FT132: “To settle CEO pay once and for all we should peg it to the pay of athletes, the Hollywood elite, musicians and authors.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 24th, 2012

Fundamental Truth

Sports Stars only Work Part Time yet they Earn almost as Much as CEOs

It’s open season on rich CEOs.  From the Occupy Wall Street movement to the Obama Campaign attacks on Republican candidate Mitt Romney.  CEOs are too rich.  They don’t pay enough in taxes.  And they hate children.  Because they oppose higher tax rates on their income.  Which can only mean one thing.  They hate children.  At least if you listen to those on the Left.

So how well paid are they?  Well, they are paid well.  But not as well as some well-paid rich people.  Especially those typically associated with the Left.  High earning sports stars.  High earning Hollywood elites.  High earning superstars in music.  And high earning authors.  There are some conservatives in these fields.  But it’s hard to know who they are.  Because they tend to hide their politics to avoid undue attention on themselves.  Whereas liberals can be as outspoken and as critical of conservatives as they wish and never bring any undue scrutiny on their incredible high earnings.  Why?  It is the great unspoken rule in being filthy rich.  If you are an outspoken liberal you can be as filthy rich as you want and you will never hear an unkind word about your obscene wealth.  So let’s look at some filthy rich people.  Let’s look at the top 10 annual earners in the following sectors (see links above for source information):

Of the sectors shown CEOs are only richer than sports stars.  But not by much.  Which says a lot about the earnings of sports stars.  For sports are seasonal.  They have off-seasons.  And yet they make almost as much as CEOs.  Who work year round.  But other than the part-time sports stars the filthy rich CEOs are less filthy rich than the Hollywood elites, superstars in music and authors.

No One says that Musicians Earn too Much even though they Earn More than CEOs who Earn too Much

The median household income at the end of 2011 was $ 51,413.  Some may say this is rich.  If you’re making minimum wage perhaps it is rich.  But it’s a long way from those noted above.  Interestingly many of these people will say CEOs earn too much.  Some may even say these sports megastars earn too much.  But not many.  Few if any will criticize Hollywood elites, superstars in music and authors.  Even though they live a far better life than they could ever imagine.  Why?  Because these rich people say they care for the little guy.  And support Democrat candidates for office.  Which, of course, takes the spotlight off of their obscene wealth.  And they can insulate their lives from the policies of Democrats.  Which tend to be anti-business.  Including high taxes.  A complicated tax code.  And high regulatory compliance costs.  So CEOs tend to support Republican candidates.  Who tend to fight the anti-business policies of Democrats.  Because they hurt the businesses they’re responsible for.  Which, of course, makes them look greedy.  And like they hate children.

So how do these filthy rich people compare to the median household income?  Like this:

The sports megastars are the pauper of the group.  They only earn 780 times the median household income.  Musicians are the filthiest of the rich coming in at 1,701 times the median household income.  Meaning the average income of the top ten superstars in music equal the median income of 1,701 households added together.  Another 687 households more than the average income of the top ten CEOs.  Yet people say CEOs earn too much.  But no one says that musicians earn too much.  Even though they earn more than those who earn too much.

If CEOs are Overpaid then so Must Everyone who is Paid More than Them

People tend to pick on CEOs.  Because they are highly compensated.  Not as highly as musicians, the Hollywood elite or authors.  But highly.  They get those high compensations for a reason, though.  A few bad decisions at the top can ruin a successful business.  Whereas the CEO who consistently makes good decisions will make a business grow.  Creating wealth.  And jobs.  At the CEO’s business.  And all the businesses that feed into it.  Thanks to the stages of production.  So a good CEO can create a lot of economic activity.  Wealth.  And jobs.  Not to mention a whole lot of tax revenue.  Which fund all those Democrat programs.  Including the ones for children.

The other filthy rich create jobs, too.  And wealth.  But nowhere near what a good CEO can create.  For few of them are singularly responsible for building their industries.  Unlike a John D. Rockefeller.  An Andrew Carnegie.  A George Westinghouse.  Or a Steve Jobs.  These people changed the world.  And put hundreds of millions of people to work through the years.  Compared to the limited economic activity a pop star creates.  A movie star.  An author.  Or an athlete.

