive for tax evasion if not down right illegally through the exploitation of loopholes.
youareretardedMar 20, 2011
So raising taxes are bad because people will just avoid them?
I can't think of anything we can do to fix that issue so why bother trying.
/s
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
did I say we shouldn't fix the problem? No.
youareretardedMar 20, 2011
Sorry that part was for yurmutha412, see the post above yours.
anub1sMar 20, 2011
So you're saying that people are likely to look at the higher tax rates on the higher income, give up on achieving that income level, and just say f**k it it's not worth it?
The entire f**king system is based on the idea that people are greedy, it COUNTS on it. Don't f**king kid yourself.
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
No, they'll do just what I said. They will find ways around paying the taxes. There's a whole world that will charge lower taxes. They will simply have a business in another country on which they show profit, and keep the businesses that don't make money or show a low profit in the US. It's you that are kidding yourself. You will never get that money. You will only cause profitable businesses to leave the US.
anub1sMar 20, 2011
No matter what we do we f**k ourselves. We give far too much power to the rich, and the worst part is we are willing to allow it to happen because we have some mass delusion that we all have the opportunity to become one of them.
More and more people are having to dream of just stability, rather than riches and extravegance. It's only going to get worse if we keep supporting a system that is founded on greed, where wealth is treasured. I don't kid myself, I know the country will not see a lot of that money, but do we just allow that to happen while deluding ourselves into thinking that the jobs will stay here regardless? Technological advancement continues to put people out of work, and it's only going to get worse, all for the sake of the bottom line.
Corporations don't give a s**t about people, the owners and directors care about the money coming in and that's it. They don't care how many jobs they supply. As long as people continue to support those corporations, it won't change, either.
Philosophically we are all f**king idiots, everyone is kidding themselves.
yurmutha412Mar 20, 2011
The alternative to corporations is basically socialism and it works much worse. Even Russia and China have given in to corporations and private enterprise because they work better and people aren't starving there anymore. Right now, we are in the middle of globalization and a lot of businesses have shifted manufacturing to low wage countries, but those wages are improving slowly and things will come up eventually. We'll than have more consumers and people will be on a more equal footing. Private enterprise works the best.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
anub1sMar 20, 2011
How so? How would a democratic socialist state work worse than a corporatocracy? How would people working together voting on everything and not being ruled by their masters at the helm of their livlihoods be a bad thing? People simply must be told how to live?
The problem with every single economic doctrine that is in use today, whether it be capitalism, socialism, or communism, is that they all work under the assumption that we live on a planet with unlimited resources, fact is, we don't. We are continually digging our own grave, and it's because we are in fear of working together as a species, claiming that it's a form of slavery, and not real freedom. Bulls**t on that for one, but for another, what we do right now is a form of slavery. We are slave to corporations because we need the money in order to live. Money, the absolute root of modern day evil.
There are alternatives to this idiocy we call economy, but we are too stupid as a whole to actualize it, and so, are doomed to fail eventually.
miklkitMar 20, 2011
Raise tariffs! Level the playing field. If you want to play in my house, then you have to play by my rules.
shark72Mar 20, 2011
Oh, please. Name one person who has lost the incentive to make more money due to a progressive tax system.
Remember... the more money you make, the less your total tax burden as a percentage of your income. For instance, SSA has about 30% less impact for me than it does for you (assuming your income is average), and every additional dollar I can make over my current income is another dollar that won't be subject to social security tax; in the meantime, 100% of your salary will continue to have social security collected against it.
Remember when Warren Buffett said that his tax burden in terms of percentage of his income was less than that of his secretary? He's right. I've already noticed the same thing, and I'm probably only two or three tax brackets above you.
norman619Mar 20, 2011
Maybe he sees how it is wrong to punish people for being successful? How about EVERYONE pays the same tax rate? That's called a FAIR tax.
anub1sMar 20, 2011
That's a piss poor argument that is philosophically flawed. One word destroys that entire argument: Society. You live in a society and take advantage of what it has to offer, including the ability to make your fortunes, you WILL be expected to put back into it, and at the same rate as you take out of it. People with more wealth take more out of the society, and therefore will be expected to pay more into it. That's called FAIR living.
bcronosMar 20, 2011
Ahhhh... But it's NOT fair if you're more successful than the losers...! They think they deserve part of your profits without actually contributing anything to earning them...
brathorMar 20, 2011
Because everyone who was ever wealthy built that wealth from the ground up!
dusanmalMar 20, 2011
What civil/human right do rich humans lack so that they can be taxed more? They already pay more than fair share. Fair as everyone pays exactly the same percentage of income as taxes. Only than no human rights are violated. What you are saying is the same as Nazi "it's the Jews" just in your case you discriminate based on income versus Nazis on nationality and race. Equal treatment for all is the only solution. Right to vote must be given with all voters participating with the same percentage of their income in Govt. funding.
As for article: It is called free market. Participate if you want and if you are excellent by its measures you'll be rich. I chose to teach and do not expect monetary riches. But just because I earn less does not mean I want my Govt. to steal (as it is) from the "rich" because they are "different". Asking for higher taxes on "rich" is equal to denying civil rights to any group (blacks, LGBT, women, immigrants,... you pick - just another group of "different" people) .Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
goweigusMar 20, 2011
maybe they feel that you shouldnt get taxed more because you make more?
invadercthulhuMar 20, 2011
Because talking heads successfully convinced the poor that putting pressure on the rich is bad for them. Stupid poor people
fairley7Mar 19, 2011
As billionaire Warren Buffet said: "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning."
(http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett)
crock2Mar 19, 2011
The war is pretty much over at this point. The rich have won....
melthornalMar 19, 2011
There is a 0% chance the rich will ever win, ever. Throughout all of the future, the rich will lose. The rich will take, and then lose everything. Then they will take more, and lose everything. It is 100% impossible for the rich to "win." When there are 99% poor people, the rich will lose 100% of the time.
laborerMar 19, 2011
Yeah, its going so well.
While this may be true in some sense, just sitting by thinking that it will be taken care of by the "future" is ridiculous. No offense.
We are over a decade past the year 20 thousand. This is the future. Why arent the poor doing anything about this war yet?
melthornalMar 20, 2011
Actually, THIS is the present. THAT was the past. The future hasn't happened yet. Get it straight.
laborerMar 20, 2011
Please press "alt"+"F4" on life.
Thanks.
melthornalMar 20, 2011
You think it exceedingly short time frames, don't you? You must be one of those people who believe it is all about them, your experience is all important. You must see change now, or it isn't happening. Very shallow, self centered outlook. Solipsist, almost.
laborerMar 20, 2011
Easy to say when you arent among those dying. Or to a family member of those financing the modern first world through wage slavery and accepting despotism worldwide, as in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
But you think what I say is about me? In America?
This is about what is right in accord to basic human rights. Nothing more.
And now that real poverty is starting to strike those in the modern states, Europe and the US, now people become interested. Interest is not enough. Action is the only currency of change.
Action need only be active social campaigning, and you will be helping ease those historical injustices. But damnit, be proud that you are doing the right thing! The time is not tomorrow. This is not anyones problem but ours.
It is our time, charge of this democratic government falls heavilly on the new generations. One human, one vote. This is the will of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. This is our greatest, and still yet unused, tool.
My previous comment was a mistake. Sorry to have purposefully agitated you. We obviously have the same goals, therefore fighting is not only pointless, but harmful.
Cheers.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
it's because "poor" keeps being redefined.
spartan777Mar 20, 2011
They haven't won until we're all either in prison (very profitable for them) or slaving away 70 hours a week without any unions, and the entire government has been privatized and we have democracy only in name.
youareretardedMar 20, 2011
It looks like we are getting close. How many people belong to unions now as compared to the past? What hasn't been privatized yet?
spartan777Mar 20, 2011
Schooling is still dominated by the public sector. We still have SS and Medicare. All of these things are under attack and I'm not saying things are going well, but we still have a long way to fall.
DasBeukeMar 19, 2011
I think we owe it to ourselves to not support their companies if we can. Work for yourself, you can do it, it's easier than people think.
upnorthgirlMar 19, 2011
And they wonder why a 100,000 people were marching in Madison last Sat.
donnyw1967Mar 19, 2011
Absolutely true, my issue is not with the bonus as much as with the fact that the workers had to fight for the crumbs and the ceo is handed millions. I am pretty sure the workers had a lot more to do with making the profits
adambomb5060Mar 19, 2011
Well, a good CEO makes all the difference. Without workers, there would, of course, be nothing at all, but from a top-floor office, workers look like ants to be burned with the magnifying glass that is profit maximization.
donnyw1967Mar 19, 2011
Although a good CEO may make a big difference in some industries, Disney? I think they could replace him with a flower pot and still be profitable.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
I guess you know where to invest then.....
cold0008Mar 20, 2011
This is what is screwing up our economy. When we invest in a company, we don't make most of our personal profit off of our share of the profit, we make it off of growth. So if I invested in Disney and their profits remained steady I would make little or no money, but if I invested in them and they sold off chunks of their business to show increasing profits every year I would make quite a bit of money until they ran out of things to sell.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
If their profits remained steady you would continue to earn the profits back in the form of either dividends or realization of those future discounted earning that the stock is meant to reflect (which most solid stocks and bluechips do).
If they sold of chunks of their business their stocks would quickly take a dive due to the loss of future returns, unless it was used to pay off debt sort of like AMD did when it spun off its manufacturing division.
miklkitMar 19, 2011
Yup. Those tax cuts are really pumping up the economy. The average Joe lost money last month while these guys get bonuses. And the ones that fired the most workers got the biggest bonuses. That should tell you why they are not your friend and do not deserve your support. By firing you they make more money.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/28/AR2010092806143.html
http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201010080001
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/04/09/businessinsider-15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4.DTL
4Herp2Derp0Mar 19, 2011
Then they just tell everyone else to pick up the slack.
Worker productivity is high in America because we are forced to be that way without getting compensated for the increased productivity.
spartan777Mar 20, 2011
That is partly true. We are forced to work more hours against our will by our bosses, but productivity per hour per worker is almost identical in the US as it is in, say, France. Krugman has an excellent article on this subject.
"here are some ratios of France to the United States:
GDP per capita: 0.731
GDP per hour worked: 0.988
Employment as a share of population: 0.837
Hours per worker: 0.884
So French workers are roughly as productive as US workers. But fewer Frenchmen and women are working, and when they work, they work fewer hours.
Why are fewer Frenchmen working? As I’ve pointed out, during prime working years they’re as likely to work as Americans. But fewer young people work (in part because of more generous college aid); and, mainly, the French retire earlier. The latter is arguably the result of misguided policies: Mitterand made early retirement alarmingly attractive. But it’s not a problem of weak productivity or mass unemployment.
And why do the French work shorter hours? Probably for the most part because of government policies mandating vacation time.
The bottom line is that France is a society with the same level of technology and productivity as the US, but one that has made different choices about retirement and leisure. Vive la difference!"
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/28/gdp-per-capita-here-and-there/
miklkitMar 20, 2011
Shorter hours worked equals more production per hour.
In Union construction we used to regularly work 7 days a week. Then time and motion studies showed that working Sundays was a waste of time. We were a bunch of zombies staggering around making mistakes and hurting ourselves. That was in the early 1990s.
Now we are moving to 4 -10 hour days. Again because we are more efficient per hour working those hours. There is always the option of working Friday and Saturday if needed.
It appears the French are way ahead of us, as usual.
kaelyiestaMar 19, 2011
CEO pay is a function of our stock markets, which are in turn highly distorted coercive entities which exchange trillions of dollars per year from speculators who would otherwise see that money taxed.
There is a reason why CEO pay immediately started climbing in the 80s. Two specific laws were enacted during that time that were particularly in sync with the sudden change: laws restricting companies from paying CEOs by salaries, and laws taxing citizens more unless they put money into 'investments' like 401ks.
It also doesn't help that competition is so hindered by regulatory protectionism of corporations. Nor does it help that individual taxation is so high, encouraging corporations to keep capital within the business itself which can be more easily tapped by the CEOs at the top. The list goes on and on, but the real point is this: central planning cannot replace a societies direction of resources. Worse still is that central planners rarely even try to reflect the will of society anyhow. Giving control over us in economic matters to a small group of people will always result in a small group of people robbing the rest.
http://www.google.com/images?q=ceo+pay+graph
theswashbucklerMar 20, 2011
"CEO pay is a function of our stock markets"
CEO pay is a function of the good ol' boys network.
shwaavayMar 20, 2011
You are quite wrong about that.
jpsy422Mar 19, 2011
So people that work for years and years to become owners and CEOs shouldn't be rewarded? Do all of you plan on being low to mid level employees your entire life? Reward the top people and the people below will have a reason to work towards advancement. Why would you work harder to become a CEO/President/VP if all you saw was a significant increase in workload and exposure to litigation, but only a modest increase in pay and minimal increase in bonuses/benefits? You are paid for your exposure to risk, of which execs have the most. Pretty basic economics.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Schweppesale2Mar 19, 2011
The point they're trying to make is that these very same corporations don't have enough cash to hire workers despite the numerous tax cuts we've been throwing at them. Instead the money is being used to line pockets.
Closed AccountMar 19, 2011
Have you seen the statistic that says that no one makes it from the bottom or middle to the top? So you are really special? Really? Went to Harvard did we? Born with that silver spoon like Bush? So if none of this is true then why are you throwing everyone under a bus so you can chase an imaginary dream that will never happen. This isn't "Pretty Woman".
I think we need to look into why these guys are getting these kind of bonuses when they don't help the situation at all. The only thing they produce is wealth. Not for anyone but themselves.
ravagedsoulMar 20, 2011
If you look at CEOs of billion dollar companies, they are people who have been working for 40 or more years, having started in an entry-level position like anyone else.
It's absurd to suggest that no one makes it from the bottom to the top; where exactly do you think CEOs come from? No board of directors is going to hire a CEO who does not have decades of working experience.
As for compensation, Robert Iger (just the first name in the article) is responsible for 140,000 employees, thousands of suppliers, customers, and shareholders. Compare to a regular employee who is responsible for no one except himself; who gets to go home at five doesn't think about work again till the next day.
CEO compensation has gotten excessive, but it's the same cause as it is for athletes and entertainers - competition for a limited resource drives up the price.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
I will say I do not agree that no one will ever achieve the American dream. But my American dream is to be wealthy in all regards. This wealth does not include the greed that has seemed to stricken this planet. I want to be wealthy, so that I may help people and get them to live and love life, such as I do.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
You are saying that some guy who was working in the mail room at Goldman Sachs was then found to be such a great worker that they promoted him until he finally was making 8 figures?
I know, Bill Gates was a poor little rich boy who dropped out of Harvard. Tel me that story again. And the CEO of BP he was a bum in the streets of England until they found what a great leader he would be. The homeless guy with the golden voice. He's a millionaire now, right?
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
Actually Warren Buffett read his story....it is no silver spoon story. Give me a break. The guy in the mail room at Goldman Sachs doesn't deserve to make over minimum wage....he has a simple job with minimum thought to his tasks. Odds are he doesn't have a college degree. He is getting paid for his level of work. So he can go out find a slightly higher paying job, go to a community college or finish out his GED and work his way up over time but it takes more than just showing up for work to actually move up.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountMar 20, 2011
It is f**king amazing. You know, MATH. Really. There is this field called statistics, you really should take some time and look into it. You might hear about gausian curves. Warren Buffet is one out of 300 million. He might be one out of a million. That is 0.0001%. That is nobody, so my statement still stays. Take some math classes and maybe you will get it. I doubt it. Kinda deep.
So your family got lucky and that's all anyone else needs to do. Just hope that some day something doesn't happen to you that you can't control and it ruins your life then maybe you can understand? You sound like a typical conservative/libertarian assh**e. I got mine and f**k you. You must have f**k you money. How much is that today? $200M?
Can I be you? Please oh please. I just have a conscience. Can you show me how to lose it so I can be an assh**e too? Oh yeah, I have to hope that my family does all the work for me. You are my HERO!
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
Completely disagree. Not every CEO is a silver spoon baby. You watch to many movies where the CEO is simply out golfing. Any CEO worth his grain puts in more than 80 hours a week, sacrifices spending time with loved ones, is constantly on the road looking for new business opportunities. I have watched my own family go from the bottom to the top through hard work over time. It took 30+ years and you know how WE as a group did it? We never expect a hand out or the rich to give us their money. We learned about the loopholes just like any other person can do and used them. We all spent more time working then 40 hours a week. And now we get to see the rewards. Guess what and no one went to HARVARD. No one was born RICH. We actually lived the AMERICAN DREAM and got somewhere sadly you will never get. Why because we believed in the corny dream and we got somewhere! Mock us if you will...but we made it sounds like you didn't because your cynicism. Keep blaming everyone but yourself.
eraptorMar 19, 2011
@jpsy422,
You don't get the issues driving criticism aimed at executive/Wall Street pay practices.
The criticisms of executive/banker pay aren't based upon jealously, they are based upon the growing and dysfunctional chasm of individual performance and pay. As someone who has worked with compensation (including executive comp & benefits) for over 25 years, I can assure you that executive pay as reached levels that are no longer valid or justified. Hell, Bud Crystal (executive compensation expert) has been proving this truth for DECADES. I can also tell you that due to cronyism, most Americans have as much chance of becoming an executive as they do of becoming professional athletes during their career.
While there will always be a disparity between an average employees pay and that of executives, current disparities amount to economic insanity. The only thing the current compensation chasm succeeds in achieving is going concerns and fiscal mismanagement. Why does it happen? Simple. Executive/banker pay is based upon prevailing market pay practices , NOT company performance (that's simply the cover used to justify wealth redistribution within U.S. companies). I should know as I've witnessed it from the inside.
As for the workload argument, it doesn't hold much water. While the life of an executive and some bankers is stressful, stress levels and workloads haven't grown at the same rates as their pay over the past 3-4 decades. If you think the bureaucrats who run most corporations/banks are worth more than the people who CREATED those companies, then you have lost sight of their REAL economic value and that of line workers.
With regard to risk exposure, most it is driven by internal factors (i.e., executive/banker behavior), not external threats.
armedrebelMar 19, 2011
No one is saying that CEOs shouldn't make more than the average worker. But CEO pay rising while average worker pay is falling is neither fair nor good for 98% of people in this country.
spartan777Mar 20, 2011
"No one is saying that CEOs shouldn't make more than the average worker"
I don't say that... but I think we do need to get rid of CEO's. All of them. Workers should run the workplace.
"Man never regards what he possesses as so much his own, as what he does and the laborer who tends the garden is perhaps in a truer sense its owner, than the listless voluptuary who enjoys its fruits."
-Wilhelm Von Humboldt, "Limits of State Action" 1792.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
That is like saying let's let children educate themselves or patients operate on themselves. Read business psychology and you'll see that someone will always come out as the leader in a group. People need management end of story....so regardless eventually overtime new ceo's will replace those once removed by the group mentality.
spartan777Mar 20, 2011
"you'll see that someone will always come out as the leader in a group."
I'm not sure that's true, but either way, you would institute democratic structures in place of bosses. It wouldn't be a free-for-all, which is most likely what those ambiguous business psychology studies start with.
John Dewey has got it right-
"Until industrial feudalism is replaced by industrial democracy, politics will be the shadow cast on society by big business."
Political democracy is a sham without economic democracy. Luxemburg provides us with the urgency of discarding workplace Stalinism-
"the errors committed by a truly revolutionary movement are infinitely more fruitful than the infallibility of the cleverest Central Committee."
In the case of the workplace, the bosses are the central committee and the revolutionary movement would be workers' democratic control.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
...So you replace one "jackass" with multiple ones? It is a fantasy to think just because it is a group of people they will be anyone better. Corporate structures currently have a board of directors overseeing a firm....but I guess boards made up of workers who probably have little business savvy would really beneficial right? Apple would really operate smoothly with some of those summer interns at the helm, who have NO experience in running a business right? Okay I'm tired of arguing let's go back to socialism and feudalism, it got us really far in the past 1700 years before our nation was founded right? Russia was extremely successful with it's massive deployed of socialistic tendencies right back when they were the USSR...I just wonder sometimes if people have actually sat and taken a complete course in micro and macro economics to understand how things really operate.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
This is so true. Well said.
spartan777Mar 21, 2011
Yes, lets go back to monarchism. After all, what experience does the common peasant have running a country?
Familial/corporate dictatorship is the way to go.
eraptorMar 20, 2011
I would agree with you if all workers possessed the skill set required to supplant most CEO's, but in truth it takes a significant amount of education, knowledge and experience to run a large company. While their pay packages defy logic, this job will always require a certain skill set.
I'm not picking on workers. In truth, most CEO's couldn't replace them either. Skill sets and experience will always be relevant to every job in America, regardless of whether we're talking about CEO's, middle management or workers.
spartan777Mar 22, 2011
I think we've long past reached the stage in technology and industry in which we need bosses to tell us what to do. With some education and if given the tools, the whole of the workforce could replace the old workplace dictators. Also, I think it worth whatever small hit to productivity there is for the sake of replacing "industrial feudalism," as Dewey described it, with industrial democracy.
Maximization of profits and productivity might be best served with such hierarchical structures, but there is surely more to life than maximization of profit.
eraptorMar 22, 2011
If the business world was as quantitatively objective as many people assume, you'd be right. Unfortunately, after working in the private sector with both small and large companies for over 25 years, I've learned that there's far more subjectivity and individual judgment required in this position.
Computers can supplant some of the things that are done by CEO's (i.e., quantitative analysis), but most of their job responsibilities require people skills (i.e., politics) and strategizing. Replacing a CEO is akin to replacing a professional sport coach. You see, that's the role that most exemplifies what a CEO SHOULD be doing...leading a team of professionals.
spartan777Mar 22, 2011
I still don't see any compelling reason workers can't work democratically to accomplish what one overpaid voluptuary does.
FaSinPat factory is one of the biggest producers of ceramic tiles in the Western Hemisphere, yet they accomplish it all by democratic forms and without a CEO or "Patrones."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FaSinPat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_cooperatives
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
You sir are what we call a Moron -- end chat
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
They absolutely should. Most CEO of the mass majority of the fortune 500 and 1000 are the founders of their own firms. They put forth tireless hours into building their companies from nothing into something. They understood what it truly means to risk what they had, and it got them somewhere. Not all corporations operate like the big bad banks....and for those that think everything is like office space need to stop reading the "slanted" news and go out and take a look for yourself.
eraptorMar 20, 2011
I hate to disappoint you, but a precious few CEO's actually founded the companies they run. Most of them were either hired/appointed to their positions or grew their companies through acquisition (e.g., Warren Buffett), not innovation or exemplary business skills (e.g., Steve Jobs). As such, conglomerate CEO's (like Warren) are rewarded for pushing paper/capital around, NOT building a business from scratch (as Steve did). This does not justify their market "value" or compensation packages.
alienkidMar 19, 2011
Why isn't norman619 or digfarkel chiming in on this one?
It's strange to see a post without at least one of them talking some nonsense talking points in a comment with dozens of down diggs
pdemmertMar 20, 2011
look down 4 posts lol
simonsezzMar 19, 2011
Look up the CEO of United Healthcare, I think he makes 300 times what the average worker at the company makes. One of my friends works there and she tells me how every week they are told about more layoffs and made to work longer hours. Actually the company does everything it can to get the worker to quit so that they don't have to pay unemployment. And people are coming out against unions, groups that offer protection against this sort of thing. WTF is wrong with some people?
jagwealthMar 20, 2011
I wish I could vote myself a pay rise.
norman619Mar 20, 2011
CEO pay has nothing at all to do with the wages paid to regular workers. This is yet another attempt to foster class envy/warfare.
pdemmertMar 20, 2011
ridiculous statements do not compute...please try again...
norman619Mar 20, 2011
Translation: I have no idea how businesses are run.
Understood.
Let me break it down for you. The worker's wage is determined by the market. CEO's salary is decided by whatever the stockholders feel they are worth. One has nothing to do with the other.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
Let me break it down for you.. and I will try to be as simple as possible, so your brain will understand.
These people are "Gagging" the system. The same people that make the rules and set the salary, are the same people in that elite group.
Publicly-traded companies are run by corporate boards who determine a CEO's pay and benefits. Board members are usually experienced leaders from other large corporations whose expertise is called upon. However, many corporate boards comprise members whose individual goals often include becoming CEOs of major US firms themselves, so it is in their interest to provide lucrative (or excessive) compensation packages to the chief executive officer.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
............To continue.. cause I though your brain might need a break. The HUGE money paid to these CEO's has to be compensated somewhere. This cost is passed on to the working man.
CEO pay has increased 45% in the past ten years. Contrast this with the fact that the federal minimum wage increase, which just went into effect, gives bottom-rung workers roughly 7% less money, in real terms, than they were making a decade ago.
doskrautMar 20, 2011
Didn’t Henry Ford teach you profit above all else is the business way. What happens when a company gives its employees a raise .it cut’s into profits, low profits = unhappy share holders. And if the CEO can get one person to do more work as Henry Ford did then the share holders earn well. Henry Ford said it best “I pay you to work not eat”.FMC employees worked a 12 hour day, no lunch breaks until the riots
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
Remember people that our buy out money has been used to pay CEO, more money. The same CEO's that have failed in the past. How many chances do these people get anyway??? Well apparently Corporate greed says, they have 9 lives.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
And who suggested the buy out? The same guy those workers voted into office, it was the president's call....not really the CEOs. So we should get mad at....the CEOs? Might wanna rethink that logic.
dalexandruzMar 20, 2011
If you are making 100k(electrical engineer, programmer, stock trader) a year you are freaking rich, that is about $5900Net a month in your pocket.
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
Poor people should have tried harder.
Unlike me, who inherited a billion dollars and was paid through college by my dad.
In all seriousness though, we need to stop giving rich people anything. Tax them to hell, they can survive it. Trickle down is a load of bull. It's been 30 years, GOP, when is it going to get to me?
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
...amazing...guess what..someone somewhere in that family's history had to make the money that has been enjoyed for generations. I hope it never reaches you, do you know why? Because they should get to play with every dollar they have in their pockets and you should go back to school and educate yourself in business, then network, get an internship, become a full time higher, play the political game, become a CEO and make the big bucks yourself. But how their money is your money is completely flawed logic. The rich don't owe anyone anything. You are the only person that owes you. From how it sounds you owe it to yourself to WORK AND BECOME EDUCATED AND STOP LOOKING FOR HANDOUTS.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
I'm not looking for handouts, I'm looking for an end to corporate ass kissing that is benefiting nobody but the super rich.
These people have money, we are in debt, and yet we don't tax them? Why? They obviously are not doing anything worthwhile with all that money considering unemployment keeps going up.
You have a right to be rich, sure. But you don't have a right to be rich at the expense of society.
We have lost our values as a nation when having money instantly makes you a better person then everybody else; which is what you seem to think.
Reaganomics is a load of bull.
This stupid policy of "let's let the rich get away with anything and never tax them" is what lead to the financial crises to begin with, it will be what causes the next financial crises, and it is what is making the middle class completley disappear.
You tell me to educate yourself but you obviously aren't heeding your own advice.
You want to know what America was like when people like you controlled everything?
Watch There Will Be Blood.
Or at least read this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_massacre
If being a socialist means I care more about people then some rich assh**e's money, then yes; I am one.
I don't give a crap about the people killing my democracy and destroying the rights people fought so hard to gain.
The American dream is dead(or at least dying) and your whole ideology killed it.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
No do you know what caused the country's current financial crisis? Overspending from mismanagement. We are in current debt because of programs such as social security, medicare, defense of the commonwealth. These are all socialistic programs that put an incredible amount of strain of the country. So what you want is this...tax the rich so they can pay for these hand-outs to the poor.
Only the small minded think of using violence as a means to an end. Do you know what the intelligent individual does? Get smart, use the loopholes, works hard (community college, keeps getting a better job, 4 year university, then even better higher paying jobs, then graduate school, and gets even better jobs after, and so on and so fourth) until they are freaking loaded and rich.
Socialism is what is currently putting the largest strain on our country because so many feel they are entitled to something. Look up the national debt and find out how it is broken down, you will find these programs are the reason why we currently have a deficit. I personally don't agree that increasing the tax on the rich is the answer. At the same time, I don't believe the rich are stupid enough to s**t forever on their workers. Arrogant yes but eventually smarter CEO's come along and know how to tie an even bigger carrot to the stick. Your socialistic tendencies actually are what killed America...sorry champ!
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
"No do you know what caused the country's current financial crisis? Overspending from mismanagement. We are in current debt because of programs such as social security, medicare, defense of the commonwealth. These are all socialistic programs that put an incredible amount of strain of the country. So what you want is this...tax the rich so they can pay for these hand-outs to the poor."
Do yourself a favor and research what you are talking about. We are in debt because, first of all, we refuse to raise taxes for people with money. Second, we refuse to lower the unnecessarily huge military budget.
The financial crises happened because bankers(who pretty much control your government, by the way) pretty much gambled with billions of dollars, sold subprime mortgages which fell through, which brought down banks and made AIG have to repay the money; which lead to shockwaves that ended up doubling the national debt and generally making everything worse for everybody.
The problems that caused it are still there.
Anyway, do you know why we have these "handouts"? Because we are a civilized country that cares about it's people, and not freaking Zimbabwe!
You want to see what happens when you take away support structures for the lower class? Chaos, crime, urban decay, all of that. Idealism won't save you from the angry mob that's looting your house, idiot.
"Only the small minded think of using violence as a means to an end. Do you know what the intelligent individual does? Get smart, use the loopholes, works hard (community college, keeps getting a better job, 4 year university, then even better higher paying jobs, then graduate school, and gets even better jobs after, and so on and so fourth) until they are freaking loaded and rich."
The most the vast, VAST majority of people can hope for is being middle class. And that hope gets less and less every year, if you can't see that I feel sorry for you.
You're deluded and you're eating your corporate leaders crap, thinking it's steak. Fact is, it's all crap.
"Socialism is what is currently putting the largest strain on our country because so many feel they are entitled to something. Look up the national debt and find out how it is broken down, you will find these programs are the reason why we currently have a deficit. I personally don't agree that increasing the tax on the rich is the answer. At the same time, I don't believe the rich are stupid enough to s**t forever on their workers. Arrogant yes but eventually smarter CEO's come along and know how to tie an even bigger carrot to the stick. Your socialistic tendencies actually are what killed America...sorry champ!"
Rich people don't get rich by caring about other people, it's a fact. Look at history, look at the present. Read the news. You get rich by being ruthless.
The kind never prosper in the business world.
There are no "smarter" CEO's because CEO's know the only way to get ahead is s**t on everybody who opposes you. You give people too much credit.
There is so much stupid crap we should cut in the budget. But food stamps for single mothers? Go kill yourself, you're a bigger parasite then they are.
People are entitled to have lives of dignity and opportunity.
People like you are taking away that right.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
You are probably the biggest piece of s**t, I have ever read here on digg. Worthless, absolutely worthless. It is sick.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
Haha all I can do is laugh, you know why? The wealthy have figured out how to work the system, similarly to how some have learned to live off unemployment without ever looking for a job. The system has loopholes, since we all know this why not exploit them? Moral issues? Many people scream "Oh foul, they are using and abusing the worker" yet if they were the boss I'm sure they would be doing the exact same thing.
Also for all you pessimists that don't believe the American dream is possible, wrong, it is, you know why? There is a difference between the American dream and getting handed a silver spoon. The American dream means hard work such as working during the day and taking classes online or at a community college at night to get ahead. Anyone can achieve this, education is still the best way to get ahead. People who say it isn't possible are those who give up at some point or another because "it's too hard" and "life is unfair, why couldn't my parents have just been rich." I know so many people who have worked smart and hard (spent time learning more about the world, laws, and sociology) and guess what it pays off. They get ahead and join the elite and use the loopholes and don't ever have to worry about their kids going hungry. Why, because they worked smart, and the hardest part was time management and staying motivated.
I just feel terrible for those who throw up their hands and say "no one can ever get that rich, I'll always be a little worker" and I say sucks to be you It's your loss, cry about it and watch as other people around you don't give up and excel and make it into the upper class. I'm not angry with the wealthy. I actually get frustrated with those that don't plan ahead or come up with a game plan to get ahead. Had kids really young? Maybe you should have considered your financial situation first and wrap it to prevent mistakes. Not getting far with a high school diploma, maybe you should have thought ahead and look for community college scholarships. Don't like being a worker? Come up with a plan because expecting the wealthy to give up money and hand it to the janitor or factory worker is truly insanity. They press a button or move crates, can they read accounting spreadsheets and strategize using margins that involve the global economy....probably not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
"The wealthy have figured out how to work the system"
They are the system you idiot.
"The system has loopholes, since we all know this why not exploit them? Moral issues? Many people scream "Oh foul, they are using and abusing the worker"
So basically you think money is more important then human rights?
