50 years of pension for 20 years of work

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
I don’t know, but if a government took over my company and didn’t pay me prevailing market rates, I’d give the company and my government the middle finger and find another employer that did.. [/quote]

Feel free to do so. Nobody is stopping you, assuming you can find a better job.

If you did, wouldn’t be gone already?

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
BTW: shouldn’t we also put a salary cap on athletes in San Diego? Should we put a cap on Padre’s and Charger’s? Didn’t Petco use public financing too? What if the Padre’s had a salary cap but other teams don’t? I guess it wouldn’t matter geting a bunch of C and D string players (especially since judging how the Padre’s are, it seems like we currently got them anyway).[/quote]

The Padres or the Charges are different animals.
The teams are profitable and they can pay their players and executives whatever they want. The city can certainly take away some of that profit margin at contract renewal.

I’d be more than happy to say sayonara to those teams and truly call their bluff.

A company that owes its survival, or it’s very existence, to government assistance is obligated to live by government rules.

If you kids live with you and you provide them a roof over their heads, they need to do as you say. If they can earn their own money and fully support themselves, then they can do as they choose.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
BTW: shouldn’t we also put a salary cap on athletes in San Diego? Should we put a cap on Padre’s and Charger’s? Didn’t Petco use public financing too? What if the Padre’s had a salary cap but other teams don’t? I guess it wouldn’t matter geting a bunch of C and D string players (especially since judging how the Padre’s are, it seems like we currently got them anyway).[/quote]

The Padres or the Charges are different animals.
The teams are profitable and they can pay their players and executives whatever they want. The city can certainly take away some of that profit margin at contract renewal.

I’d be more than happy to say sayonara to those teams and truly call their bluff.

A company that owes its survival, or it’s very existence, to government assistance is obligated to live by government rules.

If you kids live with you and you provide them a roof over their heads, they need to do as you say. If they can earn their own money and fully support themselves, then they can do as they choose.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
BTW: shouldn’t we also put a salary cap on athletes in San Diego? Should we put a cap on Padre’s and Charger’s? Didn’t Petco use public financing too? What if the Padre’s had a salary cap but other teams don’t? I guess it wouldn’t matter geting a bunch of C and D string players (especially since judging how the Padre’s are, it seems like we currently got them anyway).[/quote]

The Padres or the Charges are different animals.
The teams are profitable and they can pay their players and executives whatever they want. The city can certainly take away some of that profit margin at contract renewal.

I’d be more than happy to say sayonara to those teams and truly call their bluff.

A company that owes its survival, or it’s very existence, to government assistance is obligated to live by government rules.

If you kids live with you and you provide them a roof over their heads, they need to do as you say. If they can earn their own money and fully support themselves, then they can do as they choose.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
BTW: shouldn’t we also put a salary cap on athletes in San Diego? Should we put a cap on Padre’s and Charger’s? Didn’t Petco use public financing too? What if the Padre’s had a salary cap but other teams don’t? I guess it wouldn’t matter geting a bunch of C and D string players (especially since judging how the Padre’s are, it seems like we currently got them anyway).[/quote]

The Padres or the Charges are different animals.
The teams are profitable and they can pay their players and executives whatever they want. The city can certainly take away some of that profit margin at contract renewal.

I’d be more than happy to say sayonara to those teams and truly call their bluff.

A company that owes its survival, or it’s very existence, to government assistance is obligated to live by government rules.

If you kids live with you and you provide them a roof over their heads, they need to do as you say. If they can earn their own money and fully support themselves, then they can do as they choose.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
BTW: shouldn’t we also put a salary cap on athletes in San Diego? Should we put a cap on Padre’s and Charger’s? Didn’t Petco use public financing too? What if the Padre’s had a salary cap but other teams don’t? I guess it wouldn’t matter geting a bunch of C and D string players (especially since judging how the Padre’s are, it seems like we currently got them anyway).[/quote]

The Padres or the Charges are different animals.
The teams are profitable and they can pay their players and executives whatever they want. The city can certainly take away some of that profit margin at contract renewal.

I’d be more than happy to say sayonara to those teams and truly call their bluff.

A company that owes its survival, or it’s very existence, to government assistance is obligated to live by government rules.

