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.
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.
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.