Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
faterikcartman
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=faterikcartman]Just because someone got a sweet deal yesterday doesn’t mean someone hired tomorrow needs to be offered the same deal.
Again, comparing groups or whether or not certain jobs are tough, etc., etc., ad nauseam, just muddies the water. All we should be looking at is if there are qualified people willing to do the job for less. I assert there are plenty.[/quote]
They’re not. That’s why many departments are going to a two-tier system where new hires are paid less and/or get fewer benefits.[/quote]
Not everywhere:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dwp-pension-20101014,0,5040462.story?track=rssParticipant[quote=CA renter][quote=faterikcartman]Just because someone got a sweet deal yesterday doesn’t mean someone hired tomorrow needs to be offered the same deal.
Again, comparing groups or whether or not certain jobs are tough, etc., etc., ad nauseam, just muddies the water. All we should be looking at is if there are qualified people willing to do the job for less. I assert there are plenty.[/quote]
They’re not. That’s why many departments are going to a two-tier system where new hires are paid less and/or get fewer benefits.[/quote]
Not everywhere:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dwp-pension-20101014,0,5040462.story?track=rssParticipant[quote=CA renter][quote=faterikcartman]Just because someone got a sweet deal yesterday doesn’t mean someone hired tomorrow needs to be offered the same deal.
Again, comparing groups or whether or not certain jobs are tough, etc., etc., ad nauseam, just muddies the water. All we should be looking at is if there are qualified people willing to do the job for less. I assert there are plenty.[/quote]
They’re not. That’s why many departments are going to a two-tier system where new hires are paid less and/or get fewer benefits.[/quote]
Not everywhere:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dwp-pension-20101014,0,5040462.story?track=rssParticipant[quote=CA renter][quote=faterikcartman]Just because someone got a sweet deal yesterday doesn’t mean someone hired tomorrow needs to be offered the same deal.
Again, comparing groups or whether or not certain jobs are tough, etc., etc., ad nauseam, just muddies the water. All we should be looking at is if there are qualified people willing to do the job for less. I assert there are plenty.[/quote]
They’re not. That’s why many departments are going to a two-tier system where new hires are paid less and/or get fewer benefits.[/quote]
Not everywhere:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-dwp-pension-20101014,0,5040462.story?track=rssParticipant[quote=jstoesz]This topic has lost all substance and has denigrated a circular shouting match. There is no way you are going to convince CAR or jp or the rest that the public sector is overcompensated. It is just not going to happen. And like wise, not in a million years are you going to convince the rest of us, that these folks are underpaid civil servants acting out of a need to help their fellow man.
I do tend to wonder if that old saw applies to even this topic (on both sides of the argument I might add)…
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Maybe I am unfairly impugning others motives…[/quote]
You got me thinking, probably unintentionally!, that I should have added that police and fire are supposedly “public service” jobs — yet their unions fight for the best pay and benefits they can squeeze out of municipalities or the state.
I think municipalities need to start operating in a similar fashion. When faced with strikes or “blue flues” as many overpaid workers as possible should be fired and replaced with qualified people at as low pay and benefits as possible.
In fact, I would go so far as to see about renegotiating contracts as an alternative to layoffs. If the employee is truly worth more they will certainly go out and earn it, and more power to them! The reality, however, is likely that they’re kidding themselves.
In this way people will be closer to being paid what they are actually worth. With so many on this board fans of realistic pricing of property I’m surprised that everyone can’t get behind this concept.
That said, jstoesz you have highlighted that many people vote on issues with their emotions and no rational argument will ever sway them. They would probably say that people like me vote with their emotions too — but in a different way. I would probably be accused of having my views due to meanspiritedness.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]This topic has lost all substance and has denigrated a circular shouting match. There is no way you are going to convince CAR or jp or the rest that the public sector is overcompensated. It is just not going to happen. And like wise, not in a million years are you going to convince the rest of us, that these folks are underpaid civil servants acting out of a need to help their fellow man.
I do tend to wonder if that old saw applies to even this topic (on both sides of the argument I might add)…
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Maybe I am unfairly impugning others motives…[/quote]
You got me thinking, probably unintentionally!, that I should have added that police and fire are supposedly “public service” jobs — yet their unions fight for the best pay and benefits they can squeeze out of municipalities or the state.
I think municipalities need to start operating in a similar fashion. When faced with strikes or “blue flues” as many overpaid workers as possible should be fired and replaced with qualified people at as low pay and benefits as possible.
In fact, I would go so far as to see about renegotiating contracts as an alternative to layoffs. If the employee is truly worth more they will certainly go out and earn it, and more power to them! The reality, however, is likely that they’re kidding themselves.
In this way people will be closer to being paid what they are actually worth. With so many on this board fans of realistic pricing of property I’m surprised that everyone can’t get behind this concept.
That said, jstoesz you have highlighted that many people vote on issues with their emotions and no rational argument will ever sway them. They would probably say that people like me vote with their emotions too — but in a different way. I would probably be accused of having my views due to meanspiritedness.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]This topic has lost all substance and has denigrated a circular shouting match. There is no way you are going to convince CAR or jp or the rest that the public sector is overcompensated. It is just not going to happen. And like wise, not in a million years are you going to convince the rest of us, that these folks are underpaid civil servants acting out of a need to help their fellow man.
I do tend to wonder if that old saw applies to even this topic (on both sides of the argument I might add)…
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Maybe I am unfairly impugning others motives…[/quote]
You got me thinking, probably unintentionally!, that I should have added that police and fire are supposedly “public service” jobs — yet their unions fight for the best pay and benefits they can squeeze out of municipalities or the state.
I think municipalities need to start operating in a similar fashion. When faced with strikes or “blue flues” as many overpaid workers as possible should be fired and replaced with qualified people at as low pay and benefits as possible.
In fact, I would go so far as to see about renegotiating contracts as an alternative to layoffs. If the employee is truly worth more they will certainly go out and earn it, and more power to them! The reality, however, is likely that they’re kidding themselves.
In this way people will be closer to being paid what they are actually worth. With so many on this board fans of realistic pricing of property I’m surprised that everyone can’t get behind this concept.
That said, jstoesz you have highlighted that many people vote on issues with their emotions and no rational argument will ever sway them. They would probably say that people like me vote with their emotions too — but in a different way. I would probably be accused of having my views due to meanspiritedness.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]This topic has lost all substance and has denigrated a circular shouting match. There is no way you are going to convince CAR or jp or the rest that the public sector is overcompensated. It is just not going to happen. And like wise, not in a million years are you going to convince the rest of us, that these folks are underpaid civil servants acting out of a need to help their fellow man.
I do tend to wonder if that old saw applies to even this topic (on both sides of the argument I might add)…
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Maybe I am unfairly impugning others motives…[/quote]
You got me thinking, probably unintentionally!, that I should have added that police and fire are supposedly “public service” jobs — yet their unions fight for the best pay and benefits they can squeeze out of municipalities or the state.
I think municipalities need to start operating in a similar fashion. When faced with strikes or “blue flues” as many overpaid workers as possible should be fired and replaced with qualified people at as low pay and benefits as possible.
In fact, I would go so far as to see about renegotiating contracts as an alternative to layoffs. If the employee is truly worth more they will certainly go out and earn it, and more power to them! The reality, however, is likely that they’re kidding themselves.
In this way people will be closer to being paid what they are actually worth. With so many on this board fans of realistic pricing of property I’m surprised that everyone can’t get behind this concept.
That said, jstoesz you have highlighted that many people vote on issues with their emotions and no rational argument will ever sway them. They would probably say that people like me vote with their emotions too — but in a different way. I would probably be accused of having my views due to meanspiritedness.
Participant[quote=jstoesz]This topic has lost all substance and has denigrated a circular shouting match. There is no way you are going to convince CAR or jp or the rest that the public sector is overcompensated. It is just not going to happen. And like wise, not in a million years are you going to convince the rest of us, that these folks are underpaid civil servants acting out of a need to help their fellow man.
I do tend to wonder if that old saw applies to even this topic (on both sides of the argument I might add)…
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
Maybe I am unfairly impugning others motives…[/quote]
You got me thinking, probably unintentionally!, that I should have added that police and fire are supposedly “public service” jobs — yet their unions fight for the best pay and benefits they can squeeze out of municipalities or the state.
I think municipalities need to start operating in a similar fashion. When faced with strikes or “blue flues” as many overpaid workers as possible should be fired and replaced with qualified people at as low pay and benefits as possible.
In fact, I would go so far as to see about renegotiating contracts as an alternative to layoffs. If the employee is truly worth more they will certainly go out and earn it, and more power to them! The reality, however, is likely that they’re kidding themselves.
In this way people will be closer to being paid what they are actually worth. With so many on this board fans of realistic pricing of property I’m surprised that everyone can’t get behind this concept.
That said, jstoesz you have highlighted that many people vote on issues with their emotions and no rational argument will ever sway them. They would probably say that people like me vote with their emotions too — but in a different way. I would probably be accused of having my views due to meanspiritedness.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]faterikcartman – I think a public sector employee certainly did have the ability to go out in the private sector to make money.
Many people were getting a real estate license and selling. I remember hearing how the amount of licenses issued had increased greatly in California during the bubble. Do you suppose this happened b/c there was money to be made?
Why do you think money wasn’t made in the bubble? Perhaps you didn’t hear the Giant Pool of Money. It is worth a listen.
They discuss the story of the bubble and crisis and one guy, Mike Gardner – man who got into the mortgage industry after getting hired away from his previous job as a bartender.
An area sales manager named Glenn at WMC Mortgage made 75 to 100k a MONTH. Over a million a year. I do not think these are exceptions. It was common.
I’m glad you brought up the military. I’m not sure what the income is for military, but they do have benefits, medical, dental, housing, food. And from what I understand, if you stay on for 20 years, you get a pension, also.
The military offers these incentives b/c otherwise they might have difficulty getting people to sign on. They offer to pay for education. Many people take advantange of that, as well
Some of the cops that I know had served in the military. They said the psych requirements were much lower in the military than SDPD.
Lastly, ever hear of Blackwater? They’re private and the mercenaries are making much more than our public military.
And yes, now that our unemployment numbers are so high, certainly more people turn to public service. And the list is long b/c right now the City does not have the money to hire anyone. During the bubble, the City had a hard time keeping positions filled – and that’s even w/the lure of benefits.[/quote]
There are just so many posts in this thread it is difficult to find the time to keep up.
I think you got accused of making a straw man argument earlier, and here you are again.
I did not say that money was not made in during the bubble. My comments were in regard to salaries. Amusingly you cite an example to refute my point that, I’m almost certain, involves a person who earned that money through commissions.
And your arguments about the police vis-a-vis the military are all wet as well as we already know police departments have waiting lists of qualified people so the distinction that their psych requirements are more stringent is meaningless. Not to mention they did nothing to prevent the LA Rampart and other police scandals.
Finally, give me something to refer to when you argue that the city (presumably San Diego) had a hard time keeping positions — specifically police and fire — filled.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]faterikcartman – I think a public sector employee certainly did have the ability to go out in the private sector to make money.
Many people were getting a real estate license and selling. I remember hearing how the amount of licenses issued had increased greatly in California during the bubble. Do you suppose this happened b/c there was money to be made?
Why do you think money wasn’t made in the bubble? Perhaps you didn’t hear the Giant Pool of Money. It is worth a listen.
They discuss the story of the bubble and crisis and one guy, Mike Gardner – man who got into the mortgage industry after getting hired away from his previous job as a bartender.