If you kids live with you and you provide them a roof over their heads, they need to do as you say. If they can earn their own money and fully support themselves, then they can do as they choose.

[CA renter]

[quote=jonnycsd]Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.[/quote]

To put it bluntly, you don’t understand the argument.

Regarding Somalia:

In many areas there were (and still are) no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

AND

The TFG has not been able to effectively collect taxes, has no notable finances or real power base,[5] and has struggled to exert control over Mogadishu since an attempted move in late December 2006.[3]

AND

Following the downfall of the Siad Barre regime, there was effectively no formal monocentric government law in Somalia. While some urban areas such as Mogadishu had private police forces,[11] many Somalis simply returned to the traditional clan-based legal structures for local governance and dispute resolution.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia

How’s that “no taxes” and “private police force” working out for them?

When I speak of socialism (and yes, the U.S. has a mixed system, which is exactly what I’m trying to defend in this thread), I’m referring to European-style socialism.

Play with these numbers, and see where the socialist countries turn up, in almost all measures of well-being.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capita

AND

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-index

Be sure to check out where the U.S. places in all measures, when compared to the “evil” socialist countries.

[quote=jonnycsd]NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.[/quote]

Firstly, I have never said, nor will ever say that our military personnel are paid appropriately. IMHO, they have the most difficult job of any of us, and they have been sorely neglected as far as pay and benefits go, and I won’t even get into how they are treated once they get home. If anything, these men and women should be the highest paid over everyone, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe then, we’d also be more judicious about which wars we choose to partake in.

Do understand that firefighers and police officers are not only being paid for the risks they take, but also for their training and expertise, in addition to their mental, emotional, and physical ability to do their jobs. Anyone can ring up a sale at a cash register (probably most of us here have done it in our early years). Truck drivers used to be paid well, but their union has been weakened, and they no longer have the same representation.

While those other jobs are important, they are not a matter of life-and-death, nor do they provide society with the same overall benefits that public safety personnel do. I’d bet big money against anyone who says a private system works better. Show me **ONE** example where a country with private police/safety personnel is safer and more productive than countries with well-paid, public safety employees. I’ll even challenge someone to show me **ONE** country that has poorly paid (but still public) public safety employees, but still manages to outperform countries/societies that pay more.

Public safety personnel are the backbone of any civilized society. By paying them decent wages and benefits, you can attract the most qualified candidates, and you can hold them to higher standards, which greatly reduces the potential for corruption — and everything that goes with it (note Mexico or other Latin American and African nations).

[CA renter]

[quote=jonnycsd]Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.[/quote]

To put it bluntly, you don’t understand the argument.

Regarding Somalia:

In many areas there were (and still are) no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

AND

The TFG has not been able to effectively collect taxes, has no notable finances or real power base,[5] and has struggled to exert control over Mogadishu since an attempted move in late December 2006.[3]

AND

Following the downfall of the Siad Barre regime, there was effectively no formal monocentric government law in Somalia. While some urban areas such as Mogadishu had private police forces,[11] many Somalis simply returned to the traditional clan-based legal structures for local governance and dispute resolution.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia

How’s that “no taxes” and “private police force” working out for them?

When I speak of socialism (and yes, the U.S. has a mixed system, which is exactly what I’m trying to defend in this thread), I’m referring to European-style socialism.

Play with these numbers, and see where the socialist countries turn up, in almost all measures of well-being.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capita

AND

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-index

Be sure to check out where the U.S. places in all measures, when compared to the “evil” socialist countries.

[quote=jonnycsd]NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.[/quote]

Firstly, I have never said, nor will ever say that our military personnel are paid appropriately. IMHO, they have the most difficult job of any of us, and they have been sorely neglected as far as pay and benefits go, and I won’t even get into how they are treated once they get home. If anything, these men and women should be the highest paid over everyone, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe then, we’d also be more judicious about which wars we choose to partake in.

Do understand that firefighers and police officers are not only being paid for the risks they take, but also for their training and expertise, in addition to their mental, emotional, and physical ability to do their jobs. Anyone can ring up a sale at a cash register (probably most of us here have done it in our early years). Truck drivers used to be paid well, but their union has been weakened, and they no longer have the same representation.

While those other jobs are important, they are not a matter of life-and-death, nor do they provide society with the same overall benefits that public safety personnel do. I’d bet big money against anyone who says a private system works better. Show me **ONE** example where a country with private police/safety personnel is safer and more productive than countries with well-paid, public safety employees. I’ll even challenge someone to show me **ONE** country that has poorly paid (but still public) public safety employees, but still manages to outperform countries/societies that pay more.

Public safety personnel are the backbone of any civilized society. By paying them decent wages and benefits, you can attract the most qualified candidates, and you can hold them to higher standards, which greatly reduces the potential for corruption — and everything that goes with it (note Mexico or other Latin American and African nations).

[CA renter]

[quote=jonnycsd]Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.[/quote]

To put it bluntly, you don’t understand the argument.

Regarding Somalia:

In many areas there were (and still are) no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

AND

The TFG has not been able to effectively collect taxes, has no notable finances or real power base,[5] and has struggled to exert control over Mogadishu since an attempted move in late December 2006.[3]

AND

Following the downfall of the Siad Barre regime, there was effectively no formal monocentric government law in Somalia. While some urban areas such as Mogadishu had private police forces,[11] many Somalis simply returned to the traditional clan-based legal structures for local governance and dispute resolution.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia

How’s that “no taxes” and “private police force” working out for them?

When I speak of socialism (and yes, the U.S. has a mixed system, which is exactly what I’m trying to defend in this thread), I’m referring to European-style socialism.

Play with these numbers, and see where the socialist countries turn up, in almost all measures of well-being.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capita

AND

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-index

Be sure to check out where the U.S. places in all measures, when compared to the “evil” socialist countries.

[quote=jonnycsd]NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.[/quote]

Firstly, I have never said, nor will ever say that our military personnel are paid appropriately. IMHO, they have the most difficult job of any of us, and they have been sorely neglected as far as pay and benefits go, and I won’t even get into how they are treated once they get home. If anything, these men and women should be the highest paid over everyone, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe then, we’d also be more judicious about which wars we choose to partake in.

Do understand that firefighers and police officers are not only being paid for the risks they take, but also for their training and expertise, in addition to their mental, emotional, and physical ability to do their jobs. Anyone can ring up a sale at a cash register (probably most of us here have done it in our early years). Truck drivers used to be paid well, but their union has been weakened, and they no longer have the same representation.

While those other jobs are important, they are not a matter of life-and-death, nor do they provide society with the same overall benefits that public safety personnel do. I’d bet big money against anyone who says a private system works better. Show me **ONE** example where a country with private police/safety personnel is safer and more productive than countries with well-paid, public safety employees. I’ll even challenge someone to show me **ONE** country that has poorly paid (but still public) public safety employees, but still manages to outperform countries/societies that pay more.

Public safety personnel are the backbone of any civilized society. By paying them decent wages and benefits, you can attract the most qualified candidates, and you can hold them to higher standards, which greatly reduces the potential for corruption — and everything that goes with it (note Mexico or other Latin American and African nations).

[CA renter]

[quote=jonnycsd]Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.[/quote]

To put it bluntly, you don’t understand the argument.

Regarding Somalia:

In many areas there were (and still are) no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

AND

The TFG has not been able to effectively collect taxes, has no notable finances or real power base,[5] and has struggled to exert control over Mogadishu since an attempted move in late December 2006.[3]

AND

Following the downfall of the Siad Barre regime, there was effectively no formal monocentric government law in Somalia. While some urban areas such as Mogadishu had private police forces,[11] many Somalis simply returned to the traditional clan-based legal structures for local governance and dispute resolution.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia

How’s that “no taxes” and “private police force” working out for them?

When I speak of socialism (and yes, the U.S. has a mixed system, which is exactly what I’m trying to defend in this thread), I’m referring to European-style socialism.

Play with these numbers, and see where the socialist countries turn up, in almost all measures of well-being.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capita

AND

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-index

Be sure to check out where the U.S. places in all measures, when compared to the “evil” socialist countries.

[quote=jonnycsd]NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.[/quote]

Firstly, I have never said, nor will ever say that our military personnel are paid appropriately. IMHO, they have the most difficult job of any of us, and they have been sorely neglected as far as pay and benefits go, and I won’t even get into how they are treated once they get home. If anything, these men and women should be the highest paid over everyone, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe then, we’d also be more judicious about which wars we choose to partake in.

