Going for Broke – Will Legislate For Food

The count down to Armageddon is on again.  Apparently, if we don’t pay off some of our debt or raise the debt ceiling, the world will end Tuesday.

You know what? I am soooo over this whole “the world will end if we don’t do such and such” mindset that the politicians and the newsies want to keep us perpetually wrapped within.  Fear keeps them employed so I can see why they like it.  I just can’t figure out why we let them do it.

Here’s two things about our most recent world ending, hellsacommin fearfest:

A) If every nation that ties its currency to ours suddenly fails because we owe more than we’re allowed to by law (an arbitrary law we made up and changed several times to suit our expedient needs) then they’re all stupid and deserve to go belly up.  But they’re not stupid and they won’t go belly up.  They’ll change a law or a line in a law or move some electronic numbers from one column to another and the sun will still come up tomorrow (bet your bottom dollar).  Everybody will still be here and the next fear threat scandal will already be loaded up in the barrel and ready to fire straight at  our gawping faces.

B) There’s too much money and real estate involved and they’re never going to let it all crumble away because rich people will always do what is in the best interest of rich people.  If you count on nothing else in life it should be that the ultra wealthy have very strong instincts for survival and greed (and the survival of greed).

Here’s the info you should have in the front of  your brain but don’t.  This is the stuff that the republicans seem to be very good at deflecting attention from and the democrats seem to be completely incapable of focusing our attention on:
If we let the Bush tax cuts expire… the tax cuts for the top 2% of the wealthiest Americans (the wealthiest population in the history of wealthy populations), we would be out of debt in just over 5 years.  We, the US, the country with the biggest debt any nation has ever had, the largest economic engine the world has ever known and the home of the greediest muthers the planet has ever seen, could be out of debt and paying for new roads, bridges, hospitals and teachers in five short years if we simply asked our richest 2% to pay the level of taxes that they were paying under Bill “depends on what the meaning of IS is” Clinton.

Why isn’t that “Page One – Above the Fold” in every newspaper?  Why isn’t it on the front of Google and Yahoo News, AOL, MSN, the NYTimes-Online and the Washington Post eVersion every day… all day? 

It’s almost like rich people control the media.

Why aren’t you mad about this?  You live here.  You vote, or at least I hope you do.  You may feel powerless.  You may think, “What’s the point? They’re going to do what they’ve always done.” But the only reason they get to do that is that you stay sitting on your couch when you should be sitting at your computer typing 60 enflamed words a minute to your congress person telling them to get this shit fixed and that the 2% can damn well cough up some green backs to repair the thing that they broke in the first place.

In the 1950’s the pay separation between the CEO’s and average workers in what we now call the Fortune 500 companies used to be about 20 to 1 (a CEO made 20 dollars for every dollar a mid level manager made. )  20 to 1 was here in American and extreme compared to the rest of the world where even now it is more commonly about half of that.  During the 1980s the pay gap between CEO’s and average workers grew from 42:1 to almost 85:1.  By 2004 it had jumped to 301 : 1.  And now???… well now, right here in the good old US of A, the ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay is running 475 to 1 while in Japan, a very profitable nation with a very good standard of living, the ratio is 11 to 1.  The average Japanese CEO would kill himself in shame if his company failed so badly that it needed to be bailed out by the government in order to stop the world economy from crashing.  American CEO’s take bonuses of 15 million dollars for doing that.

In case you need somebody to characterize that for you… that’s a bad thing.  This level of greed is not a sign of American business success and superiority.  It is an example of institutionalized insanity because these companies can and do lose billions of dollars in a single year and the CEO’s still make the monster money.

How can there be people who think of themselves as republicans while also being middle-income, poor or unemployed?  How is it even possible that there are people who are not rich, yet still believe that it’s in their best interest to vote for the republicans who clearly have only the protection of the rich as their goal?  It reminds me of that line about the  greatest thing the devil ever did was to convince you that he wasn’t real… Well, the greatest thing the republicans ever did was to convince 14% of the american population that protecting the rights of the rich was somehow good for poor and middle-income people.  The reason I say 14% is that one-third of eligible voters (33%) actually vote and one half of them ( 16% or so) vote republican.  Take out the top earning 2% and you’re left with 14% of the population that have been brainwashed into protecting rich people contrary to their own self interest.  It’s like these people are saying to themselves, “Maybe I’ll be rich someday so I’m not going to vote for things that are against the interests of other rich people.”

They have a better chance of winning the lottery or being hit by lightning than of becoming rich enough to join the two percenters. Yet they feel they need to protect the future possibility of success rather than the current reality of privation.

Republican politicians protect themselves and their monied patrons with the argument that what’s good for business is good for the country and that, in turn, is good for poor people.  Taxing rich people is bad for business and therefore bad for poor people.  They’ve done a fantastic job of connecting the two arguments but I promise you that they are not connected.  Taxing the rich is not the same as taxing business.   The tax rate for businesses is too high (one of the highest in the world) and is one of the primary reasons that so many corporations have moved their operations and business addresses overseas.  On the other hand, the tax rate for rich people is the absolute lowest in the world.

We need to separate the concept that Rich People equals Business Owners.  It’s just not true in most cases.  The richest rich guys I’m talking about are not owners.  They’re the CEO’s hired by stock holding board members to run the companies and they’re living like princes.  Employment packages for these guys now normally include massive contractual bonus structures, golden parachutes and stock options that pay off regardless of the company’s actual bottom line. The basic argument in favor of this system is that you have to pay really big money to get the best people.  But these are the same guys that destroyed the economy and bankrupted the world as well as their own companies. Yet they still got paid.  In some cases, they got paid with our money from the bail outs.

The Bush tax cuts that need to expire are not about companies.  They’re not about keeping business moving or greasing the wheels of industry.  They’re about tax breaks for private jets and massive yachts and 15 million dollar bonuses.  They’re for rich people. For protecting the money of rich people who have paid their republican butt monkeys to hold the rest of us hostage and threaten the end of everything we hold dear so that they can continue to light giant cigars with hundred-dollar bills.  And if that doesn’t piss you off, you’ve either been completely hypnotized by republican rhetoric or you’re opening a box of stogies right now.

Got a light?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

381 Responses to Going for Broke – Will Legislate For Food

  1. metroeloise says:

    I suggest that we make a new corporate form: Limited Profitability Corporate. LPC. They would get tax breaks, preference in government contracts. One defining point is to limit the ratio of total compensation to 12:1. Non-Profits to be held to a 7:1 spread. Also make terms for all corporations! Make them reapply for license. Make a social component to re-qualify.

  2. Julie says:

    Just a hat tip to gmeyers. This is a fantastic piece of writing and I am now a fan 🙂

  3. Kevin Ennis says:

    “They have a better chance of winning the lottery or being hit by lightning than of becoming rich enough to join the two percenters.”

    Apparently I should go buy ~50 lottery tickets.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      guess who makes the most money off of the lottery if it isn’t the state? It’s the no bid highway contractors who use lottery funds to build roads and bridges at 2-3 times the cost that normal companies would every be charged.

      • Patrick says:

        @gmeyers2112: What state do you live in that allows no-bid contracts for state construction projects?

      • gmyers2112 says:

        Texas, and by the way, they all have no bid contracts, they just don’t always tell you about it. Usually, its a room full of white guys deciding who get’s to build the bridge at the overpass and who gets to do twelve miles of ashpalt from nowhere to BFE. If you’ve been paying attention, you’ll note that just because we have rules does’t mean people with money follow them. Hell, even poor people break rules, why would people who can afford floors of lawyers be any different?

      • I thought the Texan lottery benefited education? Has this changed, or was it ever true? Not that the Texas Board of Education is anything you want to be giving money too…

      • gmyers2112 says:

        don’t get me started on the lottery. That’s afuckin boondoggle.

      • Lori in AZ says:

        You don’t have to defend yourself against any of these assholes…. great article!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Mason says:

      You are interpreting the the 1 in 50 numbers too literally. While it may mean that if there are 50 people in a room, one of them is super rich, it doesn’t mean that the other 49 just need a reroll. The 1-2% KEEP THEIR WEALTH. They do not give out opportunities for upward mobility, despite our American Dream ideals.
      Watch “Born Rich” or “The One Percent” made by the heir of Johnson & Johnson. Very revealing.

      • Dave says:

        I was born in the bottom 10%, I’m now in the upper 10%. The American dream is alive and well and I’m proof that it still exists (and I’m not white, so don’t try to put that on me). The lazy gripe about the successful because they were too lazy to work their way to the top.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        not always. congratulations on your wealth. Not every poor person is lazy and not every rich person earned it.

      • Hey, Dave…you do know there is a picture right next to your comment, right? Well, I’ll admit your not so much white as pink…

      • Grandma says:

        Ever read “The Outliers”? It’s not true that “if I can do it you can do it and if you didn’t you are just too lazy.” That’s haughty, arrogant, and makes you a not so nice guy.

    • Jonathan Jou says:

      Mason is right about your interpreting the math, but there’s something far more obvious with what you’re saying that makes the idea rather tragic.

      The odds of winning the lottery are roughly as large as the odds of being struck by lighting. And these odds are the same ballpark figures you’re talking about for a chance to join the top 2%. So 50 lottery tickets will do nothing to even get you close to a chance to becoming that rich.

      But hey, 2% is great odds for a lottery. Do you know any?

    • laddie says:

      Even if they all won you still wouldn’t make the club… sorry.

  4. Brigham Denison says:

    Great story, but unfortunately, no one seems to care! When a blow job Monica Lowenski) gets more air time than the Repiblicans bending over the entire middle class and lower class and having their way with them (vasoline not included, not in the budget), there is something really wrong. Time to get off your asses and let the Politicians know, “We’re Mad As Hell and We’re not going to take it anymore!”

    • Brigham Denison says:

      Great story, but unfortunately, no one seems to care! When a blow job Monica Lowenski) gets more air time than the Repiblicans bending over the entire middle class and lower class and having their way with them (vasoline not included, not in the budget), there is something really wrong. Time to get off your asses and let the Politicians know, “We’re Mad As Hell and We’re not going to take it anymore!”

      • gmyers2112 says:

        you have to write a letter. YOu have to write a letter a week. You have to get everybody you know to write a letter a week. and then you have to run for office and be better than the asswipe that is in there now. Be better and people will see it. It takes a while for the eyes to open, but they do open.

  5. I love the chart, but would love it even more if you would give attribution to the source of the data.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I never had more than 20 people read anything I worte so source the info wasn’t high on the list. However, it is all easily findable info. Google the terms income gap, ratio ceo, average workers, worldwide. You’ll get a lot or answers. Be prepared to read quite a lot and then boil it down.

      • randy hennigar says:

        When fame makes her entrance, she will come in fast. Maybe you could just publish your browsing history…hehe. Do you think Google keeps any extra data? Why does the CEO of Google get to meet with Obama? Just curious…

      • Mike Savage says:

        google has found me absolutely -0- sources for this information:

        “If we let the Bush tax cuts expire… the tax cuts for the top 2% of the wealthiest Americans (the wealthiest population in the history of wealthy populations), we would be out of debt in just over 5 years”

        I would REALLY like to know where those facts came from because even the most liberal democrats stated increasing the taxes on the top 2% would only net no where near what you are claiming. $14 trillion in debt paid off in 5 years by just going to clinton rates? i would say for a 100% without google that is a lie. Maybe you were trying to say deficit? Either way that would be incorrect as well.

        Please correct.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        then try bing. And get off my lawn.

      • Rob says:

        No, really – Please let me know the source.
        I’m a Public Library librarian and “Google it” doesn’t qualify as authrootative information. I’d like to pas this along, cause it looks really compelling, yet it’s important for me to confirm that the data is accurate. I am not one who mindlessly forwards data without checking sources first. There’s a enough lies and BS on FB and the Net. Please help us out. Thanks if you are able to site the source of the graphic

      • gmyers2112 says:

        Rob, Im not trying to be, nor do I wish to be autoritative. I read some shit. I wrote some shit. If you want to pick up my shit and smear it on sombody eles’s walls, you can’t really come back and me and say, Hey’ dude, you’re shit was a little runny. Can you stiffen it up a bit?”

        The answer is no.

    • Beth says:

      Yes, I agree. Can you share the data source? thanks!

      • Tim says:

        gmyers: Seriously, you “read some shit,” and “wrote some shit.” Now, you say you wrote this. Furthermore, the article is well-written. Your replies are full of unintelligible “shit,” and mis-spelled words. Good luck getting serious consideration.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I wasn’t looking for serious consideration. Really. I’m just writing to hear myself type. Have you read my piece about penis on the menu. Clearly I’m not taking this seriously. OK?

    • Terry says:

      In two minutes I found on Google a chart showing similar numbers as reported on this blog by googling “CEO to worker pay imbalance. The article was from the “Economic Policy Institute”.

    • shearic says:

      inconvenient truth – the numbers are from 1999 from this book: See: http://goo.gl/2htJR
      since then, the number for the US peaked to 525 and latest value is at 263.
      That, according to this AFL-CIO graph: http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/pay/
      The fact that the disparity grew by approx 5x under Clinton, and reduced by approx 1/2 under Bush, kind of kills the “Republicans bad” narrative though.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        did you ask the AFL-CIO for their source?

      • shearic says:

        the AFL-CIO sited the source for both their graphics. no need to ask.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        that’s where I think you’re wrong. If you require me to source, but you don’t check the source, what’s the point. The AFL-CIO cited source but you didn’t check the source. Maybe they were just citing a previously cited citing of a cited source that somebody cited. See my point? You believe simply becasue somebody put a tag on it and you dn’t belive becasue the tag wasn’t there when in fact, it has nothing to do with the tag. That’s why I say, go out and find your own reasons to believe something.

      • Stu says:

        Does it really matter how we got here, but only that we are here now?

    • Alexis T. says:

      gmysers: Rob’s right on here. You’ve written an awesome piece (some of which is going viral on Facebook). I’d also love to cite & spread the word. But if you’re going to get defensive about sources, then I can’t trust your article. Since it’s taking off you have a chance to make a real difference. Re-do the research yourself, cite the sources & you’ll make an impact. Step up!

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I don’t know that I would characterize it as defensive so much as reflexive. My reflex action when being told what to do by complete stangers (thousand of them at a time) is pretty much to tell them no. In this case, I wasn’t trying to be somebody’s source material to be cited elsewhere. I’m not interested in it. I understand that you have an agenda that is different and I’m ok with that for you, but it ain’t for me. I’ve mentioned more times than I care to count that I searched the internet using terms like CEO pay, average worker pay, gap, disparity and other terms like that. I’ve even published links that other people have found and sent in to the comments section. But my purpose in writing the piece int he first place was not to wave your banner or trumpet your cause. My intent was to make my best friend laugh or my wife think I was smart enough to have sex with. I wrote about something I cared about and that I could find enough information about with easy searching that I could get a handle on the numbers and then cut loose with a rant. That was my intent. I’m sorry that my intent does not line up with your needs, but I’m not responsible to your needs… only mine. So, thanks for reading. I hope you got that I’m not terribly serious and tip your waitress before you leave.

  6. Max says:

    Could you show us where you got the pay ratio numbers from? It’d make a great protest sign…

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I used the internet and did research. I threw out that woudl was too over the top. I read what I beleived to be respectiable sources. I combined or composisted several different reports (soe were only asia, some only europe, etc.)

      • smt says:

        From the what I’m finding on the internet, it looks like current figures for the US (2010) is 343:1, and that the same ratio was 525:1in 2000. All of these figures are abhorent, but it really helps make the case when you can cite sources. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_pay for further sources.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        yeah, I’m not usually thinking when I’m writing that somebody is going to source me. I go out and look on the net for information, I do aenough reserach to find stuff out but not so much that it starts being work. I don’t get paid for this and I’m not getting a grade so really, I’m writing for me. If you can lock down source materical that agrees with my numbers and want to send them, I will credit you and include it in the blog. I think it is important for people to understand that I’m just a guy who can type. I’m not a Harvard educated economist. I’m not running for office and in all liklihood, you wouldn’t like me personally if you met me. So read, enjoy, take from it what you want, but let’s try not to treat it as holy writ..

      • Kim says:

        so you don’t have an official source for this data?

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I’m not an official. I’m a guy

    • Dane says:

      Well, just to be fair gmeyers, any time you write an article where you claim to present to facts, you SHOULD be prepared if anyone asks what about your source material; otherwise, how would we know who is giving us truth and who is giving us BS? Skepticism is healthy. It’s not meant to criticize you but rather strengthen the argument. I can’t, in good conscience, pass along info if the person I got the info from says cites as their sources “I read some shit”. We want this argument to be strong and the only to make it so is to see to it that it’s supported by corroborating data.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I guess the best answer is for you to make choices in who you believe. You need to understand that I’m not a journalist, a jurist or running for office. I’m just a blogger. The threshold for what I have to do is pretty low. Your own natural and healthy skepticism is a good thing but doesn’t actually require me to do anything to prove something to you. I appreciate that you read my piece and that it caused you to think. But to think of it as anything more than an entertainment piece or to overlay some kind of rules of journalism on it after the fact misses the point. The point is, find your own truth. The point is, don’t believe anybody just because they can type. The point is, some things are just for fun and shouldn’t be used as the plank in your campaign to topple corporate greed. I can say what I want, the way that I want and I don’t have any responsibility to you on how I do that. You don’t have to read it, but if you do, you don’t have to believe it, but if you do you don’t have the right to place a requirement on me to do more, write more, say more or research more. I’m not trying to be shitty about this, but for god’s sake, the last two days I’ve had 5,000 yelling from one side and 5,000 people yelling for the other side, and a bunch of them yelling at each other and I just wrote an opinion piece. Christawmighty, did you even read my piece about penises on the menu or the three part series on wiener gate. If you read any of the other things I’ve written you will see that I’m not taking me seriously. And if I’m not taking me seriously, they why in the hell are you taking me seriously? Go do something important and get off my tit.

  7. ‘America Is NOT Broke’:

    Michael Moore Speaks in Madison, WI — March 5, 2011


    Contrary to what those in power would like you to believe so that you’ll give up your pension, cut your wages, and settle for the life your great-grandparents had, America is not broke. Not by a long shot. The country is awash in wealth and cash. It’s just that it’s not in your hands. It has been transferred, in the greatest heist in history, from the workers and consumers to the banks and the portfolios of the uber-rich.

    Today just 400 Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I seem to recall that our founding fathers felt like a little revolution from time to time was a good thing.

      • also remember that our founding fathers WERE the top 1%.Slave ownership being a metric of wealth, Charles and Charles Coastworth Pinkney of SC were the two largest slave owners in the country, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson weren’t far behind, and all 4 were signers of the Constitution. The numbers get worse when you look at the congress as a whole. Just saying, when you hold up the framers as examples of fiscal responsibility, remember that they were a small group of rich white men who, with the exception of John Adams, didn’t want to pay their taxes and so created a new country.

  8. Catherine says:

    Powerful, provocative piece. Thanks. Would love to share the chart, and I think it would be stronger still if sourced. Are you willing to share where you found the data?

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I knelt before the lord our Google and finger prayed for and answer and ye an answer came to me thirteen fold and twenty. Readeth the words provided by the lord Google and then, like profits before me, decied what I wanted to use and that which was dross.

  9. Oldnegro says:

    Good article. BTW can you share the source for the chart? Thanks

    • gmyers2112 says:

      The source was me asking google and reading an aweful lot of different articles. I suppose at a certain point you could refer to me as the source, except I’m not a reporter. I’m at best a curmudgeon and at worst just some yayhoo who can type. I’m comfortable with the numbers, but if you need proof you’ll really have to gently google the lord internet to see if she pees any trurth into your cup. Good luck.

  10. m says:

    Why no discusion about how much sports “players” make incl. endorsement & also our entertainment industry. Ohh, no one wants to rag on their fav team or star. Yet what they bring home far exceeds the 5-15mill a “normal” CEO takes in.
    You make it sound like only Reps are wealthy. Yet most sports figures & movie stars are Dems.
    The game is the same, no matter Reps or Dems.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      read more of my other articles. I’m sure you’ll find something you like being torn down by me, including sports heros and entire systems of wealth distributution.

    • Thomas says:

      Actually, 5-15 Million per year would be the elite of any group of professional athletes. That is the cream of the crop who takes home that much, maybe 1 in 50 or 200 or 500, depending on the sport. So if you say, “stars” instead of “players” it might be more plausible. And what they take home is NOTHING compared to what their owners and managers make, the “CEO’s” of their industry. Also, these people are not leaching off their stockholders, or workers under them. Nonetheless, they should pay taxes based on the amount of money they make. If they make it like a CEO, they should pay like a CEO!

      Our stars are Dems because we like people we admire to have a heart. CEO’s have no such public image to maintain (until a scandal erupts…too late) and thus no such obligations. Also, film stars and especially athletes work extremely hard at their craft to get to where they can make that kind of money. Connections don’t matter because unlike in the corporate world, if you flop when it comes time to deliver, no one bails you out. You simply stop getting hired. There’s no “Severance package”. The majority don’t come from privileged families and many are straight from the working class, and have real empathy for those still struggling, at the least retaining faint memories of not actually having money.

      I can see what you’re trying to do, which is excuse both the CEO’s and the Republicans. Not happening.

    • G says:

      Professional athletes and actors deal with the same income gap as the rest of the country. For every film star making millions there are hundreds of excellent actors trying to scrape by on union scale, supplementing their income with a second job in order to survive. For every major leaguer there are thousands of minutely-less-talented ballplayers barely surviving in the lower echelons of minor league farm systems. That said, I agree that there’s not a nickel’s worth of difference between the Dems and Repubs. Both are corporately owned.

    • LL says:

      Hear! Hear!

      In addition to “corporate greed” I’d love to see a protest against “celebrity greed”…

  11. Freeta Goodholm says:

    First of all the Bush tax cuts expired in 2010, you mean the Obama tax cuts.
    Second if we ask the top 2% to pay at the clinton rates ” we would be out of debt in just over 5 years.” not even close.
    The greed, hatred and covetousness that fills gmeyers heart is disturbing.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I think you’ve been misinformed. However, I will agree on the words “first, Bush and disturbing”

      • DebraJoy says:

        gmeyers 2112 ~ I Love your answers here!!
        thoughtful, sharp wit and really Thoughtful article!!!
        I am one of those who believe that OUR democracy entails More than just ‘voting every other year’ and I DO what you suggest, regularly, ~ with gusto and anger ~ I write letters and Call my reps and encourage anyone and everyone to do it.
        The more you do it,[contacting your congressional Reps] the Better you get at it and articulating thoughts comes easier with practice.
        thanks again for this piece. You’ve inspired me !
        ~ deb

      • gmyers2112 says:

        Thank you Deb. You made my day brighter. and my last name is spelled myers.

    • Thomas says:

      The tone of your reply is disturbing. The author in no way indicates any greed, hatred, or covetousness. Calling such things out when they are being displayed on a level never seen in the whole world, is not in fact displaying them. Calls for justice are not, as you would have it, “player hating”.

  12. ErikaM says:

    I am full agreement with you, and thank you for doing the math. However, could you let us know where you found your data, particularly the income ratio table? If that’s provided, I’m more comfortable referring students to the site. Thank you.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      ooooh, I wouldn’t refer students. That seems like a really bad idea. Howeer, I asked google, read a lot of the responses (spent a coupld days looking around and composited it.) You could say, essentially, that google and I are the source. I did actual research. I’m not likely to do it again so it should be celebrated in the streets with gunfire and the kissing of nurses.

  13. You win the internets with this one.

  14. P.S. I can understand why you haven’t been posting but it’s a shame. You’re a good read.

  15. This is great! Can you source the info on the table, so that I can share it and have a response when people question the validity (as they are wont to do).


    • gmyers2112 says:

      Yeah, this was several months agao and I really only remember asking google and then compiling results, averageing a bit. You can search ratio, executive pay, average worker pay. There is a lot of source materical.

  16. Hilton Obenzinger says:

    The statistics for CEO: Avg Pay are astonishing. But what’s your source? I’ve passed it on – but people want confirmation. Got a source?

  17. PJ madore says:

    Can I ask where you got the graphic that shows the ratios of pay?

  18. dianne mcmanus says:

    Amen and Amen..and can I get an Amen????

  19. Alex Hardman says:

    Get a share on google+ button. Great article.

  20. dianne mcmanus says:

    So the source is Google. I am not doubting it.. I just know that when I share people will be asking me! LOL

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Thank you Dianne. BTW, Do I know you from somewhere. The name Dianne McManus sounds familiar to me. Did you go to school in Texas? Have you written something I might have read?, etc.

  21. asdf says:

    CEOs only mistake was to raise prices of company services or products when they didn’t need to. They were giving unimaginable profit to their companies that didn’t last long. Private jets and millions in bonuses for CEOs was like a bone for a dog in the owner’s point of view. It’s the government that was busy doing something else instead of helping those companies get even more profit establishing long term export and is some CEOs fault that were in extazy and didn’t feel the coming end to make in time adjustments to their companies.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      There’s a place between “they’re all wrong and we’re all right” but on this one, unless you’re one of the 2% you need to line up with the dirty proloteriate my friend because you may sound like them, but they will never let you be one of them.

  22. Bill says:

    I love the chart comparing the CEO salaries to others. I have seen something like this elsewhere long ago. However, I’m wondering – do you have a source for these figures? Forbes? WSJ? Or?

    • helisforhel says:

      I’ve got a source. I worked for a fairly large, Fortune 500 company that went through rounds & rounds of layoffs, pay & hour cuts. Business was terrible, morale even worse, certainly not fun times. And at the end of the fiscal year, they gave the CEO a 300% raise (yes, you read that correctly). The company continued its downward spiral and these days is a shadow of its former self. That hasn’t hurt the upper echelon, of course.

      And this is the norm. The Jack Welch/Chainsaw Al styled ‘cut the bottom & starve the middle and reward our friends at the top’ mentality permeates capitalism in America today. It’s high time we stopped the madness, but with GiantMegaCorps beaming bullsh*t into every home and radio in this country, I fear that they’ll just continue to win. And the rest of us, of course, will continue lose.

      • LL says:

        Great response. I used to work for one of the mega banks before being “laid off” in 2002. Funny thing, shortly thereafter we merged with another mega bank. Within 3 months I found my old job posted on the new bank’s website…and no, it wasn’t just me…my whole department was laid off. Now my old job is in Mumbai.

        This is the same bank that used to micromanage our schedules so we’d never average more than 29 hours per week (so they didn’t have to give us benefits). Notice I didn’t say we never worked more than 29 hours in a week…we did. But management was quick to notice any “visible trends” and quash them. At the same time, our CEO received a $17 million parting gift…yes, they paid him that just to LEAVE.

        Don’t even get me started on the expectation that we contribute to the bank’s political action committee, which wasn’t “required” but “strongly recommended”…

  23. Jealous says:

    a lot of jealously from those that work hard and earn a good income.

  24. D.A. Lannom says:

    Your repeated requests for source info were never clearly answered. What a cop-out. You lack credibility because of it. If you’re going to bash, do it with authoritative sources. You’re no better than the politicians spewing fear if you can’t back up your thesis with FACTS.
    Good points, though, especially about the differences in rich guys vs rich owners.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I think it is important to note that I’m not a writer for ABC news or Reuters. I’m just a schlub with an internet connection. I read, I look around, I investigate, but I’m not what anybody would or should call a reliable source. If you’re wanting to use me as a source, I will tell you what L. Ron Hubbard told the Scientologists, “Leave me out of it. You’ve missed the entire point. Thank you.”

  25. Jealous says:

    Distribution of wealth, now that’s a great idea. NOT

  26. randy hennigar says:

    I enjoyed your article and passion, however, your math doesn’t work if you use actual real numbers. I will help you: The total wealth of those top 2% equals only about 1.5 trillion dollars. If you confiscate ALL OF IT, considering we just raised the nations debt limit to 14 trillion, how does that pay off our debt? And after the first year of this, now that EVERYONE is broke, including the smart, entrepreneurs and leaders who used to form and operate companies and employ people are closed – where are your roads and bridges and hospitals? I agree with your basic premise, that debt is bad (since just the interest payments to China are paying for over 70% of their military budget), I just disagree with your cause/effect relationships. Did you ever work for a poor person? Our government, accounting system, tax system is set up to benefit mainly corporations, both large and small! Why fight it? Yes, reaching the top 2% like hitting the lottery. But if you ask those at the top what their life goals were you will find serving as many people as possible with the best product/service as possible was the original goal and they DID just get lucky. But earning $100,000 per year is entirely possible if you incorporate yourself and hire out your time based not on how many hours you are “present” on the job – but guarantee results and productivity in return for money. Every businessman on this planet would hire you if you offer a profit, however small. The problem today is employees have become liabilities, not assets. Lawsuits, paid breaks, unions work rules, prevailing wage government contracts which equal more unions and many taxes all add up to the employer paying more than double what the employee takes home. If you incorporated yourself and assume some responsibility (read risk) you could easily earn more than double or triple or any amount – as long as everyone makes a profit. All the banks and the rich really want to do is earn about 10% on their capital investments, with minimal risk. All we need to do come up with IDEAS that produce wealth & prosperity which lasts and make people’s lives nicer over time. My main suggestion to your blog is to give back some ideas instead of merely criticizing what IS. Did you ever read the book by Robert Kiyosaki callled Rich Dad Poor Dad? Just for the record, my crusade is to revolutionize the work force into millions of corporations that all make money, get tax deductions for business expenses and eliminate barriers to success. Did you know for the amount you pay in taxes in one month you could incorporate legally? But my company is going to do the paperwork and pay for it, for the right people. I look forward to receiving your blog and saving our country.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      You put a lot of time into your response and I’m sure that according ro your math and your argument it works out for you. But you should understand that the taxes for the top 2% aren’t on the money they already have, it’s on the money they make. The money they make is considerably more. Also, the tax breaks that we want to let run out, change the taxes on the upper 2% from 35% to 39%. It’s not like we’re going from 14% to 78% like happened under Nixon for the same group. Or like when it went from 50% to 80% for that group under Reagan.

