Actually, CEO salary is the biggest red herring. When that stat is thrown out they only measure the winners (survivorship bias). What about the thousands of CEO's that make NOTHING. ZERO. Zilch. NADA. In fact, what about the CEO's that went into debt, lost everything, are broke, destitute. Sure, when you only measure the winners the numbers look really bad. Here is a pop quiz for everyone. Movie stars. Can anyone tell me avg annual income of a member of SAG (screen actors guild)? This list includes the likes of Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, etc. Some of these stars making 50 to 100 million in a good year. But what is the avg salary of all members? This is meaningful data btw because all working actors are required to be members which means we have the winners and the losers in the same data set.
Dude, if you were literate you would know I've been one of the biggest FED critics on ET. But when you post crap I have to call you out on it. My character requires that.
If I misjudged you I apologize, But just to be clear, and I'll make it super easy for you. Are you for Abolishing Federal Reserve ?? YES or NO And you don't even have to go into details of replacing it with national central bank the way China and Russia did. You can just answer with yes or no. Talk about making it easy. BY THE WAY, it seems you believe there is no inequality problem in US, based on what you wrote in this thread. Hey it's ok to have your own opinion, just don't veil it behind some curtain, be open and specific about it or people see through it
I've probably stated on ET over 500 times that if it were possible to abolish the FED, I would. The problem is you have an "ideology" which is fine but when you try to back it up, you confuse the facts. Income inequality in this country comes from many different factors, way too many to list here. But CEO salary is NOT one of them. In fact, CEO salaries tell us very little a out the inequality problem. For one, they represent so few data points and two, survivorship bias. The avg CEO doesn't make jack. But if you avg the winners, then yes, it looks really big. It would be like saying the avg trader makes 100 million a year from averaging the top 100 hedge fund managers. The reality is the avg trader in this country makes less then minimum wage once you factor in the losers (and there are many). I just want you to get your FACTS straight. Just screaming at the FED is not an argument. Saying we are going to die and the world is going to come to an end is not an insightful comment. Try to gather your thoughts and be specific about what you are trying to say. We do not have an inequality problem in this country. We have an educational deficiency problem. For even if we took all the wealth from the rich and gave it to the poor over time they would squander it back to the rich. For they don't know the knowledge or the means to do anything with that wealth and therein lies the rub.
I already wrote about education program being devised by government 30 years ago to dumb people down. So the vote the "proper" way. How is it that most of you MoFos on ET supposedly know the economy better than this billionaire whos been in business his whole life. HE SAYS, people in US are becoming too F'in poor to buy stuff. AND YOU SAY, no it's not that, there is gotta be something else. I rest my case.
No dude, you just spit out conspiracy stuff without ever MAKING an argument. Regarding your billionaire idol, every ideology has a billionaire idol. The left has Soros, the neo-cons have Kovner, the right has the Koch brothers, the libertarians have Peter Thiel. So the whole "billionaire knows more then us" argument is shallow. Because the argument then digresses down to my billionaire is smarter then your billionaire. And round and round we go. You are the example of someone that has an interest in politics (which is great) but lack the education to understand what your views are hence why your talking points ultimately come down to name calling and throwing a tantrum. I applaud your interest, but you need to learn more. Right now you are struggling to put together two coherent sentences and it makes for difficult reading. One last thing I'll say regarding income equality. Income equality is not the "cause" of the problem, it's the effect. You need to address the "cause" in your argument. And it would make for better dialogue if you tried using some of your own thoughts instead if saying this billionaire said this, debate over.
On ET, if you can draw a straight line, the world is your oyster. All good points. Still, Hanauer's liberal view gets much more press than other billionaire views, or so it seems.