Posted on 08/19/2010 7:07:45 AM PDT by Comrade Brother Abu Bubba
Your comment is at odds with a number of recent studies. Do you have any numbers to back up your comment? I have 2 sources. Go to Heritage Foundation or BUreau of Economic Analysis.
According to BEA: Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.
There are few guaranteed pensions in private sector not to mention guaranteed jobs or bonuses. When times are good, the private sector may adjust up to compete for top workers, but they also hire those over qualified in tough times. The government does not lay off, does not cut pensions, could care less about profit/loss/revenue—all laws of the economic cycle under which businesses must live.
With the proper selection of the statistics used, I'm quite certain that you could conclusively "prove" either to be the case.
When you see statistical tricks like that you know you are dealing with somone who used to be a publicly professed Liberal but they’ve changed their label to make more money out of a wealthier foundation.
Yep, I am here in MD near the heart of government job-land where they live like royalty compared to those in other areas of the country that foot the bills. New home developments are being built here while other areas main employment is home forclosures. The public servants have become the masters.
Closely related :The Public Employee Union Scam
As people have already pointed out on this thread, the non-government average is artificially decreased because it includes large numbers of low-skill menial laborers and illegal aliens who have no government equivalents.
Big Pensions for rank and file Federal workers ended about 20 years ago. Ordinary Federal workers now may have a small pension but the bulk of their retirement comes from their own Thrift Savings Plans (similar to a 401k).
There is plenty to complain about regarding the Federal workforce but lets not exaggerate.
If that's what you think, you need to reread the entire article. The author is comparing career paths of people with similar education and experience and the federalistas beat those in the private sector hands down.
This isn't to say that there are not people in the federal work force who are worth their weight in gold and grossly underpaid.
William Casey, who was one of the architects of the collapse of the Soviet Empire is a prime example. The man was well into his 70's and could outwork men half his age. The competent policies of the Reagan Administration combined with competent administrators like Bill Casey, created an opportunity for peace and prosperity which we may never see again in a century.
But the sad fact is that dedicated public servants like Bill Casey are the exception and not the rule.
I’m sorry but states are going bankrupt funding pensions that the taxpayers cannot afford. I know what I am talking about—I live in Illinois, and the State is a mess due to unfunded pension liability—we area tied with Greece on lists of likely default. We have street cleaners and garbage collectors making as much as folks with Masters degrees. However, I am not comparing those folks, nor am I comparing aggregates. (Seems all the government paygrade defenders are talking aggregates—I am not comparing aggregates—)Your article is talking aggregate when it makes it’s claims citing private sector workers not having degrees...I just don’t think you can make that comparison.
It states: “state and local workers are, on average, about four years older than private-sector workers and half have a four-year college-degree or more, compared to less than 30 percent in the private sector. Once these differences in age and education are factored in, state and local public workers earn less, not more, than their private-sector counterparts. But what about benefits?”
The article did not discuss benefits which is the huge differential here and what makes government workers receive twice as much—it is not just pay but pay plus benefits....and there is no mechanism to tell government entities that they cannot afford these benefits any more, yet we are telling workers everyday in the private sectors—look at the unemployment numbers—none are from government workers except perhaps the temps in the census.
I am saying the clerk at the DMV who has no college degree and only years punched on the clock is making a lot more than the clerk at a store or other private sector entity with similar educational background and experience. In part due to pay, but primarily due to benefits—health and retirement.
There are no government pensions in private sector—local, state, and federal workers are getting them, we can’t afford them because the government nevewr adjusts for declining tax inflows—they just bill future generations—hence Atlas Shrugged coming....
Also, government workers do not have to participate in Soc. Security retirement—they have their own programs....
I am saying that the government worker with a BS in liberal arts who has been employed with government is making more than a private sector worker employed with a BS. the bank.
BTW, I am not sure of your source on your numbers—CPER seems to lean left to me...at least from some of what I saw.
“
The United States right now needs to be moving in the opposite direction
from the one we are currently heading in. We need the brightest college
graduates innovating in the private sector, not working as overcompensated,
under performing federal workers. We need lower tax rates to stimulate private industry.
“
Amen, Amen, and Amen.
FINANCIALLY, I made a terrible mistake in the early 1990s.
I had the chance to go to work for the EPA.
I declined.
I suspect my bank account is shy about a million dollars or more.
My friends that stuck with the EPA are now just about as rich as Croesus.
BUT...at least I had the choice to say NO to this sort of obscene
scheme to confiscate (STEAL) money from the US taxpayer in the name
of “public service”.
I fear that the recently graduated student may have no other choice
than to join THE ROBBER BARONS of the Federal agencies.
I seriously think the Heritage Foundation is flawed. I would have to see exactly how they came up with their numbers but I have a suspicion that they might have including costs of training and payouts to contractors as part of the cost of labor. Costs paid to contractors can be close to double what the employee actually makes. Add in tremendously increased employee costs in DOD for things like hazardous duty pay because of the wars in Iraq and Afganistan and that will also inflate the numbers greatly. I find it hard to believe that the average Federal worker makes anywhere near what the Heritage Foundation says they do. Their numbers seem more reasonable for avarage compensation packages of GS-12s and above but they do not make up a huge portion of the overall Federal workforce. Anybody can go to USA jobs and see what Federal jobs pay around the country. Some have a very high earning potential that is almost impossible for the average employee to reach but most don’t pay that much.
“There are no government pensions in private sector—local, state, and federal workers are getting them,”
Most Federal workers now get a small pension but most of their retirement comes from their TSP which is like a 401k. The more they contribute, the more they get. Big Federal pension plans for new employees were eliminated about 20 years ago.
“Also, government workers do not have to participate in Soc. Security retirement—they have their own programs.”
That simply is not true.
From the Facebook page of a guy running for City Council in Mission Viejo, California — gave me a laugh.
Elect Mark Dobrilovic to the Mission Viejo City Council:
I recently asked my friends’ little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, ‘If you were President what would... be the first thing you would do?’ She replied, ‘I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.’
Her parents beamed with pride.
“Wow...what a worthy goal.’ I told her, ‘But you don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that. You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and sweep my yard, and I’ll pay you $50. Then I’ll take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house. She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, ‘ Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50? ‘ I said, ‘Welcome to the Republican Party.’
Her parents still aren’t speaking to me.
Mamas, don’t let your babies grow up to be leeches.
said 5ag612q to her test tube.
Why doesnt the homeless guy just vote for Obama so he can take the money from you (the main character) to give to the him (the homeless man) to spend to ‘stimulate’ the economy? Then when he has no money to hire the homeless man Obama can attack him for being greedy and claim the stimulus ‘saved’ the homeless man's job.
Practically I would want most homeless men fooling around with my lawn mower.
What's the difference? I view government workers the same as welfare recipients. Both are leeching off the taxpayers.
Children have no such prejudices -- yet.
There's much talk of those who don't care for too much government - but NOT ENOUGH TALK about government workers ( with power ) who resent the people...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.