- This topic has 325 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 10, 2010 at 7:07 AM #17809August 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM #588496
CoronitaParticipantJust make more money, and then you shouldn’t care about what everyone else is making :), with the exception of probably those folks in Bell, CA.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
August 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM #588589CoronitaParticipantJust make more money, and then you shouldn’t care about what everyone else is making :), with the exception of probably those folks in Bell, CA.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
August 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM #589129CoronitaParticipantJust make more money, and then you shouldn’t care about what everyone else is making :), with the exception of probably those folks in Bell, CA.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
August 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM #589236CoronitaParticipantJust make more money, and then you shouldn’t care about what everyone else is making :), with the exception of probably those folks in Bell, CA.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
August 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM #589546CoronitaParticipantJust make more money, and then you shouldn’t care about what everyone else is making :), with the exception of probably those folks in Bell, CA.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
August 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM #588556jimmyle
ParticipantYes, but there is nothing we can do about it. They have bought our politicians including Obama.
One thing you can do is cheat on Taxes and make sure they don’t catch you. Start buying online.
August 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM #588650ParticipantYes, but there is nothing we can do about it. They have bought our politicians including Obama.
One thing you can do is cheat on Taxes and make sure they don’t catch you. Start buying online.
August 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM #589189ParticipantYes, but there is nothing we can do about it. They have bought our politicians including Obama.
One thing you can do is cheat on Taxes and make sure they don’t catch you. Start buying online.
August 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM #589295ParticipantYes, but there is nothing we can do about it. They have bought our politicians including Obama.
One thing you can do is cheat on Taxes and make sure they don’t catch you. Start buying online.
August 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM #589606ParticipantYes, but there is nothing we can do about it. They have bought our politicians including Obama.
One thing you can do is cheat on Taxes and make sure they don’t catch you. Start buying online.
August 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM #588566(former)FormerSanDiegan
ParticipantI agree in general on reducing the number of federal employees, but the comparison given above is not apples-to-apples.
The metric used above is intended to inflame, rather than inform.
The private employment number include all employees, including fast food workers, retail, construciton laborers, etc.
The federal government employees skew towards higher educated positions. The equivalent of the above private jobs (cafeteria work, construciton labor, retail) are contracted out to the private sector by the federal government.In fact, as we reduce federal employment to fewer numbers, the approach has been to keep the oversight and management government positions, and outsource the lower-paid positions.
So, as we right-size the government, this metric will probably continue to skew higher for the average federal employee, compared to average private employee.A better metric would be a comparison of wages and benefits for similar positions at various levels. If one looks at that comparison I would suspect that the higher end jobs (engineering, management) pay signficantly more in salary/benefits in the private sector than in Federal employment, while lower end jobs likely pay more in the federal govt than in privsate employment.
August 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM #588660ParticipantI agree in general on reducing the number of federal employees, but the comparison given above is not apples-to-apples.
The metric used above is intended to inflame, rather than inform.
The private employment number include all employees, including fast food workers, retail, construciton laborers, etc.
The federal government employees skew towards higher educated positions. The equivalent of the above private jobs (cafeteria work, construciton labor, retail) are contracted out to the private sector by the federal government.In fact, as we reduce federal employment to fewer numbers, the approach has been to keep the oversight and management government positions, and outsource the lower-paid positions.
So, as we right-size the government, this metric will probably continue to skew higher for the average federal employee, compared to average private employee.A better metric would be a comparison of wages and benefits for similar positions at various levels. If one looks at that comparison I would suspect that the higher end jobs (engineering, management) pay signficantly more in salary/benefits in the private sector than in Federal employment, while lower end jobs likely pay more in the federal govt than in privsate employment.
August 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM #589199ParticipantI agree in general on reducing the number of federal employees, but the comparison given above is not apples-to-apples.
The metric used above is intended to inflame, rather than inform.
The private employment number include all employees, including fast food workers, retail, construciton laborers, etc.
The federal government employees skew towards higher educated positions. The equivalent of the above private jobs (cafeteria work, construciton labor, retail) are contracted out to the private sector by the federal government.In fact, as we reduce federal employment to fewer numbers, the approach has been to keep the oversight and management government positions, and outsource the lower-paid positions.
So, as we right-size the government, this metric will probably continue to skew higher for the average federal employee, compared to average private employee.A better metric would be a comparison of wages and benefits for similar positions at various levels. If one looks at that comparison I would suspect that the higher end jobs (engineering, management) pay signficantly more in salary/benefits in the private sector than in Federal employment, while lower end jobs likely pay more in the federal govt than in privsate employment.
August 10, 2010 at 9:12 AM #589306ParticipantI agree in general on reducing the number of federal employees, but the comparison given above is not apples-to-apples.
The metric used above is intended to inflame, rather than inform.
The private employment number include all employees, including fast food workers, retail, construciton laborers, etc.
The federal government employees skew towards higher educated positions. The equivalent of the above private jobs (cafeteria work, construciton labor, retail) are contracted out to the private sector by the federal government.In fact, as we reduce federal employment to fewer numbers, the approach has been to keep the oversight and management government positions, and outsource the lower-paid positions.
So, as we right-size the government, this metric will probably continue to skew higher for the average federal employee, compared to average private employee.A better metric would be a comparison of wages and benefits for similar positions at various levels. If one looks at that comparison I would suspect that the higher end jobs (engineering, management) pay signficantly more in salary/benefits in the private sector than in Federal employment, while lower end jobs likely pay more in the federal govt than in privsate employment.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
