Sore loser in the bidding war

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=no_such_reality]
Although we can just had her to the list of bad behavior by those stringently hired and ‘qualified’ gub’ment workers.[/quote]Ba-zinga :-D[/quote]

Do you think most criminals come from the private sector, or the public sector (proportionally)?

[an]

[quote=CA renter][quote=AN][quote=no_such_reality]
Although we can just had her to the list of bad behavior by those stringently hired and ‘qualified’ gub’ment workers.[/quote]Ba-zinga :-D[/quote]

Do you think most criminals come from the private sector, or the public sector (proportionally)?[/quote]
Neither. Most criminals don’t work.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]Do you think most criminals come from the private sector, or the public sector (proportionally)?[/quote]

Most criminals don’t have jobs in either sector.

You still running with this “private sector employees are of a higher caste” theme?

Everyone has their stereotypes, but that one is pretty unique.

[svelte]

[quote=AN]
Neither. Most criminals don’t work.[/quote]

You know what the eff she meant.

Do most employed persons who commit crimes work in the public or private sector.

If you want to get technical, I would submit that virtually every person alive has broken the law at some point. Making us all criminals. And most of us work.

[img_assist|nid=17992|title=What Day Is It|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=500|height=500]

[spdrun]

Neither. Most criminals don’t work.

Not sure if that’s true — even professional criminals (read: mafia) often have legitimate jobs or businesses.

While she’s technically a criminal, I’m not sure if I’d use “criminal” to describe her. More like vengeful, petty psychotic.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=scaredyclassic]we’d probably have people, not computers, decide what to charge, and what the deal if any should be.

we’d have laws, with specific penalties.

we’d have judges probably monitor the proceedings are see if they felt the law was being complied with.

we’d probably have lots of disagreement about what those particular indicviduals actually do, sinc e reasonable people can differ …

how would a justice system differ from the current legal system, other than in terms of producing a specific outcome in a specific case?[/quote]

maybe we should have computer programs handle some of the prosecution and sentencing decisions. I would like to see more objective measures. Objective inputs and outputs.

Why does a crime merit difference punishment, depending or the background or the social standing of the perpetrator? I think that the results of justice are very different when the perpetrators and the victims are of different social classes.

I think that BG is right… as long as Ms. Rowe can pay her lawyer, she will get off fairly easy. The perpetrator and the victims are about the same social class. There are sympathies for both sides.

Should the facts that Ms. Rowe is a devoted mother and sole caretaker of her disabled daughter have any bearing on the outcome? Any difference if Ms. Rowe were a prostitute and petty thief who lives in Skyline instead of Carmel Valley?

[FlyerInHi]

CAr and njtosd, just remember what I said when you hear women complain about being wronged.

I didn’t say “wrongly sensitive” but I just meant “more sensitive” than men.

Plus I fully realize that what applies to a group does not necessarily apply to individuals.

The law enforcement gunslinger who posted earlier was testing his profiling skills because I’m sure he’s good at it. Profiling only works if you infer certain characteristics to certain groups of people. And that results in a lot people being unjustly targeted because the simple math is that only a tiny percentage of people are criminals.

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Do you think most criminals come from the private sector, or the public sector (proportionally)?[/quote]

Most criminals don’t have jobs in either sector.

You still running with this “private sector employees are of a higher caste” theme?

Everyone has their stereotypes, but that one is pretty unique.[/quote]

I’m not the one who started the public vs. private sector worker theme. But if someone wants to sling BS around, I’ll call them on it. It is a fact that the public sector has higher standards WRT education, experience, and character/criminal background/psychological requirements when compared to similar jobs in the private sector.

[joec]

[quote=CA renter][quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Do you think most criminals come from the private sector, or the public sector (proportionally)?[/quote]

Most criminals don’t have jobs in either sector.

You still running with this “private sector employees are of a higher caste” theme?

Everyone has their stereotypes, but that one is pretty unique.[/quote]

I’m not the one who started the public vs. private sector worker theme. But if someone wants to sling BS around, I’ll call them on it. It is a fact that the public sector has higher standards WRT education, experience, and character/criminal background/psychological requirements when compared to similar jobs in the private sector.[/quote]

Not this public vs private employee debate again…

I’ll repeat it again, but certain public sector jobs have certain (NOT HIGHER OR BETTER) standards because the job just requires it. Like if you were to audit foster parents, you couldn’t have been a child molester, etc…

Honestly, I think anyone who thinks public sector workers are more skilled/talented are just deluding themselves…Especially people who have never succeeded in the private sector and had only government jobs.

