Are Government Employees Overpaid?
SodaHead News
2010/11/14 11:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
331 votes
|
|
85% | |||
|
57 votes
|
|
15% | |||
Something’s gotta give. With President Obama and Republicans vowing to focus on deficit reduction when the new Congress is seated in January, the cuts have to come somewhere.
Tea Party darling and GOP Senator-elect Rand Paul of Kentucky has a simple idea for how we can reduce the federal payroll by at least 10 percent: cut the salaries of all those fat cat government employees.
You know, the ones who are making CEO-worthy cash while the rest of us are struggling to get by.
Paul told ABC’s “This Week” that, according to his calculations, the average government employee earns a six-figure salary.
"The average private employee makes $60,000 a year,” Paul said. “Let's get them more in line, and let's find savings. Let's hire no new federal workers."
And even though the Federal Debt Commission agreed on Wednesday that the federal workforce should be trimmed by 10 percent and that federal government salaries should be frozen across the board, the reality, according to ABC News, is that the average government employee doesn’t earn anywhere near Paul’s apocryphal $120K figure.
Instead, a spokesperson for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management said the median government salary is actually … $65,000, while the latest data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that full-time federal employees earned an average of $73,765 in 2009, while federal civil servants brought home $81,258.
Some federal employees told ABC that because of layoffs, like many office workers, they are now doing more than one job for the same pay.
"You have to consider differences in experience and education," Jeffrey H. Keefe, a professor with Rutgers University's School of Management and Labor Relations told ABC. "My suspicion is the federal government is really weighted heavily towards professional [jobs]."
Unlike the mix of jobs in the private sector, which range from minimum wage to well- compensated CEOs, federal jobs are concentrated in professional, administrative and technical occupations, with most of the lower-skill federal gigs that require less than a high school education outsourced.
So, do you think the government should cut the wages of federal workers to reduce spending?
Tea Party darling and GOP Senator-elect Rand Paul of Kentucky has a simple idea for how we can reduce the federal payroll by at least 10 percent: cut the salaries of all those fat cat government employees.
You know, the ones who are making CEO-worthy cash while the rest of us are struggling to get by.
Paul told ABC’s “This Week” that, according to his calculations, the average government employee earns a six-figure salary.
"The average private employee makes $60,000 a year,” Paul said. “Let's get them more in line, and let's find savings. Let's hire no new federal workers."
And even though the Federal Debt Commission agreed on Wednesday that the federal workforce should be trimmed by 10 percent and that federal government salaries should be frozen across the board, the reality, according to ABC News, is that the average government employee doesn’t earn anywhere near Paul’s apocryphal $120K figure.
Instead, a spokesperson for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management said the median government salary is actually … $65,000, while the latest data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that full-time federal employees earned an average of $73,765 in 2009, while federal civil servants brought home $81,258.
Some federal employees told ABC that because of layoffs, like many office workers, they are now doing more than one job for the same pay.
"You have to consider differences in experience and education," Jeffrey H. Keefe, a professor with Rutgers University's School of Management and Labor Relations told ABC. "My suspicion is the federal government is really weighted heavily towards professional [jobs]."
Unlike the mix of jobs in the private sector, which range from minimum wage to well- compensated CEOs, federal jobs are concentrated in professional, administrative and technical occupations, with most of the lower-skill federal gigs that require less than a high school education outsourced.
So, do you think the government should cut the wages of federal workers to reduce spending?
Top Opinion
-
Rockies Man 2010/11/14 20:44:11Yes
+22Without a doubt! Not only should their salaries be cut, but their numbers as well. They are inefficient, non-productive and a drain on the economy. The post office is the classic example of government waste, the price goes up, salaries go up, the post office loses billions every year and production goes down
http://healthproductadvice.co...
Another way to cut salaries and gain taxes would be to have a Fair Tax, 18% across the board for everyone, not on your income but only on items purchased once you paid your tax for purchase that's it. and this would also apply to used items by applying a 10% flat tax.
It would remove the IRS all together... Average income for IRS employees is $70,000.00
And as for the 50 people who voted 'No', get off Sodahead.com government officials!!
If the salaries of the roughly 3 million federal employees or for that matter any employee of any company,state or local governmet are cut by 10% you create an immediate 10% INFLATION of salaries v cost of goods and services for those employees. Prices are NOT going to drop just because someones salary drops 10%. Let's look a little closer too. An average federal employee DOES NOT a six figure salary. The last figures I saw was the average is about $59800. So multiply that average reduction in wages of 10% (roughly $6000) by 3 million you get roughly $18 Billion in reduced wages. The ripple effect of that reduction in wages to the rest of the economy will be staggering.
Along with those salary cuts Rand Paul wants to reduce the numbers of federal employees. Let's see say Rand Paul has his way and we reduce the number of federal employees by 25% (that is the figure he has been tossing around since the beginning of his campaign), that is 7.5 million jobs cut. Now how much will that cost the economy? 7.5 times say the average $60k? -- That's $450 BILLION dollars additional in salaries that will come out of the eco...
If the salaries of the roughly 3 million federal employees or for that matter any employee of any company,state or local governmet are cut by 10% you create an immediate 10% INFLATION of salaries v cost of goods and services for those employees. Prices are NOT going to drop just because someones salary drops 10%. Let's look a little closer too. An average federal employee DOES NOT a six figure salary. The last figures I saw was the average is about $59800. So multiply that average reduction in wages of 10% (roughly $6000) by 3 million you get roughly $18 Billion in reduced wages. The ripple effect of that reduction in wages to the rest of the economy will be staggering.
Along with those salary cuts Rand Paul wants to reduce the numbers of federal employees. Let's see say Rand Paul has his way and we reduce the number of federal employees by 25% (that is the figure he has been tossing around since the beginning of his campaign), that is 7.5 million jobs cut. Now how much will that cost the economy? 7.5 times say the average $60k? -- That's $450 BILLION dollars additional in salaries that will come out of the economy.
So Total $450+$18 Billions is $468 BILLIONS in salaries that will NOT BE SPENT into our economy. Result? Well lets just say the ripple effect will be Catastrophic!!. Want to see retail take a $468 BILLION DOLLAR CUT!!! Where do the jobs go when that many people stop spending????
Oh and where are all those people going to go the first day out of the job. Straight to the unemployment line. Opps!! That won't be there either, cause the Republicans and Tea Baggers want to get rid of unemployment benefits too!!!! As well as health care OPPS!! Another big one Everyone of those people laid off will head for the wellfare office for food stamps and general assistance and MEDICADE!!! MORE money going out. OH BUT NO!!! The Republicans want to get rid of food stamps and general assistance and MEDICAL as well!!!!
ONSET of the second major and devistating recession since the great depression. Think I'm wrong? JUST ASK ANY MACRO ECONOMIST!!!!
Certainly glad I live in the country and away from the big cities. Certainly glad I have a nearly indestrutable home, all concrete. Certainly glad I owe no one any money. Certainly glad I saw this coming 15 years ago and put my finances a ZERO debt position.
THANK YOU DAVE RAMSEY!!!
http://www.usatoday.com/money...
http://www.cbsnews.com/storie...
$1.17 TRILLION DOLLARS TAKEN OUT OF THE RETAIL BUSINESSES IN THE COUNTRY!!! And the ripple effect will be felt all around the world!!!!
Thanks very much. You just MADE my case for NOT pulling off the Tea Bagger agenda.
*Private is paying the Public's salary. Public IS NOT paying Private's salary.
The Public sector is funded solely on the taxes the gov't takes in.
The Private sector is solely funded on investment and/or profits.
Soon, VERY SOON, there will be a revolt by the little guys against this greed and this country will see an upheaval the likes of which has NEVER been seen before.
I would suggest to you John "B" that you get YOUR house in order as well if you want to survive it.
I have watched the economy go up and down so many times I got off the roller coaster and now live a simple life. That roller coaster that you say I am not a part of is going to implode shortly because of the greed and lack of concern for the little guy. The Big Corporations have stripped the wealth from the little guy and sent it overseas via jobs and buying from "cheap" produciton markets.
You see the problem is that those "cheap" production sources are simply transfers of wealth OUT of the country. We send trillions of dollars out of the economy that we could be spending right here in the US.
As for your "true business people" scrach the surface of each and you...
I have watched the economy go up and down so many times I got off the roller coaster and now live a simple life. That roller coaster that you say I am not a part of is going to implode shortly because of the greed and lack of concern for the little guy. The Big Corporations have stripped the wealth from the little guy and sent it overseas via jobs and buying from "cheap" produciton markets.
You see the problem is that those "cheap" production sources are simply transfers of wealth OUT of the country. We send trillions of dollars out of the economy that we could be spending right here in the US.
As for your "true business people" scrach the surface of each and you will find a greedy individual or corporation that is not looking out for the people but looking to put as much money in their own pockets as possible.
The country is Bankrupt but doesn't have the sense to face it. ALL caused by greed.
Dave Ramsey is wonderful, too. Agreed there.
We can't afford to keep borrowing money from China! We'll become the next, gigantic, Iceland!