Oh, Keith is not going to like that title.
I just listened to a university statistics professor give a brilliant lecture on innumeracy in the United States and now I’m all fired up. He talked about Americans inability to comprehend large numbers, even in ordinary life settings. One of his examples was salary discrepancies. We all know some careers make a lot of money and we understand other job choices reap smaller financial reward. Yet, have you ever crunched the numbers and considered how far apart these numbers really are? Take professional athletes for example. According to Sports Illustrated “The Fortunate 50”,Tiger Woods earned $128,000,000 in 2008. Contrast that with numbers from the Chronicle of Higher Education which reports that the average associate professor at a baccalaureate university earns $87,000 per year. What do those few extra zeros really mean? It means that the average college professor would have to work 1,471 years to earn what Tiger Woods earned in one year. One thousand, four hundred, seventy-one years! Now I concede that Tiger Woods is a unique situation in professional sports. He earns more than twice that of the #2 ranked top-earning athlete (Phil Mickelson, by the way). So, let’s drop down a few notches to the #6 earning athlete, Alex Rodriguez. A Rod earned $35,000,000 in 2008. Your average medical oncologist earnings max out at an average of $455,000 per year. So today, in this country, A Rod will earn in one year what it takes a doctor fighting cancer 77 years to earn. It is feasible that an oncologist would work his entire life and not earn what Rodriguez earned in 2008 alone. And how about public school teachers? In Utah, the average school teacher with a master’s degree earns $32,000 per year (let's all groan together). Dale Earnhardt Jr earned $27,000,000. A Utah school teacher would have to work 844 years to earn Junior’s 2008 paycheck. To review:
Tiger Woods 1 year earning = University professor 1,471 years work
Alex Rodriguez 1 year earning = Medical oncologist 77 years work
Dale Earnhardt Jr 1 year earning = Utah school teacher 844 years work
Happily pro-athletes are not the only benefactors of our pay-scale lunacy. Forbes.com ranks highest paid CEOs. Mark Papa of EOG Resources was compensated $90,000,000 in 2008. It would take your average lawyer 796 years to achieve that single amount, an oncologist, 198 years.
Now I fully support the concept of giving the people what they want and charging what you can for it. I understand that NASCAR, the Superbowl, and the World Series are part of what makes America great. But I wonder if the dude screaming insults at Jeff Gordon realizes just how much more money that boy pulls than the local EMT or cancer researcher. Do we really think that Ben Roethlisberger should earn $25,000,000 in one year when your city fireman, who would risk his life for you, earns roughly $50,000. (It will take the fireman 500 years to earn $25,000,000.) As a people, we gotta get our priorities back in order.
Another example of innumeracy involves wealthy philanthropists.
Take the Walton family (founders and owners of Walmart) for example. They have received accolades for contributing over $1,400,000,000 (that's 1.4 billion dollars!) to various educational charities between 2003-2007. This sounds impressive, worthy of salutations, glory, laud and honor until you consider their actual net worth of $82,500,000,000 (that's 82.5 billion dollars!). In reality, their donation of 1.4 million dollars is less than 2% of their net worth. That is equivalent to the city fireman donating $825 to charity over the course of 4 years, or $206 per year. Not sure a parade is warranted at 2% contribution levels.
Next time I hear sports commentators gushing over a charitable act by LeBron James ($40,000,000 per annum) or some CNN reporter praising Ray Irani of Occidental Petroleum ($223,000,000 in 2009) for building a school in Beirut, I’m going to throw my shoe at the television set. Numerically speaking, they are being applauded for dropping a nickel in the March of Dimes canister.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
While it is true that many of the wealthy get media attention and accolades for their charitable giving, there are many others who donate generously with no expectation of reward. Walton's 2%donation doesn't seem like much to those of us who regularly donate 10% of our worth, but it is not our place to judge how much others give or don't give. I, personally, think Walton's donation of $1.4 BILLION is commendable. That's a heck of a lot more money than I'll ever see in my lifetime! I do agree with your comment: "not sure a parade is warranted at 2% contribution levels". Then again, donors shouldn't expect "parades" (or anything else) if their donation(s) is offered in the true spirit of giving. Regardless, should it matter whether someone donates enough money to fund a text book as opposed to an entire school? I certainly hope not. Hopefully, the donation is appreciated either way.
I just feel smart when I read your posts. I agree with you on this one and will be throwing my shoe as well.
Sure looks like our priorities are messed up, right! Thanks for breaking down the numbers and making me even more angry!
Thanks, I was looking for another reason to be sick of the world we live in.
And once again your post title contains a word I've never, ever heard before....
while I agree with the post I also wonder if we concentrate on individuals too much as well. As it takes a university professor 1471 years to make what Tiger makes in a year it can also be said that it takes 1471 university professors to make in one year what Tiger does. Do those 1471 professors donate as much collectively as Tiger or the Waltons. If a group of 2000 highly educated professionals came together and raised 1.4 billion dollars to give to educational charities there would probably be a parade and we'd all probably feel pretty good about it.
Also I'm not too sure about comparing one's donations against one's net worth as I'm not sure many people who are not LDS (and thus not asked to give 10% of income) can show they have donated more than 1% of their net worth over their lifetimes let alone over a span of 4 years.
In the end as long as the parade has candy I'm all for it.
Your post was an enjoyable read. I may have to become a blog stalker.
Jake,
Thank you for the cool comment. I like the way you think! Your 2000 Professors example took a bite out of my bitterness and helped me see things in a slightly different light. Furthermore, it would appear you are not "innumerate" like so many of us. You flipped those numbers around nicely.
Finally, I like that you like candy!
Do you blog?
Cheers!
While it does seem outrageous to pay athletes so much more than say our doctors and firemen, you have to look at what is driving those figures. A large part of it is supply and demand. While becoming a doctor is more difficult than say becoming a teacher, it is nowhere near as hard as becoming a pro athlete on that level. Many people, if they studied hard, could become a doctor. Many people can qualify to be a fireman; very few will ever, no matter how hard they work, have the skills necessary to play like A-rod or Tiger. Also, Nike will not benefit at all from putting that oncologist's picture in their ads. Is he smarter? Yes Is he doing something a million times more beneficial for our society? Definitely! Will he make millions of 18-25 year olds want to spend their money on Nike Shox cleats? Probably not. Do I think that Rothleisberger should earn $25,000,000 a year? Yes ma'am! I say, "Go Ben! Go capitalism! Whatever the market will bear." Yes, our firemen, policemen, etc should be better compensated. I don't think that means ole Ben and company should have to make less. You want to really get my blood boiling....let's talk about how poorly compensated and cared for (medically) our military is!
Just my immediate thoughts,
Sherri
YA...send some of the millions my way!! We're fine art framers...we totally deserve it!
Post a Comment