Parade Magazine's Annual Salaries Issue

It's that time of the year again, when the Sunday newspaper publication, Parade, reports on "what people earn". I'm always amazed at how little or how much some occupations compensate their workers.

I also read between the lines of the article, as it seems to set up the class warfare scenario, using the "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" mantra. The reporter, in my opinion, is somewhat disingenuous when she mentions that "the salary gains of the last five years have gone to the highest-paid workers". Well, here we go again. Socialism at it's worst, building on the case for wealth redistribution.

Another drive-by is her assertion that "most Americans didn't see the long economic boom reflected in their paychecks". Excuse me, but what Karl Marx university did she attend? Asides from the complex shift from an industrial to a service/technology base in this country, she is guilty of the sin of omission -- she left out the part of people bettering themselves.

One good example is a bartender that almost whines that she only made $25,000 last year. As an occasional frequenter of bars, taverns and pubs, I think she understated her income by leaving out all those wonderful tips I left for her last year. And how many hours did she work to claim that figure? If she really is despondent over her salary, she can do what a lot of other people have done: improve your situation.

I love these articles like Parade's, as they always present a monolithic perspective. For instance, on the other end of the spectrum of upper-middle class, a professor from South Dakota laments that "inflation seems worse than official reports indicate". This poor Geologic Engineering academician only made $94,300 last year in the classroom. Correct me if I'm wrong, but South Dakota can't be one of the most expensive states to live in.