Exactly who ‘makes enough money’ in Obama’s eyes?
“I do think,” you may have heard President Barack Obama say about a group of Americans last week, “at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”
And if you hadn’t heard it before now, you may be wondering who he was talking about.
Perhaps he was speaking to Hollywood — producer/directors such as George Lucas or Steven Spielberg, who were paid $170 million and $150 million, respectively, according to Forbes magazine’s 2009 list. Less generous, but still better than I and probably you, were Jerry Bruckheimer at $100 million and Atlanta’s Tyler Perry at $75 million. Or actors such as Harrison Ford ($65 million) or Adam Sandler ($55 million).
Then again, he might have been talking to America’s television stars. Dr. Phil (McGraw) pulled down $80 million, Forbes reports. Simon Cowell of “American Idol” was close behind at $75 million. And there’s Oprah, our highest-paid celebrity, at $275 million.
But Oprah is one of the president’s biggest backers, so let’s forget the big and little screens and turn to musicians. For all the challenges to that industry, Madonna managed to bring home $110 million. There’s Beyonce Knowles at $87 million; Bruce Springsteen, $70 million; Kenny Chesney and Dave Matthews Band, $65 million each; and a cool $60 million for the band Rascal Flatts.
I could mention athletes, but Tiger Woods was in a class of his own at $110 million (a figure he won’t match this year).
Oh, wait — maybe the operative words are “at a certain point”; Obama must have been talking about dead celebrities! It’s been half a century since Rodgers & Hammerstein put out a new musical, but their estates saw $235 million in new earnings. The King of Pop, Michael Jackson, with $90 million, and the King of Rock ’n’Roll, Elvis Presley, with $55 million, also did not do poorly posthumously.
Now, if you think it would have been odd for President Obama to scold celebrities in this way, you’re right. He was talking instead about businessmen – specifically, those who work in finance. Want to guess how many chief executives of financial companies in 2009, according to Forbes, earned as much as the 20 celebs I’ve listed here?
How about none?
In fact, the $2.4 billion in total earnings of the 100 highest-paid CEOs, regardless of industry, barely beat out the $2.1 billion of the twenty-five best-compensated celebs (living ones, that is). Just seven of those 100 CEOs worked in the financial industry.
I don’t begrudge Beyonce, Spielberg or Tiger — or the head of JP Morgan — the pay they receive. Nor do I begrudge Obama his $5.5 million in 2009 income — again, more than I and probably you.
So why does the president begrudge the same to others?
He claims that he doesn’t. The full quote from his Wednesday speech in Quincy, Ill., was:
“I want to be clear, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. But part of the American way is you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service. We don’t want people to stop fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow the economy.”
The second sentence is the one that defines “fairly earned” for Obama. The man who as a candidate spoke of “spreading the wealth around” has found a matter he considers within his pay grade: other people’s pay.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
256 comments Add your comment
Yolanda
May 2nd, 2010
6:01 pm
Im pretty pisssed cause I am in apartment 3 bedroom $834 payed by section 8 for Lakwyfa, Deanta, and Marquis and ma lol! They want me to get renters insurance. how can i put that $20 on datax payer/
Jackalcrat
May 2nd, 2010
6:10 pm
“It’s very difficult to be a true libertarian AND support King Barry the Magnanimous. You either adhere to the Constitution or you don’t. Being a libertarian is believing in the maximum personal freedom possible. ”
Heh. No NMP, that’s just a typical left wingnut liberal lying sack of dog squeeze trying to make a point. They lie to attempt to make points and one up you. But you and I both know these pathological lying sniveling psycho-fanatical conservative-infatuated stalking left wingnut liberals could care less about the truth and character.
“Better stock up on seafood now, the oceans are doomed, ”
Thanks for the heads up Tea-Man. Already got some shrimp and oysters this weekend from the Gulf Coast and am planning a fishing trip down there next weekend to catch as much as I can before it’s too late. Rumor is the smell of oil is already wafting the coast of Alabama near Gulf Shores. Obama’s doing a hell of a job.
And mindless Obamabots why we call that administration the Teleprompter Administration. Get him off the prompter and he can’t think.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/01/obama_uses_teleprompters_at_commencement_address.html
Yolanda
May 2nd, 2010
6:50 pm
God Lord Jacksass Crat! you sooss sly. I wish I coulds give you my powerss baby! Increase the white race!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yolanda
May 2nd, 2010
6:53 pm
Good Lordie you have got me!!!!!!
