Lest the corporate powers-that-be fail to comprehend the depth of contempt the huddled masses hold them in, let's review some Facebook comments on a Sept. 1 Post-Gazette story about layoffs and CEO pay.

The story concerned a study by the Institute for Policy Studies, which found CEOs at the 50 companies that announced the biggest layoffs earned, on average, 42 percent more last year than the average CEO of a S&P 500 company. Layoffs were measured from Nov. 1, 2008 through March 31. The figures do not reflect how many of those who lost jobs were subsequently recalled and, if they were rehired, on what terms.

With the national unemployment rate standing at 9.6 percent and with 6.2 million of the jobless being out of work for six months or longer, the tempest-tossed are understandably upset by the Washington, D.C., research group's revelations.

"They are a bunch of blood sucking pigs who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves," one PG reader and Facebook frequenter said of the layoff-leading CEOs.

Wrote another: "Tar and feather a few -- that would end the practice."

To which one laid-off worker responded: "Today is the first day after my severance ran out . ... My job went to India. I'm willing to learn how to tar and feather."

Imagine what they would have posted if the PG had reported this snippet from the institute's study: The average CEO of a large company makes 263 times what the average American makes.

Extract the venom in the comments and you'll find substantial justification for what the Facebook posters had to say. The fact of the matter is, a lot of Americans -- right or wrong -- are upset about CEO pay and are making their feelings known.

There are statistics to support their visceral reactions.

The Congressional Budget Office recently reported the average after-tax income for the richest 1 percent of U.S. households was $1.3 million in 2007, up 281 percent from 1979. Over the same period, the 20 percent representing the nation's poorest households saw their after-tax income rise 16 percent, from $15,300 to $17,700.

After-tax incomes for those in the middle rose 35 percent to $77,000.

Granted, people fall in and out of the top 1 percent each year. However, regardless of the turnover at the top, very few Americans will believe the cream of the crop worked hard enough and smart enough to justify the fact that their household income grew so much faster than everyone else's.

Among the disbelievers are the 64 percent of Americans who believe they will never be able to afford to stop working and retire, according to a survey conducted by StrategyOne. The pollster's Labor Day survey of more than 1,000 workers found that 46 percent of them had their wages and salaries reduced in recent years, that 44 percent are worried about losing their jobs, and that 48 percent are concerned about having their hours cut.

Why wouldn't they be upset about what the institute's Sarah Anderson, the lead author of the report, concluded?

"CEOs are squeezing workers to boost short-term profits and fatten their own paychecks," Ms. Anderson said.

In the minds of many, the notion that CEOs are being incentivized to eliminate jobs reflects the limited creativity in the corporate suite.

Now that the Federal Reserve Board's drug of choice -- chronically low interest rates -- is no longer fattening their top lines (revenue) or their bottom lines (profits), the CEO playbook is scripted strictly for what lies in between: costs. And American workers are one of their biggest costs.

To be sure, not all CEOs are born equal. There are some who are creative and are worth every penny they earn, and maybe more. Some have taken pay cuts of 10 or 20 percent during the recession, actions that won't deter some from venting on Facebook.

And it is also true that despite the high unemployment rates among the wretched refuse of our teeming shore, the ranks of the still-employed include more than a few whose productivity falls well short of what they are paid. Delusions about the value of our work are not confined to the corner office. They extend to the shop floor, the halls of government, the classroom and, yes, even the newsroom.

But CEOs need to understand how most Americans feel about their paychecks.

The CBO's after-income figures reflect the greatest concentration at the top of the income scale since 1928, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. They indicate the debilitated state of America's working class, a condition that should concern all citizens, rich as well as poor.

CEOs also need to understand that popular sentiment, whether grounded in statistics or based on raw emotions, eventually will be reflected in public policy. CEO pay is no exception.

Whatever regulators have done and will do about executive pay may be enlightened or draconian. It may provide ample wiggle room to comply with the letter of the law while violating its spirit.

But instead of forcing the government's hand, wouldn't it be better for Corporate America to do something about it themselves? That would avoid the costly, ham-handed regulatory intervention CEOs get paid to complain about with regularity.

"Money Q&A" and "Company Town" are featured exclusively at PG+, a members-only web site of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.