DISQUS

Ben Gray · 10 months ago

The reasoning goes that "You Pay for Quality"... Well, we're all paying now...

jtyost2 · 10 months ago

Wow

billhutchison · 10 months ago

That's pretty crazy ...

CH · 10 months ago

good god.. those greedy bastards.

Bobby · 10 months ago

I would imagine professional sports players salaries have grown just as fast, if not, faster.

To that end, the cost of a ticket to the movies or a game, have sky rocketed as well... I need a new job. :-/

Peter · 10 months ago

But haven't corporations gotten substantially larger over the past 50 years? Or is that a part or the problem?

Adium · 10 months ago

I need to become a CEO

Cailean Babcock · 10 months ago

Ridiculous. Talk about needing pay cuts. 40 to 1 is already getting pretty heady; 360 to 1?

gnomeboi · 10 months ago

Seems like there should be a name for this. Wait. There is. Capitalism!

flarkcon · 10 months ago

Really, not all that surprising. Considering the inflation rate between the two time periods the divide woulfd only grow. Though it doesn't make this any better.

Alex · 10 months ago

No, inflation does not have anything to do with that: If I earn $1 and you earn $2 today and wages grow by 30% a year, I will earn $1.30 next year while you will earn $2.60 - so you will still end up earning exactly twices as much as I do. And this is what "inflation" does: It pushes up prices and wages by a similar percentage across the economy. It does not increase the spread between rich and poor. The forces for that are of a very different kind.

flarkcon · 10 months ago

Yeah, you're right. I should have thought before I posted. Thanks for the correction.

Dave Parks · 10 months ago

It's insane!!!

randyhall · 10 months ago

You are all kinds of perky and upbeat today, Leo!

mm1968 · 10 months ago

Cap the pay and cap the amount of profit the banks can make, based on the number of customers and the number of employees. Otherwise one day the banks will have all the money....Think about it.....

Jonas · 10 months ago

Proves that greed is stronger than compassion. A pure capitalistic economy will destroy itself and eventually selfdestruct. Pity that we need to go into finacials crises to call for more regulation and stop the greed. We need fairly compensated leaders, but we kind of passed the fair component, way back...

dfasio · 10 months ago

whats the big deal! America is about making money. Only in america can someone come up with an Idea and become extremely rich. If you want to spend all your time making money then so be it. If a person wants to speak for a living in the political arena then so be it too! Anyway I believe that america has been taken over by traders who are of the worst kind and no CEO could ever be as corrupt. Liberalism- the principles sound good in general however once you have submitted, your every move depends on those in power.

Ridge · 10 months ago

You people commenting are idiots. The presidency has traditionally been a public service role, not a role to make money. CEO'S are in the business of making money, for themselves, for their companies and for their share holders. Why is that a problem? Do you prefer we pay the president more? Really? How about bush? should we have paid him more? I guarantee that these CEO'S have created proportionally more jobs and wealth for the citizens of this country that any president in history has. And by the way, don't forget that these CEO'S are paid honestly, by people who want to pay them, the president and his lackey, regardless of party are paid by grift, whether we want to pay them or not.

ScottBickhaus · 10 months ago

Unbelievable, although I guess I shouldn't be too floored by this we do live in a free market society (for the most part) and there must be a demand for CEO's at those prices our companies wouldn't be paying that much ... right?

Ihorro · 10 months ago

They deserve the presumption of scoundrelness.

Joe Knapp · 10 months ago

I recall that when Red Sox slugger Carl Yastrzemski signed a three-year $500,000 contract in 1968, it was a little scandalous that a baseball player was making more ($167K) than the president, then $100K. So the president's salary was immediately increased to $200,000. They kind of gave up after that.

George · 10 months ago

I think you guys are missing an important part of this statistic. If, as I think is the case, the President's salary hasn't changed in many many years ($400,000/yr I believe), then this statistic is very flawed. CEO salaries are market driven. I'm not saying that some CEOs don't get exorbitant salaries, because some certainly do. However, in 1960, I believe that the President made $250,000, and a $250,000 salary in 1960 would equate to $1.732 million in 2007. Recalculate this statistic using $1.732 million for the President and see what the ratio is. That would be a fair comparison.

Brian · 10 months ago

Let's not be so worried about private company's CEO, let only worry about government funded agencies. The company's that take money from the govenment, should be under those guidelines until the money is payed back.

BC · 10 months ago

This either means CEO pay went excessively high OR the president's pay didn't go up by enough. I would argue for the latter.

Tony · 10 months ago

Darn, makes me wanna be the CEO and not just he line worker.

FreddyC · 10 months ago

and they deserve it! they all work so hard designing things and selling and ....

Oh wait, that's what all the employees do. Well someone has to have the $80,000US desk and go golfing all the time. The company would crumble if they did not!

Tom MacDonald · 10 months ago

I recall a similar study of star baseball players where for about 50 years they earned something like 14 to 1 of average worker, now it is 200x or more.

Robert B · 10 months ago

It's just as greedy to obsess over what CEO's as it is for CEO's to go to work and make it. Their BOD's agree to their compensation and performance targets. If they price themselves out of the market, nobody has to pay it. If we're going to cap CEO's pay, let's also cap the pay of actors, athletes, ex-pols (e.g. bill clinton, Algore), Oprah, inventors (e.g. google goons), VC's, musicians, and anyone else who makes more than the average lefty brown shirt. This issue isn't how much they make, it's what they do to make it. Is there any question that Steve Jobs is worth at least 360x some guy running a register at the Apple store?

benad · 10 months ago

The large shareholders are responsible for this. And by that I mean the funds and investment groups. And by that I mean the bankers that have too much cash from those risky loans.

benad · 10 months ago

The large shareholders are responsible for this. And by that I mean the funds and investment groups. And by that I mean the bankers that have too much cash from those risky loans.

Ivanco · 10 months ago

LET THE FREE MARKET RULE!!

KJ · 10 months ago

We do still live in a CAPATILST COUNTRY and It's a GOOD thing...... I agree if they take this bogus SPENDING bill that is our money then there should be accountability....but how about some accountability from our GOVERNMENT. I work inside the Beltway I know how much waste goes on...with NO ACCOUNTABILITY.....

David Moore · 10 months ago

I wonder if there is a positive correlation between inflated pay and corporate performance. I'm inclined to say, unlikely.

Momo · 10 months ago

Sono tutti un gruppo di avidi bastardi!
Andare a trovare i ricchi!

Florida · 10 months ago

So what? I can't see how this matters to me. This makes me want to try harder to become a CEO, and failing that make as much money as I can otherwise.

Ivan · 10 months ago

Hmmph I guess comments are edited

Ivanco · 10 months ago

The free market should rule CEO pay not the government!

Pukee · 10 months ago

One word. GOP

mjmoreland · 10 months ago

Why do we complain about CEO's making that kind of money when utility baseball players are making that same kind of money? I don't here anybody calling for a boycot on sports.

mjmoreland · 10 months ago

In 1960 the average baseball player was making $17,934 per year
in 2008 the average was up to $3,150,000

In 1960 the average ceo for a major corp was making $190,000 a year. Using the same increase the average ceo would be making about $33,500,000 a year.

One is running a large corporation employing 1,000's of people and the other is playing a game!

Dan · 10 months ago

god I hope that statistic is wrong...

Smee McFee · 10 months ago

One word; Awesome!
Great incentive to keep trying to make it to the top.

To bad the executive branch hasn't kept itself from over-reaching its powers in the same way that its salary has been kept in check.

I wonder how movie stars' wages compare? Price of movie tickets?
It seems like so many of them want to be asked their political opinions on anything, but at least I can choose not to participate in their salaries. If I attempt not to pay an actual politician's salary, I get put in jail for tax evasion.