advertisement

GUEST COMMENTARY: Wall Street salaries v. minimum wage

Wednesday, March 12, 2014 | 1:28 p.m. CDT; updated 3:49 p.m. CDT, Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Purveyors of Ferraris and high-end Swiss watches keep their fingers crossed toward the end of each calendar year, hoping that the big Wall Street banks will be generous with their annual cash bonuses.

New figures show that the bonus bonanza of 2013 didn’t disappoint. According to the New York State Comptroller’s office, Wall Street firms handed out $26.7 billion in bonuses to their 165,200 employees last year, up 15 percent over the previous year. That’s their third-largest haul on record.

That money will no doubt boost sales of luxury goods. Just imagine how much greater the economic benefit would be if that same amount of money had gone into the pockets of minimum-wage workers.

The $26.7 billion Wall Streeters pocketed in bonuses would cover the cost of more than doubling the paychecks for all of the 1,085,000 Americans who work full-time at the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

And boosting their pay in that way would give our economy much more bang for the buck. That’s because low-wage workers tend to spend nearly every dollar they make to meet their basic needs. The wealthy can afford to squirrel away a much greater share of their earnings.

When low-wage workers spend their money at the grocery store or on utility bills, this cash ripples through the economy. According to my new report, every extra dollar going into the pockets of low-wage workers adds about $1.21 to the national economy. Every extra dollar a high-income American makes, by contrast, only adds about 39 cents to the gross domestic product.

And these pennies add up.

If the $26.7 billion Wall Streeters pulled in on their bonuses last year had instead gone to minimum wage workers, our economy would be expected to grow by about $32.3 billion — more than triple the $10.4 billion boost expected from the Wall Street bonuses.

This immense GDP differential only speaks to one price we pay for Wall Street’s bonus reward culture. Huge bonuses, the 2008 financial industry meltdown made clear, create an incentive for high-risk behaviors that endanger the entire economy.

And yet, nearly four years after passage of the Dodd-Frank financial reform, regulators still haven’t implemented the modest provisions in that law to prohibit financial industry pay that encourages “inappropriate risk.” Time will tell whether last year’s Wall Street bonuses were based on high-risk gambles that will eventually blow up in our faces.

Low-wage jobs, on the other hand, endanger nothing. The people who harvest, prepare, and serve our food, the folks who keep our hotels clean, and the workers who care for our elderly all provide crucial services. They deserve much higher rewards.

Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies and is the author of the new report Wall Street Bonuses and the Minimum Wage.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Michael Williams March 12, 2014 | 4:13 p.m.

I'd take Sarah a whole lot more seriously if she'd have included rich folks like entertainers, athletes, politicians, and the like.

Instead, she limits her discussion to wall street.

Failure to include ALL rich is the calling card of someone with a hidden agenda; rich-is-rich regardless the politics.

This article is a lie by deception and/or omission.

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith March 13, 2014 | 8:00 a.m.

The Missourian seems to be running more articles from persons affilitated with the Institute for Policy Studies. It has become easy to identify these articles without even having to look at the credit at the bottom of an article. Regardless of the topic, the writer's slant is the same.

There are columnists who represent different views, some of them are even lauded by their journalistic peers. Why aren't they being represented?

(Report Comment)
Michael Williams March 13, 2014 | 8:44 a.m.

Ellis: "Why aren't they being represented?"
_____________

Is that a rhetorical question?

I think it's all just probability. You see, I read the KCStar and the StL Post-Dispatch and, while both newspapers lean left, they DO have columnists with a right bent. Some columns from both papers eventually appear in the Missourian, but....gasp....all are of the left lean. What are the odds of this? Not a single conservative column....ever. Is this like flipping a fair coin 100 times and ending up with 100 heads? With that kind of luck, the Missourian should by lottery tickets....

(Report Comment)
Michael Williams March 13, 2014 | 8:46 a.m.

Ellis: "The Missourian seems to be running more articles from persons affilitated with the Institute for Policy Studies."
________________

Probably because you can buy 'em cheap.

You get what you pay for, tho.

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith March 13, 2014 | 11:01 a.m.

Michael:

Well, whatever! I'll stick with Saint Patrick and the manure spreader, thank you. At least that's something tangible, not a bunch of hallucinatory prose.

Got the car washed and the gas tank full; I'll be in Columbia tomorrow afternoon, on the way to Rolla. \

Columbia IS still there, isn't it? I understand some things collapse there, especially when they've been neglected.

PS: If the Missourian receives these articles gratis they're still hugely overprised. :)

(Report Comment)
John Schultz March 13, 2014 | 11:23 a.m.

So the author didn't quite say how the money would get from Wall Street firms to those earning minimum wage, which makes her claims of a multiplier effect specious at best.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements