CORPORATE AMERICA FIGHTS NEW LAW TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH THEIR CEO'S ARE GETTING PAID. SHOCKER.

Lately, the SEC seems to run on unicorn farts and leprechaun gold because they certainly don't seem to be doing their job. Their latest fiasco was the attempted court battle with Mark Cuban over alleged insider trading. Now, considering that the SEC has ignored insider trading with just about anyone who isn't famous, like say Martha Stewart, this whole bugaboo had witch hunt written all over it. They alleged that Cuban used information against a company to sell off stock when he knew the price was going to nose dive. The only problem was that so called insider information was readily available to everyone in the form of news paper articles, TV news stories and a zillion websites warning about problems with the company in the first place. He didn't need special info to know what was up and acted accordingly. The fact that these idiots failed to figure out what Bernie Madoff was up to but went after a guy who didn't even need to break the law to know things were hinkey makes one not trust the judgement of this organization anymore.

However, thanks to people like Elizabeth Warren and the Dodd/Frank Act, the SEC has proposed a CEO pay ratio rule. This would require large public companies to calculate the ratio of pay to their executives as compared to what the average person gets. Now mind you this won't go into effect until 2015, but already CEO's are fighting mad over having to disclose what they get paid. Why? Because if the average person finds out the obscene amount of money their bosses are getting, I fully expect them to be tarred and feathered before the day is out.

Wall Street, banks and other lobbying groups are fighting hard against this provision because they know people will be PISSED of they find out the pay discrepency that has reached record levels. We keep hearing how companies can't give raises because of the economy, but the truth of the matter is all that money is going to the top level executives. Over the past decade, 93% of the wealth accumulated in this country had gone to just 7% of the public. The remaining 93% of us are fighting over the lousy 7% they have left us with. This is a major factor to the rising inequality that will eventually swamp this country into third world status. Is that really what you want America?

British economist Andrew Smithers in his new book, "The Road to Recovery," shows that stock related bonuses make executives make decisions that are short term based which in turn hurts everyone. By not spending on long term investments rather than short term gains, they are more subject to booms and busts than a company well protected against such gains and falls. Yes, short term the executives do well, until the bottom falls out and everyone pays where the average worker is hurt worse as now he has no job and no savings while the rich have plenty to keep them solvent until they find something else to steal from. In the 1970's, US companies had 15 times the capital devoted to investments as they gave to shareholders. Today it is 2-1.

It has been suggested that a 20-1 ratio from worker pay to CEO should be the limit. It is right now around 400-1 and the data suggests this is unsustainable for any economy without a Depression happening. We tried this in 1928 and that led to huge problems for everyone not fantastically rich.

JC Penny, who is in dire straights due to the last CEO who was terrible, has a pay ratio of 1795-1. WTF?  Ron Johnson drove the company into the ground by eliminating sales and coupons while going after a the mythical rich hipster crowd which does not exist in large numbers. He might as well have tried to get dodos and wooly mammoths to shop there. He was gone in 17 months but not before running JC Penny into the ground.

The business community is up in arms over this, even though CEO pay is already disclosed annually. But I have a feeling if they see how much the average worker is getting screwed, that heads may roll and, gasp, raises may have to be given. The horror, the horror.

Many are worried about this as some have stated that such a look at the ratio of pay from CEO to average worker may make demands of hefty salary raises and other changes to corporate structure. No wonder they are fighting it so hard. Who wants to disclose they are effectively stealing food out of people's mouths? They must remember that as the GOP's philosophy for the poor is "Let them eat nothing," may really backfire when they see how little they are actually making. Good.

Take Ron Johnson again for example. If the average worker knew that the guy who may have cost them their career was going to walk away with a $53 million severance package, he probably wouldn't have gotten out of the building alive. This also might effect shareholders future compensation packages for CEO's who don't deserve the money they are making.

Ben and Jerry's had to get rid of a rule of an 8-1 ratio as what CEO wants to work for $81,000 a year and I would agree with that. However, making $400 million a year, as some CEO's do, is outrageous, unsustainable, and ultimately detrimental for society. This new rule could change that and finally allow some accountability into our failing economic system. It certainly won't do the harm that corporations are doing right now.