I don't have any figures or links to back me up, but I'm betting the number of people employed by lots of low level workers being able to make regular purchases of all sizes is WAAAAAAAAAY more than all of the high paid executives put together.
Argh. Of course it is! I'm not arguing that! If it's an issue of salary caps OR workers getting laid off, of course I'm on the side of salary caps. Which, okay, probably is exactly what you're saying. I apologize -- that was not at all the way I was looking at the argument.
I'm just not at all sure that companies would take the money they're not paying their executives and use it to keep more rank-and-file employees. If that really is the way it's going to work, then that's a different story. It's just not the way I generally think of corporate finance working.
I guess I just have some trouble with the "no pity for people making/dependent on people making more than $x" position empirically.
TB, I'm no expert on programs that give cash assistance to working mothers, so I can't comment on what's in place. As a general principle, I'd say some degree of strings -- with an eye toward welfare of the children -- is appropriate. And, if assistance is income-based, the government can certainly insist on proof of income (which may be as simple as sending the appropriate office a copy of a W-2 or tax return).
I'm not saying "no bonuses." There may certainly be people whose performance in 2008 is bonus-worthy. It just doesn't make sense that aggregate bonuses should be among the highest ever in a year when the bottom dropped out.
In related news, here's an article about a new report on the cost and standard of living in NYC, and it's kind of shocking, and makes me think I should move. (Although the headline is crap.) [link]
Sean, I'm having m-net flashbacks. Remember the days when our screaming fights were in tiny green letters on a big black screen?
He's working on a list of Swiss cheese links next.
DUDE. Why you gotta be such a hater?
In related news, here's an article about a new report on the cost and standard of living in NYC, and it's kind of shocking, and makes me think I should move. (Although the headline is crap.) [link]
Seriously. I know things here in SF are expensive, but from the price of lattes to utilities to income taxes, there are many things that are noticeably cheaper than NY.
there are many things that are noticeably cheaper than NY.
Yeah, but just try getting an $8 manicure!
t /grasping at straws
Yeah, but just try getting an $8 manicure!
I can do that! It will suck, and make me worry about infection, but I can do it.
Yeah, but just try getting an $8 manicure!
Right?? Anyway, my own personal rent is cheap for NYC and reasonable for any expensive city, so I'm doing fine. But still.
DIBS!!!
Mwah!
