First, I’m no apologist for CEO’s who rake-off outrageously large paychecks that no reasonable person can classify as “earned from value added”.
And, I understand that politicians like to huff, puff, lie and throw stones at fat cats.
But, when Hillary goes into her hypocritical rants about overpaid CEOs I gotta shake my head.
Prof. Mark Perry posted a great analysis debunking Clinton’s frequent riff about CEO pay being “300 times that of the average worker.”
Cutting to the chase, Perry crunched some BLS data and concludes that the ratio is more like 4-1/2 to 1 … $216,000 to $49,000
Why the difference versus the 300 to 1 campaign rhetoric?
Simple, the 300-to-oneders, simply cherry-pick the numerator and the denominator …
Perry decodes that the numerator is made up of a couple hundred mega-CEOs … and anybody else with a job goes into the denominator.
So, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs goes into the numerator, but the CEO of the local ad agency doesn’t.
George the hamburger-flipper goes into the denominator … and gets divided into Lloyd’s pay.
What, pray tell, does one have to do with the other?
While we’re at it … let’s go deeper on the hypocrisy angle.
Mrs. Clinton has no problem taking dough from the evil-doers that she criticizes.
To the point, she has no problem taking money from Blankfein of Goldman Sachs.
Oh yeah, and when she does, her $630,000 per hour speaking fee is roughly 13 times the average annual worker’s pay.
But, that’s ok because “That’s what they offered me.”
Give me a break.
At least Bernie can say the stuff with a reasonably straight face.