Welcome to the wonderful world of STATISM

[Ricter]

Quote from indahook:

Of course if you make tens of millions you dont need lifetime support. Thats not the discussion. The discussion is a public servant making 6 figs plus lifetime bene`s. And COLA raises every year...while the govt puts a lid on inflation via fudged CPI to reduce its Social Security liabilities to the private sector payers I may add.

Right now the average public sector worker makes more than the private sector plus they receive lifetime support.

There will always be economic inequality. But we are better off when the private sector holds the majority of high money earners.

After all is said and done, who should make more? A private sector worker or public servant? A valued producer working their ass off adding to the economic engine and thier families wealth? Or a tax sucking bureaucrat working 9-5?

You can't get competent people into those positions by paying much less than what they'd get in the private sector. The free market works to some extent there also. I've seen this because I used to work in government. I disagree that they are all tax sucking bureaucrats. That's just the mirror image of saying all CEOs are rapacious tycoons.

 

[indahook]

Quote from Ricter:

You can't get competent people into those positions by paying much less than what they'd get in the private sector. The free market works to some extent there also. I've seen this because I used to work in government. I disagree that they are all tax sucking bureaucrats. That's just the mirror image of saying all CEOs are rapacious tycoons.

From the article :
----------------------

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.

-----------------------

I worked for the govt also. 4 years.

All of a sudden the govt has requirements for such a high level talent pool? I would love to see some of these job titles and responsibilities.

Oh, and most CEO`s are rapacious tycoons. But at least they create private sector jobs. Cant say that much for ANY public servant.

 

[FeenixRizin]

Quote from Ricter:

The upper strata of the private sector don't need lifetime guarantees for those things. Their yearly cash compensation is in the tens of millions, their non-cash compensation can exceed that, and they typically already own assets worth millions (often billions).

Plutocracy is unsustainable.

for sounding so smart, you really are fucking dense...

 

[speres]

bigger government = more beaurocracy = more useful idiots who cant get a job in the real world = more diversity coordinators = more stupid laws, nanny state meddling, higher taxes and the shrinking of freedoms

 

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from speres:

bigger government = more beaurocracy = more useful idiots who cant get a job in the real world = more diversity coordinators = more stupid laws, nanny state meddling, higher taxes and the shrinking of freedoms

Well yeah, but in our brave new world everyone's a winner. Trophies for all. T-Ball anyone?

 

[sameeh55]

Quote from Rearden Metal:

For feds, more get 6-figure salaries
Average pay $30,000 over private sector

By Dennis Cauchon
USA TODAY

The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data.

Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.

The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules.

"There's no way to justify this to the American people. It's ridiculous," says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first-term lawmaker who is on the House's federal workforce subcommittee.

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

USA TODAY analyzed the Office of Personnel Management's database that tracks salaries of more than 2 million federal workers. Excluded from OPM's data: the White House, Congress, the Postal Service, intelligence agencies and uniformed military personnel.

The growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker's pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector.

Key reasons for the boom in six-figure salaries:

•Pay hikes. Then-president Bush recommended — and Congress approved — across-the-board raises of 3% in January 2008 and 3.9% in January 2009. President Obama has recommended 2% pay raises in January 2010, the smallest since 1975. Most federal workers also get longevity pay hikes — called steps — that average 1.5% per year.

•New pay system. Congress created a new National Security Personnel System for the Defense Department to reward merit, in addition to the across-the-board increases. The merit raises, which started in January 2008, were larger than expected and rewarded high-ranking employees. In October, Congress voted to end the new pay scale by 2012.

•Pay caps eased. Many top civil servants are prohibited from making more than an agency's leader. But if Congress lifts the boss' salary, others get raises, too. When the Federal Aviation Administration chief's salary rose, nearly 1,700 employees' had their salaries lifted above $170,000, too.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20091211/1afedpay11_st.art.htm?loc=interstitialskip

What I do not understand is that we make such a big deal over civil servents but we, somehow, execuse the almost criminal salaries of some of the executives of the privet sectors.

 

[TGregg]

Quote from Rearden Metal:

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

So they're stupid too?

 

[Burtakus]

I am not too surprised by this. What many forget is that in the government, and to a great extent the government contractors, the pay is fairly linear. Meaning that your variation between the top performers and bottom performers over time is not that great.

However in the private sector your guarantee of good pay over time does not exist but the opportunity for outrageous pay does exist. There is an exponential difference between top and bottom performers in the private sector.

If you compare private sector employees to comparable public sector employees or comparable sized organizations with comparable level so f decision making responsibility you will find that the private sector is 20% - 40% higher in compensation at the mid levels and much higher at the higher levels.

 

[Ricter]

I sense I'm getting myself off track here, I dont' find $170k/yr to be a huge compensation level, though it obviously beats what the average, shrinking-middle-class member is making, and dwarfs what the average, growing-poor-class member is making.

But, I'll easily concede that an oligarchy may be growing to compete (collude?) with the plutocracy. Afterall, we have seen a couple of runs at royalty of late, the Kennedy's and the Bush's. However, the oligarchy, despite the fact that there is a revolving door between them and the plutocrats, is still the weaker party in my view.

I mean, if we had to put heads on pikes, we couldn't even touch the upper crust, even if we could find them. But we can still probably "access" government department heads.

 

[Vista]

Quote from sameeh55:

What I do not understand is that we make such a big deal over civil servents but we, somehow, execuse the almost criminal salaries of some of the executives of the privet sectors.

One's a debit and one's a credit on the government balance sheet. If you're running a business, do you want more or less debits?

Less. You want to operate the business effectively with the least amount of expense. For years they've been spending like a dot com startup in the 90's and Obama is taking it to a whole new level.