About that CEO pay...

People who call themselves progressives like to control everything, so they put out misleading numbers about what CEOs make.

And just knowing what CEOs make compared to their workers isn't enough for the left, they also want to regulate it.

One of the leaders of this kind of class warfare left is the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, Congressman Keith Ellison.  He told Bloomberg News on May 16 that the government should "start talking about" regulating corporate pay.  Bloomberg News anchors failed to push back or ask difficult questions about such a stance in that interview.  Other outlets also accepted Ellison's left-wing pay perspectives without question.

The media's failure to critically examine Ellison's remarks wasn't a shock, since his view that "income inequality" is terrible is an attitude the liberal media share and have promoted for years.

Many media outlets, including the three broadcast networks, previously warned of this "dangerous" and "devastating" problem, complaining about the "mega-rich" (but not their own hefty paychecks).  Some called on President Obama to do something about "income distribution" while others touted economic "fairness."

The only real surprise is that Ellison's latest report complaining about CEO pay ratios hasn't gotten a huge amount of coverage and promotion yet.  He found that on average, CEOs make 339 times the pay of a median worker.  The highest ratio among them was 5,000 to 1.  The findings were reported by MarketWatch (and republished by the New York Post), The Hill, and the Guardian, in addition to the Bloomberg interview.

Isn't it time that the media actually report what an average CEO makes instead of just talking about what the highest paid CEOs of the biggest companies make?

Why don't we see what the highest paid actors, musicians, and talking heads make and compare those salaries to that of average people in their industry and then have Ellison and the media talk about regulating them?

Congressmen make more than the average CEO in the U.S., and unlike congressmen such as Ellison, they create jobs instead of piles of regulations to give the greedy government and politicians greater control.

The reason the media and Ellison himself report only the real high salaries instead of the average is because they have an agenda to control everything in our lives.

Chief Executive Officers in the United States can expect to earn a very comfortable salary, with average salaries (in the ballpark of $163K).

This is based on 1,006 CEOs in the U.S.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 2,572,000 top executive jobs and the average pay in 2016 was $104,700. CEOs made an average of $183,270 as of May 2017. That is a far cry from any numbers that the media actually reports.

Meanwhile, the average federal employee compensation in the U.S is $123,160, so they make more than the average top executives, and their benefits and pensions dwarf those of the private sector.  My guess is that most top executives also don't have a 37.5-hour work week.  Why don't Ellison and journalists talk about that?

Facts haven't meant anything to the media for a long time, but isn't it time they reported actual numbers before they talk about additional regulations?  As for publicly traded companies, the shareholders who take all the risk should say what the executives make, not the government that took no risk.

People who call themselves progressives like to control everything, so they put out misleading numbers about what CEOs make.

And just knowing what CEOs make compared to their workers isn't enough for the left, they also want to regulate it.

One of the leaders of this kind of class warfare left is the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee, Congressman Keith Ellison.  He told Bloomberg News on May 16 that the government should "start talking about" regulating corporate pay.  Bloomberg News anchors failed to push back or ask difficult questions about such a stance in that interview.  Other outlets also accepted Ellison's left-wing pay perspectives without question.

The media's failure to critically examine Ellison's remarks wasn't a shock, since his view that "income inequality" is terrible is an attitude the liberal media share and have promoted for years.

Many media outlets, including the three broadcast networks, previously warned of this "dangerous" and "devastating" problem, complaining about the "mega-rich" (but not their own hefty paychecks).  Some called on President Obama to do something about "income distribution" while others touted economic "fairness."

The only real surprise is that Ellison's latest report complaining about CEO pay ratios hasn't gotten a huge amount of coverage and promotion yet.  He found that on average, CEOs make 339 times the pay of a median worker.  The highest ratio among them was 5,000 to 1.  The findings were reported by MarketWatch (and republished by the New York Post), The Hill, and the Guardian, in addition to the Bloomberg interview.

Isn't it time that the media actually report what an average CEO makes instead of just talking about what the highest paid CEOs of the biggest companies make?

Why don't we see what the highest paid actors, musicians, and talking heads make and compare those salaries to that of average people in their industry and then have Ellison and the media talk about regulating them?

Congressmen make more than the average CEO in the U.S., and unlike congressmen such as Ellison, they create jobs instead of piles of regulations to give the greedy government and politicians greater control.

The reason the media and Ellison himself report only the real high salaries instead of the average is because they have an agenda to control everything in our lives.

Chief Executive Officers in the United States can expect to earn a very comfortable salary, with average salaries (in the ballpark of $163K).

This is based on 1,006 CEOs in the U.S.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 2,572,000 top executive jobs and the average pay in 2016 was $104,700. CEOs made an average of $183,270 as of May 2017. That is a far cry from any numbers that the media actually reports.

Meanwhile, the average federal employee compensation in the U.S is $123,160, so they make more than the average top executives, and their benefits and pensions dwarf those of the private sector.  My guess is that most top executives also don't have a 37.5-hour work week.  Why don't Ellison and journalists talk about that?

Facts haven't meant anything to the media for a long time, but isn't it time they reported actual numbers before they talk about additional regulations?  As for publicly traded companies, the shareholders who take all the risk should say what the executives make, not the government that took no risk.