pinions of buddy don: top dawgs, bottom dawgs

i couldnt sleep las nite fer thankin bout thangs. sum of em dont matter much lack my frustrayshuns at wurk. but i also couldnt quit wundern bout a idee i been a'havin.

the idee gut back into my mind whenever i red this here story name of Wall Street Bonuses to Hit Record $21.5 Billion in 2005.

i am lucky a nuff to be a'wurkin on wall street, witch i am neether banker nor trader. i jes hep keep the infrustruckshur a'goin sos they kin make thar money:

Alan G. Hevesi, the New York state comptroller, announced today that Wall Street bonuses are estimated to hit a record $21.5 billion for 2005, surpassing the previous record of $19.5 billion of 2000. Those bonuses were driven by record profits at many of Wall Street's major banks, including Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers.

The Street's munificence will be felt throughout New York: Mr. Hevesi estimated that New York State will collect $1.5 billion in tax revenue and New York City will receive about $500 million from those bonuses.

"Wall Street continues to be critically important to the economies of both the city and the state," he said.

The average bonus of $125,000 was also a record, surpassing the previous peak in 2004, of $114,270. Mr. Hevesi's figures represent bonuses awarded at 220 companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Adjusted for inflation, the 2000 record was $22.3 billion.

as ye mite magine, them amung us that make bankin n tradin possibull but dont do no bankin n dont do no tradin dont git the same reewards as them that duz. tiz lackly that nary a one of us even gut half of the averidge bonus.

dont git me rong: i am great full fer whut i gut on a counta i dint never git no bonus whenever i wuz teachin skool n such, even tho i know i wuz doin the best thang i am capabull of doin fer the worl by bein a teacher. fack is, i dint make as much in a year fer teachin as i kin git in a bonus these days. so tiz grate to git a bonus, even ifn taint but about 1% of the bonus of them i rub shoulders with everday.

but my point is this: shouldnt thay be a maximum wage? ifn we had one, we woodnt need no minimum wage n the economy wood be much stronger.

heres how twood wurk (ye know ifn ye follerd that lank on maximum wage that i dun have writ bout this idee before, but it bears repeatin) – the person in inny cumpny reeceivin the gratest reward (top dawg) couldnt git more than, say, 50 times as much as person makin the lease (bottom dawg).

magine whut the lowly cleanup lady wood half to make sos the biggest earners could git these kinds of rewards:

Wall Street chief executives will be at the top of the heap, reaping the benefits of their banks profits. Henry Paulson, chief executive of Goldman Sachs, earned a compensation package of $38 million for 2005. Richard Fuld, the chief executive of Lehman Brothers was awarded $14.9 million in restricted stock. John Mack, who took over the reins of Morgan Stanley last summer, earned $11.5 million for five months' worth of work.

ifn we had a maximum wage, then the bottom dawg at goldman sachs wood git $760,000. kin ye magine how much the economy wood grow ifn ye had yer averidge folks makin that much money?

corse, the numbers woodnt wurk thataway eggzackly. chantses are, ye wood half to lower the top dawg sos ye could afford the bottom. but even then, ifn the bottom dawg wuz makin only $100,000, then the top dawg wood still git $5,000,000. woodnt most innybidy be able to git by with that much?

corse, they mite not be willin to pay no cleanup lady frum east europe a nuff money to make that possibull, so magine they wood only pay em $30,000. the top dawg wood still git $1.5 million.

that aint no peanuts in my nayborhood!