Let’s start with this premise: “Income inequality” is one of the more absurd catchphrases of modern discourse. We’ll lump it with “The Great Recession” and “awfully good” as items that fall into the category of oxymoronic/nonsensical/overused tools of rhetoric.
Let’s face it, some employees are more valuable than others. Some companies are more profitable than others. Some workers have more employment options than others, be it by right of education or experience or work ethic. And if McDonald’s employees want to earn $15 an hour, the best way to reach that goal is to develop some skills so they don’t have to work at McDonald’s.
Yet while this is one of the foundations of economic theory, there are some caveats. So, as income inequality and the minimum wage promise to be signature topics during the slog through the presidential campaign, as they promise to generate a metric ton of disingenuous quotes from pandering candidates, the fact is that those who say inequality should not be an issue have a mountainous set of facts stacking up against them.
Consider a recent study from Equilar, an executive compensation research firm. In conjunction with The New York Times and the Associated Press, Equilar looked at compensation at publicly held companies in 2014, and it found that for the 200 top-paid CEOs, the median compensation was $17.6 million. That’s $17.6 million. For one year. For somebody whose greatest skill just might have been getting their cronies on the board of directors to rubber-stamp the compensation package.
