It’s not every day you see those sweatpants traded in for tailored suits and shoulder pads.
Last week, as I watched students march down Walnut in appropriate business attire, I wondered how soon they (you?) would be making more money than our fine new mayor.
How much does Nutter make? That’s public information: $186,044.
Depending on who you are, you might be wowed or seriously underwhelmed by that number. But if I may offer the moderately knowledgeable opinion of a Regular Working Person: that is a relatively measly sum for someone with what is — almost inarguably — one of the most difficult jobs in the county.
The catch, of course, is that salaries are in no way decided by how hard a job is — assuming such a thing can even be measured. (Imagine: seventh grade teachers and coal miners would be buying homes in Greenwich and summering in Tuscany.)
Of course there’s nothing easy about the 80-hour weeks recent grads put in at i-banks. But — upon graduation — Wharton undergraduates command an average starting salary of $108,509 (that’s base salary + signing bonus + annual bonus). 100 grand!
Pardon me while I peel my jaw up off the floor.
No one will deny that entry-level jobs in finance involve a lot of time spent staring at Excel. And yet — salary-wise — 22-year-old Wharton alums are seriously gaining on Nutter, whose job includes a promised 30-50% drop in crime over the next several years. Can you do that, ‘08 Wharton grad?
After all, that Penn cachet must command such high returns for a reason. Right?
Here’s a telling pop quiz: Who do you think makes more, the President of your fine University, or the President of the United States? (I didn’t ask you who was more competent — that’s an easy one.)
The answer, sort of predictably, is that Amy Gutmann could buy a(nother) sweet house in University City with the difference between her salary ($675,000) and W’s ($400K).
So, dear graduates-to-be, with your linen-paper resumes and your oh-so-marketable diplomas, how much are you worth?
Plenty — just as long as you’re headed to CitiGroup and not City Hall.
Tags: Amy Gutmann, career, Nutter, salaries, Wharton
An RSS feed of The Spin is available
February 1st, 2008 at 9:25 am
So so well written! This is such frightening information… and all this as we embark on a recession? I’ll take the penny tip for now :).
February 1st, 2008 at 1:03 pm
So you’re saying people who work on Wall Street make more money than people who work for the government? If only this information had been available when all the public sector workers who incessantly complain about their pay were deciding on careers…
February 1st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
In total agreement with the blog author.
There is not nearly enough recognition or publication of the fact that public servants and others who devote their lives to improving the human condition are vastly underpaid, particularly as compared to those who devote their lives maintaining the system that permits for this kind of income disparity. I’m surprised that I’m Shocked has responded with such a snide, and in my opinion ignorant perspective. Obviously that information was made available when a public servant decided to embark on a career of public service. The problem is that the public servant was forced to choose between creature comforts and the desire to help society function better.
February 1st, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Don’t forget the non-salary aspects of working in the public sector. For many of them, it can be a pseudo-doctorate, catapulting them into a much higher tax bracket.
Any prominent politician can parlay his name into, minimally, a series of high-priced series of speaking engagements. That’s small beer compared to a cushy consulting job with corporations who may have, totally coincidentally, donated to and benefited from the elected official’s political machine greasing.
And don’t forget the free pretzels that the mayor of Philly can demand at any time. He just flashes his mayor’s badge and he gets his pick of the freshest batch available. Mustard is extra.
February 1st, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“The problem is that the public servant was forced to choose between creature comforts and the desire to help society function better.”
Not really. He could’ve–since it’s so much easier–taken a job at an i-bank, made a fortune, retired and devoted the rest of his life to philanthropy. And in the case of the Mayor, I’m sure his $186K salary and countless perks afford him a very comfortable lifestyle.
February 1st, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Certainly, but at some point a choice is still forced. An individual can take a job at an i-bank, make a fortune, and then spend her or his remaining time as a philanthropist, but that person is still foregoing the additional fortune that the person who remains at the i-bank enjoys.
I personally envy the mayor’s $186K annual salary and the delightful perks that he enjoys. But I am more envious of the i-banker’s substantially larger salary and the even more substantial perks that he or she enjoys. The mayor is very comfortable. But the i-banker lives like Caesar.
February 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
So it sounds like you value material things more than the satisfaction derived from being a civil servant. You should probably work in the private sector. Do you seriously think the i-banker would say to himself, “I regret that while I’m making all this money I’m foregoing years of public service”? I doubt it. And I’m guessing someone who is most interested in aiding his community has no qualms about the trade-off of having to drive a Hyundai and shop a Wal-Mart.
February 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
I love your CitiGroup/City Hall zinger at the end!
February 1st, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I thought David Kanter’s column last week on Doug Tansey–a Whartonite who returned from Wall Street to Walnut Street, as a future doc–illustrated some of these ideas in a very personal way. The lifestyle seemed great and lucrative, not so much in reality. Sure, stick with it long enough and the time to enjoy the $$ can be there…but as said before, $100k over an 80+-hour work week is a good, but not dazzling hourly wage.
February 1st, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Wow. Great stuff! It is worth mentioning that George W. is probably paid more in the public sector than he ever earned in the private sector (other than in the employ of family and friends) whereas Pres. Amy undoubtedly would receive more pay and less stress in corporate America. Oh, and can I say, what a great reminder to all of us that what you are paid has very little to do with what you are worth, and that the truly wealthiest people may be the ones with the least money.