Robert Littel
May 2nd, 2010
6:56 pm
When the Right tries to justify their attacks against our ELECTED president by throwing back at us all the criticism we had for the criminal Cheney/Bush Fraudulency, in their illegal resource war in Iraq, the non-response to hurricane Katrina and the transfer of the greatest amount of public money into the pockets of the wealthy few at the top, they are barking up the wrong tree. Now some of them are trying to blame President Obama for the oil mess in the Gulf, that was a direct result of Cheney/Bush allowing the oil companies to write our energy policy, which let them get away with NOT having to install the acoustic shutoff valve that would have prevented this mess. They are required to use it in the North Sea field and should have been required to here.
Some of these mindless dolts have even used the defense the rantings of people so far outside of the liberal tradition, who blamed Bush for things he could, and thankfully wouldn’t have done. The only “libs” who have ever claimed Bush caused 911, or the hurricane that smacked New Orleans, are a tiny minuscule group of pre-adolescent, or off their lithium cranks, that exist in exile at the far outskirts of any group that exists. That the same type of individual is the norm on the Right, is truly a wonderment and that they are so well represented here is a testament to how desperately disconnected they are from reality, that they have to seek validation with other like minded dolts. You have been bought (cheaply) and programed to be mindless automatons for the fraud being carried out by corporatists as they either seize back the government, or trash it altogether, in-order to keep the rape of everything this country is supposed to stand for an ongoing operation. You must be so proud of your clueless selves.
Yolanda
May 2nd, 2010
7:03 pm
Well spoken Robert! I make $55k a year and I got more money back. I still paid a lot in. A lot like 4k.
Rush rules!
May 2nd, 2010
7:08 pm
Torch these pinkos!
Obama 1-(you lamo)-0
May 2nd, 2010
7:16 pm
You will see when unemployment at 7% in 11 bubbas!!!!!
Pogo
May 2nd, 2010
7:51 pm
Obama plays his constituents (who mainly base their political opinions upon class warfare and his “race”) like cheap fiddles. They are willing sheep to be led to the slaughter without any real thoughts of their own. They think and do what they are supposed to do. Some things never change.
No More Progressives!
May 2nd, 2010
10:30 pm
Jackalcrat
May 2nd, 2010
6:10 pm
Heh. No NMP, that’s just a typical left wingnut liberal lying sack of dog squeeze trying to make a point.
That may be, but I really do think that the core of being a Libertarian is the maximum individual liberty possible without infringing on anyone else.
I gotta give the lefties credit; they’ll attack anything and everything they disagree with with equal venom (the Perfezor is an example), and they march lock-step, regardless. Personally, I’d be embarrassed to admit that Chuck Schumer or Howard Dean represented me.
No More Progressives!
May 2nd, 2010
10:57 pm
Hey, Perfezor. I’m still waiting for you to tell me who to give this $11.00 to.
JKL2
May 2nd, 2010
11:21 pm
Excellent article Kyle. Love the Hypocracy of the left.
Reminds me of the Bush/Gore election. Bush had donated almost $800k to charity. Tree hugging Gore had donted $300. Not 300k, $300 total. As a true liberal, he expects the government to help everybody with somebody elses money.
Now Obama is saying people know when they’ve maid enough money. I guarantee he is still cashing those checks. Maybe he should set the example by just sending all his money to the government to help reduce the debt.
That'sright
May 2nd, 2010
11:35 pm
Kyle – Great piece. That is EXACTLY the same thing I thought of when I heard his stupid comments. Let’s hear him talk about how much the professional athletes make – after all – there salaries are sooo high that I can’t afford to take my family of 5 (2 adults, 3 kids) to just about any sporting event because the ticket prices are so high – largely due to having to pay such outrageous salaries.
Musicians and actors are just about as bad – A lot of these thugs would be just out in the street if it weren’t for their rapping or acting (hey – that rhymes – sign me to a big rap contract) – and tell me – do they go to work – working 12 to 15 hour days for 300 days a year?? Heck no – they wouldn’t last – but yet that is what I do as a person in the financial industry – but make less than 100K a year – much less 70 million. I would really like to hear Obama tell the NBA players or Oprah that they/she makes too much and that they/she needs a pay cut – yea right – it would be a cold day in hades before he tells them/her that
casual observer
May 3rd, 2010
12:59 am
I go along with everything Obama says. I back all of his Socialistic policy. He’s going to pay my rent and car payment for me. He cares about how much I make. Ilove Obama. OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA!
Instapundit » Blog Archive » KYLE WINGFIELD: Exactly who ‘makes enough money’ in Obama’s eyes?…
May 3rd, 2010
7:18 am
[...] KYLE WINGFIELD: Exactly who ‘makes enough money’ in Obama’s eyes? [...]
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
7:30 am
That’sright
May 2nd, 2010
11:35 pm
I would really like to hear Obama tell the NBA players or Oprah that they/she makes too much and that they/she needs a pay cut…………
I think pay in the NBA is predicated on 3 factors: How many tatoos you have, how many felonies you have (pending or convictions), and how badly you can butcher the English language.
I have no idea what the attraction is to Oprah (her Mother meant to name her Orpah after the Biblical character, but couldn’t spell it) but I don’t begrudge her earnings. You just won’t find me at an NBA game or in Oprahs studio. Ever.
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
7:36 am
JKL2
May 2nd, 2010
11:21 pm
Maybe he should set the example by just sending all his money to the government to help reduce the debt.
That’s not a proper function of Royalty, JKL. Refilling the treasury is a function, no, a responsibility of us mere serfs of the Kingom, so that King Barry the Magnanimous can play more golf.
I’m Going To Work Because I Haven’t Reached That Point Yet « Spring City Chronicle
May 3rd, 2010
8:03 am
[...] I’m Going To Work Because I Haven’t Reached That Point Yet May 3, 2010 by Huckleberry Dumbell, Editor In Chief Exactly who ‘makes enough money’ in Obama’s eyes? [...]
Don
May 3rd, 2010
8:10 am
What O is saying is that he doesn’t want people to stop working 100 hours a week and making a lot of money. It’s just that he wants to take almost all of that money, above a certain point.
Williebkind
May 3rd, 2010
8:47 am
I believe wage earners make too much money! There should be cap of 10 million for a wage earner. However, this would not apply to businesses because they create jobs and the neccessities of life–plus a few pleasurable things. When I say wage earners I mean everyone who does not own a business. How much do you need to aquire the American dream.
casual observer
May 3rd, 2010
8:56 am
Williebkind
Are you serious!!!! That’s a joke right??? Half the people on this blog that believe the government should regulate how much a LEGAL American earns needs to be sterilized and forbidden to vote in a free country ever.
That is the most obsurd thing I have ever heard., and scarry. Obama and his kind have created a dependant class and it’s getting worse by the day.
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
9:17 am
Williebkind
May 3rd, 2010
8:47 am
I suppose that you support a Federal Bureau of “Enough.” Some big gubmint no-nothing will send you a certified letter, telling you that, according to Official Records, you now have “enough.”
But keep sending those tax dollars. King Barry like those courses with expensive greens fees.
mit
May 3rd, 2010
9:46 am
does no one recognize an opinion when it is clearly stated…after Kyle includes the context anyway. This editorial is based on an out of context statement. There is no proof of what ya’ll are scared of, rich people not making as much. Why are all the rural rednecks who vote republican concerned with people making crap loads of money? I haven’t seen one celebrity or CEO at a tea party rally, have you?
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
9:55 am
MiltonMan May 1st, 2010
8:12 pm
HDB – only prospers when free hand-outs are given?
No….I’ve never received a handout……but the government DOES set the conditions for personal and economic growth!! Those conditions were best set for me and others like me when Democrats were in power!! Educational spending and strict enforcement of employment law granted me access to be successful. When Republicans were in control, such domestic spending was curtailed…and discriminatory hiring practices were in vogue…….
Just my experiences……and I don’t have to kiss anyone’s butt to have experienced what I have……
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
10:07 am
No More Progressives!
May 1st, 2010
10:18 pm
HDB
May 1st, 2010
8:02 pm
What did the Pullman riots in 1894 (in Illinois) have to do with slavery?
You lefties just can’t go a paragraph without mentioning slavery.
The reason that slavery is mentioned is that it’s a Southern ideology that permeates the idea of low wages and owner control. If you noticed, the Pullman Riots were a UNION reaction to low wages and unfair treatment. The African-Americans HAD to cross the picket line to maintain employment because of the racism espoused by the union AND the Pullman Company….adding the racist element into the strike!! Pullman was forced to divest!!
Union activity gave employees decent wages and working conditions….a current mainstay in economic progress…….
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
10:20 am
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
10:07 am
Union activity gave employees decent wages and working conditions….a current mainstay in economic progress.
Ummmmmmmm, Ok. GM is doing so well, and NLRB rules in favor of the UAW how often?
So what is better; a laid off Union worker at $27.50 and hour, or a working non-Union man at $16.50 an hour?
I thought blacks went “up north” to avoid the discimination liberals are so fond of repeating ad nauseum?
You can support Unions all you want to. Here’s a simple equation: Liberals + Unions = Detroit.
John
May 3rd, 2010
10:33 am
I have no problem with the statement “At some point, I think you have earned enough money”. As long as the person who determines that is the person earning the money (and perhaps their family). The problem isn’t the statement, but rather the implication that someone ELSE gets to decide when people have made enough. And Obama’s position (as President) and policies (as a leftist, who favors income redistribution) reinforces that implication.
Just Saying
May 3rd, 2010
10:54 am
After hearing Obama speak those words, I think it is time that he go without another paycheck from the American people. Didn’t he make millions for his books? If his statement is to be taken seriously then I think he made way too much money. When is enough going to be enough and who is to judge? I personally don’t care how much people make. Obviously they make that money because people out there are willing to pay them for what they do. Obama needs to stop bashing on the American dream, bashing people that work hard (or not as hard but still make it big) to make it in this country. He needs to stop this class warfare and try to encourage people to become the millions through hard work. Be a positive role model BHO! America is a land of opportunity only for those that push to fulfill the American dream!
Peter
May 3rd, 2010
11:04 am
The final screwing from the Bush Administration ?
Who knows what nightmare will come next out of the lack of oversight of anything.
Bush = worst US President ever…….. How is that Iraq War working out for American’s these days ?
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
11:20 am
Just Saying
May 3rd, 2010
10:54 am
Obviously they make that money because people out there are willing to pay them for what they do.
Econ 101. What the market will bear.
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
12:00 pm
Peter
May 3rd, 2010
11:04 am
Bush = worst US President ever…….. How is that Iraq War working out for American’s these days ?
About as well as that “Hope & Change” crap is.
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
1:12 pm
batou
May 2nd, 2010
8:07 am
“Capitalism unfettered has failed and failed abyssmally;”
Careful there, your ignorance is showing. Unfetterred capitalism has never been tried, ever, anywhere.
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
1:20 pm
Steve Ross
May 2nd, 2010
3:11 am
“It [a pop] cost .75 at costco, because the Rich CEO of costco and the soda companies and their corporate share holders and board of directors need to make their million dollar bonuses!”
Um, it costs $0.75 because people are willing to buy it for $0.75, and enough fewer people would buy it at higher prices that the profit margin would go down. If no one were willing to buy it for $0.75, it wouldn’t really matter who needed to make million dollar bonuses, would it? They couldn’t sell it for $0.75. Likewise, if raising the price didn’t put enough people off from buying it that they made more, the price would be higher–again, without any dependence on who needs million-dollar bonuses.
Willing buyers, willing sellers.
Looking at what passes for thought in so many people, it’s no wonder we’re in such trouble.
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
1:51 pm
No More Progressives! May 3rd, 2010
10:20 am
Look, I admit that in certain areas, unions have overreached…but many of the workplace rules and protections are in place BECAUSE of the unions!!
The discrimination up north is of a lesser degree than it is in the South……and that paradigm still exists!! Challenge you to go outside of the major cities in the South…and you will find those pockets of resistance still around!! (Been there….done that!)
Corollary to your equation: Conservatives – Unions = West Virginia
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
2:05 pm
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
1:12 pm
batou
May 2nd, 2010
8:07 am
“Capitalism unfettered has failed and failed abyssmally;”
Careful there, your ignorance is showing. Unfetterred capitalism has never been tried, ever, anywhere.
The financial near-meltdown is the closest, most-recent example; that’s why regulation and oversight are needed to prevent overheating!! If you take the control rods out of a nuclear reactor, the chain reaction becomes uncontrollable….then Chernobyl…if not worse!!
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
2:07 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
1:51 pm
Corollary to your equation: Conservatives – Unions = West Virginia.
You actually think that there are mines in VA/WV/KY that aren’t union? Think again, sir. Every last one of ‘em is union & has been for years. I dealt with Pittson Coal for years, and their major headache year in & out were the unions.
And if, as you imply, WV is so conservative, why do they keep sending the Senate’s only Klan member back to Washington?
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
2:19 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
2:05 pm
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
1:12 pm
batou
May 2nd, 2010
8:07 am
“Capitalism unfettered has failed and failed abyssmally;”
Careful there, your ignorance is showing. Unfetterred capitalism has never been tried, ever, anywhere.
The financial near-meltdown is the closest, most-recent example;
It’s the most recent example of unfettered capitalism? In what sense is this heavily-regulated sector of the economy–itself already distorted by government intervention–a good example of “unfettered capitalism”?
The Anchoress | A First Things Blog
May 3rd, 2010
2:41 pm
[...] until the president decides that you’ve made enough money. Time to dust this one off: I mind people who are bouncing on fluffy pillows of honest-to-goodness [...]
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
3:00 pm
No More Progressives! May 3rd, 2010
2:07 pm
We all know that Robert Byrd brings the money back to WV…and he’s good at it!! Also remember, today’s Republicans are yesteryear’s DEMOCRATS…they are the conservatives!! Today’s Democrats are yesteryear’s REPUBLICANS..they are the liberals!! What may come as a surprise to many here is that the GOP was CO-FOUNDED by black people….and now, the conservatives do as much as they can to denigrate minorities!! The juxtaposition speaks volumes!!!
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
3:03 pm
mgd May 3rd, 2010
2:19 pm
It’s the most recent example of unfettered capitalism? In what sense is this heavily-regulated sector of the economy–itself already distorted by government intervention–a good example of “unfettered capitalism”?
To answer your question: Regulation and oversight of such were MINIMIZED due to the repeal of Glass-Steagall. That cut loose the financial engine; when it overheated…no oversight and regulation in place to bring the market under control….therefore, near-collapse!!
Effective regulation and oversight would have prevented this from happening!! That’s my view!!
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
3:24 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
3:00 pm
…..and now, the conservatives do as much as they can to denigrate minorities!!
Cite an example, please.
richard40
May 3rd, 2010
3:26 pm
Notice that public sector workers and politicians also aren’t on his “making too much” list. In fact, according to his proposal for the government taking over colleg loans, they will get a huge subsidy, forgiveness of their college loans, for working in the public sector. Only those evil capitalists are on the target list.
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
3:28 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
3:00 pm
We all know that Robert Byrd brings the money back to WV.
Sooooooo, I guess it’s good that Byrd is a (former) Klansman, or something. I wonder what you’d be saying if Jesse Helms had been a Klansman.
It’s be OK as long as he brought the pork back to NC, right?
mgd
May 3rd, 2010
4:04 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
3:03 pm
“To answer your question: Regulation and oversight of such were MINIMIZED due to the repeal of Glass-Steagall. That cut loose the financial engine; when it overheated…no oversight and regulation in place to bring the market under control….therefore, near-collapse!!”
_____________________
To characterize the levels of regulation and oversight as “minimized” is inaccurate. Regulation increased overall during the Bush administration, as much as almost everyone–Democrats and Republicans alike–would like to believe otherwise. In 2004, the SEC changed the net-capital rule from a hard and fast limit to a subjective amount under direct SEC oversight. That’s a rule change, and it may have been significant, but it was hardly deregulation or lessening of oversight. If anyone can produce any information on any significant financial sector deregulation since 2001, I would be most interested in hearing about it.
The partial repeal of Glass-Steagall by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 repealed the portions of Glass-Steagall that prohibited commercial banks from acting as investment banks, and vice versa. There is little evidence that this partial repeal contributed in any way to the recent financial crisis. There is no correlation between institutions that took advantage of this repeal and those that failed. In fact, institutions that did not take advantage of the repeal included some of the most spectacular failures, e.g., Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. This only makes sense as they lacked the stability that commercial deposits would have provided them. In fact, without Gramm-Leach-Bliley, those troubled investment banks acquired by commercial banks during the crisis would have had nowhere to go.
