If I follow the logic of the argument, which I think I do, Federal District Judges' pay, adjusted for inflation has decreased since 1969. It started out as $40,000 , and is now $150,000 per year. When we compare this to the wage for a Harvard Law professor moving from $28,000 to $250,000 in that same time period we can see how poverty has struck the federal bench. When I look at the Census Bureau statistics, I can see what they mean [sic]. The average 1969 wage earner made $29,166 per year (in 2000 dollars) compared to the $40,290 that the average person earned in 2000. The article really brings it into focus by pointing out:
Now, $150,000 sounds like a lot of money to most Americans, and it is. But the real crunch comes for many judges when they have to send a couple of kids to college. Tuition is rising much faster than inflation, and $30,000 a year for each child comes right off the top of a paycheck. And, notes Breyer, “there are no scholarships for people who earn $150,000 a year.”I can understand the statistics, and how we can twist them. I have kids and bills too. But no matter how many times I read the article, all I hear is let them eat cake.