Letters to the NY Times

[kentuck]

Regarding: "when given the choice to value people who are providing worthwhile services or people who exist purely to satiate their own wealth and fame, we choose the latter."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/opinion/l26herbert.html?ref=opinion

<snip>
The attacks on union compensation Bob Herbert describes are most egregious when they come from Republican lawmakers, who earn more than $160,000 a year with excellent benefits and will probably be able to return to or begin other lucrative employment when they leave office.

I suggest in these difficult economic times that lawmakers do what they are asking of the autoworkers, whose taxes support them, and take large cuts in both their salaries and pension benefits.

Carol Nissenson
Washington, Dec. 24, 2008


....more good letters

[SharonAnn]

1. Very good! One point, I never use the word "earn" when high compensation

is being described. Partly because I doubt that highly compensated people (paid in the millions per year) actually "earn" their pay. The word "earn" presumes that they do something that has incredible value. Usually outrageous pay is a result of someone learning how to game the compensation system.

I use the word "paid" since that doesn't presume whether they're worth it or not. It's neutral.

Think about it. There is a difference in your perception when you read/hear that someone is "paid" millions of dollars versus when you read/hear that someone "earns" millions of dollars.

Edited for spelling.