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
4:17 pm
No More Progressives! May 3rd, 2010
3:24 pm/ 3:28 pm
Robert Byrd has addressed his past…and has consistently voted on more civil rights protections…much more so than Jesse Helms!! Helms LED the opposition against the MLK Holiday…and Ronald Reagan was set to veto the bill….but his veto would have been OVERRIDDEN by Congress……..Helms was staunchly against minorities…look at his campaign when Harvey Gantt ran against him!!! Denigration to the utmost!! Fast-forward to the Arizona law……that’s denigrating AND profiling minorities…and in some cases….AMERICANS!! Passed by Republicans….
VekTor
May 3rd, 2010
4:43 pm
“If the money is in the hands of the few, then less cars, less couches, less computers, less meals, less clothes, less everything is purchased, which means less revenues for companies, which means more layoffs, and more jobs going over seas for less cost, its a NEVER ENDING CYCLE until you take the $$$ back from the rich who control everything!”
This is flabbergasting. Let me guess… your conception of the hyper-rich is informed by that cartoon of Scrooge McDuck, and you think that these folks have all of their wealth stashed in a swimming-pool sized vault so that they can jump off of a diving board into mountains of it. Because it’s just sitting there, doing nothing.
These people didn’t get to be hyper-rich by being that ignorant. The vast majority of their wealth is IN USE, funding the creation of jobs, making MORE revenues for companies who are able to expand based off of being able to borrow that money, meaning LESS layoffs, more job creation and a better standard of living overall.
Almost all of that wealth is out there in the real world, creating more new wealth. That’s why they keep getting richer… because they know how to create wealth, rather than consume it.
Educate yourself.
No More Progressives!
May 3rd, 2010
4:56 pm
HDB`
May 3rd, 2010
4:17 pm
If Jesse Helms was in he Klan, would you give him the same pass as Byrd? Yes or no?
Josh Reiter
May 3rd, 2010
5:12 pm
Oh my, I just can’t believe all the people who say they don’t have a problem with jacking up taxes on the rich. People who are worth several billion dollars aren’t like Scrooge McDuck and have a big room full of gold coins that they swim around in. Their money is sunk into investments, and savings, and assets that total to their net worth. This money is all doing something to some degree in various segments of the economy and helping to drive forward wealth generation for all those other income brackets below them. The problem is when the gov’t comes along and takes that money in the form of taxes that money instantly loses value. A dollar in the private sector does far more productive good than a dollar in the public sector. The gov’t has bloated bureaucracies, fraud, waste, ludicrous pensions, and overly generous benefits programs, that soak up about 20 cents of every dollar it brings in. Governments are far less efficient and much slower to react to changes in market conditions than privately owned institutions. The moment a gov’t takes 80% of a persons wealth they are essentially taking 20% of that money and burning it, effectively destroying wealth.
Plus, Obama went off script when he made this statement. So, whatever meaning or intent was being implied certainly didn’t fit entirely within the framework of the speech as it was originally written. When I read what he said it sounds like, “I think that people can reach a point where they make too much money but the American way is to just keep on going ahead and making it.” If you took some of the words and moved it around you could say, “I don’t believe bears should maul people but the bear’s way is to just keep going on mauling them anyway.” He is providing a glimpse into how he thinks rich people should react to increases in taxes and abrogation of their wealth. Like, deal with it, were gonna take your money whether you like it or not.
Finally, all this begs the question, okay so you don’t think people should become that rich? Well, when do you think the gov’t has too much power?
Bob
May 4th, 2010
8:35 am
Your numbers are off. Salary is a MINUSCULE part of CEO compensation. STOCK OPTIONS and DEFERRED COMPENSATION are where the money is at, and they’re making MUCH MORE than you say.
Kyle Wingfield
May 4th, 2010
12:14 pm
Bob, I wondered about the same thing, so I checked some other sources as well. This one from the WSJ, for example, includes much more than salary but tells a very similar story: http://bit.ly/bngh0p
Fwiw, I chose to use the Forbes figures in the column because I thought it would be good to keep some consistency of sourcing across the celebrity and CEO data.