      I was explaining the fundemental differences between the parties to some 5th graders recently. Near the end of it, a kid said, “So, if you’re rich, you should vote for republicans because they protect your wealth and if you’re poor or middle class you should vote for democrates because they protect the poor and the middle class, right?” ANd I said, it would seem so. They he said, “But my whole church is republican and we’re all poor.”

      A wise man said a long time ago, “There is no reason for a poor man to be a republican, unless he wants to wash the car.”

      • erich oelschlegel says:

        according to *anyone’s* math, it should work out for you. math, unlike opinions, is always the same every time.

      • Michael says:

        Yet you do not answer his main point. The facts show that your article is false and yet you never address this one time.

        No wonder you only had 200 views a week. Your math would say this to be true:

        Currently tax revenue is about $3 trillion. We spend $4.5 trillion, that is a $1.5 trillion DEFICIT. We are in $15 trillion of DEBT.

        Under your assumptions “the tax cuts for the top 2% of the wealthiest Americans (the wealthiest population in the history of wealthy populations), we would be out of debt in just over 5 years.”

        This would mean raising those taxes on top 2% would have to yield ($1.5 trillion a year)+($3trillion) = $4.5 trillion in additional annual revenues. To pay off the debt and the annual deficits.

        Do your math again, it is 100% impossible for your “facts” to be true with regards to this statement of “be out of debt in 5 years”. Clean up your article with facts instead of political slander

      • gmyers2112 says:

        yet youstill do not get that I am not answerable to you. The more you want it, the more I will not answer. I’m not your dancing monkey.

        Side bar, I’ve never actually seen a dancing monkey. I’m sure the must have existed at some point for there to be a term that includes the words dancing monkey, but..

        Anyway, I digress.. where was I… oh yeah, fuck off, man. Go do something worthwhile with your time instead of fighting a war of electrons with typing speed.

      • Michael says:

        Address the clear and honest criticisms about where you got your facts from. Gain some journalist integrity instead of hiding behind the internet. If you believe so much in this stuff you would have at least done MLA and cited your sources. if you can not back up these “facts” you found on the internet stop writing. Thank reddit for your page views but know this writing is the crap that makes politics in america unbearable. Clearly one sided piece with absolutely no sources on the most important facts.

        Go to the huff post for obvious one sided articles.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I’m not a journalist. What would I do with journalistic integrity?

    • Eric says:

      Thank you Randy — apparently you did not go to public schools or have the “New” math.

    • Charles Owen says:

      I found this line interesting: “Did you ever work for a poor person?” First, you tend to think this means all business owners are rich people. They are not. The vast majority of small business owners have put everything they own into the business and are taking out as little as they can get by on in order to build the business. They consider themselves fortunate if they reach the point where they can pay themselves a reasonable salary. They know that paying themselves a massive salary will kill their business in no time at all. And, in answer to your question: Yes, I have worked for a poor person. Many small business owners and entrepreneurs are poor. They have put all they have into their business and are living on next to nothing so they can build it. Some choose between Christmas for their kids or meeting payroll. And, keep in mind that most small businesses are in this phase of their development. Most fail in the first two years.

      This idea that we are hurting businesses by increasing the tax on high-income earners is nonsense. If they are getting that big a PROFIT, they have an established and working business. They are not choosing between Christmas and meeting payroll (or they are milking it till it dies, another thing that happens too often). Increasing their taxes isn’t going to cause them to not expand or shut their business down. If anything, they may be inclined to reinvest more into their business rather than taking it in profit. Most small business owners I have known work very hard to NOT show a profit so they don’t pay taxes on it. If they have a choice of buying supplies or equipment at the end of the year, and not paying tax, they do it. Seems like your low taxes are sometimes a disincentive.

    • Brien Rice says:

      Thanx I was going to write a response to randy but you covered it.

      • Brien Rice says:

        Remember how the nation was never going to get out of debt before Clinton was elected? The debt ticker in NYC was counting our astronomical dept #s and then we came out of it in the end of his term with a SURPLUS! I’m sure lot’s of one percenters wanted to make huge profits off of the bad economy perpetuated by Papa Bush but Clinton was elected and they couldn’t for a while. This greedy bunch tried every dirty trick in the book to get him impeached. They waged a despicable smear campaign that divided the country to further the “conservative culture”. They fed on the more gullible segment of the population of the time, and after Bush Jr. stole the election the greedy ultra right wing conservatives put in place the most sophisticated abstract financial instruments to further the transfer of wealth to the select few.

        The deception was in the math!!!

        What gmyers2112 says is true and those of us who put more value on the collective than our own pocketbooks know this to be true. Mathmatical strategy and interpretations can do fantastic things until those selfish few use fear to dilute rational thinking.

        Great work gmyers2112 fight the good fight! fb me so I can here more.

  27. Ursula S. says:

    Do you have any suggestions on who to vote for, since republicans are out? Obama? Oh, right, he is doing the best job ever on wrecking the economy! Those are the only two choices. A couple more would be nice.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Don’t just vote for who they give you. Vote for who you think is right. THere’s always somebody on the fringe with some good ideas. Voting for them doesn’t make them win, but their ideas get incorporated in the larger debate.

      • pfroehlich2004 says:

        Better yet, register as a Republican or Democrat and vote (or run!) in their primary election so that whoever you think is right has a shot at running on a major-party ticket and actually getting INTO office

      • Brien Rice says:

        I agree but the strategy of feeding funds and media attention to the less likely third candidates to draw from a more realistic moderate contender to dilute their voting base can be a very effective way to further conservative candidates. I vote for success but promote those who might be more inline with my values. Sometime voting for an outside candidate with less of a base can be a vote for the extreme right and they know it.

  28. alnga says:

    There is a whole lot more to the story here that you either have not researched or are holding back in reserve for a future story. While many with serious money are in fact greedy and apparently serve in positions over their heads, there many folks with money that are in fact quite altruistic. It is hard to understand why anyone should be paid 400 times more than any of their associates, but apparently that is the case. When you see cases like this make a decision not to purchase the products or services of that corp. You should contact the stock holders or corp. v.p.. someone who will deliver the message, but conversations with bloggers and posters will not be very effective.

  29. chris bowen says:

    Can I have the source for this info. I am running for Mayor in my city as a third party candidate and I shared a link to this story. I am being called out for it, and I would like the source of the data to prove it’s legitimacy.


    Chris Bowen
    Indianapolis, IN

    • gmyers2112 says:

      oh, you don’t want to quote me, Mr. Brown. I’m just a guy with a computer. Do your research, ask the internet like everybody else. I wish you well, but I am not a reliable source to run for office on.

      • randy hennigar says:

        With a humble attitude like yours, gmyers2112, we may well start quoting you soon – since that means your learning, too.

      • BalrogV72 says:

        “I’m just a guy with a computer” is Swahili for “I make crap up and don’t source it just to make myself seem smart.”

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I don’t have to make myself seem smart. You’re doing that for me.

  30. The wealthy don’t pay anything close to 35% in taxes. They average around 13% after deductions. If you make under $50,000 you pay 20%, or at around a 50% higher rate.
    I like this chart, too, but researched a lot and couldn’t reproduce your exact figures. The point is accurate about the disparity, but I think the figures might be a little off. But really, 300+X more is obscene anyways.

  31. lj says:

    great peice. can you source the figures for me? especially the ceo:avg worker ratios.
    point me in the right direction anyway, to confirm the figures. i’d very much like to spread the info around, as well as the link to this article. Thanks.

  32. Lee says:

    The numbers you cited on executive pay are astounding. I want to quote them, but feel a need to verify them first. I did not see them on Wikipedia when I stopped there. I will go back and keep looking. Thanks for the post. Any help you can give me on verifying those numbers will certainly help. Best

  33. payperfilm says:

    Since these CEOs are hired by the shareholders, why do the shareholders choose to pay them such large compensation packages? Isn’t there someone out there who can perform the job for much less? If I wanted to trim costs to make a business more profitable, why not look at the big expenses first?

    Any thoughts? If CEOs are greedy, then why aren’t shareholders?

    • gmyers2112 says:

      the shareholders and the voting share holders are two differtn groups. If you own stock in Citi and you vote your shares, it means diddles. The guys who vote have millions of preferred shares and they vote enormous conpensation for themselves. The regular folks can vote against it all day long and since their votes are an infinitesimal fraction of a percent, they statistically mean zippo..

    • Simple. CEO’s are people. They can leave. They can get hired way. They can just quit.

      The compensation package is based on a simple question. What will it cost to keep this person in the position they are in? What would it cost to replace them with someone that can perform better or equivalent?

      • gmyers2112 says:

        If those guys actually performed well, I’d say, good on ya. But what most of us are a little pissy about is the guys who bankrupt companies and crash the economy and still get enourmous, contractually guaranteed bonuses. If you fuck up, I would expect you to get fired. If they fuck up, they get 30 million dollars. It’s at least a point of conversation, wouldn’t you say.

  34. The Statement of CEOs to Worker payment ratios presented here does not include that of so-called Developing Country state of affairs. India, for example, has a Ratio of 2000 and more! And these are supported by the very same Multinationals who have cornered ALL in the Developed world. If we analyze how the Developed world actually subsidize Top executives/ CEO’ etc, it could be understood that they are squeezing the poorer undeveloped and developing countries. All our (India’s) education system are tuned to support the Developed world; our Agriculture, Medicine, Food processing, Business, Industry, and even Governance are all tuned to support them – mainly the US. As years progress, we are sure to note greater and greater squeezing by them, which could finally result in a human holocaust of unprecedented proportions, resulting in a catastrophe far greater than that could be inflicted by a few Atomic Bombs. Now one could understand why these “Developed” nations are so much interested to set shop in a country like India. Our country has a Middle Class (purchasing power) population of 350 million that rivals the total population of the US and Canada combined! Having squeezed out their own people, they now have the potential to squeeze out Indian Purchasing Power! Our foolish (agency commission) Government laps up this as if that creates Economic Development – forgetting that 850 million Village level poor people here do not earn average income of Rs.20 per day!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      If we use India as a guide post on economic responsibility, we’ve already lost the game.

    • GetMoneyOutOfPolitics says:

      Please my friend, never, never, EVER mistake giant multi-national corporations as being “The US”. Those companies have no more loyalty to us than they do you. Yes, it IS true that at the moment they have seized control of our government, but pardon our dust while we remedy that.

  35. Sam O'Hanlon says:

    typo: “20 to 1 was here in American and extreme “

  36. Pingback: Oh Yeah…Its the WORKERS Who Are Waging Class Warfare « ENDAblog

  37. John Thompson says:

    Gee and here I thought the title was Centrist.

  38. Thank you! Sharing now…

  39. Dale Luc says:

    just about right you think!!!!

  40. hm says:

    What was your source for the CEO vs. average worker graph?

  41. AJ Wilkinson says:

    We need a Hegemon. In the Orson Scott Card sense of the word.

  42. VTMartha says:

    Great article! The fact that most of those commenting have asked the same question may be a contributing factor to our not making much progress on this front. 😉

  43. Pingback: ONe pretty big reason for our economic issues

  44. I would love to find out your source for that graph showing CEO pay compared to worker pay. I would like to share it on Facebook, but not until I know its source. Thanks! Great post!

  45. I will share – but would like the source of the stats please.

  46. Pingback: #occupywallstreet - Page 2

  47. aaron says:

    this is some good stuff here. but i’m afraid you do us all a terrible disservice by publishing information like this WITHOUT CITING A SINGLE SOURCE for your data. anybody can rattle off “facts” that support their hypothesis, as fox news pundits do every night. some of those facts may be true and documented, some may be mere word of mouth, and some may be complete fabrications on the author’s part. your audience deserves the opportunity to verify the facts, so we’re not just blindly following the propaganda machine of the moment.

    i’m not suggesting you’re deliberately trying to mislead your audience. i agree with and rather enjoyed this piece. i just wish i could in good conscience share it with my online friends, which i simply cannot if you refuse to cite sources for such critical data as this. even a vague reference such as (“according to the new york times”) is better than nothing at all.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      it was not my intent to do anybody a service or any kind. dis or otherwise. I was simply writing an entertainment piece for me. I went from having a 200 page views a week for stupid diatribes to 6,000 page views an hour and now I have people yelling at me over the internet calling me an asshole for not citing source material. I don’t get paid for this and I’m not getting a grade and I’m not writing a paper to be handed in to the national foundation for explaining shit Gary says. I’m sorry if it doesn’t serve your purpose, but it served mine.

      • BalrogV72 says:

        You mean it served to stroke your ego to show you how lazy you are to make crap up that’s not true and won’t produce a single source. Both sides are asking for proof, yet you offer none. You do have the freedom to write whatever you want but I’d love to know what the color of the sky is in your world.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        just becasue I’m not willing to show you step by stepo the things I read in order to justify me writing anything, let alone a silly blog, doesn’t mean I’m lazy or lying or making shit up. What you seem to miss here is that you’re doing what a couple thousand years of christians have done by layering your own meaning on top of something that somebody else did or said. I’m not jesus. I’m not pilot. I’m not even one of the guys in the crowd throwing stones. I’m the guy writing on the walls in 6 foot tall letters “Romani ite Domum”. I’m not the argument for or against your cause. I’m not a part of your cause. I don’t give a shit about your cause. You making comments about my ego really only goes to show that you don’t get the point. You should not read my stuff. We wil probably not agree, ever. If we met in a bar, we wouldn’t like each other. I might let you blow me, but I probably wouldn’t enjoy it and it would be just to make a point. So, take you attitude and you angry ire and pokes at my person and go spend some time being constructive or at least not such a dried booger stuck to the doorknob.

  48. As far as I can tell, the CEO pay chart reproduced above has its origin in a Management 510 class presentation given at Louisiana Tech University on 17 November 2005 by Adam Choate, Dana Rowzee, and Jerrod Tinsley. As a CEO of a small business, I find it curious that the authors cite no source for their pay ratios. More curious is the outrage this alleged disparity tends to elicit among parties not otherwise given to trumpeting their financial concerns. If your life ambition is to grub for money, the 475:1 ratio makes for a useful career inspiration. If you have more spiritual ambitions, there is no reason to get your panties in a bunch over it.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      the chart itself may have analogs in different places around the internet, but I read the articles, collected the numbers and put them in a table. So, there may be other tables out there, but this one was mine.

  49. I just finished listening to Thomas Friedman who was on NPR with Tom Ashbrooke yesterday. And your comment don’t just vote for who they give you is right in line with Friedman’s message. I was having dinner with a group of woman who all happen to be Democrats and I mentioned I voted for O’bama but said, he let us down and he needs to be accountable. I expected the fear response and I got it…a vote against him is vote for a Republican. Friedman said we need to vote for our agenda and not for a candidate because the American people are having an ecomomic crisis and the politicians are having an election. He mentioned what Ross Perot did for the country when he gained so much popularity….he altered the agenda for the next 4 years so that Clinton was forced to pay attention to the deficit. Friedman says: we need to force the far left and far right to the center and sign a plan that addresses fiscal issues in a fair way….both sides need to be forced to compromise. I think we have to stop fighting among each other over emotional issues that we will NEVER agree on and work toward building our Country back up through education and innovation.

  50. GetMoneyOutOfPolitics says:

    Here is a very informative paper along the same lines written by a professor at UC Santa Cruz, and yes, for the 30 of you wanting sources, he lists them. http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

    • BalrogV72 says:

      Ok so where does it say in that whole study that you yourself can’t work hard, come up with a great idea and join that 1% like many others…Steve Jobs, Bill Gates ring a bell?

      Instead of bitching about the “unfair system”, why not use your brain and create something that everyone wants and get rich like Mark Zuckerberg.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        Christ Balrog, you have such a chip on your shoulder. If this stuff pisses you off so much, maybe you should play in somebody else’s sandbox for a while.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        and really, Balrog? Seriously? Phil wasn’t a threatening enough name for you, or whatever your parents named you? You had to go with Balrog because of the flesh ripping gore induced fear? You need to move out of your mother’s house, meet a couple of female humans and stop with the vulcan hand signs and the middle earth “action figures”.

  51. pfroehlich2004 says:

    Those compensation ratios are rather shocking. Could you provide us with links to the source data? (Always like to know these things when I’m making an argument.)

  52. Pingback: KGMI-AM Joe’s Blog » Blog Archive » Darn Right We’re Angry…

  53. Jeannie says:

    Hi: do you have a source for the chart that you listed up above? I think everything you wrote here is very interesting and I’m totally with you…but as a liberal…I know we tend to get carried away with out facts…so I’m trying to avoid that, hence the source request. 🙂 Thank you!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      sorry no. I write for entertainment. I really don’t think it’s a great idea to use me as source. I read a lot, I googled a lot and I wikipediad a lot. Most people don’t like those as sources, but that’s where I found it. You can find it too by searching terms like ceo pay, income disparity ratio national internaltion and stuff like that.

  54. Pingback: TIL the ratio of pay between American CEO’s to the average worker is 475:1. Japan is 11:1. at SatelliteHeadlines.com

  55. And the sad part is… they want MORE!!!

  56. zack says:

    Here is his source so everyone can STFU:

    [12] Lauren Etter. “Hot Topic: Are CEOs Worth Their Weight in Gold?,” The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 21, 2006, at A7.

  57. aaron says:

    i don’t know why my previous comment wasn’t posted, but i’m glad to see i’m not the only one calling for sources. it’s too convenient for you to hide behind “i’m just a blogger” “i’m not a journalist” etc. but here’s the thing. you’re presenting economic data as fact and interpreting it in a public forum, and whether you get paid or not this makes you a journalist. it’s a free country and you’re totally free to pull every convenient figure you can find off the internet to make a point and share it, but know that there are many of us out here who consider you part of the problem more than the solution. anyone can find anything on the internet and that doesn’t make any of it true. i came to this article via friends referencing your figures on facebook as truth. continuing the same stupid cycle of unverifiable information dispersement that you’re participating in here. you got your information from god knows where, and now others are getting their information from you. those of us who strive to make ethical and just choices in life/politics based on factual evidence are left to simply hope that there’s something true in this mess of statistics being passed around. otherwise, it’s absolutely no different than previous memes such as “obama is muslim” and “the holocaust never happened” and “saddam hussein participated in 9/11”. i agree with your general opinions expressed here, but i fundamentally disagree with you strategy for arriving at them and your philosophy on journalistic integrity. go get some hard verifiable data and join the REAL push for social justice in our society. otherwise you’re just blowing smoke up people’s asses and you’d be more useful sharing your opinions about last week’s episode of Bones.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Dude, I’m not hiding. I’m out in the open and I’m telling you I read a bunch of shit that I found on the internet and I wrote a fucking entertainment piece. You lot have turned it into an entire campaign. Fucking let go of it. My point was to rant. I found something to rant about. Then three months after I wrote it, something happened on wall street that made it seem more relevant and somebody picked it up and started waving it like a banner. “A shoe a shoe, he has left us a shoe!” I’m not hiding from anybody, fuck you and fuck your brother and fuck that friend of yours with the earth shoes and the other one that refuses to shave becuase he’s so fucking cool and it helps him get laid. I don’t care about you or your need for source material. I’m not on your team. I”m not on your side. I’m not part of your movement. I write for me. Now fuck off and get off of my lawn. I’m not the messaih, I’m just a very naughty boy..

    • aaron says:

      correction: i now see that my previous comment got posted. and i see that you commented on it.

      i’m sorry for my somewhat hostile tone. i swear i’m not trying to call you an asshole, etc. i’m just concerned with this trend in our society. everybody making assumptions based on hearsay they find on the internet or at the water cooler and forming their political opinions around them. but it’s not like gossiping about sports or something. these are very REAL issues with very real consequences for the choices we make based on the opinions we form. we owe it to ourselves and to each other to at the very least try to form these decisions on a playing field sodded with truth and hard evidence. otherwise we’re all just making stuff up and slinging it at each other for the mere political theater of it all and progress is held captive. all while real people continue to suffer the consequences of that inaction and lack of progress.

      but more specifically in response to your comment… a) tell the millions of unemployed or underpaid americans out there that socio economic politics is “entertainment”. and b) the internet is not a private diary. you didn’t write this “for yourself”. that’s just a convenient way for you to not take responsibility for your role in society.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I’m not saying anybody’s station or prediciment is entertainment. I’m saying what I wrote was entertainment. Don’t put words or meaning in my mouth. You’ve written enough on this to have your own blog. Consider it. Also, if I want to make the internet my private diary, I can do that. You don’t own it and I can just write for myself. And lastly, I’m responsible for my role in society and as such I get to say what that is for me. You can decide for you. Let’s not decide for eachother because I’m pretty sure neither of us would like that.

  58. Bob Hughes says:

    A couple of things – I like that this is very central in thinking. Some of the points I really enjoyed:

    1) Tax people, not business. Businesses don’t pay taxes. They pass that onto consumers. Spot on.
    2) The gap ratio. I’m a firm believer in you get what you give. If you give a lot, you should get a lot. Nevertheless, I believe that we should recognize that companies don’t try to be good corporate citizens in respect to their employees. Companies serve the market (Lower costs, increase profits).
    3) In respect to #2, shame on companies that agree to pay these CEO-bozos ridiculous amounts of money to run a company into the ground. Like all supply and demand scenarios, if more companies would recognize that all around performance should be the driver for pay, it would not be the norm to give these CEO’s huge salaries….and don’t tie performance only to profits. You have to consider workers, quality, charity and profits. If more companies set the bar like this, others will follow.
    4) I don’t like taxes. However, I know I have to live with them. Just spend my money wisely.
    5) Why do people that make over $106,800 stop paying into Social Security? What is the mentality behind that? It would seem to me that everyone should continue to pay the same percentage. Granted, i think you should be self sustainable. However, when you have your money invested for retirement and the market dumps, who is going to help you? How is that the investors fault? SS is always going to be needed, just in case. However, will it always be there? It could….lift the cap.

    Our government is broken. How do we fix it? THAT is the question.

    Sorry for the diatribe. bh

  59. aaron says:

    ps. i’m not a part of any movement and my friends are ordinary working people with ordinary shoes. i’m speaking solely as an american citizen who hasn’t deluded himself into thinking the internet is private and that politics is simply something happening on tv for me to rant about.

    this ain’t your lawn, buddy. this space is public. and you’re shaping society with your free speech whether you accept it or not. all i’m saying is i wish you’d do so responsibly and stick to things you actually know or be prepared to defend your assumptions.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Chris Hardwick says, and correctly, that irony is lost on the internet. Comedy and jokes miss the target about 60% of the time becuase the assmunch on the other end thinks you’re serious. I’ll spell it out shitbird. Get off my lawn is something a cranky old man yells at kids who are making too much noise. You kids are making too much noise with all of this mitching and arguming over sourcematerial and what did I mean or not mean. None of it interests me. Just get off my lawn and go argue someplace else. You’re driving my dog nuts.

  60. Bailey Roth says:

    The amount of people who have asked for a source for your information is quite entertaining. As are your responses. I particularly enjoyed the one about your source being the entrails of a still born calf.
    Well done bit of griping!

  61. ryan says:

    So, we take the money from the corrupt CEOs and give it to corrupt politicians (whose exorbitant spending got us in debt in the first place?) I agree that we need a solution, but I don’t think this unprincipled one is it. It’s more putting a band-aid on a broken leg.

  62. axion537 says:

    What envious class warfare drivel!!!
    “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of ENVY, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”…Winston Churchill
    What people can achieve in this country should be praised and emulated, their success is not at your detriment.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      you stopped being fun a while ago.

    • William says:

      Check out the maximum federal income tax rates for the year that Steve Jobs started Apple. Just google “history of federal income tax rates.” You could do the same for Microsoft and most any successful U. S. business. You will see that taxes have nothing to do with innovation, which leads to job creation. We have had low interest rates and historically low taxes for the past 9 years and it has lead to huge accounts in Panama, Switzerland, etc. but not to a healthy U.S. economy, which produces jobs or the revenues necessary to meet our budget needs.

  63. jagayhere says:

    Thoughtful and well argued – but just wondering (in case anyone asks, trying to refute) where your pay ratio numbers come from. Thanks.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I threw a bag of scrabble letters into the air and when they landed they spelled out the gist of the argument. The rest I inferred from a conversation I had with God (not the god of abraham, that guy nevers stops talking. no I meant the god of the inuiit. He’s quiet and gets to the point)

      • jagayhere says:

        That was helpful! But I’ll ask, in all sincerity, one more time. I for one like to be able to say where my information comes from, so as to elave no leverage to the crazies. If you don’t mind. btw, is the inuit god a man, too?

      • gmyers2112 says:

        the plain simple truth is I read a dozen or so articles on the internet from reuters, BBC, NYTimes, and a lot of other material that I just found by linking through. I didn’t know there was going to be a quiz. I didn’t write down my source material because frankly, I thought it was pretty obvious that I was just ranting to make myself feel better and to make my neighbor laugh. You can google some and bing some and just link thorugh. The serach terms are eash. ceo pay, average worker pay. ratio. disparity, things like that. get creative. you’ll find it. Also, somebody else who read the blog posted some links when they found them, you can find some of it there.

      • randy hennigar says:

        Do you believe in evolution and the primordial ooze source of life, then? I do enjoy your responses and humorous writing style very much.

  64. brian says:

    sounds like you need to get a job as a CEO. I’m sure it’s really easy.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I’m a director of operations. Plus I seem to be spending a little too much time talking to you all.

      • brian says:

        Great. Sounds like you are well on your way! Next stop: CEO! You probably just need to update your resume a little, right? It’s sure to be a cakewalk position. Hire me as EVP of something cool.

  65. Matt Bigelow says:

    I enjoyed sharing this piece with my friends, and now regret I stumbled across the article in the first place. On some level, this author first felt some incling of justice (or injustice) to think of the thesis, investigate the material, and write the article (or, by his standard, “entertainment piece”). On some level, he at least acknowledged that others would be interested in his work, and this appealed to his vanity (others would recognize his effort and think he was smart). Even though he acknowledged he doesn’t receive any compensation (money, grade, etc.), this became a labor of love and when he felt he had enough “evidence,” he formulated his thoughts and ceated something coherent. If the author didn’t believe these things, then he is more desparate than I thought. On some level, he did the work. However, when pressed for more information, the author panicked and lashed out at those who might have supported him, simply because he felt he was being held accountable. On some level, Sir, you are a professional and the world demands that you act and behave like one. I don’t know your exact age and I don’t care – suffice it to say your behavior here is reprehensible and demonstrative of a toddler. I feel betrayed. When I finally came across something I felt was relevant and insightful, I couldn’t wait to show others – simply because there is so much out there to the contrary. I was heartbroken when I read the comments. If I created something, especially after spending as much time as you did on it, especially under the guise of entertainment, and especially after receiving no compensation and I posted it for the world to see, and it caused others to be interested in my point of view, then I would be ecstatic! And my next response would be to share my sources with others – because – without credibility you are nothing. On some level you have provided a service to the world and when others ask to see what you see, you slap them in the face for caring and spit on them for reading your work. The least you could do is appologize. The most you could do is thank everyone for reading and acknowledge that everyone here has wasted their time. But what you did was contradict everything you stood for in your article by responding to your readership the way you did, thereby making you worse than the greedy bastards you were writing about. Your lack of integrity and display of insecurity are deplorable and you should be ashamed. Honestly, if you want to be an entertainer / writer / author / journalist / educated and informed adult American, you have completely gone about it the wrong way. If you believe “blogging” anything you believe to be correct is your right and grants you liberty to entertain yourself then please, do what other teenagers do and save it for your diary. Do not pretend to be writing for only yourself when your’re the one responsible for posting your work on the internet. And do not insult our intelligence with your trite responses and misplaced indifference. We all deserve an appology.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Matt I disagree with several of your assumptions in this response. My wife agrees with you on a couple of them. I think you like using hyperbolic language and you felt the need to do so in anger when you felt somehow that I had wronged you. You’re entitled to that feeling but I haven’t wronged anybody. I haven’t positioned myself for your purpose and therefor cannot betray you. I have not made a promist to you though perhaps you implied a promise. I cannot be responsible for things that happen in your head. I have answer the questions 200 times in the last two days. I have also been flippant and sarcastic. I am a flippant sarcast. So shoot me. I’m not your source, your leader or your messiah. I’m not even in the game.

    • Marcusiologist says:

      At first I thought this comment was ironic… Did you read the entire thread? The blogger’s credibility was supported by a number of unsolicited, independent commenters. The blogger established his tone in the original post and the rest was (to stay in armchair Latin theme) lasciate ogni speranza.

  66. Tom says:

    Respectfully, your table comparing US fortune 500 CEO/worker ratios seems distorted. It appears that for other countries you are including all CEO and not just CEO of their top earning companies as was done for the U.S. I think a clear picture comes from a 2007 Washington Post article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/11/15/GR2008111500247.html

    Sorry, but when someone does not cite their sources and just tells other to go Google it for themselves, I get a little suspicious.


    • randy hennigar says:

      I am still looking for some date to support my contention that CEO’s compensation packages are mainly based on performance, NOT guaranteed pay, like the “rank and file” insist upon getting. Nobody except true leaders is willing to take risks and refuse to accept pay for poor performances.

  67. This article is fantastic- consider it shared.

  68. For being really level-headed in the original post it is surprising how asshole-Maddox you are in your forum. Anyway, instead of typing “pray to google god” a hundred times you should have just googled the shit yourself and reposted it. But I’ve got your back:


    The numbers are slightly different from what you posted, but the premise is the same.

  69. someone named oregonrunner says:

    I believe the point of Mr Meyers2112 is that fair is fair, and that everyone who lives in our wonderful country should pay their fair share of taxes no matter who you are…It really doesn’t matter who you are…I mean does anyone actually see or hear about any of our governments republicans or democrats taking any cuts in their salary or downgrade their insurance until the economy gets under control, and that includes our president…If any of them were actually worried about how to get the deficit straightened out, then they would do anything in order to correct the problem, BUT THEY AREN’T!!!! We the people are the ones who suffer from lack of jobs, and so many people have lost, or are losing their homes…But our countries leaders ARE NOT doing anything about it….None of those in office (Democrats or Republicans) really need the money, because most of them are well off anyways….It is the people who need the money in these desperate of times…And the show ain’t over people, the worst has yet to come…Our leaders have FAILED us time and time again, and WE THE PEOPLE , keep making the same damn mistake over and over again because we keep putting those same crooks into office…or they buy the election like a certain someone did who shall remain nameless…I must also mention that our rights that our soldiers have fought so hard for, and died for are being taken away one at a time, and no one seems to even notice or care…But I bet most do care , but we all need to wake up and pay attention, because one day, if we don’t wake up and do something, those rights may not still be there one day….I hope I am dead and buried the day that happens…

  70. Danni says:

    When you open your mouth and say something, or sit down and type it, you become responsible for the effect your words have. If you are going to make a statement and claim it is a fact, you must be prepared to support your conclusions and defend your ideas. I don’t care how much of a sarcastic sonovabitch you think you are. I thought this was a well written article with decent information.

    Now I just think you’re full of shit.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      not really. You’re still responsible for your own response. regardless of what I say, you have to chose to be ok with it or freeked out by it or climb up on a soap box about it. And just becuase you want ot make an issue of it doesn’t mean I have to.

  71. Jane Jewell says:

    No wonder people are protesting!

  72. EEAndersen says:

    I found a reference to the data here:


    a research report from 2006?

  73. Kelly says:

    I’d really like a reliable source for this. A friend shared it on FB and it’s useful if accurate and verifiable. Otherwise, the fact is as good as “Fox News said so”–which is not to impune your post or credibility at all. When I throw data at naysayers, I want it to be ironclad, adjudicated, peer-reviewed, solid.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      some of the other responders found the source material. I suppose you could read a few of those. The ones that weren’t trashing me were able to find the source in a couple of minutes of easy searching.

  74. kpyles says:

    Thank you for a wonderful entertaining piece of writing. I probably enjoyed it because it smacked of my own feelings and after 50 years of reading a little of everything I have learned to take everything with a grain of salt. I really don’t care about your sources because when it comes to numbers they can be skewed to back up anyone’s side of the story. I related to the well written opinion and appreciated your responses to those who have nothing better to do than beat a dead horse. It doesn’t take a genius to see this country is messed up (or at least the greedy people have made it seem so) but there really is nothing new under the sun and historically speaking we never seem to learn from our mistakes. Except for watching the Tigers stay ahead of the Yankees tonight, (how’s that for having your priorities straight) your blog was a very nice change of pace. Keep voicing your opinion, it was well written and made my husband and I laugh at your responses to some irritating comments. P.S. I also realize it is not your job to make me laugh 🙂

  75. keithlj says:

    You mentioned, gmyers2112, that all of the states have no bid contracts for building roads. Well, what the states are forgetting about is the opposite side of the formula for getting a bid. That is the workers have to be only paid a set amount for their work. This is across the board for all workers in the country or state. Also the other part of the non bid contract needs to be changed. That would be a bid process but the state lets the bid portion out. The next in line either says yes or no. If no on the contract then it goes to the next in line. Even though this process will not work in the united states it is exactly what happened in Sweden and Sweden was the highest producing economy on a per capita basis for decades. Actually, my great uncle was the architect of this process, Augutine Bergman. Then from this success the rest of the Swedish society demanded socialism and the economy of Sweden has been faltering ever since. It would seem that a no bid contract is by itself a form of socialism as well. It definitely is not capitalism whatsoever. Rather the argument should not be the high cost of the ratio difference but the disparity between risk and reward. Governments impose heavy fines on faltering companies and personally hold the CEO and some others totally responsible for underpayment of income taxes. Does an employee have this risk if strictly doing their job. No. Perhaps this is where the difference lies. Or are the laws required to be known by CEO too numerous and thus the great breadth or difference between worker and CEO. Reduce the regulation and the workers wages should become tighter in relationship to the CEO.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I think you’re over thinking it here Keith. I was being sarcastic. I was saying that the system is so corrupt everywhere that even in places where they seem to have legitimate bid practices stipulated by law that behind closed doors, money talks to money and the game gets rigged. It isn’t new. The Romans did it to great success for hundreds of years. But, you’re waaaaay over thinking what I said. With as much writing as some of you folks like to do, you might consider just getting your own blogs. And in the mean time, try not to read more into everything somebody says than they actually meant.

  76. Jari Sky says:

    @ Mason, Dave, and gmyers2112:
    Some people are poor because they are lazy. Some people are poor because they were born poor and into a set of unfortunate circumstances, circumstances which necessitate that in order to succeed they work much harder, and sacrifice health and personal relationships, far more than people have to if they were born rich or in fortunate circumstances. While it’s true that some rich people simply got there on their own merits by working hard, they didn’t work 425 times as hard as the rest of us. Regardless of merit, the difference is outrageous. And money begets money, so sadly, those who are lucky but don’t work hard are still far better off than those who are unlucky and work hard.

  77. Vlad says:

    It’s “I’m writing for myself,” not “I’m writing for me,” and “I’m not taking myself seriously,” not “I’m not taking me seriously.” Grammar matters.

  78. Would LOVE a reference or two to the source of the chart and information herein. It’s pretty overwhelming and needs to be shared (which I have done). But people need the source info to corroborate the info. Thanks much.

  79. If one more person asks for your source…gawd, do you people read the blog and responses? Really Kelly, “When I throw data at naysayers, I want it to be ironclad, adjudicated, peer-reviewed, solid.”, do you really think the world is still that black and white?

  80. ajwolfe says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the statistics were accurate, though I wish you backed up your numbers with some form of respectable source rather than backing them up with…well nothing. Sorry dude, but that’s shit you learn in middle school. That’s basic journalism (not that most media bothers).

    I follow the sentiment. I agree with the sentiment. I just wish people like you who are well spoken and well informed would take the extra five seconds to provide their source so that they come across as more legitimate. That way, when the people who furiously type 60 words per minute to their Congressman go to town, they can quote a respected source for those figures, as opposed to some random website.

    That aside, keep trucking along. You’ve got fire and a good flare for the English language. Kudos.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      thing is, AJ, I’m not a journalist. I barely qualify as media. Some of the other commentors have found source material you can use. I’ve left their posts intact.

  81. wskmb says:


  82. usbfc says:

    While I agree that this number is out of hand and that there is a troubling practice of corporations cutting workers to cut costs and then rewarding the top brass with extra money…

    … let’s be aware of what we’re talking about.

    Do you think that a CEO of a major corporation has a mere 10 times the responsibility and scope of the average employee? Do you think a CEO who oversees the livelihoods of thousands upon thousands of employees as well as relationships with suppliers, retail outlets or stores, competing corporations, economic fluidity and change, etc ONLY deals with 10 times the responsibility of the average employee?

    For me, the answer is NO.

    CEO’s deal with exponentially more responsibility and impact than the average worker. His decisions can impact thousands and thousands of people as well as the economy. That is an awful lot to think about and, in my opinion – regretfully, if worth more than just 10 or 20 times the salary of an average worker.

    And, I also worry about ‘capping’ income. I’d much rather prevent that much income from trickling down to children and future generations because that creates a much greater advantage to the poor than merely one guy pulling himself up to that level.

    If we were to talk about caps, I don’t see how you could ‘cap’ income for a CEO to any less than 100:1. People should have the ability to become anything they want to be. When you begin to try and balance everything out, thus taking away personal responsibility in our destiny, you destroy humanity. You don’t honor it.

    Life is what you make it. And, the haves will always extend a hand to help the less fortunate. The US is among the top 5 of charitable contributors in the world. The wealthy are the biggest givers.

    But, that doesn’t mean we should ignore the fact that some people falter and fail. Some people don’t do their best, think of others, and try to make something of themselves. And, others say “I don’t care what it takes, or how I’ve failed in the past, I’m going to make something of myself”.

    That is the way life should be. Personal responsibility.

    Mind you, CEO’s and the wealthy need to take this as well. This article is important because it opens the conversation about how the elite can use some self-reflection.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I think a guy who crashes his company and the country’s economy probalby shouldn’t expect to get the 20 million dollar bonus. That’s what I think. And while kudos to the guy who ca get a deal like that. You can make life better for an enitre company by reducing the bonus to a reasonable level and spreading the remainder over the entire company employee pool. that’s what I think. There’s right, there’s wrong, there’s legal and there’s shitty greed. I’m just saying you can get rich but you don’t have to grind everybody’s nose in it.

  83. Justsaying says:

    If you are going to write an article like this, you need to cite your sources always, other wise you just sound like another tin foil hat wearing hippie. Saying “I’ve never had more then 20 people read my stuff” is a lazy excuse.

  84. Rob Yates says:

    can you supply some references for your figures, please! otherwise you amde up numbers to support your argument.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      that isn’t so at all. Just because I don’t want to cite source for you doesn’t mean I made it up. You can think I made it up and you can tell people I made it up, but that doesn’t mean I made it up. Several people in this comment section have found the references themselves and posted links. But here’s the thing, Rob. You don’t believe me becasue I didn’t post sources but you will believe somebody else if they do. But did you, or would you go check out those sources? Proably not. You just believe because somebody hit a threshold of typing for you. Don’t just believe people because they can type. Go out and find your own facts. Do some research. I did. I don’t feel compelled to prove it to you or show you my work, but I did my research for me to the point where I was reasonably conviced of what I was finding. There was a consistency to the data and it wasn’t tied to political rhetoric or ideology so had no particualr ax to grind other than the obvious.Convince yourself. Don’t ask me to do it..

  85. Bonzo says:

    Well, reading this, especially the comments, was both an entertaining and enlightening way to start my day. Nice piece, nicely handled responses to commenters and such. Thanks for posting and letting me sit briefly on your lawn (I’m getting, I’m gettin’…) ‘Preciatecha!

  86. Pingback: How Wall Street Speculation and Tax Avoidance are Starving Public Revenues « Dragonfly Dreaming

  87. Adrienne says:

    This is getting pasted all over facebook. On one of my friends’ walls, her friend asked for the source data. I researched it (because I’m on your side, politically!) and found the US CEO income disparity data to be accurate. However, I’d like to know where you got the data for the other countries because I can’t find numbers anywhere near that. The sites I found say EU CEOs earn half as much as US ones – not 10-20 times less.

    I don’t know why this has become such a popular link today, months after you wrote this, but it is. If you just “wrote some shit,” (aka, pulled it out of your ass), then you really aren’t helping convey our message to a broader audience.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I can’t remember where I found it all, but some of the other readers and posters to the comment section have found various links to data concerning this and I’ve let those stay up.

  88. Chris in MN says:

    Here’s a wacky idea: Why not have a flat tax so EVERYONE pays the same share of taxes?

    • gmyers2112 says:

      as long as all of the loops are closed, sure. But wealthy people can afford lots of loops. Poor people can only afford drugs. Lots and lots of dehumanizing drugs that they can buy from Walter White.

  89. steve says:

    and gmeyers… the trouble isnt the article…. the trouble is most people believe everything they read is accurate. hence your problem now.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      That is a problem. I think I’ve said in the last few days at least as many times as I’ve said anything else, that people shouldn’t just believe something because somebody can type. Even if that means they can type cited sources. The cited sources could be made up, too. Seeing it written does not make it so. I know what I read. I know what I found and I know what I believe to be the truth of the situation but that is strictly a belief within me. And as much as it makes my heart hurt that there are people out there who will believe anything there are an equal number who will believe nothing but never try to find out something. (That belongs on a t-shirt).

  90. Sarah says:

    Gmyers2112…I believe people are looking for validity and honesty today and by posting this article, you are no better then the ‘Corporate bigwhigs’ YOU denigrate. Possibly you have a bit too much time on your hands…Go make a difference…volunteer….help your neighbors..GET A JOB!!!

  91. Trace says:

    Awesome article. It started a heated debate on FB with my friends and me. I wonder if you have read Sam Harris’ bloc post titled How Rich is too Rich? Anyway, keep it up, I’ll be back.

  92. Terry Fraser says:

    This is a great thread. It’s funny to see how many people come here demanding to see source materials, (despite the fact that many have been provided). Then, there are those aching to contradict the premise.
    Isn’t it obvious now that most people today believe what they want to believe regardless of what they see, read, experience or sense? There are plenty of outlets now so that you can reinforce your premises whether they are correct or not.
    The bottom line is that this country is being held hostage by the Republican right, and from what I can tell most of them vote against their own economic interests, mostly because they fear any of their tax money is being used to fund welfare or unemployment benefits. They have come to the belief that all of these people are lazy and useless, and they aren’t going to take it anymore.
    I’ve been retired for three years now from a company that routinely closed American factories in small towns where people will not find comparable employment, and those jobs were sent to China. We used the extra profitability to give ourselves bonuses and the excellent perfomance of our company made our stock options lucrative. Then, we sold the company and make a killiing.
    Sum total, millions paid to the Executive committee, about 5,000 Americans out of work. That has been happening for 20 years in this country. We’ve lsot our manufacturing base and the “service economy the Republicans promised has turned out to be a “servant” economy. There’s jobs out there, but they pay $10 a hour, while our engineering production supervisors, foremen, middle management, accounting and customer service jobs are overseas.
    Obama inherited this mess, and hes tried his best to keep us out of a depression, at the cost of his popularity. We had 8 years of mounting debt under Bush, and all we did was enrich his backers. Under three years of Obama, we’ve increased this debt, mostly trying to keep Americans afloat.
    Perhaps it is the lesser of two evils, but I know which platform I’ll be supporting in 2012.

  93. EconoJ says:

    Some data sources, including one that has the original chart embedded in it (jadaliyya.com). The google search took me about 10 seconds. The follow-up on links and reading took about 5 minutes. There are no excuses for all the clamor.






  94. jclifton says:

    @gmyers2112. Two things. Your article is wonderful and frames the social conversation well. It seems obvious — but not apparently what many seem most to care about — that we are once again a third world nation, and have the robber barons/feudal lords in power to prove it. Our bank balances were literally stolen, and the financial industry is in the process of taking our homes as proof that neither we nor our government truly matter. Whoever needs the nuance of keenly validated data really doesn’t “get it.” Oh, and as you obliquely emphasize: they’re severely lazy.

    The other is that as good as your article is, your responses are infinitely better. You are patient to a fault, yet when tested, respond with facility and great clarity (see posts just above).

    Thank you.

  95. Janie says:

    I love that 1) There are still stupid people asking to have the sources cited and 2) that some people still choose to completely ignore the concept for the authors grumblings and focus solely on the fact that a blogger didn’t cite a source or that the numbers weren’t spot on with other sources (though the sources others have posted still show this huge skewed obscene ratio that proves the bloggers point). This left / right shit is so damn frustrating. Work the fuck together with no agenda other than to fix what’s broken.

  96. gmyers2112 says:

    I elected my boy. Really? You’re going with racial slurs? Obama tried but probalby not hard enough to rein in republicans in congress. When he had a chance to ram some programs through congress he didn’t do it because he was trying to be the president of everybody instead of the president of the left. That might have been a mistake. But you really can’t blame any of the inactivity since the congressional elections on Obama since the republicans got back the seats and said, out loud and in clear language, “We don’t care what he tries to do, good or bad, we’re against him getting anything done. If we can stonewall him for the next two years, we can win back the white house.” So, who’s the most fucked and most cynical in this equation?

  97. Pingback: Look whose watchn’ the wells / Ben Zene Occupied Dallas | Arlington TX Barnett Shale Blogger

  98. Dave1950 says:

    Hey, I’m going to take the high rode here. I don’t really care what the exact ratios are it’s quite obvious that the corporate heads are robbing us blind. It’s really amazing that we should be having an argument here. If Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert got a hold of something like this they would be having a hay day with it. Think Rick Perry denying that Climate Change exists while we can give him sourced data up and down the yin yang; the empirical evidence was there; 3.8 million acres burning in his state. Here we have empirical evidence of corporate greed; there are hundreds (I don’t know exactly how many) cities across the US protesting this crap. Years ago I had to take a test for my teaching credential in CA, known as the CSET. In the study guide it said that the Roman Empire collapsed because of political corruption, economic collapse, and warfare. Those that don’t learn from history are destined to repeat it. Do we really need sourced data to prove it happening again? Thank you Mr. gmeyers 2112. This has been both informative and entertaining. Bless you, man!

  99. Brooke says:

    I read the article. Loved it! I read much of the conversation beneath the article, and it made me sad. I teach eighth grade. Every time one of my eighth graders plagiarize, I remind them that they committed a federal crime and could be seriously punished for it if they do it again down the road. To use a chart and not cite it, or know where it came from, can get you into serious trouble. Also, plagiarism isn’t even about using someones words, but also their ideas. Be careful with things like that! You’re a really good writer, but are really bad at receiving criticism. The comments read like one of my 13 year old students having a bad day.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Listen Brooke, first of all, plegerizing isn’t a federal crime, it’s a tort. Second, I didn’t use somebody elses chart, I made my own based on information I found from a number of different sources, colated, sorted and formed into an entertainment rant on a blog. It is information that you can find if you’re interested enough to look and that I’m not interested enough to show you. Third, I’m sorry you’re sad, but you, and about a third of the people who have read this posting of mine seem to have missed the point that I’m not a serious guy. I’m not a journalist. I’m not turning in this piece for a grade and I’m not writing for the New Yorker. I wrote this for me and to make my friends laugh and my wife think I’m sexy with my big old brain. I could not, even if you paid me, give a dried up poo if this lines up with your sense of journalistic requriement. Thank you for reading, but piss on the rest of it.

  100. I see dumb people...and they're EVERYWHERE says:

    I’m amused at how so many people have gotten worked up about this article.  It’s ridiculous to tell someone they can’t write something on the Internet without listing sources.  It’s his blog!!  He can post whatever he wants whether sourced or not.  Just as you have the right to believe it or not.  
    It’s funny how people want to call him lazy when I’ve seen numerous posts with the same damn question.  If you are going to be so passionate about something, maybe you should do your own research.  I mean, at least read the damn thread first before you go posting something that’s been asked at least twenty times already.  I ask you, who are really the lazy ones here?? 

    Mr. Myers,  you get a big thumbs up from me!  I appreciate the time you spent researching the information and the thought you put into this article.

    If nothing else, it at least has people thinking about things they probably paid no mind to previously.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      thank you sooooo much. Really. I’ve felt like I was trying to swim upriver for about the last 3 days and you (and a few others, have gotten the point.) Gold star.

  101. Sue L says:

    I would be nice if you could add a Google + option to your page, some of us would like to share this on Google+. Eye opening chart! I do understand other people wanting to follow some of the data source because you can read anything on the Internet and some of the people asking for the source may not have read all the comments to know that you had responded to that question already (or a thousand times). When I respond to an article I don’t always read all of the comments and I don’t always read the bloggers other articles to “know” their style.

    That many people all asking the same question tells you there is some validity to the question. Instead of getting defensive and angry about being asked the question, realize it is part of writing or blogging on the net. A simple footnote to the article would have saved you a lot of time and anger.

    My profession is finance so I too like to see or know the numbers behind statements such as: “If we let the Bush tax cuts expire… the tax cuts for the top 2% of the wealthiest Americans (the wealthiest population in the history of wealthy populations), we would be out of debt in just over 5 years.” It would be nice if it was that simple and could be done that quickly.

    I did enjoy the article so don’t think this is all about picking you apart. Suggestions for improvement don’t have to be an attack. I think the 475:1 statistic is outrageous! I also think that we have become “sheep”….myself included. Your article is thought provoking as I’m sure you meant it to be…………

  102. Roy Savary says:

    I really can’t blame anyone for wanting to bash the republicans for protecting the rich. I’m so far to the right, I can’t even see the republican party, and I don’t agree with most that they do. In fact the fringe is to the right of the Tea Party, and I consider myself the fuzz on the edge of the fringe. However comma this does not change my view of what is right and wrong. Its also quite the error to lay all the blame on the steps of the conservative types, is also misguided. The democrats bear as much wrongdoing as the others, whether you choose to believe it or not. The republicans care for the rich, so do the SOB democrats. All the rich are not all republicans. There are as many rich democrats as rich republicans, and like their counterparts, are only interested in preserving them and theirs for the betterment of themselves. Sound familiar? EVERYONE should pay the same percentage in taxes, corporate, personal etc., to exclude nobody. No more tax loopholes, no lobbyists, disband the IRS, term limits for every elected official, close our border to the south *completely*, turn prisons into PRISONS instead of rehab cat houses. Make greed and corruption a crime instead of a *right of passage*; THEN, and only THEN will you see things start to turn around. By the way, welfare; 90 days worth, and your done. No generational entitlement; its OVER!. By the way, the UNITED STATES government has NEVER created a job, unless you count WELFARE. Remember that sucking sound H Ross Perot mentioned, well…

  103. Have made this same argument to others, and eventually gave up. Those same unemployed and/or poor ignorant people do not want to change their views. even when presented with facts and figures. It’s the same as attempting a rational discussion of religion with these people.
    There is now a rule at my house: NO discussion (read: argument to some guests) of politics or religion at gatherings here. All thanks to above mentioned rabid followers of TV demagogues, conspiracy theorists and other media ‘personalities’ that are friends of my boyfriend.
    Mercifully it doesn’t change what I write, think or vote.
    Bravo. Well written piece, but I also need to find source information to back this up. Do you have any of the material you had originally used to give a starting point?
    Simply Googling will take hours to sort results (and the statistics, variations, etc that were used to compile them).
    Many thanks

  104. randy says:

    I have enjoyed this thread very much, having been referred to this blog by my “liberal, college indebted, radical (unemployed & useless to society) family member” as his “source” of news and philosophy…ironically, the author turns out to be an actual clear thinking, fearless, EMPLOYED, married guy. The complete opposite of the Wall St./Occupy Sacramento crowd. I came here out of concern for our nations future – since a member of my own family has become what i see as completely confused and incoherent (could be the pot smoke?). I can only hope the owner of this blog not only continues to write, but gains listeners…since it is in the “replies” gained by taking a position that we can maybe find the “middle of the road”. Thank you myers…

    • gmyers2112 says:

      yer welcome hennigar. BTW, you’ve written enough to me on this thing to fill your own blog. You might consider it. There’s a shortage of people who can string words together in a coherant fashion. I can’t spell or type worth a spit, but I manage to get the point across most of the time. You seem also to have the facility.

  105. Molly says:

    Wow I really wish I hadn’t re-posted your graphic on my facebook page! Reading your multiple responses to comments asking for source data for your ratios makes it clear that you made up these numbers. The sad thing is that the ratio of CEO pay to average worker *is* egregious, but you only hurt the cause of correcting that injustice by beep bop boop typing made-up numbers. This undermines the legitimacy of real outrcries against this trend, like that of the AFL-CIO. You could have said the first time someone asked you for a source was outright that you invented the numbers to emphasize a point. That would be fine. But please just say so, rather than alluding to, but not linking to, authoritative websites. Please develop some literacy with regard to research and writing. Blogging is public writing, and please at least try not to spread misinformation.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I wish you hadn’t either.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      It really bothers me that I would be undermining the legitimacy of real outcries (like that could actually happen) Listen Molly. I’m glad you read it. I’m glad you felt charged up by it engouh to write something. I’m even glad that as a human you have a desire to help… somebody. Maybe even anybody. But what I don’t really care about is that you felt compelled to correct the way I present ideas. YOu don’t have to use my words for your argument if you feel I’m undermining something. Really, if my words undermine and argument that you’re making, you’re the one making the mistake. I just wrote some crap on a blog. You’re the one who felt compelled to use it as a bludgeon for your issue. If that use is damning to your issue, you’re the one that did it. Feel me?

  106. Steve S says:

    Deleting comments of people who correct you tells me all I need to know about you.

    Enjoy your blog.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I have a brother who used to yell at me on the phone until I hung up on him. Then he called back and yelled at me for hanging up on him, so I hung up. It took him a while, but he eventually figured out that I didn’t have to listen to him say shitty things to me. Likewise, I dn’t have to post comments from people who start out with, “You ignorant fuck….” and go downhill from there. I’m glad you liked reading it. I’m glad it made you think enoguh to write a comment. I’m sorry that you don’t get that I’m in charge of what gets posted in the comments.

  107. Josh says:

    Why don’t these writers ever cite their sources? I feel as though I can agree and relate to much of this argument, but without a cited source to some study/survey/poll/census data I just can’t accept the table as a fact. Cite it, and let us review it, because you simply telling the people what you think is wrong with the nation is no better than politicians who do that every day. The potential credibility is priceless.

  108. Karen Goheen says:

    Would somebody please take the time to rewrite this blog article and include source material and publish it somewhere? This is a well written article with interesting “facts” and conclusions, and entertaining too…especially the comments and replies to comments. It would sure make sense to make this thought provoking essay available to a larger audience! :o) Cheers to gmyers2112 for writing with passion, attitude, humor, creativity, and intellectual curiosity…and honestly responding to his critics and those who want more information (source citations)! I laughed more than I’ve laughed in days….while at the same time finding resonance with the beliefs and attitudes expounded on in the blog. I could have written the same article yesterday as I pondered the economy, the purpose of OWS, politics, etc…but without nearly as much attitude, humor, and passion!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      So Karen, you smacketh with one hand and jacketh with the other.
      You’re comments and plaudits for my article are like saying, “You write well for such a stupid fuck.”
      Thanks. Really.

      • cperigen says:

        HA! Thanks for this. You made me laugh out loud. I would find that somewhat of a compliment. It seems as though the “stupid fucks” in America are the only ones who are doing anything at the moment (according to CNN and all those news people reporting on “Occupy Wall Street”)

  109. FangyMcJangy says:

    History tells the truth. The way it’s going doesn’t work for long. I see a lot of seemingly intelligent people that could be helping us get out of this mess!

    Tighten up people.

    Thanks for the blog post duders
    Enjoyed it!


  110. Diane Lewis says:

    The numbers tell it all. We could use a floor and ceiling on wealth. We also need to make it illegal to contribute to elections. They should be finanaced by taxes. and also, we need to get rid of lobbyists. Congress should have no benefits, (pension, healthcare) that the average citizen does not share in.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I agree those would be good things, in the correct measure, but, they’re also just pie int he sky. Somethings, honestly, will never happen, no matter how good and idea they might appear to be.

  111. FangyMcJangy says:

    History tells the truth. The way it’s going doesn’t work for long. I see a lot of seemingly intelligent people that could be helping us get out of this mess!

    Tighten up people.

    Thanks for the blog post
    Enjoyed it!


  112. cperigen says:

    You know what bugs me about all these people asking for sources is…you are right. You’re just a blogger sharing your opinion (and a well educated, well informed opinion at that!) but seriously, if people want to know the TRUTH then they need to go out and find it (as you generously suggested a multitude of times but people kept asking the same question..”Where are you sources? Where are your sites?”) Seriously, this is a great OPINION article with great references to great information, most of which, if you read a multitude of articles, blogs, research results, etc you would know that right away. America is now awoken…and I think everyone is STARTING to finally get off their couches…so now let’s get edumacated people. Glad you started with this here blog but stop bugging poor “gmyers” and go read some shit. Preferably from around the world. Seriously.

  113. Elisabeth Sommer says:

    The author is absolutely on the money (as it were), particularly the remark about people preserving the wealth of the super rich because of the myth that they too may one day be wealthy. Our dream has long been a nightmare of untrammeled greed and the distortion of a 16th century view that linked wealth with success and virtue. That concept grew out of a desire to alleviate guilt over the pursuit of profit, and was never intended to cover the sort of extreme wealth and behavior we see currently. Indeed, for all that the founders revered the Roman Republic, our leaders, especially the Republicans (oh, irony) seem to give their allegiance to the Roman Empire (i.e. “private good, public bad”). Where’s Tacitus when you need him? We do desperately need some public control of private economic behavior because, in fact, no economic behavior is truly private. One way or another it affects us all.

  114. tucker MC says:

    Your choice: A Democrat (Obama), a subsidiary of Wall Street, or a Republican (probably Romney), a subsidiary of Wall Street. A choice between the fake change of 2008 or the promise of fake change.

    Solution: Green party (or anybody but the Repubs/Demos).

  115. bcc says:

    This would be a bit more convincing if it weren’t the Dems who own Fannie Mae hadn’t destroyed the banking/housing sector.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I’m not particularly interested in convincing anybody. But thanks for playing our game.

      • bcc says:

        You’re quite welcome. Someone as informed as yourself has the low-down on federal spending, clearly. (heh)

        Seriously? There are those of us who had to learn about government abuse the hard way; such as by actually working for a GSO (Government Sponsored Organization) such as Fannie Mae.

        I don’t have the years, and you can’t afford the space; fortunately you don’t need much in the way of citations to know that Fannie Mae was its own little economy approximately the size of Brazil.

        As long as Fannie Mae exists, a few people will enrich themselves egregiously (as in tens of millions of dollars for doing something as complicated as supervising the profit-making ability of an entity that gets to borrow BELOW PRIME). The rest are a bunch of gerbils who will eat their own young if it gets them an extra mouthful of food.

        Your tax dollars at work.

        More government spending means even more financial rape. OTOH, some folks think that if you’re going to get it, you should lie back and try to enjoy it.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I tend to be an “enjoy it” kinda guy

  116. Pingback: Average USA CEO to worker pay ratio – 475:1. « Financial Freedumb and Brownie

  117. Rick says:

    Did u make these numbers up?

    • gmyers2112 says:

      No. Numbers, as we know them, were invented by arabic scholars a couple thousand years ago. The major accomplishment that set them apart for all previous number systems was the inclusion of the concept of zero.

      • Mildred says:

        Great day in the morning! I love your sense of humor, and I’m glad you didn’t write this blog post to start a revolution, although you may have inadvertently fanned the sparks of one. “We didn’t start the fire..”

  118. tannabanana says:

    I could only go so far to read all of the posts. But what I did read was hysterical! I think the author’s ideology is on a track but clearly needs resources.

    Blogging is a public post and can be spread to the masses… clearly. With technology growing as a mass medium exponentially… anyone can become a so call “journalists.” Sadly, the traditional model of printed mass media as public watchdogs is quickly fading. It’s the responsibility to those who “post” to do their research and site their sources, regardless if they feel it’s just for themselves. What great potential this medium has for the people to be heard and act as their own public watchdogs. But it is truly important that if seemingly factual data is to be posted it should be well researched and sited. An opinion is just that… an opinion. But fact needs to be backed up in order to be credible.

    It’s equally an important responsibility for those that spread these posts to do the same; before passing information on, make sure that the author has done their homework and has sited their sources. If not either do some research themselves and re-post or don’t pass along.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Thank you for finding the funny. I understand that you feel I should follow some sort of “rules for posting” as per my blog, but I hope you won’t be offended if I say I think you’re wrong. My only responsibility in writing is to write what I want to write. I realize that some people may want to use it for their own purposes and therefore it would appear that I have a responsibility to make it usable to them. But it’s a false assumption. I might not want it used for that purpose. I might disagree with the purpose. I may be completely indifferent to the purpose. I really don’t need to justify anything to anybody. I’m not making an argument. I’m just saying a thing. I’m saying a thing I believe to be true based upon information I have seen. Truly, if a person wants to use something that I’ve created for their own purpose, the responsibility rests not with me, the creator of the thing, but them, the user of the thing, to choose whether or not the item fits the purpose.
      So, thank you for reading. I’m glad you were entertained, but please don’t tell me what I should or shouldn’t do with regards to my writing. You seem completely capable of writing thoughtfully and intelligently. If you need to create an argument in favor of your program, interest or agenda, I’m sure that you can do a fine job of it.

    • Elisabeth Sommer says:

      Yes, one certainly should, when relevant, cite one’s sources. As for siting sources, that can be more difficult depending on where one wants to put them and how big they are.

  119. Are there any references for the numbers you wrote here? I would like your source of information. BTW yes I am middle income if not lower middle and I lean republican just a disclaimer

  120. opinion is fine but when you are giving information as FACT, in order to be responsible and engage in real debate that can create real change, Honesty must be integral to the discussion. Giving refences help bolster the credibility and therefore the opinion.

  121. Wilna says:

    The comments for sources has given me chuckle. It’s kind of ironic how the author states “But the only reason they get to do that is that you stay sitting on your couch when you should be sitting at your computer typing 60 enflamed words a minute to your congress person telling them to get this shit fixed…” Which to me implies how a majority of Americans don’t put forth the effort needed to create changes to the system. Then, here within the comments of this article shows people with an interest to know more, yet, who is willing to put forth the effort to gain the knowledge and who wants someone else to feed it to them? Just saying…

    • gmyers2112 says:

      well, yep, that’s one for you. Still doesn’t mean that I want to actually do any work. My nature is my nature and I’m not really interested in rising above it.

  122. abcedertree says:

    gmyers2112, I love this thread, even more for your comments than the article itself, and I appreciate how you’ve firmly pressed a point that has irritated the hell out of me.

    Automatically assigning political responsibility to anyone who’s a good writer is like demanding that anyone who’s really good at sex must have sex with everybody. EVERY individual person of ANY political conviction needs to learn the never-ending art of verifying information for oneself.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I appreciate that you liked it or that you liked being irratated by it or that … you liked having sex with it?

      I like the old cold war philosophy coined by the Reagan Whitehouse, Trust, but Verify. I’m not a Reagan guy, but his team could coin a phrase.

  123. gmyers2112 says:

    I think our numbers differ significantly, but the point remains that the ultra rich became ultra richer during this economic period when everybody else was getting cornholed. For them to not pay a little more to maintain the institutions that allowed and facilitated that massive wealth gathering, seems, well.. greedy and just a bit poo pooey.
    I know that small buiness is always held up as the group that would get hurt when the right wants to stop something that would cost the ultra rich, but historically, it has never worked out to be the truth. Small business rises and falls more on the tail of what happens to regular and poor folk. Its just that the left has been historically bad as making that point. In fact, the left is not so much an organized party as it is a collection of causes that stick together becasue they aren’t the other category. I think it was Will Rogers who said, “I’m not a member of any organized political party. I’m a democrat.”

  124. Johnny Tax Payer says:

    Did you really erase my replies? Wow, typical left

    • gmyers2112 says:

      yeah, it didn’t really have anything to do with left or right. As you notice, I’ve publish a lot of points of view from the other side of the aisle. I cut you out because you were being a dick. I can be a dick in my house, but, you know, it’s my house. If I get dicky in your house, I’d expect you to show me the door. And you can take all of the not dicky things you said with you on the way out. So, though you made some points that I’m sure you were proud of and that spoke to your point of view, as soon as you tried to smack me on the forehead with your dick, I had to throw you out. That’s not so much typical left as it is typical me.

  125. John Kennedy says:

    I’ve seen this graph a few times and it irritates me.

    If you have a ratio of CEO pay to worker pay, the ratios should read 1:12, 1:15, etc…

    As I would ask my 12 year old students, “How many CEOs do you have?”
    One CEO salary to 22 worker salaries.

    I am just a teacher, it’s all my fault anyway.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      We’re not measuring the ratio of ceo’s to workers. We’re measuring the ratio of pay units that each receives (on average). The ceo’s are receiving multiple units of X for every one X of the average employee.

  126. Grooty Hooter says:

    I’m not interested in using you as a source, I’m interested in the sources which you used to put together the ratio graphic. You said before in the comments “do some Googling, boil it down”, and I assume that’s what you did. What sources did you end up with from your searching?

  127. John Kennedy says:

    “…pay separation between the average worker and CEO’s in what we now call the Fortune 500 companies used to be about 20 to 1…”

    • gmyers2112 says:

      ok, but really, you knew what I meant, right?

      BTW, I fixed it.
      All for you, man.
      All for you.

      I looked at your facebook page. What a crazy coincidence that you married a woman named Kennedy.

      oh, here’s something we share; atheism.
      whattaya know. common ground.

      • John Kennedy says:

        Of course I understand.

        I agree with you.

        And, it’s not about me, it’s about what you are saying. The point is relevant and important, but the intro to your message was a graphic that cast your message in a negative way. The article is what’s important, but the tease needed a minor fix.

        It could be worse, I could’ve been named after Ike.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        Ike Kennedy. And you’d have a rotweiler named Agnew.

  128. Excellent piece! Can you please cite your sources for the numbers in your table so I can use the information in a conversation I am currently involved in? I know he will ask where you got them even if I link back to this page.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I think you mean, “the conversation within which I’m currently involved.” This has been asked and answered a great many times. Peruse the previous comments and answers and you will find enough to work with, but do me a favor and read the next article first. I appreciate the read and the interest, but. well, you’ll see.

  129. joeinboston says:

    Wow! Very disturbing info. Can you provide any info on the source of this data?

  130. Pingback: Occupy Wall Street | Official Statement | Video Recaps & More « That's The Hookup

  131. PGMG says:

    “How can there be people who think of themselves as republicans while also being middle-income, poor or unemployed? How is it even possible that there are people who are not rich, yet still believe that it’s in their best interest to vote for the republicans who clearly have only the protection of the rich as their goal?”
    My experience with middle and lower income Republicans is that they are voting with their religion or moral values, not their bank accounts. Right wing politicians know this, and spout off their anti-abortion, pro-family values rhetoric because they know if they look more Christian than the opposing Democrat that they will win the votes of the tens of thousands of people for whom Christian values are more important than earthly wealth. And by wealth, I mean having enough money to pay your bills and live comfortably. Democrats can talk all day long about how big business is stealing from the poor, but as long as that democrat is pro-choice or not outwardly super Christian they are not going to get the votes. Makes me pretty sick…

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I have wondered the same thing many times. A lot of it has to do witht he fact that the Republican party attached itself to religion a long time ago. The same fever that takes over for religion was transferred to republicanism. If you look at the kind of stuff they say, a lot of times it borders on cult like belief against all logic and that is the defining charactistic of religions.

      Thanks for reading

  132. Pingback: #ows SolidarityStats 2: Median CEO pay in the US is 55% greater than in Continental Europe

  133. george says:

    What in the hell is a blogger? What Bull Shit this article is!! Maybe the problems of the world would be solved if bloggers (whatever that is) would get a job. I know, you already have a job. Go get another one. If you worked as hard and as smart and made the sacrifices as did the top 2 %, then you could be one of them, and we could bitch about all the money you have. GET A LIFE, LOSER!!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      A blogger is a person who writes in a blog. You, otherwise referred to as a shitbird, is a guy who flies around shitting on bloggers.
      BTW, you tell me to get a life because I’m wasting my time writing the blog. Dude, you read it even though you hated it and then spent time from your life to tell me how I’m wasting mine. So really now, who’s the bigger loser?

      oh, and you’re reading this too, so… double loser.

      • george says:

        I saw your “blog” (whatever that is) because an acquaintence sent the link to me. I might add that this person is one who thinks we should take everything away from those who work and give it to those who don’t work (like the bloggers, I guess).
        Am I wasting my time. Yup, but it is raining today so can’t play golf. I am long ago retired. I was one of those bad guys when I was a worker. Made lots of money working 50, 60, 70 or more hours a week evert week for more than 40 years. Started shining shoes, selling papers, working in drug store and on farms and more (before I was 15). I might add that I gave many thousands to others (not counting the fortune I paid in income taxes), and that I always spent at least 4-500 hours a year helping those less fortunate.

        I’m a double loser? As I said, if you don’t have anything else to do, than blog. What a stupid way to spend a day. Perhaps you could get off your ass and go help others. Those bad 2% you hate do this every day of their lives. Now, if you don’t like our system, I’ll be glad to contribute to a plane ticket to send you to Iran, N. Korea, China, or wherever you feel the system is more fair.

      • gmyers2112 says:

        I saw your “comment” whatever that is.

        From the things you said and the things about this that confuse you, I never would have guessed that you were retired. You seemed so young and with it. I don’t doubt that you worked hard for you retirement. You earned it as did my father. But the world you grew up in and worked for 40 years does not exist for people my age and younger. After the war, the entire table was tilted toward the US. We owned every market and every advantage. We told the world what to do and because we’d just destroyed half of it defending freedom, they listened. But because you guys kept smacking them in the faces with your dicks for 40 years, they’re a little pissed at us now and things are not quite so simple,.. so easy or so fortuitously inclined in our direction. We still work hard though, we just get paid a lot less if you adjust for inflation. Americans put in 30% more hours per week at work than your generation ever did and all of our unions have been busted or nutted. Also, we have to have both adults in the family working just to make the ends meet whereas you were able to have June Cleaver at home watching the Beev and doing the milkman while you were at the smoke shop getting your special blend from Al the tobacconist.

        Listen up old man, the Dodgers moved a long time ago and so have most of the well paying jobs because you’re crowd sold us down the fucking river for a retirement plan. You’ve got two or three years left to even out your karma before the big door prize in the sky. You can either be a part of the solution or an ossified old part of the problem that smells of Preparation H and Bay Rum. You can get out and help somebody, like somebody helped your parents during the depression, or you can get the fuck out of the way. Either way, I’m not too worried about whether or not you think “blogging” is a productive use of my time. You’re gonna be worm dirt pretty soon and we won’t have to deal with you. And another thing… stop driving so slow, you’re making the rest of us crazy.

      • george says:

        [EDITORS NOTE: I’m editing George a little here because he’s saying a lot of really stupid shit, but I wanted to address one or two of the items he posted in his latest response ]

        George says:
        Now, the poor underprivileged only have all the food they can eat, cell phones, tv, cable, cars, boats and on and on. In addition, the top 2% have made it possible for them to not work and have handouts of every kind. We didn’t have any of these things (including car). What we did have we worked for.

        Response: We (my family and me) are not underprivileged and we don’t have any more than just exactly enough to eat so I really have to wonder how the actual underprivileged are making it. I have a cell phone because everybody, including wandering desert tribesmen have cell phones now (I know that yours has the really big buttons, but the rest of us use the “smart phones”), we have A tv that’s 10 years old, two cars that have a collective 250,000 miles on them, I have a picture of a boat that I might be able to buy someday if I can manage to get paid for killing an old man in a retirement community in Florida but other than that, a boat is a wealthier man’s dream. The top 2% haven’t do anything for me except steal this nations wealth and put it into several very large piles where they don’t help anybody. Money is like cow manure. It doesn’t do any good if you don’t spread it around a little.

        George Says:
        Don’t tell me that you work 30% harder. That’s baloney. And, the reason your wife (or I guess it could be your “boy friend” today) works is that you want more stuff.

        First I didn’t say harder, I said longer. It is statistically factual and has been known from folks at the bottom end for a long time. Folks at your end couldn’t function without assistants and secretaries and actual working people doing things while you sucked up Cutty Sark at the club on three hour liquid lunches. And the reason my wife and I both work isn’t to have more stuff, it is to have some stuff and by stuff I mean food and clothing for our kids.

        The part about this that really gets me pissed is that you believe what you’re saying. You actually think it’s true. You are so far removed from the reality of what’s happening in this world that you think most people are on welfare because they prefer it, or that more than 10% of America is unemployed because they’re just lazy or stupid. You really believe that the top 2% are the saviors of the universe and the rest of us are just wastefully sucking at their teat. I don’t think you’re evil or stupid, but I know for a fact that you’re wrong.

        George Says:
        Your mother may have been June Cleaver “doing the milk man”, but this was not true for me.

        I say:
        My Dad was the milkman and he speaks well of your wife.

        George says:
        Your comment about the unions is interesting. Who do you think is responsible for all the manufacturing jobs going overseas? It was the unions, dead head. Try competing when the unions have the cost of the guy sweeping the floor at a GM plant costing $75,000 + a year.

        Wow, really. The unions have fought to keep jobs here and it was working for a very long time until Reagan started giving tax breaks to companies who participated in the global spread of capitalism (read: sending jobs overseas). It was intended to help better the lives of people overseas and increase their incomes so that they could buy more stuff from us, etc, but the short sightedness of the initiative had the actual effect of eventually moving all of our manufacturing away because them dang chinee peeples werk for a bowl of rice.

        Also, my best friend was an actual assembly worker at a GM plant and he worked really long hours and never made more than 40 grand a year and about 15k a year in medical benefits and he was there almost 18 years before being laid off with nothing but a union stipend that lasted 8 weeks.

        George says:
        I’ll bet I have done more to help people EVERY YEAR OF MY LIFE, than you have done in your entire life.

        I’m a scout leader and have paid for more scouts to be scouts than I can remember and I’ve done it since my son was 6 (he’s 18 now). I’ve coached two seasons of soccer per year for the last 12 years for free and I’ve paid for the fees and uniforms for about half of those kids because their families could not and though I don’t have extra, I can at least do that. I’ve taught classes for free at the community center and I’ve organized food drives every year that I’ve lived in Texas (36) becasue as much as we have here, we have a lot or really poor people too. (and more now that we’ve had so many years of Bush and Perry). So sing me a sad sad song about how you help people and nobody else does. You are the victim and all us po folk should jes work harder sose that mebee we can brang you a glass of lemonade at the club, an mebee, jus mebee, if’n we’s good lil worker drones and doan look atchata in da eyes, you might put a little something extra on the tab for me and mah babies, what I had as a way to get me some more welfare.

  134. I’ve seen the CEO:average worker chart all over the web recently; any idea where the data can be found? Thanks!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      it kinda freeks me out to see a chart I made pop up all over the place. The source question has been answer quite a lot. You can scan the other questions and answers and find what you need. But to be clear, I read a lot of different reports. There was no single report that had all of the info on it. I did that thing we used to call reserach (I don’t know what they call it now. I’m old)

      Anyway, there’s a fuller (more full, more than full, fulliest?) explanation of this on the next article, if you want to read that one. You seem like a nice person though so I apologize up front for the adolescent use of the F bomb… and the repeated coming back to it. Over and over and over.

      and over.

  135. AynRand says:

    First of all kudos to you and this blog.
    Despite the fact that it pretty much sums up my opinion on what is wrong in the corporate world today, you achieved a lot of buzz around this topic which per se is a good thing…

    Now to all the folks that are requesting sources for your information: is it really that important to prove the obvious? Is any of those questioning your numbers really not aware of what’s going on? Does it really matter whether a CEO on average makes 200, 475, 550 or 4750 times the amount of money you and I make?
    Not really; there is so much information floating through the media day after day showing the gap between the ultra rich and the average Joe that to me backing up your arguments is completely irrelevant:

    1. Home Depot paying Bob Nardelli $210M severance for being fired after 7 years (here you go before all the silly source requests pop up: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_03/b4017001.htm)

    2. Richard Grasso, New York Stock Exchange, taking $140 million in deferred compensation (again: http://www.forbes.com/2007/10/30/merrill-severance-compensation-biz-wall-cx_lm_1031failure_slide_4.html?partner=msnedit)

    3. 25 Richest Hedge Fund Managers Made $22 Billion in 2010 (ditto: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/01/top-richest-hedge-fund-manager_n_843632.html)

    Now, whoever read your blog and criticized it is either not following the media (fairly unlikely given the fact that they “found” your blog) or plain and simple can’t fit the truth into their view of the world and how they think it should be…

    One more thing I just have to mention is the reference to why CEOs deserve the insane amount of money they make, namely because “…a CEO […] oversees the livelihoods of thousands upon thousands of employees…” as one of the commenters stated above. I really like that one because it is brought up left and right in this discussion.
    What is the first thing every CEO does if Wall Street is not happy with their numbers? Yes, you guessed correctly: job cuts! Responsibility for employees, my a$$!!!

    What it comes down to, is that the American corporation is the only form of dictatorship tolerated (and even glorified) in a society that is so much wired towards “freedom”. You adhere to its rules or you are screwed. Sure, you can quit anytime and get a job somewhere else. But that is almost like if the East German Government had told its suppressed citizens that they could leave and move to the USSR if they don’t like to live locked up in the GDR. Actually, at least back then there was another system (the free “West”) whereas for the regular worker drone today there is no other choice since the conditions in the professional world are not specific to a company but rather to the corporate world as a whole. Well, sure they could quit, pack up and move to another country, it’s that easy…

    As I said, a fantastic read and you summed up perfectly how it comes that so many folks still seem to have a problem taking their blinders off:
    “It reminds me of that line about the greatest thing the devil ever did was to convince you that he wasn’t real… Well, the greatest thing the republicans ever did was to convince 14% of the american population that protecting the rights of the rich was somehow good for poor and middle-income people.”


  136. melissa says:

    Did a little poking around about 1% vs. 99%. Mother Jones had my fave graphs with source links.


  137. nikki says:

    a-phuccing-men! awesome article. thank u 4 putting it so candidly. let those who have eyes 2 c, c.

  138. I would like to see someone do a breakdown of the wage proportions of Administrators to Teachers in the US school systems… I wouldn’t be surprised if it was as bad, or worse.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I’m sure there is a disparity but I’m equally sure that it is nowhere near the same scale. Teachers average about 45k. At the low end of the CEO ratios shown on the chart was 11 to 1. 45,000 multiplied by 11 is 495,000. There would be very few school administrators in this country that pulled down that kind of chedder and if they are, it’s probalby for an enormous school district. From what little I know about school administration at the city level, I gotta believe that half a million dollars a year to run the Chicago or Los Angeles public schools is not worth it. You would have to pay me more just to put up with the parents.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      this will sound needy and desperate, but share the article with everybody you know through all of your social media connections. Also, read my other articles. If I haven’t offended you yet, I’m sure to at some point.

  139. Connie Davis says:

    What a great read; what a terrific writer! Will source for myself any statements written if I feel the need to verify, or on which I want additional information. Always have–always will, irrespective of the source. Others should, too, if the subject is important to them. So much to think about in your blog, and I am grateful that you wrote this.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Thank you. My favorite part of your comment is the correct usage of the word irrespective. In a world where the non-word irregardless is spoken by potential Presidents and potentates, nuclear becomes nucular and “for all intents and purposes” is about dolphins with attitude (intensive porpoises), it is refreshing to see that the most flexible language in the history of mankind (now, humankind.. see, flexible) can still be used correctly.

      Plus, I’ve always liked the name Connie.

  140. Deko says:

    Snarf ruined Thundercats.

  141. LOL says:

    Here is a new perspective, The numbers are not invented. The prove exactly what you stated. Instead of thinking about CEO pay to average pay, Think about it in CEO hours of life spent “Working” to pay for things compared to their employees. http://logicandpolitics.blogspot.com/2011/10/why-are-people-so-angry-and-frustrated.html

    I like this blog. Keep up the good work.

    • LOL says:

      Gmyers, I too have to admit I get lazy and don’t want to find a bunch of sources and link to them or list them. What I do when that happens is often use personal sources, OR real math. One of the most profound pieces I have ever seen was this Colorado professor on youtube talking about the shit we are in using nothing more then the “doubling factor” For those that haven’t seen it, it is here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY. Using nothing more then quotes from current (at that time) politicians and this single math formula to show how some of the most outrageous beliefs are unsustainable by any measure.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      Remember to tell all your friends.

      I’m here all week.

      Don’t forget to tip your waitress…

  142. Cosmic Rose says:

    Never once did he pause for second thought, for second thought may flatten the lyric into prose, bring down the dream castle to the level of cottage and the barn. Like a magic spell the dream spilled from his head. And a new trick he learned. To mold the clay without so much as the touch of his hand. To write the play without the paper or pen. The very thought was tool enough,
    sufficient in itself. The Ram reads from a book that is too old… to sheep, far too young.

    I sense a little cosmic in ya brotha. I also find it a bit refreshing that after thousands of years of faith based living… homo-sapient uprights are finally asking for PROOF before they will simply believe something. Too bad they still want someone else to provide it for them.

    If there is ONE thing that EVERYONE can take away from this extremely entertaining dialog… its that we have a terrible problem in this country with READING COMPREHENSION. It could just be me… but I don’t get why people demand truth, knowing they can not decipher it once offered.

    BTW… I like your digs… hope I was respectful enough to be invited back from time to time… cosmicly speaking Rosebud

    • gmyers2112 says:

      oh, yes, Brother. You can come back any time. If for no other reason that the lilting lyric left lolling in the lee as you left.

      Now what’s that thing yew wuz sayin about them sheep? Is they comin to the party too?

      There was some talk of homos as well and that unsettled me a bit but I’m trying to be more open to folks.

  143. Cosmic Rose says:

    Sure glad to know what I left, was left lolling in your lee and not your loo.

    Homo-sapient uprights are sheeple dressed in monkey suits. I am told… that if you build it… they WILL come. All you have to say is party and I will…

  144. Heywood says:

    Funny how GE is mentioned. Gee, who’s campaign were they a big donor to again? Oh yeah, Obama.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      That’s like saying “Nabisco reaped record earnings this year. Hey guess who just ate a bunch of Chips Ahoy…. Obama.” It makes the same amount of nonsense. Notice that nonsense is the combination of non and sense.

      Just so you know, according to public records from both of the parties and from GE, GE contributed almost exactly the same amount of money to both parties. They don’t care who wins, they just want somebody to pick up the phone when they call in a favor.

      Most major companies contribute equal amounts to opposing forces. It’s called hedging your bet. It’s how they got to be major companies in the first place.

  145. Neal Rohrs says:

    The numbers that you use are not even close to accurate. The Bush tax cuts dropped the highest bracket from 39% to 35%. That 4% would be about $120 BILLION more in taxes on the top 5% of income earners. The national bebt is $15 TRILLION. We can’t tax our way out of the mess we are in. Your plan would pay off the debt in 100 YEARS if we never had any more deficit spending.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I know you believe that Neal, but it has been shown enough times by people that I trust and believe that my numbers are reasonably close and I’m gonna stick to my argument. But, for the moment, let’s say you’re numbers are exactly correct. Don’t you think that in a time of dire national need, the top 2% of earners could pony up an extra 180 billion a year to help cover some of the costs of fixing the shit that fell on our heads because of Bush wars, Cheney Halliburton cronyism, and “let’s just pull out all of the safeguards and see what happens” Wall Street excess? It’s like I’m saying “your dog bit me” and you’re saying, “yeah, but he’s only a dobie, not a mastiff.” I still got bit and it fucking hurts. You standing there pissing on it doesn’t make it feel better.

      If you’re not rich and you’re defending the republicans, you have been fooled by people smarter than you to protect their interests against your own. Good luck with that.

  146. LOL says:

    Neils statement exemplifies the simplicity that makes it so hard to get functional policy instituted. Only focusing on immediate impact. Nobody asks the question, “then what?” 180 billion saved, “then what?”. Give it to big business in the form of loans. “Then what?” They will hire people to make more products. “To sell to who?” and “which people”? The loss of understanding of consequences for our actions is a cultural problem that affects us from the personal everyday decisions all the way up to the political level.

  147. Cosmic Rose says:

    I can’t believe the Christian Right aren’t all over the 1%ers demanding that they tithe 10% of their wealth DIRECTLY toward doing God’s work. Such as… feeding the poor… housing the homeless… administering to the widowed and destitute… and providing health care to those who are ill and diseased. Then there is that “Give unto Cesar that which is Caesar’s”, admonition espoused by the big JC. Ya know… the tax code 2000 plus years ago seemed to be pretty darn oppressive to the denizenry of the day… as much as it is in our current experience? Its just strange to go about demanding that our leaders be CHRISTIAN since this is a CHRISTIAN NATION founded upon Christian principles… yet anyone would be hard pressed to see Christian precepts being enacted in politics… unless it is to provide mere LIP SERVICE. Any REAL God should be as pissed off as I AM when things are being done in my name that I do not agree with.

    Sorry… I’m just using the lords name in vain… obviously. DISCLAIMER: THE ABOVE WAS COMMITTED WHILE TONGUE FIRMLY EMBEDDED IN CHEEK. Not to mention… laced with a great deal of “the power of myth”. >;-}~

    I do believe there is a solution to our present dilemma… which unfortunately has more to do with greedy human nature than anything else. We are experiencing an ENERGY CRISIS due to our LACK CONSCIOUSNESS (there might not be enough to go around). Indeed… in a microcosm of the macrocosm sort of way…money is simply a form of energy exchange that is fast approaching its peak and headed into OVERSHOOT… as is most everything else in our present paradigm of reality. Few are focused on achieving some sort of balance because they are too concerned about “Getting Theirs”, whilst the getting is good. The key to achieving this needed balance of which I speak is implementing Humanistic Economics into the equation…. cosmicly speaking of course.

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I was raised a Catholic which means now I’m an atheist. I have no particular love for the christians. I know a lot of them and most are decent people, lest I would not be friends with them. However, I regularly see and then comment to friends and family (who then roll their eyes because there goes Gary again) that christians, especially their leaders are the least likely people in the world to actually practice what they preach. I know jews and I know muslims and I know buddhists and I think I actually knew a shinto animist once, and of the ones I knew, they all seemed to actually do what their books proscribe. I think it is as rediculous to live by a single book like the bible or the koran as it would be to live by the Silmarillian or the Sears catalog, but the ones who claim to believe something and then force others to deal with thier obsolete world view and then do not do and they say we should do,…. well, it just makes me want to start smiting people.

      I heard a guy explain the way that christians allow themselves to call themselves christians yet not behave in a christian manner is based in the many contradictions in the bible. Taken at face value, these contradictions allow people to pick and choose which thing they want to use that particular day to take away your shit and bury in a big hole full of nonbelievers.

      it’s almost like it was a plan…. except nobody could be that devious. or could they….?

  148. Numa says:

    Hi, I was just taking this class about state/firms relation… woluld you give me the source of that chart of CEO pay ratios? a scholar valid one… thanks!

    • gmyers2112 says:

      I read about a dozen articles. I collated the information. I made the chart. I wrote an entertainment piece for my own amusment.

      You have to realize from reading my article that it is not intended as a quoting point right? Very few of the peer reviewed articles in circulation make such prominent use of the words fuck, dip shit and cocksucker. (I may have edited out cocksucker). You’re not likely to catch anybody up on the hill pointing to my piece about Penis on the Menu as a source about 3rd world diets.

      Do yourself a favor. Open up a search engine and type “ceo, average worker, pay, ratio, worldwide”. Don’t use me as a source. I’m just here for laughs. Use me for that.

  149. Alan K Hunt says:

    gmyers2112 says: “I read some shit. I wrote some shit.” and “Don’t use me as a source. I’m just here for laughs. Use me for that.”
    Exactly. Whatever you’re reading is bullshit, and so is your regurgitation of it. This is some really shabby crap here. It’s discouraging to see that many people apparently take this stuff seriously, but I’m happy to hear that you don’t,

    • gmyers2112 says:

      The most interesting thing about what you wrote was your name. Alan K Hunt: it kinda looks like Alan Khunt. I bet a lot of people make that type of association with you.

      Here’s an interesting side note about the word cunt. It’s from one of the ancient germanic languages and it means “shit bird who misses the fucking point”. Neat how the growth and evolution of language can come full circle like that.

      PS, if you are a republican and you ain’t rich, you’re voting against your own interests. If you are rich and you’re a republican…. where’s my fuckin money, you bastard. I’ll take it in health care for my kids, if you don’t mind.

  150. Superb blog! Do you have any recommendations for aspiring writers?

    I’m planning to start my own blog soon but I’m a little lost on everything.
    Would you recommend starting with a free platform like WordPress or go for a paid option?
    There are so many choices out there that I’m totally overwhelmed .. Any tips? Thank you!

  151. stan says:

    I have a friend in the Philippines and she told me on many occasions… “I’d love to be poor in your country”. I didn’t realize how well I had it until i spend some time in her country. I believe most other places look at us as Disney world. Most of us have “stuff” that we don’t even use. I can’t watch all the TVs in my house or use all my bathrooms. I keep my house at a comfortable temperature even when I’m not home. And truth be told I have food in my refrige that spoils before i eat it. As for health care, whether you have insurance or not they will treat you. It must be somewhat profitable (my town advertises emergency room wait times on billboards). It just seems silly to me “now” to focus on a small percentage of people who make what seems to be too much money.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s