Do understand that firefighers and police officers are not only being paid for the risks they take, but also for their training and expertise, in addition to their mental, emotional, and physical ability to do their jobs. Anyone can ring up a sale at a cash register (probably most of us here have done it in our early years). Truck drivers used to be paid well, but their union has been weakened, and they no longer have the same representation.

While those other jobs are important, they are not a matter of life-and-death, nor do they provide society with the same overall benefits that public safety personnel do. I’d bet big money against anyone who says a private system works better. Show me **ONE** example where a country with private police/safety personnel is safer and more productive than countries with well-paid, public safety employees. I’ll even challenge someone to show me **ONE** country that has poorly paid (but still public) public safety employees, but still manages to outperform countries/societies that pay more.

Public safety personnel are the backbone of any civilized society. By paying them decent wages and benefits, you can attract the most qualified candidates, and you can hold them to higher standards, which greatly reduces the potential for corruption — and everything that goes with it (note Mexico or other Latin American and African nations).

[CA renter]

[quote=jonnycsd]Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.[/quote]

To put it bluntly, you don’t understand the argument.

Regarding Somalia:

In many areas there were (and still are) no formal regulations or licensing requirements for businesses and individuals.

AND

The TFG has not been able to effectively collect taxes, has no notable finances or real power base,[5] and has struggled to exert control over Mogadishu since an attempted move in late December 2006.[3]

AND

Following the downfall of the Siad Barre regime, there was effectively no formal monocentric government law in Somalia. While some urban areas such as Mogadishu had private police forces,[11] many Somalis simply returned to the traditional clan-based legal structures for local governance and dispute resolution.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_in_Somalia

How’s that “no taxes” and “private police force” working out for them?

When I speak of socialism (and yes, the U.S. has a mixed system, which is exactly what I’m trying to defend in this thread), I’m referring to European-style socialism.

Play with these numbers, and see where the socialist countries turn up, in almost all measures of well-being.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capita

AND

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_hum_dev_ind-economy-human-development-index

Be sure to check out where the U.S. places in all measures, when compared to the “evil” socialist countries.

[quote=jonnycsd]NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.[/quote]

Firstly, I have never said, nor will ever say that our military personnel are paid appropriately. IMHO, they have the most difficult job of any of us, and they have been sorely neglected as far as pay and benefits go, and I won’t even get into how they are treated once they get home. If anything, these men and women should be the highest paid over everyone, as far as I’m concerned. Maybe then, we’d also be more judicious about which wars we choose to partake in.

Do understand that firefighers and police officers are not only being paid for the risks they take, but also for their training and expertise, in addition to their mental, emotional, and physical ability to do their jobs. Anyone can ring up a sale at a cash register (probably most of us here have done it in our early years). Truck drivers used to be paid well, but their union has been weakened, and they no longer have the same representation.

While those other jobs are important, they are not a matter of life-and-death, nor do they provide society with the same overall benefits that public safety personnel do. I’d bet big money against anyone who says a private system works better. Show me **ONE** example where a country with private police/safety personnel is safer and more productive than countries with well-paid, public safety employees. I’ll even challenge someone to show me **ONE** country that has poorly paid (but still public) public safety employees, but still manages to outperform countries/societies that pay more.

Public safety personnel are the backbone of any civilized society. By paying them decent wages and benefits, you can attract the most qualified candidates, and you can hold them to higher standards, which greatly reduces the potential for corruption — and everything that goes with it (note Mexico or other Latin American and African nations).

[briansd1]

CA renter, please give me a break. Police and firefighter don’t even have college degrees. Many of them barely made it out of high-school.

Why not require minimum 4-year college degrees from accredited universities?

[briansd1]

CA renter, please give me a break. Police and firefighter don’t even have college degrees. Many of them barely made it out of high-school.

Why not require minimum 4-year college degrees from accredited universities?

[briansd1]

CA renter, please give me a break. Police and firefighter don’t even have college degrees. Many of them barely made it out of high-school.

Why not require minimum 4-year college degrees from accredited universities?

[briansd1]

CA renter, please give me a break. Police and firefighter don’t even have college degrees. Many of them barely made it out of high-school.

Why not require minimum 4-year college degrees from accredited universities?

[Author]

Posts