The REAL Top 1%: Washington D.C.

Let's say that you wanted to address your economic grievances. How do you go about doing this. Do you:

1. Protest the areas and counties which contain all the wealth or,
2. Protest the source of the problem?

Both scenarios are fine with me, however; Occupy Wall Street protesters seem to want to choose the latter. Only protesting certain elements of the problem that they hate, while disregarding other elements of the problem they seem to be fine with. This is pretty much why I have yet to see any capitalist haters protesting in front of an Apple Computer Store or any protesters camping out in front of an AMC movie theater. But I digress.

Washington Annual Average Income Trumps Wall Street's

Protesting the Top 1 percent of income earners is actually fine, as long as the Top 1 percent are the actual source of the problem. In this case the OWS protesters have missed their mark twice. Not only is Wall Street not the source of the problem they are not even the Top 1 percent of income earners, Washington D.C. is. According to the U.S. Census data, Washington D.C. is the wealthiest metropolitan area in the United States.

This is not something which just happened recently either. This swap has been happening for years. The average Federal employee worker receives compensation of $126,369. The problem with this disparity is that even though federal employees also pay taxes, their salary is also paid by tax payers. But again, this is perfectly fine. I do realize that there is and should be a legitimate role for Government. By protecting private property rights, in which without it our entire capitalistic system would struggle and cease to exist. This is perfectly fine, as I have no intention of "getting" people who make more money than I do.

The problem with this is that the Federal Government isn't subjected to the market place and yet feels the need to interject policy which keeps the market from functioning. And of course, when bad things happen it isn't the fault of Government. It was only because Government wasn't doing enough.

Government Protected Bad Practices. Not the Market.

And if you say Government is interjected in the marketplace to protect consumers from greed, go back to the case of Bernie Madoff. He has been running his ponzi scheme for two decades. A reasonable investor decided to check out his program by using an independent investment advisory before making any large investments. Since we have an SEC who's job it is to prevent ponzi schemes people never bothered to do their own research. People have been reporting Bernie Madoff to the SEC for years and the SEC did NOTHING. The Government protected Madoff. The market caught on to madoff long before the SEC or any other Government institution ever did. It took an entire bubble collapse and millions of investors to start asking for their returns back for the SEC to realize that he was running a ponzi scheme.

Without the SEC or any Government institution people would have done their own research. Like they are suppose to do. This is the general problem with Government and Washington. The corruption everyone is so afraid of happens when Government is involved. When the Government screws up it doesn't get sued, it doesn't go out of business and no one is held accountable.

CEO's Earn Their Bonuses. Government Gives Themselves Bonuses.

Also people complain about CEO's getting these big bonuses for being a CEO. So what? It's not like anyone can become a CEO of a major organization. World class talent is paid to the people who have the ability to perform those obligations. The one thing which keeps CEO's from being paid as high as they should be paid are their Human Capital. Where as in Government, nothing prevents the federal government from paying it's workers more than what they would be earning in the private sector. The federal government in fact over-pays it's workers 22 percent higher than the average private sector employee.

Even Alan Krueger, the chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, agrees:

The federal governments benefits are also much greater to that compared of the private sector by a margin of over 30 to 40 percent. If you were to cut all the benefits of all public sector employees, you could have reduced the federal budget by $47 Billion Dollars.

Can't Forget the Lobbyist and Lawyers.

Lawyers and Lobbyist are the biggest beneficiaries of the Federal Government, not banks. The median salary for a Washington D.C. lawyer is anywhere from $170,000 to $300,000 a year.

I've been saying that Washington is the problem for weeks. I don't know what Washington has to do short of stealing your money for all these OWS to see the truth. Which is something that Washington practically does in the form of taxes. They have legitimate concerns, but they have directed their anger at the wrong people. If they really cared about how the supposed "wealth gap" has grown they should be protesting Washington. Wall Street isn't even a factor. They are not even among the Top 10 of the Highest-income metropolitan statistical areas in the United States.

The OWS protesters should really do more of their research. If they don't they will only be confirming everything mainstream Americans already know about them. They are not about change the system. They are merely about advancing leftist radical policies.

What they need to do is camp out in front of the White House. Camp out in front of the Federal Reserve. Camp out in front of the Supreme Court. Camp out on the steps of Congress. Occupy the Oval Office.

 

In 2010, the average wage for someone in the securities industry was $361,000.

It would appear your claim that "Washington Annual Average Income Trumps Wall Street's" is incorrect.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/bankers-salaries-vs-everyone-elses/

 

Regulatory agencies are subsidized by the Government so that may have a lot to do with it. Finra especially.

 

It would still appear that the average wall street wage is three times the compensation for the average federal worker., and hence it would appear your analysis is wrong.

I am not sure what your "regulatory agencies are squibby dabbly doo" claim has to do with anythign here. You made an assertion and it is incorrect. If you can find some sort of data to support your claim then please do. If you want to move the goalposts to fit your now failed claim, well, I don't see how that is intellectually honest.

 

and everything will be alright

 

Security regulators are federal workers in a since that all reports and actions they take are the direct action of the SEC.

Regulatory agencies are part of the securities industry. Research it.

Not really.

Have fun. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1128329

 

I am sorry, but that is made up garbage. Absolute garbage and has nothing to do with your discredited claim.

I am certain there are people on this forum that are idiotic enough to believe your statement, but I am not one of them.

Actually you did. I quoted it. I proved it incorrect. If you want to pretend reality did not happen or the post is not there, then go ahead, but to argue that I did not is simply nonsensical.

Indeed, that was fun. Your link had nothing to do with your now discredited claim that "Washington Annual Average Income Trumps Wall Street's".

Do you really want to go this route? to deny that you were wrong and shown to be wrong? Because I can argue this all day, especially since I am correct.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:INSULT REMOVED>>> I like how you ignore that security regulators are controlled by the SEC.

If you want to pretend that the security industry isn't controlled by Washington then be my best.

Actually this link already does it for me.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...e-u-s-capital-richer-than-silicon-valley.html

It's a 66 page PDF study. You had to read it to see it. Let me know when you do. Your ignorance about this topic is apparent.

All you did was show me that the securities industry makes more than the the average Washington employee, when the security industry are practically Washington employees.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED INSULT AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

Silicon Valley is not Wall Street nor is it Washington. Again, you are moving the goalposts to fit a failed argument, and ironically it still fails.

Your claim was that the average wage of a person livbing in Washington ws higher than that of Wall Street. Your claim was wrong.

 

<<< MOD EDIT: QUOTED DELETED POST AND ANSWER REMOVED >>>

The average annual income of Washington Metro area trumps wall street because it does. It's number one in the country. Silicon Valley is number 2 now. Wall Street is number 12.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest-income_metropolitan_statistical_areas_in_the_United_States

Still want to keep going?

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED INSULT AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

Sure.

#12 on your link is the New York/New Jersey? Connecticut/ Pennsylvania metropolitan areas, not Wall Street. I am not sure what you were attempting to prove or if this is just the 4th time you have moved the goalposts.

The claim in your OP was clear. It is also incorrect. Now it looks like your plan is to obfuscate, deflect, avoid, and belittle.

That still will not make you right.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED INSULT AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

Wall Street is obviously not a district. It's the name of a street. Wall Street is located in New York. The New York Metro area includes Wall Street. So yeah, you're wrong for the 7th time.

Quit while you're behind. You're just an embarrassment to yourself.

I don't need a plan. The average annual income in DC is higher than Wall Street. Wall Street is only located within the Top 20. The Census even confirms this as well. I just do the belittling for fun.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED INSULT AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

Sure. You said Wall Street, not the entire four state area. You are moving the goalposts to fit your failed, and it has failed miserably, assertions.

It is not higher than Wall Street. This has been proven to you.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED INSULT AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

The entire Metropolitan area of New York includes Wall Street just like the entire Metropolitan area of Baltimore&#8211;Washington includes D.C. <<< MOD EDIT: PERSONAL INSULT >>>

According to the Census, that is wrong. But keep trying. I'm sure you'll convince me you're right if you keep trying.

 

<<< MOD EDIT: ANSWER TO DELETED QUOTE REMOVED >>>

May I point out your OP specifically says Wall Street? Not the entire metro area? Furthermore, you are asking, quite clearly, why the OWS folks are not protesting Washington instead of Wall Street.

Now if you want to post delusional garbage about how you were actually taking about the NYC metro area, which is not what the OWS folks are protesting, you go right ahead.

But we all know, you included, that you were wrong.

Actually, I doubt it. I think you will continue to be wrong, willfully, completely, willingly, and stubbornly in the face of facts. I base this on your current behavior in this thread.