An area sales manager named Glenn at WMC Mortgage made 75 to 100k a MONTH. Over a million a year. I do not think these are exceptions. It was common.
I’m glad you brought up the military. I’m not sure what the income is for military, but they do have benefits, medical, dental, housing, food. And from what I understand, if you stay on for 20 years, you get a pension, also.
The military offers these incentives b/c otherwise they might have difficulty getting people to sign on. They offer to pay for education. Many people take advantange of that, as well
Some of the cops that I know had served in the military. They said the psych requirements were much lower in the military than SDPD.
Lastly, ever hear of Blackwater? They’re private and the mercenaries are making much more than our public military.
And yes, now that our unemployment numbers are so high, certainly more people turn to public service. And the list is long b/c right now the City does not have the money to hire anyone. During the bubble, the City had a hard time keeping positions filled – and that’s even w/the lure of benefits.[/quote]
There are just so many posts in this thread it is difficult to find the time to keep up.
I think you got accused of making a straw man argument earlier, and here you are again.
I did not say that money was not made in during the bubble. My comments were in regard to salaries. Amusingly you cite an example to refute my point that, I’m almost certain, involves a person who earned that money through commissions.
And your arguments about the police vis-a-vis the military are all wet as well as we already know police departments have waiting lists of qualified people so the distinction that their psych requirements are more stringent is meaningless. Not to mention they did nothing to prevent the LA Rampart and other police scandals.
Finally, give me something to refer to when you argue that the city (presumably San Diego) had a hard time keeping positions — specifically police and fire — filled.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]faterikcartman – I think a public sector employee certainly did have the ability to go out in the private sector to make money.
Many people were getting a real estate license and selling. I remember hearing how the amount of licenses issued had increased greatly in California during the bubble. Do you suppose this happened b/c there was money to be made?
Why do you think money wasn’t made in the bubble? Perhaps you didn’t hear the Giant Pool of Money. It is worth a listen.
They discuss the story of the bubble and crisis and one guy, Mike Gardner – man who got into the mortgage industry after getting hired away from his previous job as a bartender.
An area sales manager named Glenn at WMC Mortgage made 75 to 100k a MONTH. Over a million a year. I do not think these are exceptions. It was common.
I’m glad you brought up the military. I’m not sure what the income is for military, but they do have benefits, medical, dental, housing, food. And from what I understand, if you stay on for 20 years, you get a pension, also.
The military offers these incentives b/c otherwise they might have difficulty getting people to sign on. They offer to pay for education. Many people take advantange of that, as well
Some of the cops that I know had served in the military. They said the psych requirements were much lower in the military than SDPD.
Lastly, ever hear of Blackwater? They’re private and the mercenaries are making much more than our public military.
And yes, now that our unemployment numbers are so high, certainly more people turn to public service. And the list is long b/c right now the City does not have the money to hire anyone. During the bubble, the City had a hard time keeping positions filled – and that’s even w/the lure of benefits.[/quote]
There are just so many posts in this thread it is difficult to find the time to keep up.
I think you got accused of making a straw man argument earlier, and here you are again.
I did not say that money was not made in during the bubble. My comments were in regard to salaries. Amusingly you cite an example to refute my point that, I’m almost certain, involves a person who earned that money through commissions.
And your arguments about the police vis-a-vis the military are all wet as well as we already know police departments have waiting lists of qualified people so the distinction that their psych requirements are more stringent is meaningless. Not to mention they did nothing to prevent the LA Rampart and other police scandals.
Finally, give me something to refer to when you argue that the city (presumably San Diego) had a hard time keeping positions — specifically police and fire — filled.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]faterikcartman – I think a public sector employee certainly did have the ability to go out in the private sector to make money.
Many people were getting a real estate license and selling. I remember hearing how the amount of licenses issued had increased greatly in California during the bubble. Do you suppose this happened b/c there was money to be made?
Why do you think money wasn’t made in the bubble? Perhaps you didn’t hear the Giant Pool of Money. It is worth a listen.
They discuss the story of the bubble and crisis and one guy, Mike Gardner – man who got into the mortgage industry after getting hired away from his previous job as a bartender.
An area sales manager named Glenn at WMC Mortgage made 75 to 100k a MONTH. Over a million a year. I do not think these are exceptions. It was common.
I’m glad you brought up the military. I’m not sure what the income is for military, but they do have benefits, medical, dental, housing, food. And from what I understand, if you stay on for 20 years, you get a pension, also.
The military offers these incentives b/c otherwise they might have difficulty getting people to sign on. They offer to pay for education. Many people take advantange of that, as well
Some of the cops that I know had served in the military. They said the psych requirements were much lower in the military than SDPD.
Lastly, ever hear of Blackwater? They’re private and the mercenaries are making much more than our public military.
And yes, now that our unemployment numbers are so high, certainly more people turn to public service. And the list is long b/c right now the City does not have the money to hire anyone. During the bubble, the City had a hard time keeping positions filled – and that’s even w/the lure of benefits.[/quote]
There are just so many posts in this thread it is difficult to find the time to keep up.
I think you got accused of making a straw man argument earlier, and here you are again.
I did not say that money was not made in during the bubble. My comments were in regard to salaries. Amusingly you cite an example to refute my point that, I’m almost certain, involves a person who earned that money through commissions.
And your arguments about the police vis-a-vis the military are all wet as well as we already know police departments have waiting lists of qualified people so the distinction that their psych requirements are more stringent is meaningless. Not to mention they did nothing to prevent the LA Rampart and other police scandals.
Finally, give me something to refer to when you argue that the city (presumably San Diego) had a hard time keeping positions — specifically police and fire — filled.
Participant[quote=jpinpb]faterikcartman – I think a public sector employee certainly did have the ability to go out in the private sector to make money.
Many people were getting a real estate license and selling. I remember hearing how the amount of licenses issued had increased greatly in California during the bubble. Do you suppose this happened b/c there was money to be made?
Why do you think money wasn’t made in the bubble? Perhaps you didn’t hear the Giant Pool of Money. It is worth a listen.
They discuss the story of the bubble and crisis and one guy, Mike Gardner – man who got into the mortgage industry after getting hired away from his previous job as a bartender.
An area sales manager named Glenn at WMC Mortgage made 75 to 100k a MONTH. Over a million a year. I do not think these are exceptions. It was common.
I’m glad you brought up the military. I’m not sure what the income is for military, but they do have benefits, medical, dental, housing, food. And from what I understand, if you stay on for 20 years, you get a pension, also.
The military offers these incentives b/c otherwise they might have difficulty getting people to sign on. They offer to pay for education. Many people take advantange of that, as well
Some of the cops that I know had served in the military. They said the psych requirements were much lower in the military than SDPD.
Lastly, ever hear of Blackwater? They’re private and the mercenaries are making much more than our public military.
And yes, now that our unemployment numbers are so high, certainly more people turn to public service. And the list is long b/c right now the City does not have the money to hire anyone. During the bubble, the City had a hard time keeping positions filled – and that’s even w/the lure of benefits.[/quote]
There are just so many posts in this thread it is difficult to find the time to keep up.
I think you got accused of making a straw man argument earlier, and here you are again.
I did not say that money was not made in during the bubble. My comments were in regard to salaries. Amusingly you cite an example to refute my point that, I’m almost certain, involves a person who earned that money through commissions.
And your arguments about the police vis-a-vis the military are all wet as well as we already know police departments have waiting lists of qualified people so the distinction that their psych requirements are more stringent is meaningless. Not to mention they did nothing to prevent the LA Rampart and other police scandals.
Finally, give me something to refer to when you argue that the city (presumably San Diego) had a hard time keeping positions — specifically police and fire — filled.
-
AuthorPosts