"Also for all you pessimists that don't believe the American dream is possible, wrong, it is, you know why? There is a difference between the American dream and getting handed a silver spoon. The American dream means hard work such as working during the day and taking classes online or at a community college at night to get ahead. Anyone can achieve this, education is still the best way to get ahead. People who say it isn't possible are those who give up at some point or another because "it's too hard" and "life is unfair, why couldn't my parents have just been rich." I know so many people who have worked smart and hard (spent time learning more about the world, laws, and sociology) and guess what it pays off. They get ahead and join the elite and use the loopholes and don't ever have to worry about their kids going hungry. Why, because they worked smart, and the hardest part was time management and staying motivated."
A good portion of the richest in the country people got their money through inheritance, for one. They sure as hell didn't earn anything.
The American dream is dead because poor people have a way lesser chance of accomplishing anything, it is harder to find a job in an economy that ships all it's jobs overseas, college is expensive, the middle class is disappearing, and corporations have our government by the balls. Your rights and opportunities are slowly going away.
You don't tell a kid who grew up in a slum in Liberia "try harder, and you can accomplish anything!". Why? Because he won't, he lives in an impoverished hellhole rife with corruption. And that is what the trend is telling me America will be, sooner or later.
"I just feel terrible for those who throw up their hands and say "no one can ever get that rich, I'll always be a little worker" and I say sucks to be you It's your loss, cry about it and watch as other people around you don't give up and excel and make it into the upper class. I'm not angry with the wealthy. I actually get frustrated with those that don't plan ahead or come up with a game plan to get ahead. Had kids really young? Maybe you should have considered your financial situation first and wrap it to prevent mistakes. Not getting far with a high school diploma, maybe you should have thought ahead and look for community college scholarships. Don't like being a worker? Come up with a plan because expecting the wealthy to give up money and hand it to the janitor or factory worker is truly insanity. They press a button or move crates, can they read accounting spreadsheets and strategize using margins that involve the global economy....probably not."
This all translates to "I'm a social darwinist who sees reality in black and white"
In other words, you're a horrible human being and obviously don't understand how complicated life is.
The greatest success of the rich in this country was convincing people like you that they are worth a damn just because they have money.
Meanwhile they are robbing you of every cent you have and making sure you don't become competition.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
...guess what I come from a family that once was low-income. My dad was on call 24/7, 365 days a year, so do you know what his salary breakdown was? Less than $1 an hour. And guess what through hard work over time, his salary increased, he was able to not always be on call. For a third of my life I didn't even see my father. His goal was to get myself and my siblings through school, so we could have a better life. We understood our parent's sacrifices, and we learned. We learned how to actually be really great people, and are very humble because of our beginnings. Both worked starting from age 14, both worked full time through college, both applied to more than 50 times to various positions through out the world in order to secure our futures.
So when someone says "we need to tax your family even more because they have worked hard to achieve their current financial status and we think the system is broke" I do in fact laugh. If the system is broke, we would still be in a f**king trailer park in Minnesota instead of a city loft in Dallas, Texas. So before you start screaming "people like me" use your words very carefully. I have merited my current position in the upper class, and don't owe any person who hasn't work as hard as me a penny. I give to only those who I can see struggle and work their fingers to the bone.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
Don't give me this sob story crap.
I said it before and I'll say it again, you don't have a right to be unnecessarily rich at the expense of society.
If you are truly rich, you aren't using even a quarter of your money in a year. Or even a lifetime. You think somebody like Bill Gates can possibly every use all of that money? He can't, nobody can. They just sit on it. It's not doing anything, it's just sitting there.
And yet you think you need it?
You are lucky, idiot. You are the exception, not the rule. Your personal experience does not somehow invalidate everything happening in this country.
As for "We learned how to actually be really great people, and are very humble because of our beginnings"
That's a laugh. You're a social darwinist if I've ever seen one, and an elitist prick who thinks he's better then other people because he has money.
You're a cancer on society more then any welfare queen. Your selfishness and complete inability to understand the circumstances of others is one of the major problems in the world.
nativeaviatorMar 20, 2011
And guess what....I drive that beautiful and fast car that passed you on the highway, I donate to charity so I get the tax break, I am able to send my children and potentially grandchildren through college, and I love the fact that I own and operate an amazing company with extremely happy employees. My life is great and I don't have to argue it with you. And guess what? There will always be the haves and the have nots. I'm a have and love it. Darwinism is the survival of the smartest and most cunning. Guess I'll survive, by the way, Bill Gates has given more than half his fortune away to causes around the globe....stop being a dumb ass in your tiny little life. Go organize a march and make a difference.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
noidea107Mar 20, 2011
"I drive that beautiful and fast car that passed you on the highway"
I drive a 2007 Honda civic. It's nice.
"I donate to charity so I get the tax break, I am able to send my children and potentially grandchildren through college, and I love the fact that I own and operate an amazing company with extremely happy employees."
So basically all the good you do is not good, but is actually selfishness?
Did you ever read the bible? Jesus gets up on the mount and says something akin to "people who give to charity just to make themselves look good are worse then people who don't give to charity".
That's you.
"My life is great and I don't have to argue it with you. And guess what? There will always be the haves and the have nots."
I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG SO THERE.
Truly you are a master or debate.
"There will always be haves and have nots"
And somehow this means you don't have to care about other people?
The objective of any society should be the make the have nots have enough o live a comfortable existence.
You seem to think they all deserve to starve and serve you and then be thankful.
We're I'm from we call this "being an assh**e".
"Darwinism is the survival of the smartest and most cunning"
In this context it just means you're an arrogant moron who treats everybody in a worse situation like subservient animals then justify it by saying they should have tried harder, even if it makes no logical sense and goes against common humanity as well as common sense.
"Bill Gates has given more than half his fortune away to causes around the globe"
I know. In fact, from what I understand he gives most of his money away.
Do you know why? Because he understand HE WILL NEVER, EVER, USE IT.
In other words, he doesn't need it and understands money not being used ever is money being wasted.
"Go organize a march and make a difference."
Screaming on sidewalks doesn't accomplish much, usually.
I'd rather vote for somebody who will tax people like you back to the poor house. Because after this conversation, I am positive you deserve as much misery as the world can throw at you simply because you are an apathetic jackass who would rather let society burn then have to pay a little more in taxes.
Ayn Rand lied, selfishness isn't a virtue.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
I have no problem with people having nice things. But you said it all "I donate to charity so I get the tax break"........ if that is the only reason that you do so, then I feel sorry for you. You are one hardened human soul and I trust the Universe will show you the so called 'light', 'way'.
sbuckley00Mar 20, 2011
I agree with you 100 percent. Not even worth trying to talk to people like nativeaviator.They are Pompous asses who think that everyone on this planet had the same opportunities, he had. Bottom line here is that no one on this planet should be rich while we still have people dying of starvation. This earth is plentiful and there is no reason why people need to die because of people like nativeaviator. Sad :-(
adambomb5060Mar 20, 2011
Do you think you would have made it to where you are if you had been exploited all your life? If you were working extra hours, wasting all your energy on a dead end job with a f**kwad boss like yourself, do you think you would be optimistic and hopeful enough, or even have the resources to make it big? No.
f**k you. It's people like you with no respect for people who are trying to work hard and get ahead that make it impossible for them to do so. Try treating your employees well - give them paid vacations, don't make them do overtime, give them cost of living adjustments every year, give them a nice long lunch break. They'll be happier and more productive, and they'll have the monetary resources to make it to your level.
But you wouldn't want that, because they're dirty, lower class, uneducated, lazy s**ts who don't deserve the money. Or maybe it's because you know the first thing they would do with all that money is hire a big shot lawyer and sue the living s**t out of you.
mheykMar 20, 2011
Isnt China living the American Dream now?
NewAlexandriaMar 20, 2011
If you wanted something to change, you were supposed to do something about it.
herberthghMar 20, 2011
Corporations didn't learn history. They don't know about situation in Russia in 1917.
invadercthulhuMar 20, 2011
God bless (f%^k) America. Land of the greed home of the sheep
briguy1Mar 20, 2011
and the rich get richer!
briguy1Mar 20, 2011
and the rich get richer!
NewsMeBackMar 20, 2011
Times when rich are getting richer and the rest - who cares.
sj3diverMar 20, 2011
This needs to be broken down to 3 groups:
Group 1. CEO's of public companies: If you don't like the fact that they get a bunch of money AND you have stock in the company then you can hire an attorney and file a claim against the company. If you are an employee you can quit. That's it.
Group 2. CEO's of private companies. None of your business how much they make. They deserve to make as much as the owners or Board will pay them. Just pretend they are high paying sports figures. Same concept.
Group 3. Rich people. Does anyone think Steve Jobs of Apple, he's worth 5 billion, has hurt the middle class? How? Point to one person he has hurt or taken money away from. This very rich person should be thanked for making the world a better place and not chastised because he is rich.
lisahuttMar 20, 2011
You are missing the point. It's not the fact that they are making the money, it's the fact that in some industries, such as Wall street firms, they make huge bonuses even when the work they did did hurt the middle class. It's the fact that even bad CEOs who place their companies in perilous positions still tend to walk away with those golden parachutes. It's the fact that CEOs at the top of health insurance companies earn millions of dollars and get bonuses while they tell you that they have to raise your premiums to offset the increase in health costs. Do you really think that EVERYONE that is a millionaire really works THAT much harder than the people under him/her?
greenwinkerMar 20, 2011
Shift the politics away from the super rich- vote Green in the next election, the green party does not take corporate money for elections...
dealspowerMar 20, 2011
Sad.
novenatorMar 20, 2011
The article actually severely undercuts how bad the gulf is. For instance, it states CEO pay is far less than it actually is compared to an average worker. The real figure is well over 400x: http://www.portfolio.com/interactive-features/2007/06/salary_comparison
This is a US phenomena. In other countries, CEOs are usually only paid 15-40 times what an average worker at their company makes: http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/6738/payratioceotoaveragewor.jpg
paulfriedman7Mar 20, 2011
Puke
lisahuttMar 20, 2011
I haven't read EVERY comment here so, excuse me if I am being redundant. But one of the key points of this article can be summed up with the author's comment "if higher profits and a higher stock price warrant better pay for CEOs, why doesn't the same ring true for the average employee." This is why I will never believe in the "trickle down" theory of economics that the super haves want to thrust down the throat of those that simply want to do a job they love and keep themselves out of debt. Our culture in the US teaches us to define our worth by how much we are paid so we idolize the super wealthy and talk them up as geniuses. And while some of them are, I am sure there are plenty of geniuses earning more modest incomes. Wealth does not a better person make so to trust the majority of those at the top to do the right thing and pay the people who actually do the work more is like expecting the same top earners to use their personal GOP delivered tax breaks to "create jobs". Not gonna happen!
imarascalMar 20, 2011
How about boycotting those companies who pay such big bonuses. Of course, the guy way down theline would be the one to suffer the most. Koch Bros...Koch Bros
ShootTheRunnerMar 20, 2011
...stay calm. Don't get too mad... *beathing deeply*