Journalists Overpaid, Says Jamie Dimon

JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon recently said journalists make too much money, based on the amount of revenue newspapers generate and media companies' lack of profitability.  The Bureau of Labor Stastistics says journalists make $43,780 annually.  In addition to his $23 million salary last year, Dimon also justified JP Morgan Chase's average wage rates of over $340,000 per year on the basis that it, as a Wall Street Bank, has to hire the best employees.  Attitudes like this from Wall Street CEOs and others in the Top 1% explain why those in the bottom 99% distrust Wall Street Bankers.  Media companies should not be allowed to go bankrupt, but their purpose is to truthfully disseminate the news.  With the amount of money both Dimon and his bank makes, he can hire public relations specialists to help dress up the facts to present to overworked journalists and make the bank look better than it really is.  The consolidation of media companies occurred because of pressure from the banks to be profitable, leading them to pursue the most sensationalizing stories as opposed to the news stories that people need to hear.  As a result, most people do not trust network news and Jon Stewart, even as a comedian, has taken the role of America's most-trusted news broadcaster.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/28/jamie-dimon-newspaper-reporter-pay_n_1307989.html; http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/02/28/jamie-dimon-want-to-make-sure-everyone-hears-him/?mod=wsj_share_twitter

Top 1%'s Share of 2010 Income Gains Amount to 93% in U.S.

In 2010, the first year of recovery following the painful job-destroying recession of 2007-2009, the top 1% received 93% of all U.S. income gains during the year.  Which means the bottom 99% of the population is left to fight over the remaining seven percent.  The decline of unions has helped spur the decline, as well as tax policy and stock gains by the rich.  Not suprisingly, more Americans are falling into poverty and cannot even afford to eat.  It is very clear that income inequality caused the recession and correcting it is the only way towards recovery. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/1-percent-income-inequality_n_1321008.html

If Top 1% Had Not Ripped Off Trillions, You Would Be Making Thousands More Now (for 12/6/11)

In 1947, the wealthiest 1% of Americans received almost 12% of national income. This figure fell to 10.7% by 1967. The wealthiest 1%'s share of America's income never topped 12.8% from 1949 to 1979, and stood at 10% when Americans voted Ronald Reagan President of the U.S. in 1980. This rose to 15.5% when he finished his term in Office and rose to 21.5% when George W. Bush became President in 2001. It rose further to 23.5% in 2007. This means the bottom 99% of Americans have seen their share of America's economic output fall by over 10%. Annually, this equals $1 trillion in extra income for the wealthiest Americans. Since 1980, if trends based on productivity for the middle class held form to today, they would be making an average of $12,500 more per year.
http://www.alternet.org/story/152621/if_top_1_hadn't_ripped_off_trillions,_you'd_likely_be_making_thousands_of_dollars_