My only real experience with public jobs is during the hiring process, everything is SO slow…By the time they get back to me, I already have 3 offers in hand all higher paying without me having to jump through hoops to prove I’m your guy.

Think of also the mentality of the people who work in a government job. Most jobs are harder to get fired from so you have a segment of workers who simply aren’t as competitive

My brother works with government workers in the defense industry and complains all the time about how once their hours are done, they are done as well. Also, things move so slowly compared to the private sector where you work non-stop or you’ll get passed by, not to mention if you don’t do it, someone else will step up and work harder than you. Your job is also much less secure so you can’t afford to sit around like some public employee.

Look at teachers/cops, you name it, molest kids and you still get paid while they figure out what happens, or kill someone and you get paid time off automatically. Does it make them more qualified or more experienced or better in anyway?

Absolutely not!

All that said, I don’t think you’ll ever agree with me or anyone else on this topic and instead of slinging your own BS that the public sector has HIGHER standards, just agree that the standards are different.

Like Bill Gates, if he wanted to run the ACA website probably can’t since he has no college degree…boo, what an idiot way to do things in general.

At the end of the day, ANYTHING the public government runs is more expensive, less efficient, more prone to fraud, rip/off people, than near anything the private industry does so please stop with the BS as well that the standards or public sector jobs is higher, just DIFFERENT.

[an]

[quote=svelte][quote=AN]
Neither. Most criminals don’t work.[/quote]

You know what the eff she meant.

Do most employed persons who commit crimes work in the public or private sector.

If you want to get technical, I would submit that virtually every person alive has broken the law at some point. Making us all criminals. And most of us work.

[img_assist|nid=17992|title=What Day Is It|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=500|height=500][/quote]
wow, someone got their panties in a bunch.

[CA renter]

[quote=joec]

Not this public vs private employee debate again…

I’ll repeat it again, but certain public sector jobs have certain (NOT HIGHER OR BETTER) standards because the job just requires it. Like if you were to audit foster parents, you couldn’t have been a child molester, etc…

Honestly, I think anyone who thinks public sector workers are more skilled/talented are just deluding themselves…Especially people who have never succeeded in the private sector and had only government jobs.

My only real experience with public jobs is during the hiring process, everything is SO slow…By the time they get back to me, I already have 3 offers in hand all higher paying without me having to jump through hoops to prove I’m your guy.

Think of also the mentality of the people who work in a government job. Most jobs are harder to get fired from so you have a segment of workers who simply aren’t as competitive

My brother works with government workers in the defense industry and complains all the time about how once their hours are done, they are done as well. Also, things move so slowly compared to the private sector where you work non-stop or you’ll get passed by, not to mention if you don’t do it, someone else will step up and work harder than you. Your job is also much less secure so you can’t afford to sit around like some public employee.

Look at teachers/cops, you name it, molest kids and you still get paid while they figure out what happens, or kill someone and you get paid time off automatically. Does it make them more qualified or more experienced or better in anyway?

Absolutely not!

All that said, I don’t think you’ll ever agree with me or anyone else on this topic and instead of slinging your own BS that the public sector has HIGHER standards, just agree that the standards are different.

Like Bill Gates, if he wanted to run the ACA website probably can’t since he has no college degree…boo, what an idiot way to do things in general.

At the end of the day, ANYTHING the public government runs is more expensive, less efficient, more prone to fraud, rip/off people, than near anything the private industry does so please stop with the BS as well that the standards or public sector jobs is higher, just DIFFERENT.[/quote]

Yes, public sector jobs usually require these higher barriers to entry, relative to similar positions in the private sector, because many public sector jobs usually entail positions of trust. Public entities are also viewed as deep pockets so they are always on guard where these liabilities are concerned, and this is one of the many reasons they have to screen their applicants the way they do. Yes, it’s slower, but it’s for a good reason — they are trying to avoid hiring people who will become a liability to the govt, so they need to hire the best possible candidates for the job. Also, since recruiting, hiring, and training consume a lot of resources, they don’t want to keep doing it over and over again, so want to make sure they get it right the first time whenever possible.

Not sure who you’re referring to in your third paragraph, because I’ve spent more years in the private sector than the public sector, and I worked my way up the corporate ladder very quickly. But since you’ve mentioned it, most of us who defend public sector workers and unions have worked in both the public and private sectors…how about you?

Yes, your brother is correct about unionized workers stopping work when their hours are over. Perhaps you’ve missed it in your history lessons, but unions are responsible for the 40-hour workweek, fair wages, safe working conditions, and all of the other worker protections that grew a healthy, robust middle class in this country that was the envy of everyone around the world. You’re also right about private sector workers setting us back many decades where labor protections are concerned.

And yet, when the effects of dismantling unions and worker protections are realized — the shrinking middle class, reduced purchasing power, wealth/income inequality, lower wages and benefits, and the way work encroaches more and more on a worker’s personal time, etc. — the hoodwinked sheeple blame the unions. Funny how ignorant some people can be. Your brother and others just like him are responsible for the decimation of the middle class in the America. Don’t blame the unions for the problems you’ve created. The unions have been trying to protect your rights, even though you’ll apparently never comprehend all the good they’ve done (and are still trying to do since the attacks against workers are still ongoing).

Nobody said that due process procedures make a person more qualified for the job, so not sure where your rant about cops/teachers who molest people is coming from. If they are found guilty, they go to jail, as well as lose their jobs. I don’t think any reasonable union member or leader would want otherwise. Are you suggesting that an accusation, no matter who makes it or what the circumstances might be, should enable the govt agency to fire the employee without due process? If you believe that, you’re part of the reason why this country has gone so far downhill.

As for your assertion that the private sector does things better and/or for less money…more bullshit propaganda put out by the privatization movement and corporate capitalists. Again, so many services have been outsourced to the private sector over the past few decades…have your taxes gone down as a result?

Here’s the truth:

The theory that the federal government should outsource its operations to private firms usually rests on a simple premise: It saves money. But why should we believe it saves money? Often the argument is made by pointing to salaries for public- and private-sector employees in comparable jobs and noting that the private-sector employees make less. So outsourcing the task to the private worker should be cheaper, right? That’s the theory, at least. But a new study from the Project on Government Oversight suggests that this theory is quite wrong. In many cases, privatizing government turns out to be far more costly.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/study-privatizing-government-doesnt-actually-save-money/2011/09/15/gIQA2rpZUK_blog.html
………..

The following one describes many of the sectors where privatization has taken hold…and failed.

Some of America’s leading news analysts are beginning to recognize the fallacy of the “free market.” Said Ted Koppel, “We are privatizing ourselves into one disaster after another.” Fareed Zakaria admitted, “I am a big fan of the free market…But precisely because it is so powerful, in places where it doesn’t work well, it can cause huge distortions.” They’re right. A little analysis reveals that privatization doesn’t seem to work in any of the areas vital to the American public.

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/08/05

……………

Federal contracts study says privatization isn’t cheaper

A recently-released study by the nonpartisan watchdog Project On Government Oversight says the federal government signs off on service contract billing rates that, “on average, pay contractors 1.83 times more than the government pays federal employees in total compensation, and more than 2 times the full compensation paid in the private sector for comparable services.”

The report, which was issued last month, concludes, “Given that one-quarter of all discretionary spending now goes to service contractors, a reassessment of the total federal work force, with a focus on contractor billing rates, could save taxpayers billions of dollars annually.”

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/2011/10/contracting-study.html#storylink=cpy

…………..

Private Sector Fairy Dust

Skip to: Prison privatization | School Choice | Paying not once, but twice | More Examples | Yes, we do need bureaucrats | Conclusion

It is common knowledge that the private sector is more efficient than the public sector because private businesses have to worry about going out of business, while government agencies do not. The private sector will work harder and smarter, since the need to compete creates incentives for innovation and hard work. Having private companies perform the jobs of government will make everything more efficient.

This common sense is actually entirely wrong.

http://justicebeforecharity.org/privatization.php

[CA renter]

And a case study about one of the biggest contractors in the country:

——

Sandy Springs, an affluent suburb of Atlanta — home to Herman Cain, professional sports players, and the woman who voiced Iphone’s Siri — had been fighting for years to spin-off from Fulton County, with many residents resentful that they were subsidizing services for poorer parts of the county. In 2005, after Republicans gained new majorities in both chambers of the Georgia legislature, Sandy Spring got its wish. The new town — conceived by retired engineer Oliver Porter, a devotee of Austrian free-market economist Frederich Hayek — had just a few months to set up a fully-functioning city government, and CH2M Hill stepped in, offering itself up as a one-stop-outsourcing-shop.

In the next two years, the newly-created communities of Johns Creek, Milton, and Chattahoochee Hills — which, like Sandy Springs, were wealthy suburbs cutting themselves loose from less-affluent counties — followed suit, signing contracts with CH2M Hill to establish fully outsourced cities.

While state and local governments across the country have experimented with privatization, selling off public assets like bridges, roads and parking meters, and outsourcing public services (including those for vulnerable populations), this experiment in “contract cities” is new and shocking to some.

“The decision to outsource the entire bundle of services a municipality provides to its citizens is an extreme form of privatization that we don’t see very often,” says Shar Habbibi from In the Public Interest a comprehensive resource center on privatization and outsourcing, “For-profit companies are not elected or accountable to the public. Their top priority is their bottom line, not the best interests of citizens. It raises very serious questions of democracy and public accountability.”

Indeed, one of the basic elements of accountability is transparency, but CH2M Hill has tried to dodge open records laws. A newspaper in another one of CH2M Hill’s company towns, Central, Louisiana, had to file suit to gain access to public records from CH2M Hill, alleging in their lawsuit that, “because the company was functioning as the City of Central and performing sovereign acts on behalf of the city,” it was subject to Louisiana’s public records law. Earlier this month, the company settled with the newspaper, with CH2M Hill agreeing to turn over the records.

Privatizing entire towns is just one part of Colorado-based CH2M Hill’s business model. For decades, the company, founded in 1946, has been at the forefront of privatizing public services — and much of its $6.3 billion in annual revenue comes from state and federal taxpayer dollars.
Fleeced Taxpayers, Bribed Mayors, and Toxic Trailers

Hurricane Katrina trailersCH2M Hill is one of the federal government’s largest and least well-known contractors, receiving billions of dollars for projects like installing wastewater treatment plants Iraq and cleaning up the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina. And it offers an array of services to state and local governments, from water and energy management, to infrastructure and construction.

Those projects have not always gone well.

In 2011, for example, CH2M Hill agreed to a $19 million settlement with the government for over-billing taxpayers for its work at the Hanford Nuclear Reactor site, admitting to federal criminal violations after submitting falsified timecards for work not actually performed. The company also paid $1.5 million to settle allegations that two of its Hanford employees funneled taxpayer funds to companies owned and run by their spouses. It also paid over $600,000 in civil penalties for nuclear safety violations at the facility. CH2M Hill received nearly $1.4 billion in federal stimulus funds to work on the Hanford site, which was the second-largest contract awarded nationally under the Recovery Act of 2009.

After Hurricane Katrina, CH2M Hill was awarded a no-bid contract to install or maintain Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) trailers to provide temporary housing for hurricane victims — but those trailers later turned out to contain formaldehyde, exposing victims to toxic fumes. In May of 2012, CH2M Hill and three other contractors agreed to pay $5 million to settle a lawsuit brought by the toxic trailer victims.

In East Cleveland, Ohio, CH2M Hill paid consultant Nate Gray as much as $10,000 a month during the period it was operating the city’s water system, which Gray used to bribe then-East Cleveland mayor Emmanuel Onunwor, who convinced the city council to award a no-bid, $3.9 million contract for CH2M Hill. In 2002, the same year that Onunwor engineered the no-bid contract, a report by the Ohio State Auditor found CH2M Hill had already failed to deliver on the promises it made to the city, overestimating how much revenue East Cleveland could get from operating the system.

Despite these problems, CH2M Hill has nonetheless continued to land federal and local contracts. Between 1998 and 2013, the company and its employees made nearly $4.8 million in political contributions to federal candidates. At the state level, CH2M Hill has spent nearly $1.2 million from 2003 to 2012 on candidate contributions, party committees, and ballot measures.
CH2M Hill “Rent-a-Government” Is Costly

The Center for Media and Democracy has documented the take over of public services and public assets as part of its series on privatization housed at a new website: OutsourcingAmericaExposed.org. But the privatization and outsourcing of an entire community is unique.

Even if it worked, the all-out privatization model is not scalable. Sandy Springs and the other communities that have tried it are wealthy enclaves with a big tax base, and few residents requiring social supports or services — virtual gated communities that have cut themselves off from their less affluent neighbors and contributed to a “two Americas” scenario say experts. The affluent isolate themselves, leaving the poor behind. Plus, much of the savings from any privatization come from paying workers less, further eroding America’s middle class.

The four towns that had outsourced with CH2M Hill eventually changed course, finding the CH2M Hill contract and fees too costly during an economic downturn. The Town of Milton, for instance, saved $2 million over two years by dropping the firm, says Milton Communications Manager Jason Wright.

While many of the towns have continued to outsource many services, some have found taking certain services in-house has benefits. There is no longer a conflict between what’s best for the community versus what’s best for the corporation (and its shareholders).

“There is no dissonance when it comes to your allegiance,” said Milton’s Wright. “You work for the City of Milton. There is not [the] scope of contract that you have to consider. You think of the express goals of Milton.”

http://thecontributor.com/local/extreme-privatization-fully-outsourced-cities

Perhaps you didn’t know this, but the #1 place where fraud, waste, and abuse occurs in government spending is where private entities and public money intersect. Private contractors and those involved in public-private partnerships are the main players involved in the abuse of taxpayer money, not unions.

[CA renter]

I want to make it clear that I am not trying to attack private sector workers as much as I am defending public sector workers from these relentless and incredibly unfair attacks.

Just go through all of the threads on this site to see who’s doing the attacking. Almost all of the threads where I have to post about this topic started out as an attack against public sector workers and/or unions.

If people don’t want to hear the truth, then stop posting lies and BS corporatist propaganda. If people want to push for the abolition of teacher tenure or public unions, then show **evidence** that any of these things will actually benefit students, taxpayers, workers, citizens, etc. as a whole. Simply repeating the right-wing propaganda is NOT going to cut it.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]CAr and njtosd, just remember what I said when you hear women complain about being wronged.

I didn’t say “wrongly sensitive” but I just meant “more sensitive” than men.

Plus I fully realize that what applies to a group does not necessarily apply to individuals.

The law enforcement gunslinger who posted earlier was testing his profiling skills because I’m sure he’s good at it. Profiling only works if you infer certain characteristics to certain groups of people. And that results in a lot people being unjustly targeted because the simple math is that only a tiny percentage of people are criminals.[/quote]

I understand what you were trying to say, brian. You’re probably right about some women being more sensitive to certain slights, but you do seem to have an odd perspective when it comes to women, in general. You like to generalize a lot, and don’t seem to have a lot of practical knowledge.

We’re not all monsters, after all! 🙂

[joec]

[quote=CA renter]I want to make it clear that I am not trying to attack private sector workers as much as I am defending public sector workers from these relentless and incredibly unfair attacks.

Just go through all of the threads on this site to see who’s doing the attacking. Almost all of the threads where I have to post about this topic started out as an attack against public sector workers and/or unions.

If people don’t want to hear the truth, then stop posting lies and BS corporatist propaganda. If people want to push for the abolition of teacher tenure or public unions, then show **evidence** that any of these things will actually benefit students, taxpayers, workers, citizens, etc. as a whole. Simply repeating the right-wing propaganda is NOT going to cut it.[/quote]

As a defender of ACA / Obamacare, if you read my posts above AGAIN, I’m actually not attacking having public employee jobs or stating we should outsource everything. You just wasted 2 long posts above trying to say that I am saying to outsource everything when that’s very far from the truth.

Some jobs simply can’t be private since it makes no financial sense to provide some services when the profits/bottom line is what’s important for most private corporations. I very well understand that such as things for fire departments, defense, police, etc…should not be private for this very reason.

Again, I state again and take issue with YOUR STANCE AND HOW YOU COME AS SAYING THAT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ARE A HIGHER STANDARD THAN PRIVATE AND THIS WHOLE NOTION THAT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ARE BETTER…

Even though that might NOT be your intent, it certainly comes off that way with what you posts and if you re-read your first comment, it’s what you write as well.

It just sounds as if you’re a know it all type person.

The whole wall of text you posted on privatizing certain industries and those not doing well isn’t even something I’m advocating or want to advocate so you might as well just delete those as a rebuttal since I’m not talking about those things.

[Author]

Posts