RockneDrive 0 Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Figure 6: CEOs' pay as a multiple of the average worker's pay, 1960-2007http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_6.gifSource: Executive Excess 2008, the 15th Annual CEO Compensation Survey from the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDsection23 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Not seeing it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockneDrive 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 Sorry, it was a graph and I saw it after I posted it but now it's not shown. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockneDrive 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 (edited) Can you provide a link? I copied and pasted the graph relating to the thread title which is about 2/3 of the way down on this link and it actually posted in full - just the graph in living color. For some reason, it became a bad link: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html Here it is again and I see it in this post at this time: Figure 6: CEOs' pay as a multiple of the average worker's pay, 1960-2007http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_6.gifSource: Executive Excess 2008, the 15th Annual CEO Compensation Survey from the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy. Hurry, someone tell me that they see it too!!!! Edited February 19, 2010 by RockneDrive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockneDrive 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 Can you provide a link? Now it's gone. If you ever want a link from a pic that disappeared, just right click on the red X where the pic was but is no longer shown and go to properties where the address will be shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereCometheIrish 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Typical conservative tactic....Blame the Red X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockneDrive 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 Ha. Care to give your thoughts, Rock? That article is quite long. I will read it, but not right away. I don't have any of my own thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockneDrive 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 Typical conservative tactic....Blame the Red X. Very funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereCometheIrish 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Very funny. :llama: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDsection23 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 I copied and pasted the graph relating to the thread title which is about 2/3 of the way down on this link and it actually posted in full - just the graph in living color. For some reason, it became a bad link: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html Here it is again and I see it in this post at this time: Figure 6: CEOs' pay as a multiple of the average worker's pay, 1960-2007http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Figure_6.gifSource: Executive Excess 2008, the 15th Annual CEO Compensation Survey from the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy. Hurry, someone tell me that they see it too!!!! I saw it in your link. Not sure what your point is in posting this. Is this supposed to be proof that we need to increase taxes on CEOs or cap CEO salaries? To me, this graph seems to contradict the agenda that you're usually pushing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scintrigue 0 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 I saw it in your link. Not sure what your point is in posting this. Is this supposed to be proof that we need to increase taxes on CEOs or cap CEO salaries? To me, this graph seems to contradict the agenda that you're usually pushing. Uhm yeah thats what I was thinking. I at first thought it was going to be a right wing blog posting opposite numbers or something. Reaganomics baby trickle down, trickle down. Unfortunatly it doesn't and people are generally self-absorbed. Its human nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.4a8887240c44a1a05bc7da3d71dd2de2.jpg)
Recommended Posts