 

<<< MOD EDIT:QUOTED DELETED AND ANSWER REMOVED>>>

If Wall Street is part of the New York metropolitan area and the New York metropolitan area is ranked 12th than Wall Street cannot possibly have a higher annual income than Washington D.C.

Common sense much?

No I'm still talking about Wall Street and Washington D.C. The Annual Income of Wall Street is still not higher than Washington D.C. No goal post requires moving, you're still wrong and your still embarrassing yourself.

Your only ability to debunk is strictly based on your choice to nitpick and play semantics. It's quite sad really.

Except the facts are in my favor.

 

Oh, the 5th time they have been moved, and it's back to their original location.

I have already linked an article indicating you are incorrect. Let's link some more.


http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/bankers-salaries-vs-everyone-elses/

http://www.consumerismcommentary.com/wall-street-salaries-are-through-the-roof/

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110529/SUB/305299977

Yes, it would appear that the average compensation for a Wall Street employee is higher, significantly, than that of someone in Washington DC. I am not sure why you continue to argue form a grossly incorrect position.

 

First link I have already debunked, second link is months old and the third one I need a subscription to see. The first link isn't even an average of the entire Wall Street employee salary. It's an average salary of an security regulatory (who work for the SEC BTW).

Unless you have any up to date sources that I can actually see, you're still wrong. I'll wait since you have all day.

 

I have already provided it. You know where to go if you want to see it.

I have all the evidence and information which supports my analysis and OP. I don't have to debunk anything. It is you who needs to do the debunking.

And they were all either wrong or outdated.

Even on my worst day you wouldn't be able to debunk me. Wall Street does not have the highest salary in the nation nor does it have a higher salary than Washington. Wall Street is not the highest average income per capita in any catergory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highest-income_places_in_the_United_States

 

Actually, not a single time have you stated or sourced what a Wall Street employee makes, But prove me wrong. What is the post number that you stated as much?

Actually, it does, and I have demonstrated as much with 4 links. I am not sure why you are claiming otherwise.

 

I've posted all of the districts wall street was listed in and ever single category they have failed to come out on top.

Because they are wrong. I don't know why you are claiming they are correct when I have statistics which shows otherwise.

 

Wall Street is in New Jersy? Pennsylvania? Connecticut? Long Island? You did indeed move the goalposts to fit your failed argument, now for the 6th time. However, you have twice claimed that Washington salaries were greater than Wall Street salaries, not the 4 state metro area. This assertion on your part has been shown to be incorrect.

But you don't have statistics showing what the Wall Street salaries are. You have claimed this numerous times and still have not provided them. Instead you provide a lot of different areas, San Jose included, and tried to pass them off.

MJ, you are incorrect. You have been shown to be incorrect. Come to the light side of the force and be correct.

 

Yes, that would be the New York Metropolitan area.

In terms of Metropolitan area, county and zip code Wall Street does not have annual salary higher than Washington. The Census pretty much confirms this.

You haven't shown statistics for Wall Street Salaries either. All you did was show the average salary for Security Regulators. Not the average annual income.

As for the average salaries for Wall Street I have it right here. And -- once again, surprise surprise -- they are not number one. New York, New York Zip Code 10280 (Wall Street) is number 41 with an annual income of $83,639.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highes...ited_States#ZCTAs_ranked_by_per_capita_income

 

Actually, it does not . You have since changed your position three times. In your OP you clearly state Wall Street, not the metropolitan area, and your assertion is incorrect, and has been shown to be incorrect.

This is a blatant falsehood. A lie. Your post is a lie. I have provided numerous links and not a single one was referring to the salaries of the regulators.

In post 2 of this thread.I stated the average salary and linked you to it. I then provided three other links that state clearly that you are incorrect.

MJ, your post is a dishonest piece of trash

Oh, so you were talking about this that live in that district and not the workers of Wall Street?

How pathetic. How shameless,. Your posts show no honor and no shame. You have changed your tune more times than I can count now. Do you honestly think that there is anyone as abjectly stupid enough to believe that your argument was regarding the zip code in which Wall Street was located? Do you? Because I have met some pretty (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid people in my time but I am not sure there were any stupid enough to believe the argument you are putting forth.

MJ, you have been incorrect numerous 5times in this thread. You have been proven to be wrong. Proven. Now you are changing your tune again. What a sorry state this country has slipped to when people are unable to admit they are wrong and instead lie.