So a CEO creates more wealth and jobs for others than most filthy rich people.  And they create more tax revenue at all levels of government than most filthy rich people.  So one would think they would deserve higher compensation for all the good they do.  But no.  At least according to those on the Left.  So what would be fair?  Call them musicians?  Movie stars?  Authors?  If so then we could even pay them more.  For no one complains about their high compensation.  Or should we cut their pay?  As well as musicians, movie stars and authors?  And sports stars?  Pay them all less.  For if CEOs are overpaid then so must everyone who is paid more than them.  Of course that probably wouldn’t go over well with the athletes, the Hollywood elite, the musicians and the authors.  So perhaps to settle the CEO pay issue once and for all we should peg it to a weighted average of the pay of athletes, the Hollywood Elite, musicians and authors.  So the amount of compensation just doesn’t matter anymore.  Because they will be as filthy rich as the people the Left has no problem with being filthy rich.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Who’s a Bigger Crook? Christine O’Donnell or Your Typical Senator?

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 22nd, 2010

Christine O’Donnell, Republican candidate for the Joe Biden’s Senate seat in Delaware, is apparently a crook.  Or so says Melanie Sloan, executive director of the nonpartisan Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).  According to Sloan she embezzled campaign funds and evaded taxes.  Like Timmy Giethner.  Charlie Rangel.  And [enter any Democrat or RINO here].  Oh my.

Sloan said, “…Republicans and Democrats don’t agree on much these days, but both sides should agree on one point: Thieves belong in jail, not the United States Senate.”  (See O’Donnell embezzlement accusation called ‘frivolous’ on the Washington Times website).   She’s a little late.  The Senate is a den of thieves.  If O’Donnell is a crook, she’ll fit right in.  If not, maybe she can make a difference.  Make the business of the Senate about the people and not the Senators’ pockets.

Yes, embezzlement is bad.  But the rape and pillage of a nation is a tad bit worse.  And by a ‘tad’ I mean whole frickin’ lot.

Perhaps I’m not being fair.  I mean, both congressional chambers are corrupt.  It was their legislation, after all, that caused the current recession/depression.  The subprime mortgage crisis.  Putting people into houses who had no chance in hell of paying off their mortgages.  The whole point of a subprime mortgage was to help unqualified people get qualified for a mortgage.  Why?  The government was reviewing their books.  And if they didn’t like what they saw, well, they made it known.  And, of course, any deficiency in minority approvals guaranteed a visit from Jesse Jackson or some other fair housing advocate.  The message was clear.  Approve.  Or else.  And they did. Then all those ARM interest rates reset.  And, well, you know the rest of the story.

It’s kind of funny.  Not in a ‘ha ha’ kind of way but more of a tragic, ironic way.  By trying to put more people into houses we may end up making more people homeless.  Which sometimes happens when a long-ass recession turns into depression.  Funny.  That wacky government.

I don’t know much about Christine O’Donnell.  But she has an ‘R’ next to her name.  And if we get enough ‘R’s in the Senate perhaps we’ll be able to return to the good old days.  When gridlock ruled.  Remember those days?  Good times.  One thing you can say about gridlock.  It’ll be a whole lot harder to create another subprime mortgage crisis if the government can’t conspire against the people.

It’s hard to take an attack on a Republican serious anymore.  With the biased media and their talking points, the Hollywood elite and the college professors corrupting our youth, it’s worse than the fable of the boy who cried wolf.  After awhile you just lose credibility.  When you know what they will say before they say it, what they say just doesn’t matter anymore.  We get it.  Republican bad.  Why?  Because they’re Republican.  ‘Nuff said.

I don’t know about you, but that’s just a weak argument.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #30: “Liberal talk radio is not successful because liberals are not deep thinkers.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 7th, 2010

LESS THAN MEETS THE EYE

The Left has long searched for an answer to talk radio.  It is one of the few mediums they do not control.   And it’s a powerful medium.  Lots of people listen to talk radio.  Few of them liberal.

When you hear ‘talk radio’, what do you think of?  Rush Limbaugh?  Probably.  Most people do.  When you hear ‘conservative talk radio’, what do you think of?  Rush Limbaugh again?  Probably so.  Now think of Liberal talk radio and what do you think of?  Silence?  Silence that is so silent that you can hear crickets chirping?  Probably.  Successful talk radio and conservative talk radio are synonymous.  Why?  America is a center-right country.  Limbaugh’s success isn’t due to any genius on his part.  He just says what a vast majority of Americans think.  And the Left hates that.  Because they’re not in the majority.

They sound big.  But that’s because they’ve got big mouths.  Sort of a mouse that roared kind of thing.  They’ve got the vast majority of the network news and print media.  The college professors.  The Hollywood elite.  And a bunch of rich people who assuage their guilt over their unearned wealth by proclaiming their liberal tendencies.  This is not a lot of people.  In fact, it’s quite few.  However, if we read or watch the news, watch a movie or a program about entertainers, go to college or hear the obscenely rich talk about helping the ‘little people’ they can’t stand and want nothing to do with, they’re there.  They’re in our face.  Some in positions of credibility.  So people see them as…credible.  However incredible they are.  Which makes it seem like there are a lot more of them than there actually are.  So, then, who are they?  Really?  These liberals?

THE GUILTY RICH

Some people have amassed vast fortunes for doing nothing. Some inherited it.  Some married into it.  Others have made vast fortunes by pretending to be other people (actors).  Some wrote books.  Others made it big in pop ‘music’.  Others rode a wave of celebrity for silly behavior for which they have no shame.  These people don’t live in the real world.  The kind of world where you get up with an alarm clock and go to work 5 days a week (or more) for a paycheck that barely pays your bills.  No.  These people don’t need alarm clocks.  And they never want for anything.  Except to be loved.

Because there are some in politics (i.e., Liberals/Democrats) that like to make everything into a class struggle, these rich people feel guilty.  For in class warfare, the rich are always the bad guys.  And they don’t want to be the bad guys.  Because people don’t love the bad guys.  So they show how much they care for those less fortunate.  They call themselves liberals.  And we forgive them for all that wealth.  The kind of wealth we say CEOs shouldn’t have.  But it’s okay for rich liberals.  Even though they don’t create jobs.  Or make things that make our lives better.

THE YOUNG AND THE STUPID

Kids are stupid.  Don’t believe me?  Ask a parent.  You tell them not to drink, do drugs, have sex, drive recklessly, skip class, lie, cheat, etc., and they still do.  Not all of them.  But many do.  They engage in reckless, stupid, irresponsible behavior all of the time.  And parents find drugs in their rooms.  Deal with a teen pregnancy.  Or an abortion.  Comfort a child with an STD.  Or help her deal with the trauma she suffers when her ‘private’ nude photos aren’t so private anymore (and seeing her arrested for distributing child pornography).  Or hearing from a child’s teachers (or your priest) that they were forwarded a sexting from your child.  Seeing a daughter in a Girls Gone Wild commercial (and seeing her lose a job because of it).  Go to the emergency room because of a car accident or drug overdose.  Enroll a child into rehab.  Or go to the morgue to identify a dead child.  Or something less traumatic, like babysitting a grandchild while your daughter dances at a topless bar.  Or is out turning tricks. 

Kids live in the now.  And they want to have a good time.  All of the time.  Sex, drugs, abortion and STDs.  That’s what they’re thinking about.  And the ‘skankification’ of women.  Of girls.  Boys want only one thing.  Sex.  And girls want to be loved.  So they’re liberals.  They’re all for the liberation and empowerment of women.  Of girls.  Anything that makes girls ‘easier’.  And helps a girl’s self-esteem by making them more ‘popular’.  So legalize drugs.  And lower the drinking age.  Makes it easier to get girls into bed.  And keep abortion legal.  So a girl doesn’t have to worry about getting pregnant.  Makes her less hesitant in putting out.  And cure those incurable diseases, damn it.  Sometimes you’d like to hook up with a girl without having to get her drunk first.  And she’d be a whole lot more cooperative if she didn’t have to worry about an STD or two.

LOOK AT ME

I drive a Prius.  Because I care.  And I’m better than you.  That’s the message.  But when a rich celebrity drives a Prius and then flies away in their private plane for some fun in the sun, they give a different message.  They’re saying, “I’m a hypocrite.”  And, of course, that they’re better than us.

There comes a time in a rich celebrity’s life when they realize they haven’t done anything worthwhile.  I mean, sure, they’ve become rich and famous.  But they did that by pretending to be someone they’re not.  Or by writing some songs that Big Music marketed well.  Or simply for being good looking.  At some point in that ’empty’ life they need validation.  That their life has meaning.  So they champion a cause.  Warn us about the oceans.  Global warming.  The hungry.  They become politically active.  And provide expertise in things they know little about.  They’ll testify before Congress not because they have scientific credentials.  But because they played someone in a movie who did.  And to show their cerebral prowess they’ll call themselves liberals.  And warn us not to vote for George W. Bush.  For if we do, he’ll legalize rape or send all the gay people to one state.  (And, no, I won’t say who said these things.  I’m sure they’re embarrassed enough.)

And we love our celebrities.  Want to be like them.  So we, too, drive a Prius.  Because we, too, care.  And, of course, because we’re better than you.

THE SELFISHLY NARROW MINDED

The single-issue people care only for single issues.  Gays and lesbians who vote based on only gay and lesbian issues are single-issue people.  People who vote based only on a person’s abortion stand are single-issue people.  People who vote based only on environmental issues are single-issue people.  Etc.  Social Security.  Welfare.  Anti-war.  Anti-nuclear power.  Race.  Redistribution of wealth.  Animal rights.  People can be passionate about any one issue.  And if they are only passionate about any one issue, they’ll vote to advance that one, narrow issue.  And damn the unintended consequences that result from advancing that one narrow issue.  And they’ll call themselves liberals.  Because they’re about the enlightened ideal.  Not profits.  National security.  The rest of us.  Or common sense.

IT’S JUST A JUMP TO THE LEFT, AND THEN A STEP TO THE RIGHT

Liberals are indeed a minority of the population.  And yet our government governs very liberally.  How does this happen?  Simple.  Politicians lie.

During the primary election, they have to appeal to their base.  And their base includes all the small little groups of people noted above.  And more.  To get that liberal vote, they have to show how liberal they are.  Once they get the nomination, they have to move to the center and lie to the independents and moderates in the general election.  Convince them that they are centrists.  If elected, they move back to the left to pay off the far Left that financed their election.  When their poll numbers fall, they then move back to the right.  It’s a dance.  Like the Time Warp.  From the Rocky Horror Picture Show

It’s just a jump to the left
And then a step to the right
Put your hands on your hips
You bring your knees in tight
But it’s the pelvic thrust
That really drives you insane,

Let’s do the Time Warp again!

And there is some pelvic thrusting going on.  But it’s not the good kind.  If you know what I mean.

IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE?

So why isn’t there a ‘Rush Limbaugh’ in liberal talk radio?  Because liberals are a small demographic.  And it’s a demographic created from small, narrow, special interests.  And a lot of them have things on their minds other than monetary and fiscal policy.  Foreign policy.  Affordable housing.  They’re thinking about sex and drugs.  Where to jet off to next.  Or checking into rehab.  They’ll rock the vote at election time.  But after that, they have better things to do.  You add it up and there is simply no market for liberal talk radio.  At least, not like there is for conservative talk radio.

When Liberal talk radio succeeds, it’s often by shocking the audience.  Belittling conservatives.  Name calling.  Like on SNL.  Or John Stewart’s The Daily Show.  It’s heavy on the comedy.  Light on the issues.  Because their audience is there for the entertainment.  Not for deep, intellectual thought.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,