Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Average American income rose 1.1% last year. CEO's? Up THIRTY-EIGHT PERCENT.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 01:39 PM
Original message
Average American income rose 1.1% last year. CEO's? Up THIRTY-EIGHT PERCENT.
Edited on Fri Nov-09-07 01:44 PM by blondeatlast
I posted this as a reply to another thread but found it so alarming and telling I thought I'd post it alone.

The chief executives of America's 500 biggest companies got a collective 38% pay raise last year, to $7.5 billion. That's an average $15.2 million apiece. Exercised stock options again account for the main component of pay, 48%. The average stock gain was $7.3 million.


http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/05/03/highest-paid-ceo...


Real median household income in the United States rose by 1.1 percent between 2004 and 2005, reaching $46,326, according to a report released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. Meanwhile, the nation’s official poverty rate remained statistically unchanged at 12.6 percent. The percentage of people without health insurance coverage rose from 15.6 percent to 15.9 percent (46.6 million people).


http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archiv...

And keep in mind--the Census figures INCLUDE the CEO boosts. Think about that a while.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
One Percenters. Use that phrase often (and thanks to havocmom for the idea).

See this thread for more: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2246033&mesg_id=2246033

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
progpen Donating Member (148 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 01:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. And we need to get behind our top 1% and show our loyalty (fealty)
Edited on Fri Nov-09-07 01:45 PM by progpen
by getting out there and going shopping!

Edited a stoopud spelling mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. I have only one thing to say:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is the 1.1 percent figure derived with inflation included or excluded?
If excluded, that would represent a net loss in income, because even core inflation during that period was running 2 to 3 percent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The link disappearead between the short time I posted and you replied.
:shrug:

It's from a Census Bureau press release (I just Googled US, income, 2006) to get it but the Google link no longer works either.

I'll keep trying to find the figures, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Found this from the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/29/us/29census.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Since it comes from census statistics, it probably doesn't adjust--and since so many on the lower SE scale opt out of the census it may be even worse, I suppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elwood P Dowd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. I think they use the core inflation figures
which are an absolute joke. They don't include food and energy, which could account for 25% of the income for median income workers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Even if you exclude food and energy, core inflation would still be higher than 1.1 percent. So...
no matter how you cut it, workers are still getting screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. Big difference between the Upper 1% and the Top 400.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. If there are 131M taxpayers,
then the top 400 represent Upper 0.0003% of the total number of taxpayers.

The top 1% represents approximately 1.3M taxpayers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Whoah. I fall to the rightish side of the scale but nowhere near the end.
I keep telling people I've got far more in common with the poorest Americans than the wealthiest.

That's simply disgusting--and EVERY voter should see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. The Top 400 can buy our government and business.
Edited on Fri Nov-09-07 02:57 PM by SimpleTrend
To me it shows the absolute necessity for a progressive income tax that's exponential, but the ways in which those are typically enacted in the past keep the top 1% taxed at the same rate as Top 400.

Taking 50% in taxes from a family earning 1 million leaves them $500,000, while taking 50% from the 100 million+ group leaves them with at least $50 million.

While the $500,000 affords a nice, comfortable lifestyle: the $50 million group is left with so much excess disposable income that they can still exert excessive political and economic influence upon every other one of us. They can buy up most company's stock as majority stock holders, for one example, for another, they can grant huge donations to the benefit of both political parties which seems to have influence on our laws.

That group, the Top 400, buys our government and businesses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC