nice article

[kandrathe]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1210726562...us_inside_today
The main point I would like the address here is the fact (in my opinion) that in the world (west mainly I guess) the best jobs in terms of income are not the ones that benefit the economy and general prosperity the most. As long as being an investment banker, professional sporter, real estate agent or singer of low quality pop music makes you richer than 'real jobs' it will continue to be a burden on our nations. Is there any way to stop this, according to me, problem?

The article sets up the weepy straw man of the poor down trodden worker who is abused by the man. In actuality, if you are an employer (at least in America) you have thousands of regulations to comply with and it takes an HR professional to help keep you legal. Workers have the right to vote with their feet and get a new job. If they are valuable, they will have no trouble selling their abilities to another buyer. The article finally gets to the point, "It is, in other words, a political disaster, with tax cuts, trade agreements, deregulatory measures, and enforcement decisions all finely crafted to benefit one part of society and leave the rest behind." What he means is that somehow the government has been rigged by the Reaganista's to benefit the wealthy. He is stating that in essence the tax cuts are for the wealthy, deregulation was for the wealthy, trade agreements are for the wealthy, and relaxing enforcements are all to benefits the already wealthy. I don't subscribe to this class warfare nonsense. These people are really, really good at being either myopic to their own viewpoints, or lying with numbers. So, his point is that by promoting capitalism, you are punishing the lower classes.

Investment Banker -- helps you to increase wealth beyond what you can do for yourself -- must be valuable to someone right?

Professional athlete -- While each ticket may only be $20 or so, when you can fill a stadium of 30 to 50 thousand to generate $600,000 in gross ticket sales, plus revenue for parking and food sales you are talking real money.

Entertainer -- Same with pop music or movie star, if you can sell a song at even $.10 a play, and you have millions of plays of that song a day, you can aggregate money.

So, no, pop star is not more valuable than teacher, but since the government and the unions control education here we may never know what people might pay for well educated children. I know some people who pay $15,000 per student per year for a private high school. So that would be $83 per day per pupil and figure 25 kids per teacher per day, so that amounts to $10,375 per week, or $375,000 for the 25 students for 2 semesters. There would be some overhead for building, books, and administration of course but still, there is no reason that teachers couldn't make into 6 figures if education were run more like business.

Point to a profession where people are paid less than their value and I'll show you the government intervention that makes it so.