In 2005, the median worker made $46,242 and the average CEO made around four times that amount, or around $180,000. In 2017 the median worker made a record $61,372 up around 33%, and according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average CEO made $183,270 in 2017 or just a 2% or 3% increase in twelve years. The average CEO today makes just three times the average worker, so why does media just repeat the lie? Obviously because they collude with Democrats heightening class resentments, and they don't want the public to know the truth or they are too lazy to do the research .

On a continuing basis, Democrats, including the media, are playing the race, sex, and class cards while they pretend they want to unite the country. One of the talking points is the bald-faced lie that CEOs make over 300 times the average worker, and their pay is rising faster than the average worker. There are around 250,000 CEOs in the U.S., but somehow we hear about only the top few hundred.

Middle-class income rose to the highest recorded levels in 2017 and the national poverty rate declined as the benefits of the strong economy lifted the fortunes of more Americans, the U.S. Census reported Wednesday. The median U.S. household earned $61,372 last year, meaning half of the families in the country brought in more income than this and half earned less.

Historical Nominal Median Household Income for the United States

Date US 2008 $52,029 2007 $50,740 2006 $48,451 2005 $46,242

Source: https://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/

The BLS reports:

The median annual wage for chief executives was $183,270 in May 2017. The median annual wage for general and operations managers was $100,410 in May 2017[.]

This article from the American Enterprise Institute gives average CEO pay versus the average worker from 2002 to 2014

According to both the BLS and the Census Bureau, there are more than 7 million private firms in the US, so the samples of 300-350 firms for CEO pay represent only one of about every 21,500 private firms in the US, or about 1/200 of 1% of the total number of US firms. And yet the AFL-CIO, Financial Times, AP, the WSJ and others compare the average annual wages of hundreds of millions of full-time employees working at the more than 7 million US companies to the CEO pay of executives at only several hundred companies, which is hardly a fair comparison.

We repeatedly hear the talking points that the Trump tax cuts are for the rich and big corporations, but there is a huge number of economic indicators that indicate that Trump's policies are lifting the economy as a whole. While the media generally report the good news, they do it quickly and almost immediately get back to the Democrat talking points.

Some of the indications of overall growth are GDP growth of 4.2 percent for the second quarter and probably 3% for the year, a record number of job openings, and unemployment claims at 50-year lows despite a much larger labor force.

Consumer and business confidence has surged since Trump was elected, and small business confidence is at the highest ever, surpassing the previous record of 35 years ago.

CNBC:

U.S. small business optimism surged to a record in August as the tax cuts and deregulation efforts of President Donald Trump and the Republican-led Congress led to more sales, hiring and investment, according to a survey by the National Federation of Independent Business. The NFIB Small Business Optimism Index jumped to 108.8 last month, the highest level ever recorded in the survey's 45-year history and above the previous record of 108 in 1983, set during the second year of Ronald Reagan's presidency. The August figure was up from a 107.9 reading in July.

The Washington Post recently had an excellent article about how the economy has improved in rural and small communities, and that is certainly not the rich.

Blue-collar jobs are growing at their fastest rate in more than 30 years, helping fuel a hiring boom in many small towns and rural areas that are strong supporters of President Trump ahead of November's midterm elections. Jobs in goods-producing industries – mining, construction and manufacturing – grew 3.3 percent in the year preceding July, the best rate since 1984, according to a Washington Post analysis.

Recently Kohls, TJ Maxx, Walmart, and others have reported improving sales and earnings. The Target CEO says it is the best consumer environment he has ever seen. Those facts certainly indicate that the economy is being lifted as a whole.

For a nerd who actually does his own research instead of repeating talking points, the Bureau of Labor Statistics page is a favorite site.

The following are numbers from December 2016 at the end of Obama's term, and after that August 2018, 20 months after Trump took office. Why aren't Democrats cheering the good news that indicates that all groups are being lifted up?

Total Non-Farm Employment 145.4 Million 149.3 Million Total Private Employment 123.1 Million 126.9 Million Manufacturing employment 12.4 Million 12.7 Million Construction employment 6.8 Million 7.3 Million Part Time Employment 5.6 Million 4.4 Million Unemployment Rate 16-19 years old 7.9% 6.3% Unemployment Rate Hispanics 5.9% 4.7% Unemployment Rate Blacks 7.9% 6.3% Unemp Rate-Less than HS 7.6% 5.7% Unemp Rate HS Graduate 5.1% 3.9%

The Democrats' policy suggestions as a result of all this economic success are the same agenda they have had for decades because results don't matter. They want more government and to head toward socialism. They want government control, more money, and more power. They advocate for guaranteed income, single-payer health care, higher taxes, and more regulations.

It is obvious that capitalism and the private sector are what gives economies the greatest results, the greatest innovation, and the greatest opportunity to be lifted out of poverty and achieve independence. It is truly a shame that the media support those who call themselves progressives but who want to move backward to what gave us the slowest economic recovery in seventy years. Why would anyone in his right mind want that?

On a side note: Since the Washington Post and other dimwits are blaming Trump for Hurricane Florence, are they giving him credit for what appears to be the current weakening of the storm? He seems to have the power to both strengthen and weaken storms at will. That is amazing. I have to wonder why he guided the storm into red states where there are competitive elections coming up instead of just sending the storm to New York, where he doesn't have a chance. I assume that the WaPo gives Obama credit for the lull in hurricanes for almost 12 years.