[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Providing my own bit of anecdotal evidence to support this point...

My company employs one of the absolute best Cisco network experts in the world. He didn't do a "useless" philosophy or arts degree but rather pursued a career in the business world. His time is in incredibly high demand, and he routinely works 60-80 hour weeks. There are maybe only 100 other people in the entire country who can do what he does.

I don't know his salary, but I suspect it's roughly in the $150-175k/year range (including bonuses). That's a very comfortable living, and most of us would be fortunate indeed if we ever reached that income level in our careers. That doesn't make him part of the 1%, though.

Now, what would happen if he absolutely screwed up on the job and was fired? Do you think he'd get a multi-million dollar golden parachute? Absolutely not. So why do corporate executives who are fired after driving their companies into the ground? It's like they play by an entirely separate set of rules, and for the vast majority of people, probably even more than "the 99%", we will never have the opportunity to join their exclusive club no matter how competent, how hard-working, or how educated we are.

I have zero problem with people earning large salaries if they deserve it, but I'd like very much to hear a compelling argument explaining why a corporate executive or investment banker can command a much higher salary, benefits package, and perks like golden parachutes while my colleague above cannot.

That is where the problem really lies. It's a social equity issue. If people are wishing they had the opportunity to be a part of the 1% it's because they can see or at least feel the gross imbalance in power and inequitable standards that have developed to favour the influence of the 1% in places that should still be ruled by social values and politics representing the majority interest.