Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

alstry (35.21)

Why Should Government Workers Make Twice As Much As Private Sector Workers?

Recs

26

May 17, 2010 – Comments (21)

Right now, including benefits, government workers are making twice as much as private sector workers.

The strange part is that the government is not even generating the taxes to pay these workers in the first place.

How long do you think it will before the private sector workers, barely scraping by, and watching their taxes skyrocket, price of goods rise, and wages implode.....REVOLT?

Has the whole world become sheep and not looking up?  How long do you think only a few can benefit from loans regardless of merit or productivity? 

British Air cabin crew workers, wanting higher wages, were ordered not to strike today while government officials and British Air execs are still drawing fantastic salaries...even though England is running a massive deficit and British Air is losing lots of money.

In Athens, there is rioting in the streets due to austerity measures demanded by bankers against workers even though the bankers are insolvent too.  In Bangkok, there is a live fire zone in the middle of the city.  Unrest is brewing in Lisbon and Madrid.

And you Fools are still watching the ticker?  Our entire financial system, including governments are now insolvent.........Welcome to the Digital Age.........it will be exciting.

21 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On May 17, 2010 at 8:16 PM, oshiri (< 20) wrote:

Comrade Alstrymous --

     I think the word you're looking for is "fleeced."

     No, the sheep aren't looking-up, but they will be feeling it from farmer Barack. He's already slipped on the wellingtons.

     And watch for some unrest down Venezuela way.

Report this comment
#2) On May 17, 2010 at 8:37 PM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

oshi,

Look for unrest everywhere......

You think you can force most people to work for money it give practically unlimited amounts to a few?

Report this comment
#3) On May 17, 2010 at 9:28 PM, devoish (99.10) wrote:

Because Gov't workers have a higher percentage of college grads than the private sector, and a much higher percentage with advanced degrees?

Because Gov't has been around longer than most companys - and as a higher percentage of older more experienced employees than much younger private companys such as the Motley Fool?

 

Report this comment
#4) On May 17, 2010 at 9:32 PM, devoish (99.10) wrote:

And they are not paid twice as much. Not even close, probably not even more.

How much did the President make as compared to the ceo's of most s&p 500 companys?

Report this comment
#5) On May 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

Dev,

The average govt worker does in fact make as much as the average private sector worker.

To compare the salary of the President to any S&P company is ridiculous......do you know what it costs to escort the President on one overseas trip....just wheels  up to wheels down? ....and that is just the beginning without needing to debate an issue that we could finish a couple of bottles of Scotch over.

As far as the government worker issue....you are completely missing the point.  We simply don't generate the revenues to pay government workers anything close to what they are making including  benefits.

The number of degress or experience doesn't matter.  It is simply money which is the limiting factor.  Once you bring in other issues, you start violating the law of money......

Airline pilots have received40- 50% paycuts over the past few years.  Same with many physician specialists with much higher educations then most government workers.  Over 60% of architects are unemployed and those that are working are likely making much smaller incomes than they were a few years ago....same with many lawyers.......then we could move to construction workers, mortgage specialists, etc......

once you start violating the law.....as the violations grow larger and larger.....the consequences become more and more severe.

If this trend continues much longer, expect what is occuring in Bangkok  and Athens to spread all over the world as frustration turns to anger and anger manifests itself in violence.

By the way, if you don't think the government is preparing for what is coming.....you are truly a sheep......do you think there is any difference between a frustrated citizen or a terrorist?

Report this comment
#6) On May 17, 2010 at 10:05 PM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

And by the way...who ever said S&P  company presidents should make so much?  That is money coming directly from the bottom line.

When the S&P company is simply borrowing the money to pay the president, the the board is littered with his or her buddies......you think the compensation is fair?

Tell that to the shareholders of Enron, WorldCom, GM....we could go on and on....and soon that list is about to get much longer.

 

PS...the first sentence in comment 5 should read twice was much.

Report this comment
#7) On May 17, 2010 at 11:24 PM, oshiri (< 20) wrote:

Johnny Devo . . .

     The idea of Greek democracy has been around longer than any form of "organized" government. They have lots of old people with college degrees working for Comrade Papandreou. And perhaps you see it as your life's work to keep over paid, well educated government workers all plussed up, even after they leave the make-works job dole.

     Sorry, but when a privileged group feeding at the public trough causes ruin, a few of us sheep raise our heads and bleat.

Report this comment
#8) On May 17, 2010 at 11:56 PM, mymini2 (< 20) wrote:

I have worked in the private sector for the last 25 years until  last year when I was laid off from IBM and now I work for State government. My pay is now about what it was in 1995. State workers do not make anywhere near as much as private sector workers. The salaries are public record. PHD's often earn in the 60's or so. Judges around 80-90k. When I worked at IBM a person without a degree but with the right coding skills could easily earn 110k+.  The governor of this state probably earns about that much. Now lets compare the governor's salary with Sam Palmisano of IBM at $20+ million.  And you think that is bad, think about all the unemployment claims and trade adjustment payouts you are all paying due to the massive reduction in workforce as the work goes to India and China. I know, it is only tax payers money.  Someone has to collect and payout taxes...

Report this comment
#9) On May 18, 2010 at 12:08 AM, oshiri (< 20) wrote:

Mymymini . . .

     I see you have been on your new job for a year or less.

     Sean Penn, Tim Robins, Susan Saradon, and Madonna all make more than your governor, and perhaps more than old Sammy Palmisano too. So what?

Report this comment
#10) On May 18, 2010 at 12:36 AM, mymini2 (< 20) wrote:

I am agreeing with the comment above. State government workers who do the same job as private sector workers make much less hands down. Government workers do not have lavish parties like the private sector. We have furloughs not bonuses.  So, I say do not blame the government workers. I have seen both sides although new to the public sector. I have trouble blaming government workers who primarily U.S. citizens and paying reasonable taxes rather than corporate greed that allows abusing Visa loopholes and tax loopholes to bolster stock prices and salaries...

Report this comment
#11) On May 18, 2010 at 1:05 AM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

My blog was not intended to deminish the work of government workers.....not remotely so.....

The problem is not work for pay.....many government workers are very hard workers, good people, and excellent at what they do.....there problem is there is no money to pay the workers.

In the private sector, when that occurs, the worker loses his or her job.

In many publicly traded companies....the only reason many are still in business is because they have access to credit...primarily from our pension funds and not  because of profitability.....

but many small private business do not have such access anymore.

My point is there is hard working people in many areas of the economy...but unless you work for government or wall street.....when the money runs out you are broke...

What do you think is going to happen when most Americans figure this out....which you know they will....can anyone say Greece?

 

Report this comment
#12) On May 18, 2010 at 2:07 AM, dibble905 (86.70) wrote:

"In many publicly traded companies....the only reason many are still in business is because they have access to credit...primarily from our pension funds and not  because of profitability....."

Say what?

Corporate Debt, excluding Financials, have been quite steady for a while. Some would say, its the Household debt that ballooned over the past few years -- who's to blame for this? Corporations or People who speculated on Home Prices?

BTW, I never knew pension funds provided credit to businesses.

What the heck are you talking about.

"My point is there is hard working people in many areas of the economy...but unless you work for government or wall street.....when the money runs out you are broke..."

Money cannot run out since the government can print more. Regardless of whether that is inflationary or not, you HAVE to stop saying money will run out because you are absolutely wrong. Perhaps a better term would be the diminshing of real wealth as fiat money becomes less valuable.

Report this comment
#13) On May 18, 2010 at 2:21 AM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

Corporate Debt, excluding Financials, have been quite steady for a while

BTW, I never knew pension funds provided credit to businesses.

Over $1.5 trillion of corporate debt was issued last year alone....and guess who bought those bonds....you guessed it, pension funds.

Just take a look at BestBuy, Harley Davidson, or any public homebuilder to see how much debt they are sitting on compared to not too long ago.....and many are not fairly reporting the true value of their assets.

Our publicly traded companies are neck deep in debt....trust me, I have friends who are bond salespeople and friends who manage very large trusts.

Report this comment
#14) On May 18, 2010 at 8:26 AM, dibble905 (86.70) wrote:

Alstry,

Generall speaking, asset values on the accounting book are at historical cost while old debt is often rolled into new debt. Corporations that have existed for a long time have assets which are biased downwards while their longterm liabilities are biased upwards (relatively speaking).

The debt issue last year was, for the most part, to capitalize on the very low historical interest rate offered by the market -- they were mostly rolls from old debt to new debt. Total net corporate debt did not grow that much. In fact, there was also significant amount of debt repurchases by real estate funds who saw an opportunity to use their liquidity to reduce their fixed rate debt at a discount (normally, fixed rate debt should rise when yields drop; but yields increased due to fear and panic -- allowing this opportunity)

Trust you? No. 

Report this comment
#15) On May 18, 2010 at 8:40 AM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

Did you notice that sales for many companies and industries are down 30, 40, 50% and more over the past few years.....and you say debt is relatively stable?

Debt to sales.....debt to tax receipts.....debt to cash flow is exploding my friend......

Who loves you baby?

Report this comment
#16) On May 18, 2010 at 8:57 AM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

While we are on that subject.....companies have also been liquidating assets but debt has remained stagnant?

And that is on an inflated asset base in many cases?

Please......wake up sheep......

Report this comment
#17) On May 18, 2010 at 11:59 AM, dibble905 (86.70) wrote:

alstry,

many and infact, most corporations that are capable of issuing bonds, have not seen 30-50% drops in sales. there a select few, but they are dime a dozen. to characterize a few companies that have seen their top line obliterated and paint an entire picture on it is outright ridiculous.

public finances, that is, debt to tax receipt is an issue, however.

perhaps if you stop extrapolating your information as if it applies to everything, you'd have some more credibility.

to characterize me as sheep is another low for you.

Report this comment
#18) On May 18, 2010 at 12:04 PM, alstry (35.21) wrote:

Much of the revenues of the companies that you say have not have substantial drops in reveues comes from government spending......

Whoops.

As far as being a new low calling you a sheep....if you havn't figured Alstrymouis out yet...we are all sheep.

Report this comment
#19) On May 18, 2010 at 4:03 PM, caterpillar10 wrote:

The Sheep Look Up - one of my favorite 60-70s era sci-fi tomes (John Brunner? - don't have a copy handy). Sequel to Stand on Zanzibar. Predictions are still coming to fruition. Influence of yours? Digital becomes so pervasive aps and ads appear in city sidewalk panels. 

Report this comment
#20) On May 18, 2010 at 6:28 PM, dinodelaurentis (67.97) wrote:

Yes John Brunner! Read them both in the 70s and they are still 2 of my favorites; I should reread them now. He saw things clearly did he not?

Report this comment
#21) On May 19, 2010 at 2:23 AM, caterpillar10 wrote:

Totally....it would have been hard to predict miniature mobile internet devices back then so he had stuff loading up on public surfaces (like massive LED screens) which do exist as ad media of course - but the idea was total digital/graphic info saturation and he got it right - high speed satellite & wireless global networking - massive incidents of toxic pollution - increasing incidents of genocide (especially in Africa) - whole regions descending into warfare for dwindling resources, the return of piracy ......that's just what I can remember - yeah, time for a re-read.   

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement