Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Anger brews over government workers' benefits

Tue Mar 8, 2011 5:43 AM EST
us-news, business, us, benefit, envy, when-erin-mcfarlane
Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 6 photos
<p>FILE - In this Feb . 19, 2011 file photo, Neporsha Hamlin, center, of Madison, Wis, protests the governor's budget bill at the State Capitol in Madison. Polls show the majority of Americans are siding with state and local government employees in Wisconsin and elsewhere who are trying to maintain their collective bargaining rights and their pensions and benefits. (AP Photo/Andy Manis, File)</p>

FILE - In this Feb . 19, 2011 file photo, Neporsha Hamlin, center, of Madison, Wis, protests the governor's budget bill at the State Capitol in Madison. Polls show the majority of Americans are siding with state and local government employees in Wisconsin and elsewhere who are trying to maintain their collective bargaining rights and their pensions and benefits. (AP Photo/Andy Manis, File)

Advertise | AdChoices

— When Erin McFarlane looks at public workers, she sees lucrative pension benefits she doesn't ever expect to get. And it makes her mad.

"I don't think that a federal employee or government employee is worth any more than anybody else who does their job and does it well," said the Slinger, Wis., woman. She's been working a couple of bartending jobs since January, when she was laid off from her job at a Harley Davidson plant after almost a decade.

She's not alone in seeing public servants as public enemies in some ways. For some everyday Americans, it's a case of pension envy.

For McFarlane, 36, it's part of a ubiquitous discussion, at the bars where she works and on Facebook. And it's the center of some of the biggest political battles playing out in state capitals across the country as governors say their states can no longer afford the benefits that public employees have been promised.

Government workers in McFarlane's state have rallied for weeks against Gov. Scott Walker's efforts to take away many collective bargaining rights, saying that would amount to killing the middle class.

A USA Today/Gallup poll last month found that Americans largely side with the employees, though about two in five that want government pay and benefits reined in.

Tony Christoff, a 38-year-old stay-at-home dad in Perrysburg, Ohio, said he believes public workers such as police officers and teachers — including his wife — should be rewarded.

"They go over and above and deserve the pay they get," he said.

That's not a unanimous view, though.

Barbara Davis, a retiree from Cherry Hill, N.J., has been watching public workers in rallies in Madison, Wis., as well as Trenton. She says the protesters are wrong about tightening benefits hurting the middle class.

"I'm sorry, but what they're doing is telling off the middle class," said Davis, 76, and a co-chairwoman of the Cherry Hill Area Tea Party. "The middle-class people don't get all the goodies that they do."

At its heart, the issue is this: Some public workers get a sweet deal compared to other workers. And it's taxpayers who pay for it.

That's set off resentment in a time when economic doldrums have left practically everyone tightening their belts. Many people have found their tax bills rising even if their earnings haven't.

In Davis' case, it's the property tax that smarts. She and her husband pay about $12,000 per year for the house she describes as a three-bedroom "tract home." That's a high tax even in New Jersey, where the average property tax bill tops $7,000 and where the Tax Foundation has found homeowners pay three and a half times the national median.

A half century ago, industrial jobs at car and steel plants provided high salaries and rich benefits. But as manufacturing moved overseas, many formerly well-paid workers had to take lower-paying jobs. By the end of the Great Recession, the economic order was undeniably changed.

"It's the government sector worker who's the new elite, the highest-paid worker on the block," said David Gregory, who teaches labor and employment law at New York's St. John's University.

For instance, most non-uniformed public employees who have worked in New Jersey for 30 years with an ending salary of $85,000 can look forward to retiring at 55 with an annual pension of about $46,000. Working until age 60 and a salary of $90,000 can bring a pension of $57,000. And many of the New Jersey's public-sector retirees have no or low premiums for their health insurance.

For a private-section worker who retires at 55, relying solely on a 401(k) without an employer match, it would take a $100 contribution to a plan every week for 30 years and getting an annual return over 7 percent to get to the same level of pension benefit as the public worker retiring at that age. Those benefits would run out after 25 years for the 401(k) retiree.

To be fair, most public-sector retirees don't get such rich pensions. New Jersey's Treasury Department says the average annual pension due state workers who retired between July 2009 and June 2010 was just over $30,000 per year; for local government employees, it was about $20,000.

And the members of the state's two biggest public employee retirement systems are required to pay 5.5 percent of their base salaries into the pension funds.

St. John's Gregory says the rest of the benefits are deferred compensation promised to workers instead of better salaries.

National data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms that public-sector workers do better when it comes to pensions and benefits.

As of last September, professional and management workers in the private sector were making $34.91 in hourly salary; public sector professionals made $33.17 an hour.

The government entities spent 1.7 times as much on health care per employee-hour worked and nearly twice as much on retirement costs. Public-sector workers — who are more often represented by unions — are far more likely to have defined-benefit pensions with promises to pay for the retirees' whole lives.

Olivia Mitchell, a professor of insurance and risk management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, says the data aren't perfect. They don't compare workers with the same education or experience levels, and they cover a broad range of jobs. Also, she said, they don't take into account that about one-fourth of public workers aren't covered by Social Security.

There's one clear downside for the public employees: "We also know that the public-sector pensions are in deep trouble financially," Mitchell said, pointing to studies that suggest that they're underfunded by a total of $3 trillion, largely because governments have skipped payments. "Exactly what will be done about that, nobody knows."

Unchanged, those retirement systems could eventually stop paying entirely.

"One way or another, if we don't make changes, the government will collapse," said Abel Stewart, of Toledo, Ohio.

Stewart, 36, the director of contemporary worship at a Methodist church in suburban Toledo, says he has a hard time conjuring sympathy for the government workers he's seen protesting because of all the time he has spent working with struggling immigrants.

"These are middle-class people who have a house, who have enough food, who are complaining they don't have enough," he said. "Instead of fighting for their piece of the political pie, they'd be better looking at how to live within their means."

Jeff Nash, a Democrat elected to the county freeholder board in union-heavy Camden County, N.J., has come to believe that public employees need to sacrifice.

"The days of government workers receiving free benefits and pensions without risk, those days are coming to an end because everyone else who pays for government services is paying more for their health insurance, like myself, and running the risk of a 401(k) as part of their retirement savings. Government is changing to match what the rest of middle-class America is enduring today."

"It's not a matter of fairness," he said. "It's a matter of evolution."

Hetty Rosenstein, the New Jersey director of the Communications Workers of America, which represent New Jersey government workers in several fields, says she gripes about her members' pensions are misplaced.

"There's pension envy because people who are working in the private sector, they're being denied pensions," she said.

___

Associated Press writers Carrie Antlfinger in Milwaukee and John Seewer in Toledo, Ohio, contributed to this report.

© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Geoff Mulvihill's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: United States
  • Public Discussion (167)
Jump to discussion page: 1 2
OttoWest

I have no problem with teachers, policemen, fire fighters, ect. receiving all the benefits they can. This current battle is to eliminate the unions from the public sector. The unions have become a money laundering apparatus for the Democrat Party. This is all fine and well in the private sector. However, the public sector is financed by the taxpayer and no taxpayer funds should be directed to any political organization.

  • 22 votes
#1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:25 AM EST
Grey Wolf

"... the public sector is bank bailouts, the oil and grain subsidies, the arms industry and the for-profit-prisons, etc, are financed by the taxpayer and no taxpayer funds should be directed to any political organization as campaign contributions from all those taxpayer financed industries."

(But hey, if my son says he only has $500 for rent and says he needs $500 for food, and I give him $500 … and then he spends $500 on rent, and $250 on food and $250 on weed, and says the $500 I gave him only went to food and rent, I'll believe him, 'cause he said so. None of those taxpayer funds went to CEO salaries or political contributions--'cause the banks and the oil industry said so… And my son said his little sister spilt some milk, so I'm gonna' be way too distracted worrying about that and tanning her behind to even consider any of that other stuff anyway… Good job, son, pointing out what I should really be concerned about, here's some more money...)

  • 32 votes
#1.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:48 AM EST
OttoWest

We're on the same page Wolf. Kill the taxpayers money flow on all sides.

  • 11 votes
#1.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:00 AM EST
GaryColumbus

Can anyone see the forest for the trees?!? This is all a ploy to get the average citizen not to think of the excessive spending and real benefits to crush. The federal politician benefits. Those are the earmarks everyone wants to get rid of. So what do they do? Put lower than their position workers benefits up for cuts, wait for the outcry, then when we want their wages and benefits reduced they say, "but you said NO". Endeth the debate. When are they willing to put their a$$es on the line for the sake of the people they govern? And why do they constantly expect the working class to pick up the tab that they amounted. And certainly no surprise that it's the Republicans pulling this smoke and mirrors bullsh1t.

  • 9 votes
#1.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:42 AM EST
Townes Van ZandtDeleted
Brian-497171

Public employees should not be exempt from reality.

Corporate execs should not be exempt from reality.

  • 22 votes
#1.5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:06 AM EST
Nicey-1026620

"I don't think that a federal employee or government employee is worth any more than anybody else who does their job and does it well,"

So why is it ok that you think CEOs should make zillions of dollars?

This is absurd.

She's mad? Why aren't people more made at bankers who steal their money all the time?

Guess what, teachers are more educated, more experienced, more certified than private sector workers on average.

A waitress shouldn't make as much as a teacher. Period.

  • 17 votes
#1.6 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:07 AM EST
bontox

Double negative there, Otto. How do you think the police, firefighters and teachers got their benefits in the first place? It was due to the very unions you wish to dismantle. To your second point of many laundering…eh? When I pay the gas station guy for my gas I don’t follow him into his office and tell him he can’t look at a porn magazine he just bought because I pay his salary.

  • 13 votes
#1.7 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:17 AM EST
northerngirl

Nicey -

I know some very educated people that are working as waitresses or bartenders - because there are no other jobs. Many of these people would be glad to get a government job and would work hard but they can't because the current workers are "protected" regardless of much work they do (or in many cases don't do). I've seen too much of it first hand, absolute imcompetence or laziness, and nobody can touch them. So what you see done is to "promote" them to somebody's department so they can become their problem.

Try to be a college graduate and get a job with the Federal Government via "USAJobs" - current Federal employees are always given preference and it has everything to do with GS levels and years, not performance.

  • 8 votes
#1.8 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:32 AM EST
waukone

Well if you think you are going to get a job with good pay you aren't paying attention. 500,000+ public sector jobs will be added to the unemployment lines in the next 7 months. Last month 30,000 jobs were cut from gov (local, state, federal) and that is just the beginniing. So anyone who thought the 220,000 new private sector jobs last month was a great thing isn't thinking about the fact that all those educated local, state, federal laid off workers will now be competing for those few jobs.

Those that were supposed to create the jobs, jobs, jobs etc. really are job killers.

Another issue I don't understand is why those who don't have good salaries and benefits aren't complaining about why their company president is making millions but they can't have a wage where they aren't living a paycheck away from being homeless. Instead they are mad at people who did demand a good wage and benefits and want them to give them up.

Why are they ok that 2% of the population controlls 90% of the wealth in this county but only pay for 58% of the taxes?

Why are they ok with the hugh gap between the haves' and have nots - largest in 50 years.

Why they are ok that jobs are sent oversea's not because they couldn't make a healthy profit in the US but because making millions wasn't good enough - billions are necessary while they poison the countries they are in, pay poverty wages, abuse the employees, etc.

Why are they ok with buying stuff from Walmart which are made with prison labor in China while complaining that there are no jobs.

Why are they ok with allowing products into this country that are contaminated and cause injury and say gov is to big?

Why are they ok with big business destroying large sections of our states (BP) and only paying a pitance for the damage that was done and then declaring huge (billions) in quarterly profits?

Well you get my drift - Maybe we shouldn't be attacking the middle class who actually get a decent wage and start attacking those who become richer off the backs of the workers and are driven by greed.

  • 11 votes
#1.9 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:18 AM EST
Lu-1328381

First we have to admit that we aren't going to fundamentally change the way humanity works, so we need to stop pointing fingers at each other and start working toward solutions. The same logic that allows public servants to point to the "rich thieves" in banking and wall street while saying, "They get this, so why shouldn't I?" is the mentality that allows people on public assistance to look at the public servant and demand, "They get this, so you'd better give me mine." We aren't going to change. We aren't going to stop trying to get more for less. There is no such thing as fair or equal, so we have to stop looking at one another and demanding fair and equal.

Second we must all realize that being in this economic crisis means that we must work together to find the fix. Take your emotions out of it, take your political opinions out of it, and look at things realistically:

1. Taxing people (including public service personnel) who have managed to hold onto their jobs more in order to continue paying others who are dependent on government (whether they are public service, retired, or on public assistance) their same level of benefits does not make sense. Very often those dependent on the various governments for their livelihood are not affected by inflation in the same way as the private sector because they receive extra compensation in the form of COLA increases, and those who do not receive COLA increases are usually capable of collective bargaining for increases when inflation becomes too high. The majority of the private sector does not have this benefit. When cost of living goes up, they are forced not only to eat that extra cost (or tighten their budgets) but also very often are subjected to tax increases in order to pay for the COLA raises of those dependent on government funding. The economic crisis will not be fixed by raising taxes. It will only get worse. Furthermore it makes it impossible for people who might have the means and ideas to build new small businesses that can employ those who are out of work. I know many people who have excellent ideas for businesses here where I live, unfortunately the banks still are not loaning to new businesses.

2. Taxing corporations more when corporations are often the only groups with enough money in order to build more jobs (in order to re-employ those who have been forced out of work) does not make any sense. The faster they create jobs, the more people employed, the more taxes collected, the less stress on governments for funding, the more likely it is that all government employees stay employed and continue receiving their "fair" pay and benefits, as usual. The overall goal has to be getting those people who have lost their jobs re-employed in order to bring about stability for everyone.

3. Firing or laying off public employees cannot be an option. Foremost doing so would only increase the number of persons who are not gainfully employed, thus decreasing tax revenue. Also they would just go on government assistance for 99 weeks, which often is more than just an unemployment check because they find the need to use other programs like foodstamps, food banks, etc, in order to survive. There is no savings in firing a public employee. Furthermore this lack of stability in their work decreases productivity and increases apathy (and if one has ever stood in line at the DMV or the Post Office, one knows that there is no room for productivity decreases or apathy increases in many public positions).

4. While it seems the simplest solution would be a "decrease in spending" this actually means a decrease in contract offers by governments. Many in the private sector depend on these government contracts for their livelihood, so to "decrease spending" in this way puts more people out of work. One must also not be fooled by the idea that "increasing spending" on contracts will have a beneficial effect, because to do so would mean either further budget deficits or greater taxation. The only solution is true private sector job creation.

5. A decrease in pay and benefits of those in the public sector seems "unfair" because these people are doing their jobs and took these positions with the promise of these benefits. In Wisconsin, for instance, they are being asked to pay more out of their salaries toward their benefits while losing the right to collectively bargain over wages beyond cost of living increases. In other words, they are being asked to give up the right to bargain collectively for more than the inflationary increases brought about by economic fluctuations. When the cost of living goes up, they would still have the right to collectively bargain for an increase in salaries across the board in order to compensate for that rise in cost. I assume that people who believed they were worth more than the collective would have the right to petition for salary increases beyond the cost of living. The collective benefit still remains up to a certain point, and then the public servants would be required to request pay increases on a merit basis. To me that sounds reasonable, but I understand people being angry and frustrated and leery. I understand the desire to point around at the rest of us and say that we aren't being asked to sacrifice anything, but remember most of us do not have the ability to seek pay raises, and all of us are paying higher taxes right now with inflation--only those in public service receive increased pay based on inflation.

6. In order to fix this mess we must create jobs. Banks are not loaning, so it is important for each of us to look around our communities and find the businesses that would fill holes (here there is a lack of entertainment and clothing stores--kids literally hang out at walmart and when shopping for clothes needs to be done 90% go out of town, which is a loss to the community). Once we have determined the needs, we can work together to build business conglomerates where multiple people invest smaller amounts in order to get the thing off the ground. Consider that 10% interest on a loan to your neighbors, who intend to create ten jobs, is money much better invested than 5% interest in stocks where you run the rick of losing everything to microtrades and crashes.

7. Many corporations are presently victims of the stock market. People are not investing long term the way they used to, which means that corporate investments are volatile. The well-established companies that have capital to spare should look for small businesses to capitalize.

8. We must change the way we do business. The jobs that were once here are never coming back. It would be unethical for our country to break the trade agreements we have built with other nations because people in those nations have become dependent on those jobs for their livelihood, and they are very often much worse off than we are. We must look to building quality products. That will be our competitive edge. Right now the market is flooded with products that are cheaply built and intended to be disposed of after a very short life, which keeps us purchasing constantly on rotation--no one can get ahead. (How many of us realize that we have to have to pay for the warranty on the new dish washer we just purchased because we know without a doubt that it will break within the next three years?) We must turn to building quality products and purchasing quality products. (Why buy five $150 cheaply made chairs over the course of 30 years when you could buy one well-built quality chair for $1000 that will last 150 years?) Our mentality as builders and consumers of products must change. This requires saving in order to purchase the things we want. Buying on credit is giving away hard earned money. On larger items, if the corporate world knows that we are saving in order to purchase outright without using credit, prices will come down in order to make our purchases more timely for them (plus a payment that is already made is much more secure to them--no repossessions required). We will be much happier people buying quality products that are made to last. Our environment will be saved by us buying quality products that are made to last. Our economy can be saved by us buying quality products that are made to last. So we must build quality products that are made to last.

  • 1 vote
#1.10 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:30 AM EST
HappyToSeeYa

Public sector employees are tax payers. Why do people and MSM continously refer to tax payers as being in the private sector, only?

Public sector employees earn salaries that are paid after work has been performed, not before. Itemized pay stubs show that the public employees pay for their pensions, benefits, and taxes. The argument used by private sector employees who claim to be paying public sector employee benefits and pensions can also stretch to claim private sector employee payment for the food, housing, clothing, and transport of public employees. I'll wait for it because surely Walker or some like-mined individual is going to say or write it.

  • 12 votes
#1.11 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 1:01 PM EST
California Militia

all the money in the Public Sector comes from taxes. The government doesnt "ssll" anything.

the problem is this. you have a union (lets say the police union). they support candidate A because candidate A says we need more police to be safe. the union gets everyone in the union and as many people as possible from other unions to vote for this guy.

then the candidate gets voted in and gives a big bonus (of taxpayer money) to the union.

the problem is that private sector unions understand that there is a limit to what they can get because if the business gets shut down, nobody gets any money. public sector unions can always ask for more because you can just raise taxes to get the extra cash.

    #1.12 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 4:18 PM EST
    Brite

    Anyone in ANY union can ask the union for an accounting as to what their union dues are being used for. If they don't like what their union dues are being used for they can demand to pay (and get) "benefits only dues", which will lower their union dues. Unions have to follow their charters. They can't make up the rules as they go along.

    • 8 votes
    #1.13 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 5:31 PM EST
    Esha1003

    Nicey, I have to disagree. From what I have seen, waitresses are doing more physically taxing work than teachers are.... more than enough to make up and then some for the added mental stress of being a teacher.

    Therefore, those people should be paid about the same and be able to make enough to live a relatively good lifestyle on.

    The real problem is not that teachers are being overpaid.... it's that 'menial laborers' for the past 50 years have been UNDERPAID dramatically, just because they don't have a worthless sheepskin.

    In my opinion, 'education' does not make you any more worthy of good pay than anything else does, save hard work.

    • 4 votes
    #1.14 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 5:01 AM EST
    CuriousG

    Esha1003,

    You're ignoring, or at least severely discounting, the difference in education and training required to be a teacher. There's this thing called supply and demand, and it takes significantly more education and training to be a teacher than it does to be a waitress. You're right that there are differences in a work day and that a waitresses job is no cake walk. I know for myself I highly value a good waitress and always tip the good ones at least 20%. That said, it takes weeks to train a waitress, and years to train a teacher. It takes a while for both of them to become proficient at their jobs.

    • 9 votes
    #1.15 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 9:11 AM EST
    Davy-755715

    Hey, assigning blame for all the problems to one group worked for Hitler for a while, didn't it? How can anyone blame (especially) the GOP for using the same approach? In the same vein, getting ordinary Germans to vilify the Jews was useful in distracting attention from the other things Hitler's boys did.

    • 3 votes
    #1.16 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 9:56 AM EST
    daMamma

    Most public employees get a very small (if any at all) retirement package or any other type of real benefits. These things have been bargained out to be smaller and smaller over the last 30 years.

    My parents worked for years, as did most of my family members, for the state. The facility was billed as a "State School", however it was nothing more than a warehousing of the retarded, severely handicapped and other 'defectives' so that society would not have to deal with these types of people. (Yeah, I know, totally unPC)

    Unless one is at the very top of the management pile, the pay is barely above minimum wage, benefits are hardly there and retirement does not exist unless you can last the system for 30+ years. The system is also designed so that it is near impossible to make it to the end of that length of time.

    In education: Administrators get paid an obscene amount of money and great retirement / golden umbrellas, teachers don't.

    In emergency services Administrators get paid an obscene amount of money and great retirement / golden umbrellas, police / firemen don't.

    In government (statehouse, townships, etc) Administrators get paid an obscene amount of money and great retirement / golden umbrellas, the average workers don't.

    In health care / resident care facilities: Administrators get paid an obscene amount of money and great retirement / golden umbrellas, the average worker does not.

    Instead of stomping on the abuses of the top of the heap, there seems to be this big attack and vilification of the average worker that does not have all the wonderful pay and benefits of the top.

    • 7 votes
    #1.17 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 1:37 PM EST
    California Militia

    my wifes mother works for city hall as a programmer. she will retire in 2 years with 100% pay for the rest of her life.

    thats not bad by any means. I would be happy with that. same money just stay at home.

    • 3 votes
    #1.18 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 2:39 PM EST
    Maricopa County Resident

    CM

    my wifes mother works for city hall as a programmer. she will retire in 2 years with 100% pay for the rest of her life.

    thats not bad by any means. I would be happy with that. same money just stay at home.

    Chances are she could have been making more working for a private company, that's usually the trade-off you make working in the public sector. Without additional information of her time there and current pay, your post is kind of anecdotal at best. I could work for Maricopa county as a Sr. Network Engineer; but, I'd also take at least a $10,000/yr pay cut. If you're getting rich working for the government, then you're probably doing something illegal....

    • 8 votes
    #1.19 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 2:52 PM EST
    Davy-755715

    Okay: In ANY given issue, there exists a line, the description of which is "fair". And in these issues, you will always find cases falling on either side of that line. In other words, some people will make out like bandits, and others will get screwed; there's no posible way this can be avoided. One last point: Both sides tend to take the examples falling the greatest distance from the "fair" line, and offer them up as if they're the norm.

    In the case of public employees I believe a panel can be set up. Its goal would be to establish pay, benefit, and retirement programs that are comparable to the private sector. The panel would be similar to the US Supreme Court, in that each sitting president or governor would nominate replacements as they are needed, to keep it from being stuffed exclusively with people from one side of the fence. But still, cases will go to one side or the other.

    Yep, I've got my own side of the fence; I tend to side in favor of those actually doing the work.

    • 1 vote
    #1.20 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 3:19 PM EST
    Division by Zero

    My mother worked as an English/French teacher then as a high school librarian for a total of 32 years. She retired a few years ago making 65% of the average of her highest-paid 4 years for the rest of her life. It's not a bad deal at all, but she did have to work 32 years to get it. In the private sector almost no employer is that generous and almost no one can count on working for the same employer for 32 years in any capacity. Heck, I've worked for 6 different employers in the past 21 years. I've been with my current employer for the longest of any, but I know I can't count on being with them until I retire.

    • 4 votes
    #1.21 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 3:40 PM EST
    worldcurmudgeon

    The unions have become a money laundering apparatus for the Democrat Party

    No, I don't believe it, sorry but this opinion is just what it is, an opinion. What we don't understand is that corporations' 401 K for workers would have paid good but when Wall Street crashed these investments along with American's real estate market, this hard earned money evaporated. Remember in the markets, there are buyers and sellers. Some one made money on the loses suffered by these investment 'instruments'.

    How much money is being laundered by corporations; tobacco made billions off of spreading cancer among all smokers and they knew it; chemical plants pollute the rivers and streams they are located near. From Ford's faulty breaks, to bad plumbing pipe in the walls of homeowners, corporations have acted in bad faith for a buck.

    • 5 votes
    #1.22 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 11:56 PM EST
    worldcurmudgeon

    People who work in public education, especially in at-risk schools, in poverty areas, in second language neighborhoods, and such work real damn hard every day for their money. The average pay for teachers, inspire of what the Republicans want you to believe, is poor at best among those with college degrees, remember teaching requires a four year degree.

    Those who are going to college should expect more than a high school drop out who slings hash because he chose to make bad decisions about his education, and his parents were no where to be found. The crap teachers take from parents, students, and often administrators is a higher level of stress than most of the major degreed professionals.

    Teachers have earned the right to a decent retirement something which Republicans do not think they are entitled to. I believe that corporations should pay their fair share of taxes, yet, they don't. Exxon did not pay a dime in taxes last year.

    • 5 votes
    #1.23 - Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:03 AM EST
    katrix

    world, people can't invest in 401(k)s without understanding the market at least a little bit. We all need to start learning a lot to be able to take care of ourselves. We can't depend on pensions; we have to save. You're talking as if none of this responsibility falls on our own shoulders. You didn't once mention us as you laid the blame. It wasn't our fault that we racked up credit card debt or bought houses we couldn't afford? It wasn't our fault that if we paid $1000 rent, we thought we could afford a $1000 mortgage and ignore property taxes, maintenance, and all the other things our landlords magically took care of for us?

    • 2 votes
    #1.24 - Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:05 AM EST
    Spikegary

    Actually, I lost about 50% of the money I had sitting in my 401(K)s. Bottom line, is that was investment profit that I lost. My original investment is still there and is slowly making money again. Anyone that was 'wiped out' most likely failed to diversify their holdings. Whose fault is that? As to 'hard earned'? How hard earned is interest income?

    Katrix, as usual, you are correct. It's easy to blame anyone/everyone elase than it is to look ourselves in the mirror and admit we screwed up.

    • 5 votes
    #1.25 - Thu Mar 10, 2011 11:15 AM EST
    worldcurmudgeon

    Katrix, with all due respect...

    I am talking about manipulated markets by these wealthy corporates. They have stock portfolios of multi-millions of shares, and hard cash, which can move a market in either direction depending on whether they hold, sell or flood markets. That means 401 K's are being manipulated. When the 401 companies takes retirement money and put it in stocks, these stocks - the retirement money, is subject to market conditions. Note the market is not stagnant.

    Remember when the market was at 9,000 there were panic sellers and also buyers who know the market would go back up. When it did they put their money on the future when the short memories of people who buy common stocks forgot about their losses and put money back into the market. Or, it was the sucker born every minute fact that they take advantage of.

    It is when the market is at absolutely rock bottom, where the selling has absolutely stopped, this is the buying point. However, the average investor does not know this, only the market manipulators do. They also know were the high will be.

    The media is full of panic news, then the pundents, the stock analysts say it cannot go any lower, the market will stay stable for a couple of days or a week, people are lulled, then it takes a big dump again, this ploy is used over and over sucking money out of the economy.

    • 4 votes
    #1.26 - Fri Mar 11, 2011 7:46 PM EST
    Reply
    mochabeans

    — When Erin McFarlane looks at public workers, she sees lucrative pension benefits she doesn't ever expect to get. And it makes her mad.

    It's a case of pension envy.

    Pretty much says it all, like crabs in a bucket I guess? "If I can't get a job like that no one should have one."

    • 33 votes
    #2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:30 AM EST
    ERich-356044

    Well said.

    Thank you!

    E

    • 13 votes
    #2.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:40 AM EST
    Maricopa County Resident

    Yup. The reason why most people don't look to public sector jobs in the first place is that the pay tends to lag behind private sector as a whole; people (generally) will make more cold hard cash working for Company X than they will working for the government; however, the benefits aren't (again, generally) as good. People like Erin have made their choice, and they're now unhappy that they chose poorly.

    • 19 votes
    #2.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:48 AM EST
    mtpromises

    I don't understand why people like Erin don't look at it differently. Why don't they wonder why their employer doesn't pay a decent wage with good benefits. Instead of being jealous and envious of somebody else's job, why don't you form your own Union at your job and collective bargain to get better pay/benefits for you and your co-workers?

    My significant other has a local govt job. He makes about half of what the prevailing wage for his position is in the private sector. The trade off that makes him stay at his govt job is the fact that it is more secure, less travel and paid vacation, holidays. The pension and healthcare are virtually the same as his old job in the private sector... which was a Union position, but now is not.

    If it weren't for Unions, we'd all owe our soul to the company store and be working for room and board.

    • 18 votes
    #2.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:23 AM EST
    CuriousG

    Why don't they wonder why their employer doesn't pay a decent wage with good benefits.

    Because getting their employer to pay a decent wage with good benefits would require some effort on her part. It's much easier to point at someone else.

    • 18 votes
    #2.4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:43 AM EST
    Division by Zero

    In the early years of employment public sector jobs typically pay less than private sector jobs. In my state a first-year teacher can start out making only $19,000 a year. That's the equivalent of a private sector job that pays a little over $9/hr. You can make $9/hr around here answering phones at a callcenter. After about 15 years of experience a teacher can be making over $60K a year, plus the pension is nice if you retire after 25 years but even nicer if you can hold out and retire after 28 years. The compensation for staying with the job for a long time makes up for the low starting pay.

    • 9 votes
    #2.5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:57 AM EST
    DEBEKI

    Erin should have gone into enormous debt getting a 4 year college degree in order to get that teacher's degree. Erin must work eight hours a day - teachers work HOW LONG per day. Erin is paying property taxes - gee, teachers are paying the same property taxes. Erin spends time with a few drunks a week; teachers spend time with 30-40 unruly kids per day per week.

    Erin wants benefits - Erin should have gotten the education to put her in a job that gives her benefits. Jealousy and envy is a sin - I wonder if Erin is a Christian.

    • 12 votes
    #2.6 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:57 AM EST
    Townes Van ZandtDeleted
    jmom-1225464

    I'm with you guys on this. I don't understand why people want to take away from others when what they should really being doing is demanding more for themselves. CEO and other executives are making far more than they used to...and this has been at the expense of their employees. It's time everyone wake up and stop treating their companies like slave owners. Change to the mindset of the company needs me and people like me more than we need the company. Stop treating a company like it's a person because it isn't!

    • 12 votes
    #2.8 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:07 AM EST
    Division by Zero

    CEO pay increased by about 280% between 1990 and 2005. During that same span of time worker pay increased by 4.7%.

    • 9 votes
    #2.9 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:23 AM EST
    Townes Van ZandtDeleted
    janice22

    It doesn't appear that many of the posters on this thread understand that Erin, as a taxpayer, is being required to pay for other people to have the benefits that her non-government employer isn't providing for her because her non-government employer can't take money from unwilling taxpayers to pay for Erin's benefits in the same way that the public employee unions do.

    • 5 votes
    #2.11 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:30 AM EST
    jmom-1225464

    Then Erin's non-government employer needs to take money out of the non-government employer's profits to pay for her benefits. What you seem to not understand is that government workers pay taxes too and pay part of their own salary and benefits...just as goverment workers help to pay the salaries and benefits of private sector employees when they pay for goods and services of any kind...

    • 9 votes
    #2.12 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:44 AM EST
    janice22

    pay part of their own salary and benefits....

    Think about that for a minute. A government employee is sending money to the government in the form of taxes just to have it sent back to them as salary and benefits.

    just as goverment workers help to pay the salaries and benefits of private sector employees when they pay for goods and services of any kind...

    I think the significant difference here is that buying goods and services from a private company is a person's choice. You don't have to support one business or another, you have choices. A taxpayer funding a government employee's salary isn't a choice.

    • 4 votes
    #2.13 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:06 AM EST
    JustMeSayingMyThing

    pay part of their own salary and benefits....

    Think about that for a minute. A government employee is sending money to the government in the form of taxes just to have it sent back to them as salary and benefits.

    It's crazy isn't it....it's almost like they are American Citizens or something.

    • 9 votes
    #2.14 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:09 AM EST
    jmom-1225464

    So government employees should work for free because you don't want to pay part of their salary and benefits? Do you work for free? We all pay each other for all goods and services whether they are coming from Walmart, a mechanic, a teacher, a firefigher, a childcare worker. I suppose you could make and grow all of your food, make your own clothes, design, build and maintain your own car, teach your own children, and save your own house if it's burning. Those are your choices.
    The significant difference is that you want to be paid for what you do...but are not so willing to do so for someone else. If you don't like your salary and benefits you do have the choice to work for someone else. No one wants to pay the taxes but they definately want representation, someone to educate children, someone to show up when they call 911...Maybe your only other choices are to live on a deserted island or to elect a government that's willing to force people to work for free.
    As for me, I'd like to have great benefits and a pension too...not take it away from other middle class Americans just because I may not be getting the same...

    • 6 votes
    #2.15 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:19 AM EST
    jmom-1225464

    It's crazy isn't it....it's almost like they are American Citizens or something</blockquote>

    What???
    Haha...had to redo this one, didn't come out right...oh nevermind.

      #2.16 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:22 AM EST
      waukone

      Again a repeat CEO/Owner pay has increase by over 200% and wages have increase by less than 5%. Who should we be focus on?

      • 4 votes
      #2.17 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:23 AM EST
      Auto 101

      D zero...what state do you live in? I find it hard to believe teachers start at $19K.

      He must live in another country here is the starting pay by state.

      http://teacherportal.com/teacher-salaries-by-state

      Erin should have gone into enormous debt getting a 4 year college degree in order to get that teacher's degree. Erin must work eight hours a day - teachers work HOW LONG per day. Erin is paying property taxes - gee, teachers are paying the same property taxes. Erin spends time with a few drunks a week; teachers spend time with 30-40 unruly kids per day per week.

      We all know that the privet sector employee is the most lazy person on the planet. lets see a teacher 7-3:30 maybe another hour to two at home. As for kids maybe they should make what my class did (it was for kids with anger problems) you allow teachers to physically restrain students and put then into a padded room. After sixth grade I went to class with the "normal students". I find it odd that people put so much responsibility on teachers and parents and refuse to say "maybe it is the kids that don't want to learn". If I decided to drive my self I may have graduated with a higher level of reading than 3rd grade I don't know about spelling the teacher even said "I don't know how to teach you. You will just have to live with it".

      You people do know that privet workers make more than public even if privet workers have higher pay they can contribute more to their 401K's, IRA's, and roth IRA's they can potentially have more in retirement. However history has proven over and over that the common person has the finial I.Q. of 76 and below. If you want them to have pay and people to have to join a union to work then raise taxes and make unions flourish. I will never join a union and I will never be put in that position I know my worth I don't need another person to say what I'm worth and I get paid for it.

      • 2 votes
      #2.18 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:52 AM EST
      Division by Zero

      I live and work in Mississippi. The starting salary reported on teacherportal.com is not accurate for my state, as it likely is the statewide average for first-year teachers. Some districts pay starting teachers as high as $36K and others pay the state minimum of $19K. The local district where I live has the highest teacher salaries in the state. If you drive 80 miles north you will make significantly less. As for the teacher workday, I can assure you it is not just 6 hours at the school and a couple of hours at home, provided that you're actually doing your job.

      • 4 votes
      #2.19 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 12:06 PM EST
      AL-1735815

      Maybe "Erin" should of went to college and got an education and she wouldn't be working as a Bartender.

      Nobody wanted the "government jobs" until the economy went bad and now it's public employees that facing the latest version of the "Salem Witch Trial".

      People that want to cut government, better get ready for less service with longer lines and fewer people to provide service.

      • 6 votes
      #2.20 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 10:32 AM EST
      Division by Zero

      Maybe "Erin" should of went to college and got an education and she wouldn't be working as a Bartender.

      I know college graduates who are working as waiters and bartenders. A degree by itself is no guarantee that one will not have to do such work. One college grad I know is currently working as a janitor at one of the local hospitals. In this economy such things happen.

      • 2 votes
      #2.21 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 11:11 AM EST
      Brite

      I don't know... I've worked as a waitress and a bartender for years, and I find the work rather lucrative. OK... there are no bennies, but the money can be pretty good. And I have 2 degrees, working on a 3rd. Maybe she's not all that good at it...

      • 5 votes
      #2.22 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 11:29 AM EST
      daMamma

      Here's the skinny on teachers and how much real work they do.

      Teachers are at school before the students. This is done in order to get things set up for the day's lessons. Most are still there after school lets out. *extra help for students that need it, and so on.

      Most teachers have 6 classes of 30 - 40 students each day. (180 - 240 kids a day)

      After school hours activities:
      Lesson plans for each class must be created then implemented. (not all classes are at the same speed so adjustments need to be made often.)
      Homework has to be graded, then marked into books
      Supplies for lessons must be purchased (out of the teacher's own pocket)
      To keep accreditations, teachers must continually upgrade their education, which means more college courses, which also costs a considerable amount of money from their own pockets.
      There are teacher's meetings with administrators
      There are teacher's meetings with parents

      There are dozens of other time consuming things teachers must do that have to be done after school hours because school hours are dedicated to teaching children.

      People get on teachers, 'they have it so good' and all that. They don't. Most have to work summer jobs to make ends meet. They also spend all summer making their lesson plans, attending meetings (required) and furthering their education (also required) It is a thankless job that does not pay near as much as most folks think and more than some seem to feel its worth (glorified babysitting).

      • 6 votes
      #2.23 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 2:07 PM EST
      Reply
      jawill11

      What a hunk of crap this article is. This quote takes the cake:

      At its heart, the issue is this: Some public workers get a sweet deal compared to other workers. And it's taxpayers who pay for it.

      At its heart, this is a GOP talking point with no basis in fact. It took the author 5 paragraphs to finally sneak in a statistic showing that public workers earn less than their private counterparts, with benefits included. If they were going to finally tell the truth, why would they spend the whole first half of the article supporting the lie that they make so much more? The headline should read, "GOP lies over public employee compensation fuels misguided anger in a minority of voters."

      Then, it goes on to talk about the so-called unfunded liabilities of the pension funds. Some states have a more immediate crisis, but nationwide, the pensions are funded for another 13 years, and that is assuming no new contributions and no improvement to the economy.

      This is a manufactured crisis by the corporations and billionaires funding the GOP and the TEA party to further crush the middle class so they can make a few extra bucks.

      • 27 votes
      Reply#3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:34 AM EST
      RainDaze

      Yep, and thats in the article too:

      A half century ago, industrial jobs at car and steel plants provided high salaries and rich benefits. But as manufacturing moved overseas, many formerly well-paid workers had to take lower-paying jobs.

      While these self proclaimed tea-partiers wrap themselves in the flag, they have no qualms about going to walmart to sent their money over-seas to support communist/socialist regimes.

      • 10 votes
      #3.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:04 AM EST
      Reply
      Bubba-939441

      Progressives are not very progressive on this issue. They want to keep the status quo. Collective bargaining is not really collective bargaining at all. A candidate who receieves millions from Unions has no incentive to bargain for the tax payer. He is bought and paid for.

      • 6 votes
      #4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:36 AM EST
      JustMeSayingMyThing

      Do you prefer your politicians are bought and paid for by the koch brothers?

      • 14 votes
      #4.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:44 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      Do you prefer your politicians are bought and paid for by the koch brothers?

      Union members don't have a problem with them, why should I?

      the Wisconsin Retirement System owns $5.5 million in Georgia Pacific corporate bonds. (Georgia Pacific is owned by Koch Industries.)

      http://sweetness-light.com/archive/wi-state-pension-fund-owns-koch-stock

      • 5 votes
      #4.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:50 AM EST
      jawill11

      A candidate who receieves millions from Unions has no incentive to bargain for the tax payer.

      That argument sounds reasonable on its face, but in reality, public employees earn less than their private sector counterparts, so the unions don't seem to have that much power in getting sweetheart deals.

      The limiting factor is still the voter. Taxes would have to be raised to pay for outlandish pay packages, and the politician knows they would have a hard time selling those, even if they are getting union money.

      • 8 votes
      #4.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:57 AM EST
      JustMeSayingMyThing

      Do you prefer your politicians are bought and paid for by the koch brothers?

      Union members don't have a problem with them, why should I?

      Those were glenn beck style jumps of reasoning there. One union owns stock in a company and you make that jump yet I am sure you had no problem with Gov Walker showing us all he is owned by them. Funny.

      • 7 votes
      #4.4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:59 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      Gov Walker showing us all he is owned by them.

      And if he IS owned by Koch it could only benefit the union since they hold 5.5 million in Koch bonds. So which deal is better for tax payers? Being owned by union bosses or being owned by Koch? Public sector unions ALWAYS negotiate against the tax payer. They want to squeeze everything they can from the tax payer.

      • 2 votes
      #4.5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:19 AM EST
      JustMeSayingMyThing

      To be honest I am not a huge fan of unions....however the people who are represented by those unions are hard working American citizens and I would choose them over the backers of the tea party any day. The idea that teachers, police and fireman should fix the budget while the Koch brothers pay less and less taxes is each year is disgusting at best.

      As you pointed out yourself one union owns that stock. There is no conspiracy for every union to be heavily invested in Koch brothers. However the there certainly is a standard that all republican politicians are.

      • 6 votes
      #4.6 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:21 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      The idea that teachers, police and fireman should fix the budget while the Koch brothers pay less and less taxes is each year is disgusting at best.

      Don't you see that the union members benefit if Koch brothers pay fewer taxes? It builds their retirement nest egg. No, I'm not a fan of unions either, especially public sector unions.

      • 2 votes
      #4.7 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:55 AM EST
      jawill11

      Public sector unions ALWAYS negotiate against the tax payer. They want to squeeze everything they can from the tax payer.

      And the taxpayer wants to pay as little as possible for the best candidates. The fact that public employees are making a little under market value for their positions indicates that the interplay is not out of balance in favor of unions.

      • 4 votes
      #4.8 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:59 AM EST
      Brite

      Hey Bubba --

      When you get your paycheck, that money is is yours, all yours, right?? So, when does a civil servant's paycheck cease to become taxpayer's money?

      • 9 votes
      #4.9 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:20 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      So, when does a civil servant's paycheck cease to become taxpayer's money?

      As soon as the check is signed. At that point the tax payer's money is spent. Don't you want to spend it wisely and get the best deal for the tax payer? Tax payers have no one to negotiate for them. Their representative has been paid off. Someone who is paid off doesn't care about the tax payer. He has no incentive to balance the budget. Let the next administration do that.

      • 1 vote
      #4.10 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:34 AM EST
      Brite

      Don't civil servant's pay taxes?? Property taxes, income taxes, sales taxes, FICA, SS?? They pay into their OWN salaries! Sure, the unions protect their jobs, but here's the thing, they work for crappy bosses sometimes too, just like you do. You may not have a union to protect you and your benefits (if you have any) but those benefits are paid for by the workers.

      Look... I don't have a union. I work free lance. But when I pay my taxes quarterly, I pay MORE taxes than most, because I'm self employed. My husband, doesn't have a union, he's military which sees a 3% COLA raise (maybe) and I get 10% VA disability which hasn't seen a raise in 5 years. He pays taxes and we will end up, in the end paying taxes on his military retirement monies (which, BTW, is less than you think, after 30 years in, is 3/4 base pay). We both have a ton of student loans that we pay on. We have a mortagage, like everyone else in the world and we will both work.

      If we are lucky, We will retire at age 70. that's about 20-25 years from now.

      A union worker on the other hand has benefits that are matched (if the negotiator is good) by the employer, somewhere around 70/30 for medical and retirement, and most retirement benefits are shot to @!$%# with the resesiion, thanks to the people on Wall Street who are making at least 10 times what everyone else is making. Plus bonuses. Are you making bonuses? I'm not. My husband isn't. There isn't a civil servant out there who is. And yet, the civil servants are the ones taking the hit. You are thaking the hit. The only difference is the civil servant a glimmer of hope that maybe, just maybe that pension fund will still be there when he retires, and that the state hasn't raided it to pay off some pet project. Still fair?

      Yeah... I support the unions. Wish to hell I had one. But the AFL/CIO wont' take me one.. who would they negotiate with?? :)

      • 5 votes
      #4.11 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:56 AM EST
      RainDaze

      Bubba

      the Wisconsin Retirement System owns $5.5 million in Georgia Pacific corporate bonds. (Georgia Pacific is owned by Koch Industries.)

      You are confusing two different entities here. The Wisc. Retirement system is not the Union. The WRS is a government entity that is in charge of all pensions for wisconsin employees. Dept. heads are salary and not union and they contribute to the WRS pension fund out of their paychecks or have their contribution directly deposited and not reported as a 'wage' via the percentage that the employer provides.

      So when they [WRS] invests those contributions into a stock, it is not the choice of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (the teachers union) or AFSCME (the clerical workers union) or WPEC (wisconsin professionals union). It is simply the Wisconsin State Retirement fund investing in the areas they see as best choice to ensure the pension funds are there to meet the projected retirement needs regardless of what (if any) union the employee was a member (or non-member) of.

      • 5 votes
      #4.12 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:12 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      it is not the choice of the Wisconsin Education Association Council (the teachers union) or AFSCME (the clerical workers union) or WPEC (wisconsin professionals union). It is simply the Wisconsin State Retirement fund investing in the areas they see as best choice to ensure the pension funds are there to meet the projected retirement needs regardless of what (if any) union the employee was a member (or non-member) of.

      That makes sense. Still, why would an employee who invests in the fund trash the Koch brothers for helping the union employee with a secure retirement?? If they have a problem with the Koch brothers could they pull their money out? I'm certainly not trashing the corporations whose stock I own in my 401K.

      • 1 vote
      #4.13 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:26 AM EST
      RainDaze

      Still, why would an employee who invests in the fund trash the Koch brothers for helping the union employee with a secure retirement?? If they have a problem with the Koch brothers could they pull their money out?

      1. They dont know where the money is being invested. The diversity of various state retirement funds is huge.

      2. Koch wasnt an issue until just the past few weeks with the fake interview (and I am not sure its an issue, its something brought up in your posts).

      3. iirc They can pull out after they quit working for the state. That will negate their retirement payment, or they can lobby for the state not to invest in those particular areas of the market (and that lobby can be any wisconsin resident such as the various lobby efforts to pull out investments in S.Africa during apartheid).

      4. The real point (as I understand it) of the Koch/Walker issue is whether Walker is working for the state of Wisconsin or outside influences (example: no bid on public utilities).

      • 3 votes
      #4.14 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:48 AM EST
      Bubba-939441

      They dont know where the money is being invested

      I don't believe that. The state is subject to full disclosure.

      • 1 vote
      #4.15 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:55 AM EST
      RainDaze

      Subject to full disclosure, yes. That doesnt mean everyone has taken the time to check it out personally. Most (myself included) look at the mailings for what I should get when I hit the age of retirement, or the soundbites on how well the total investments are doing, not about what the breakdown of the investments are by corp.

      • 1 vote
      #4.16 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 12:02 PM EST
      Bubba-939441

      Rain, do you have any problems with Georia Pacific bonds in your retirement portfolio? Would you participate in a boycott as some on here are requesting?

        #4.17 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 12:10 PM EST
        RainDaze

        If you are asking me whether I would support my retirement fund pulling out of Georgia Pacific, well that would be impossible because Georgia Pacific is not publicly traded stock and that is true of Koch Industries. Not in my retirement portfolio because its not an option.

        It was announced on November 13, 2005 that Georgia-Pacific would be acquired by Koch Industries.[2] On December 23, 2005, Koch Industries finalized the $21 billion acquisition of Georgia-Pacific. Georgia-Pacific was removed from the NYSE (it had traded under the symbol GP) and shareholders surrendered their shares for about $48/share.

        Above from wiki.

        As far as boycotting Georgia Pacific products, they are not brands I purchase anyways (at least as far as I have checked).

        • 2 votes
        #4.18 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 1:24 PM EST
        Bubba-939441

        well that would be impossible because Georgia Pacific is not publicly traded stock and that is true of Koch Industries.

        Public, private doesn't matter. If you're in the pension fund you own what used to be the debt of Georgia Pacific. Now you own the debt of Koch Brothers and fund return is dependent on the success of their private company. If you boycott Koch Brothers you boycott yourself. Why would a pension holder want their investment to fail. You're cutting your own throat.

        • 1 vote
        #4.19 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 2:18 PM EST
        RainDaze

        When a company buys out another, they pay off the stock holders and there is no debt to you any longer. I am unsure what the article references as it is, Koch (and their holdings in Georgia-Pacific) are not traded publicly since Koch bought them out. So no, boycotting Georgia-Pacific will not affect my portfolio and the purpose of a boycott is to cause pressure on the bottom line, profit. It is my power as a consumer to try to ensure corporate responsibility. They are not 'entitled' to my money.

        • 1 vote
        #4.20 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 5:04 PM EST
        Bubba-939441

        and the purpose of a boycott is to cause pressure on the bottom line, profit.

        Absolutely correct, and when the bottom line suffers your pension investment suffers.

        • 1 vote
        #4.21 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:56 PM EST
        CuriousG

        Bubba-939441,

        Very few pension plans invest so much in the company of the plans workers so as to be affected by a boycott of said company. Enron being the exception to that.

        • 3 votes
        #4.22 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:23 PM EST
        RainDaze

        and when the bottom line suffers your pension investment suffers.

        Not mine. We have established I have no holdings with Koch Ind (and apparently neither does WRS). Koch Ind. and Georgia Pacific do not offer stock. So a boycott of their products simply affects Koch Ind. profits and not my (or your) retirement.

        Sounding better and better all the time (a boycott).

        • 2 votes
        #4.23 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 12:47 AM EST
        Bubba-939441

        Koch Ind. and Georgia Pacific do not offer stock.

        Georgia Pacific bonds? In any case this little boycott will certainly not hurt Koch Industries. I remember a few yrs back Viners were going to boycott Exxon. I think they are still filling up their cars with high priced gasoline and paying the government taxes on every gallon. If Viners think corporate profits are excessive, I recommend they buy stock and get a piece of that excessive profit.

        • 1 vote
        #4.24 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 8:14 AM EST
        AL-1735815

        You can't hurt my 401k anymore than those as@h@les on Wall Street did in 2008-2009, but you don't see the "teabumlicans" complaining about that or that most of the CEOs are making over $2,000 an hour with their pay and receive millions in bonuses for screwing up the economy. Or that FOX news defended Wall Street and still call teachers over paid.

        • 3 votes
        #4.25 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 10:51 AM EST
        Reply
        Spikegary

        Once salaries and benefits become untenable, something has to change. If there's no money coming in there's no money to go out. Everyone has to feel the pain, not just everyone else.

        • 11 votes
        Reply#5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:37 AM EST
        ERich-356044

        Teachers in my district haven't had a raise in 5 years, next year will be no different.

        We have more students, and triple the amount of paperwork, due to new report cards etc. We are paying more in our medical insurance than 5 years ago, (I now pay 1/8 of my paycheck JUST for benefits.)

        Believe me, we are hurting just as much. We also made less to begin with. (being public employees)

        E

        • 19 votes
        #5.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:42 AM EST
        jawill11

        Everyone has to feel the pain, not just everyone else.

        That is a perfect argument to the wealthy and the corporations. Everyone else (the lower and middle class) have been feeling the pain for years while they continue to get tax breaks and subsidies.

        • 16 votes
        #5.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:59 AM EST
        Wizeguy

        Spikeguy:::. Everyone has to feel the pain, not just everyone else

        Except the fat cats that haven't been asked to sacrifice just keep laying tax breaks on them to create jobs...Oh wait they didn't do that here... Your anger is misdirected the Teachers and public employees did not create the crisis

        • 7 votes
        #5.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:18 AM EST
        Tired_of_ExtremistsDeleted
        Spikegary

        ERich-Nice to see you. My pension has not received a COLA increase the last 2 years, and will not see one this year or next, my job-we've been told that our boss has mandated no COLA increases this year or next too. I understand this. We will all feel the pain together-seems our government has finally seen that the light at the the end of the tunnel is right in front of the big rock wall we are careening towards. There is no way to continue to raise spending when jobs are still on the downslope-minor imporvements in the economy are great but are used to mask many of the problem areas that continue to remain unaddressed.

        Jawill-it's a perfect argument to everyone. Yes, the hyper rich and corporations should feel the pain also, but how much do you think that they have on a state-to-state basis that will erase the horrendous debt our states are in?

        Wizeguy-it's Spikegary. I have no anger towards anyone besides my state government that has never missed an opportunity to mismanage and spend more money than they had coming in especially in giving gifts to those that elected them. It's not a left or a right thing-it's an 'us' thing and a 'where do we go from here' thing.

        ToE-thanks for that. Do you have any idea what a huge hefty can liner full of vinegar and water you sound like?

        • 5 votes
        #5.5 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 12:52 PM EST
        Reply
        John-1894652

        The unions have become a money laundering apparatus for the Democrat Party. This is all fine and well in the private sector. However, the public sector is financed by the taxpayer and no taxpayer funds should be directed to any political organization.

        I don't disagree regarding unions, however allowing any corporation including foreign ones to contribute with no limit to shape their agenda is worse, at least the unions and their membership are Americans. It is class warfare and the rich would love to see the private sector middle class berate the public sector middle class, when the real problem is the redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the rich. It is about time we reverse this trend and I am not talking about trickle down. The vast majority, myself included support a surtax on millionaires. Time to give back some of that money the Republicans stole from the middle class for you. Where was the right wing angst when Bushes tax cuts were running up the deficit, and now the first thing they go after are programs for the poor and lower middle class.

        • 13 votes
        Reply#6 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:41 AM EST
        ERich-356044

        Time to give back some of that money the Republicans stole from the middle class for you. Where was the right wing angst when Bushes tax cuts were running up the deficit, and now the first thing they go for are programs for the poor and lower middle class.

        Thank you!

        • 11 votes
        #6.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:43 AM EST
        Reply
        JustMeSayingMyThing

        So a woman who works in a bar is mad that someone else has a pension. I am guessing she doesn't have a masters degree or other specialized training that many of these jobs she is envious of require. Pretty sad really, people strive to be nothing and then when they get exactly where they strived to be they want to take from people who chose to better themselves because it's not "fair."

        Honestly, my three 3 year old is less of a whiny brat than this woman.

        • 16 votes
        Reply#7 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:47 AM EST
        Tired_of_ExtremistsDeleted
        Stacey-609939

        Justmesayin....kinda snobby!..........you have no idea what her life is about, what hardships she faces, what family members need her care, etc., what her day-to-day life entails....so sorry, she didn't go to Harvard!........you can't tell me that a degree is a requirement for all public workers...........if taxpayers don't like the way their taxes are spent----taxpayers can complain!

        • 6 votes
        #7.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:07 AM EST
        JustMeSayingMyThing

        Stacey-609939

        She put herself out there to be judged by judging others. I didn't go to Harvard either and I don't expect to be paid as much as people who did. If I wanted to be paid that kind of money I would go to Harvard instead of crying that someone else did it. That's not snobby that's a reality of life you do for yourself because no one else can do it for you.

        A degree is not a requirement for most public workers, most teachers however have masters degrees. Most social workers have bachelors or masters. Most employees at other levels at least have an associates degree.

        So yes these people have put in the hours and hard work to get advanced degrees and what they get by choosing to serve the public is a lower salary than someone who works in the private sector. The trade off is they get great benefits.

        No matter what your job there are pro's and con's...if you don't like your set of circumstances you change it not attack others who have accomplished what you wish you had.

        • 4 votes
        #7.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:16 AM EST
        Stacey-609939

        sorry...some of those 'great benefits' are just 'too great'......so....if taxpayers don't like the way their taxes are spent----taxpayers can complain.

        • 5 votes
        #7.4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:24 AM EST
        JustMeSayingMyThing

        ......if taxpayers don't like the way their taxes are spent----taxpayers can complain.

        They can..but it is a waste of time and energy that could be better spent improving their own situation.

        Just so you understand the process...the correct way to "complain" is to vote in different representation not to belittle people who work just as hard as you do and have a whole lot more responsibility on their shoulders than keeping the local drunks tanked.

        some of those 'great benefits' are just 'too great'

        Says who? You? What expertise and qualifications do you have for deciding someone else's pay grade? I assume if you make these types of accusations you have data to back it up and aren't being just as petty as the lady in the story. Right?

        • 3 votes
        #7.5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:28 AM EST
        janice22

        the correct way to "complain" is to vote in different representation

        Absolutely! And that happened in November when Republicans were elected in an overwhelming sweep of state legislatures. Before anyone snaps back at me:

        The Republican Party gained 63 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, recapturing the majority, and making it the largest seat change since 1948 and the largest for any midterm election since the 1938 midterm elections. The Republicans gained six seats in the U.S. Senate, expanding its minority, and also gained 680 seats in state legislative races, to break the previous majority record of 628 set by Democrats in the post-Watergate elections of 1974. This left Republicans in control of 25 state legislatures, compared to the 15 still controlled by Democrats. After the election, Republicans took control of 29 of the 50 State Governorships.

        • 2 votes
        #7.6 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:12 AM EST
        JustMeSayingMyThing

        Absolutely! And that happened in November when Republicans were elected in an overwhelming sweep of state legislatures. Before anyone snaps back at me:

        Correct and look at where it got us so far.

        Hopefully the Democrats won't be so lazy next election and show up before these people screw up much more.

          #7.7 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:24 AM EST
          Stacey-609939

          "keeping the local drunks tanked".........real nice...jeez..

          "says who?"....says the taxpayers, ya know, the one who pay the bills, that's who!

          yeah well...we will complain!...and we have & will vote!....and things will change!!!....because the public union gravy-train is done!!!....and if anyone in the public sector doesn't like it, they can get a job in the private sector...and see what the real world's like!!

          have a nice day

          • 3 votes
          #7.8 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:24 AM EST
          waukone

          The waitress should look at how the owner of her company lives, what kind of car do they drive, are their kids going to college, how many vactions do they take? That is the place to start as should others.

          CEO/Owners pay has increase in the last 30 years by over 200% workers pay as increased by less than 5% - that is what everyone should be talking about.

          • 2 votes
          #7.9 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:33 AM EST
          JustMeSayingMyThing

          yeah well...we will complain!...and we have & will vote!..

          Not for nothing Stacey....but I am a taxpayer too and so are all the other people on this thread who don't have a problem with people being paid a fair wage for work. There is no law that says only tax payers that agree with you have a voice. BTW, all those people who have been protesting in Wisconsin they are tax payers too.

          I am still waiting to hear what your educational background is in that makes you an expert in people's pay grades?

          • 4 votes
          #7.10 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:36 AM EST
          Robert in Ohio

          waukone

          Unless you are a shareholder in a corporation, how much the CEO makes is 100% none of your dammed business.

          CEO's make what the corporation deems is their value to the business.

          Not a penny more or less

          NO one outside those shareholders has or should have anything to say about CEO compensation

          • 3 votes
          #7.11 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 1:45 PM EST
          HappyToSeeYa

          That early 2010 Citizens United SCOTUS decision was the best ever for corporations that can now use money as a first amendment right. Corporation money was spent on a 50-state strategy that caused republicans to suffer defeat by tea baggers primaries. In order to beat democrats by any means necessary, republicans teamed with tea baggers. The 50-state teapublican wins do not impress me because increasing numbers of the few people who bothered to vote are distressed at the harm that their votes are causing.

          Teapublicans do not have an overall electorate mandate to perform on behalf of corporations against we, the people. They are claiming the mandate because they won on votes from a small group of people nation-wide; that is, from the people who bothered to vote. Those people who did not vote understand, now, why every election is an important election.

          At the federal level, newly elected teapublicans outed themselves with a cherry-picked reading of the US Constitution. At the state level, the teapublican agenda was outed via Walker's prank call conversation from which we found about about the demonizing and planned destruction of public sector unions. We don't have a clue about the horrors occurring at the local levels.

          When unions are crushed what makes people think that corporations won't take back weekends, minimum wage, vacation time, sick leave, child labor protection laws, etc. which came about because of unions?

          • 3 votes
          #7.12 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 1:58 PM EST
          Reply
          Cassandra-773719

          Government jobs can't be sent to China, where there is low pay and lower benefits...although I am afraid that our own government will find a way to do it.

          • 5 votes
          Reply#8 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:50 AM EST
          Rebecca, Cape Coral, FL

          Who is this "Erin McFarlane" and why should anyone give a s$@* what she thinks??? She should stop being a bar fly, get off the shallowest of all social media sites and get a real job. Boo-Hoo Erin!!!

          • 6 votes
          Reply#9 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 8:55 AM EST
          JustMeSayingMyThing

          That's what I am saying!

          • 4 votes
          #9.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:00 AM EST
          Reply
          Rebecca, Cape Coral, FL

          Barbara Davis is either a liar, delusional or both. If she and her husband don't like the tax rates they can move. Boo-Hoo to them too.

            Reply#10 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:00 AM EST
            Wizeguy

            most non-uniformed public employees who have worked in New Jersey for 30 years with an ending salary of $85,000 can look forward to retiring at 55 with an annual pension of about $46,000

            To be fair, most public-sector retirees don't get such rich pensions

            I worked in the public sector (in Florida not New Jersey) the only people making that kind of money were the Directors or Administrators. Most were mid level employees earning $30,000 to maybe $40,000 a year. When you retire after 30 years you get about half of your annual salary.

            The idea that these retirees are living large is load of crap.

            • 9 votes
            Reply#11 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:13 AM EST
            BIG J-621659

            Usually when I see people in the working class complain about how much money or how good the benefits are in certain jobs or professions, It is from jealousy or envy, that is a part of Human nature and it is wrong but that is how we are wired!

            I would be willing to bet, that if any of these complainers were offered employment in one of these jobs or professions they would fall all over each other to get in the door!

            • 4 votes
            Reply#12 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:17 AM EST
            Kareem in my Coffee

            I have no problem with the teachers and other union workers.

            I am far more bothered by the greedy wealthy politicians who cushion their own pockets and then cry that we're broke after they get theirs.

            It's a real joke....but it's not funny.

            • 8 votes
            #13 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:18 AM EST
            waukone

            That's my point. The poor and middle class have been played while the rich have become richer and the poor poorer. 2% of the population controlls 90% of the WEALTH and they only pay 58% of the taxes. 90% of the population controls less than 10% of the WEALTH. CEO/Owner pay has increase by over 200% and wages of the workers have increased by 2%?

            What is wrong with this picture.

            • 1 vote
            #13.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:37 AM EST
            Robert in Ohio

            waukone

            If you want to be a CEO or business owner, start a business or get hired by a big corporatin

            Otherwise, you should quit worrying about what owners and CEO's make because it is none of your business or concern.

            • 1 vote
            #13.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 1:46 PM EST
            CuriousG

            What is wrong with this picture.

            Um, I'm not a CEO?

            • 2 votes
            #13.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 2:25 PM EST
            waukone

            Robert from Ohio - The information should be the interest of the employee's. Until slavery is formally adopted by the republicans we as workers should have the right to demand a living wage from corporations or our bosses. Yes, they have the right to fire us, but to roll over and stick your butt in the air to take it from your boss is unamerican.

            • 3 votes
            #13.4 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 11:55 AM EST
            Division by Zero

            Yes, they have the right to fire us, but to roll over and stick your butt in the air to take it from your boss is unamerican.

            Haven't you heard? You're supposed to be eternally grateful to even have a job and willing to accept whatever pay they deem worthy to pay you. You're supposed to roll over and take it, or leave.

            • 5 votes
            #13.5 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 12:40 PM EST
            Robert in Ohio

            waukone and Division

            Your naivete about the business world is clear and your lumping of "all" businesses and "all" CEO's into this group of heartless fuedal lords is as ridiculous.

            I worked for many years in human resources and finance for a Midwestern manufacturing corporation (over $1.5 Billion sales), we had no unions in operations and had an explicit policy that we would not deal with unions, but would close a factory as a better option.

            We felt and they still feel (I am retired) that a direct relation ship between management and the employees is preferable to dealing with a third party.

            Our employees were paid above the market level, had better benefit packages than local union workers and the market and receive an 8% annual contribution to their 401(k) plans from the company. All employees participate in a annual performance onus program tied to the profitability of the company and our average merit increases for the past ten years including 2010 works out to about 3.8%.

            Over than same 10 year period we have voluntary turnover of less than 4% in a work force of over 5000.

            Many of our employees take advantage of tuition reimbursement to get their degrees (or advanced degrees at night to better themselves) We reimburse 90% of the cost up to $5800 per year. You see we invest in our employees because we value you them.

            So in summary you know crap about businesses and what employees make and about business leaders and owners. You may have a couple of bad experiences but to think that it what all businesses are like is stupid.

            You attempts to be flippantly funny about how poorly employees are treated is ignorant and uniformed.

            Thanks for listening

            • 1 vote
            #13.6 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 1:02 PM EST
            katrix

            we as workers should have the right to demand a living wage from corporations or our bosses

            You have that right, when you apply for a position. They have the right to offer you the salary which they feel that position is worth. If you don't come to an agreement, you turn down the job offer or they choose not to hire you.

              #13.7 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 1:13 PM EST
              Brite

              Robert... you have a GOOD company. One that valued your empliyees and that your employees valued. It's not always the way, and thats where unions come in.

              Unions, as I have said before, aren't the bad guys. Like in all wlaks of life, there are good people and there are bad people. There are good people in the unions and there are bad people in the unions. You vote the bads ones OUT. You keep the good employers going, by helping them keep their happy, and if that means no unions, then don't unionize them. It's as simple as that.

              • 3 votes
              #13.8 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 1:14 PM EST
              Robert in Ohio

              Brite

              I know I had a good company

              And there are many more good companies out there which is why when the union bangers from the left start pi$$ing and moaning about no one earns a decent wage without a union, that I have to throw the bull$@!$%# flag on the field

              Are there bad employers? Of course

              Are there corrupt unions? Of course

              Are more unions and less companies the answer? Probably not because unions don't create jobs.

              Are more companies and less unions the answer? Maybe or maybe not.

              Should we all quit blaming the other side and work on the real problems facing the economy? Absolutely!!

                #13.9 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 1:36 PM EST
                waukone

                Robert - well it is nice to see that you worked for a fair company - do they still have these policies?

                I have seen to many companies who, on purpose poison and physically injure their employees'. Cheat them out of pay, don't follow employement law and believe that they won't get caught - which is true. No one watchs out for them. I know you are comfortable with that but I'm not. When neferous employers cheat, poison and injure employee's then need to be held to account. Remember the miners?

                They knew that they were in danger but like so many they were held hostage to the feed and sheltering of their families and the promises that everything was going to be fixed. I hold both the unions and the corporations responsible. If the gov isn't going to watch out for the average man/woman who will.

                If a company pay's living wages, provides benefits, etc. there is no reason for a union and I applaud them. These companies also tend to provide higher value for their stockholders by the way.

                • 2 votes
                #13.10 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 4:35 PM EST
                Robert in Ohio

                waukone

                They do still have those policies, I still do some HR consulting work with them now and again on expansion projects and planning issues. We provide high value to our employees, our stockholders and our customers that is what makes us a great place to work. And there are many other companies just like that that exist ethically and morally without the need for a union of any kind.

                If you really had evidence of what you say in the 2nd paragraph and did not report it, you are complicit in a crime so I will assume it is hyperbole. I hate hyperbole.

                I grew up in mining country in SE Ohio and no one had to work in the mines there were plenty of jobs elsewhere, but the mines paid real good. It is a personal decision, no one needs to work at a place that is dangerous or doesn't treat them fairly. They choose to based on the money and the other opportunities available, but it is a personal choice, no one in the US is chained to a job.

                  #13.11 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 4:42 PM EST
                  Division by Zero

                  If you really had evidence of what you say in the 2nd paragraph and did not report it, you are complicit in a crime so I will assume it is hyperbole.

                  The problem there is that whistleblowers get the shaft. If you're ready to blow the whistle on your employer you'd better have a substantial reserve of cash available to you because they're going to come after you with every legal gun blazing. No company ever just folds over and says, "Yeah, we're guilty and we'll make amends" when an employee or former employee blows the whistle on them. They bring their full legal team out to make that whistleblower's life a living hell.

                  • 3 votes
                  #13.12 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 4:52 PM EST
                  Robert in Ohio

                  Division

                  Never heard of federal whistleblower laws I guess

                    #13.13 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 4:55 PM EST
                    Division by Zero

                    Of course, but the protections of the various whistleblower laws don't prevent retaliation from happening, they only provide a means of compensation if retaliation is found to have happened. Often it's not what you do but what you can get away with that matters in the end. Yes, there are some good companies that will cop a mea culpa and make amends when wrongdoing is revealed, but others will try to get away with as much as they can for as long as they can.

                    • 2 votes
                    #13.14 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 5:25 PM EST
                    katrix

                    If a company pay's living wages, provides benefits, etc

                    Not all jobs deserve a living wage. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage. I made that in high school, but within half a year I got a 25 cents an hour raise (where lots of the others quit or goofed off because hey, it's just a minimum wage job). Hah, several years later my former manager from one of that job was my recruiter for my first real job - I was so glad his nickname for me was "Miss Efficiency."

                    And if you're only making minimum wage, what are you doing starting a family? If you want to get ahead, you wait to have kids until you can afford to take care of yourself. You have to make some hard personal choices in life if you want to support yourself.

                    • 2 votes
                    #13.15 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 6:59 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Robert in Ohio

                    It appears that the "private" sector wworkers are not so unanimously behind the public sector union workers as the left and union leaders would like us to believe.

                    Everyone is hurting and some think that the publis sector union folks migh thave it a little too easy.

                    When this all plays out, however it plays out, the resulting public feelings will be interesting to explore and analyze.

                    • 3 votes
                    Reply#14 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:20 AM EST
                    Philip Grant

                    When are we going to wake up? They are pitting us against each other. This public sector, private sector worker argument is being used as a distraction.

                    Why isn't anyone at least "talking" about the huge tax write offs and tax subsidies the major corporations get? We have multi-billion dollar Corporations in the country that pay virtually no taxes at all!!

                    I don't mind giving back, but don't tell me that you want me to relinquish even my right bargain while at the same time major corporations that received tax payer bail outs and are now making profits up the WAZOO, while they won't invest, won't hire, but are still getting tax breaks!!!!

                    This is a bunch of BULL KAKA..

                    We need to stop arguing with each other and realize that we are all taking it up the keester.

                    There are both Conservatives and Liberals, Pubic sector and Non at the gas pumps to pay almost a half days pay for a feaking tank of gas, and lets not mention heating fuel.

                    How about sending our kids to school? We got to pay up the ying yang if we want them join a team, or cheer lead, or be the band. That's not Conservative or Liberal or Public Sector, or Non Public sector money. All of us getting the business.

                    Have you been to the grocery store lately? Whens the last time you saw a Public or Private sector pound of grapes? How about a Liberal or Conservative gallon of milk. All of us are getting hosed.

                    I'm telling you folks, we better wake up. WE ARE BEING PLAYED!!!

                    • 10 votes
                    Reply#15 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:26 AM EST
                    JustMeSayingMyThing

                    Amen to that.....they have to divide us so we will be distracted and will not pay close attention to what they are doing.

                    • 1 vote
                    #15.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:29 AM EST
                    Tired_of_ExtremistsDeleted
                    Bill 1977

                    x3.

                    • 1 vote
                    #15.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:44 AM EST
                    sherri2012

                    Agreed. It is a brilliant strategy, and it has always worked pretty seamlessly.

                    • 1 vote
                    #15.4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:06 AM EST
                    HappyToSeeYa

                    "directly paid out of your pocket" - again, no recognition or understanding that public employees pay taxes and otherwise participate in the communities where they live [shaking my head in disgust]

                    Yeah, it is true, people are so busy hating their next door neighbor for having a public sector job that they do not bother to engage in efforts to be heard with regard to push back against corporations that have had ten years of tax breaks extended to off shore jobs instead of providing jobs for Americans.

                    Be so busy hating neighbors that it goes unnoticed that jobs provided are slave wage jobs with no benefits. Increase your hate aginst your neighbors who won't be long public sector employed because the public sector is scaling back salaries/laying off employees because of the reduced rate of tax receipts from both public and private employees. Corporations are faceless and don't pay taxes or compensation for the use of your communities' resources like roads, water, police protection and fire assistance, so they are off the hook for blame and hate. Be sure to add more corporate bought politicians during the next election who will do their very best to make the quality of your life hell on earth because those politicians will successfully give more to corporations while demonizing government, especially those among you who have public sector jobs.

                    We, in the public and private sectors are the people and we, the people should not be enemies of each other.

                    • 2 votes
                    #15.5 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 2:53 PM EST
                    CEW-1678197

                    Yes Phillip, the Dems and the Reps both do a bit of distracting at times to get their agenda through, but those who really do not understand business, and that does include the majority of our elected officials, end up pandering to either the unions (for votes and contributions), or the corporations and special interest groups for money (in the form of campaign contributions).

                    As to why no one is talking about all the tax write-offs, simple... those who know how businesses work know they are always trying to succeed and expand or improve operations, at times for better products, at times for better performance, and even at times to improve work conditions. But at times they are faced with unexpected challenges like increased operating expenses and local taxes that put a damper on things. Take Robert's former organizations. It pays its workers better than the industry average and adds some pretty good benefits into the mix. Then along comes a union that decides it needs to get into the game, because doing so increases their membership and brings in more cash. The end result will be unionized workers making the same wage, but now paying dues. And that is where it begins. After that, there will be new union demands affecting operations, pay and benefits, possible restrictions to hiring of non-union workers... and on and on. Other problems occur when poorly managed states like California make the cost of operations so high and living so expensive, it is hard to obtain the skilled labor you need or to remain in business. That is when the tax breaks come in, and they are usually offered by states to keep businesses in the state, or as in the case of Oklahoma, offered to companies moving out of one state like California to set up operations in Oklahoma. The tax incentives don't last forever, typically only a few years, and are usually limited to certain taxes. But it does make it profittable and possible for a company to move to a location where they can survive and compete. In the end, the state gets its money back through tax revenues earned from sales and increased state employment.

                    • 1 vote
                    #15.6 - Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:38 AM EST
                    Grey Wolf

                    "Yes Phillip, the Dems and the Reps both do a bit of distracting at times to get their agenda through…"

                    GE, through its ownership of NBC/MSNBC is currently doing the distracting. Meanwhile, they make millions from supplying to the US military … probably best to keep Afghanistan of the front page of Newsvine… Out of site, out of mind. "Hey, look at that nasty teacher sucking up all of your tax dollars. [Ignore that bloated "defense" budget…]"

                    • 1 vote
                    #15.7 - Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:14 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Bill 1977

                    "I don't think that a federal employee or government employee is worth any more than anybody else who does their job and does it well," said the Slinger, Wis., woman. She's been working a couple of bartending jobs since January, when she was laid off from her job at a Harley Davidson plant after almost a decade."

                    She has GOT to be kidding. Our kids need an education and motorcycles need assembling. So should these 2 jobs have equal pay and benefits? Of course not, specialized talent or training deserves premiums. A teacher has a hell of a lot more responsibility and needed a hell of a lot more schooling than the person assembling motorcycles. Putting all these jobs on even ground sounds an awful lot like that Communism thing the right is always on about.

                    • 5 votes
                    Reply#16 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:43 AM EST
                    Tchem

                    Spot on Bill! Public jobs require twice the number of college degrees as compared to private. Studies do not show a significant disconnect between public and private sector salaries (except for the benefits of Congress).

                    For a private-section worker who retires at 55, relying solely on a 401(k) without an employer match, it would take a $100 contribution to a plan every week for 30 years

                    That is just about the same amount that our public school teachers contribute to their retirement each week. Teaching has always been the job that has very limited upward mobility (contrare to private sector), but is compensated with good benefits. This same holds true for our military. If more emphasis would be put on those folks who have no intention of ever being a productive member of society, this country could make much quicker progress. But then again, what politicians wants to lose votes by holding voters accountable?

                    • 4 votes
                    #16.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:14 AM EST
                    Reply
                    babina

                    Why don't people like McFarlane and Davis get angry at and jealous of the people that are actually responsible for the ecomonic meltdown and susequent state and federal budget deficits, and are still in the top 2% of wealthiest Americans? Massive fraud on Wall Street, perpetrated by these billionaires, is responsible, not teachers, police, firefighters, public workers.

                    -Combined net worth of the Forbes 400 wealthiest Americans in 2007: $1.5 trillion.
                    -Combined net worth of the poorest 50% (150 million) of American households: $1.6 trillion.

                    http://extremeinequality.org/?page_id=8

                    You might also find this article interesting:

                    9 Pictures That Expose This Country's Obscene Division of Wealth

                    Many people don’t understand our country’s problem of concentration of income and wealth because they don’t see it. People just don't understand how much wealth there is at the top now. The wealth at the top is so extreme that it is beyond most people’s ability to comprehend.

                    If people understood just how concentrated wealth has become in our country and the effect is has on our politics, our democracy and our people, they would demand our politicians do something about it.

                    How Much Is A Billion?

                    Some Wall Street types (and others) make over a billion dollars a year – each year. How much is a billion dollars? How can you visualize an amount of money so high? Here is one way to think about it: The median household income in the US is around $29,000, meaning half of us make less and half make more. If you make $29,000 a year, and don’t spend a single penny of it, it will take you 34,482 years to save a billion dollars. . . . (Please come back and read the rest of this after you have recovered.).... - Dave Johnson

                    Read the entire article here:

                    http://www.alternet.org/economy/149918/9_pictures_that_expose_this_country%27s_obscene_division_of_wealth/?page=entire

                    Now, I already know that Alternet is a left leaning, liberal, whatever website, but that does not change the facts in the article. Mr. Johnson also includes links to his sources so you can check the facts out for yourself.

                    • 6 votes
                    Reply#17 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 9:56 AM EST
                    mtpromises

                    very good babina!

                    • 1 vote
                    #17.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:01 AM EST
                    sherri2012

                    babina -

                    Thanks for posting something that should help people wrap their minds around what has happened to the distribution of wealth in this country.

                    I will come back and read the article.

                    • 2 votes
                    #17.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:08 AM EST
                    Bill 1977

                    Great post, babina. The facts are out there, but certain people choose to completely ignore them.

                    • 1 vote
                    #17.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:11 AM EST
                    sherri2012

                    Babina -

                    I read the article at your link, and all I can say is, Holy Sh__...Rush Limbaugh owns six Maybachs? I guess that's one to park at each of the five Palm Beach homes he owns, plus a sixth to just tool around in.

                    I must confess, at times like this I am ashamed to share citizenship in the same country with people who were willing to help catapault an obnoxious toad like RL to fame and fortune.

                    The article is mind-boggling, to say the least. The real kicker is discovering that the inequity of wealth in America is greater than Egypt's.

                    So I wonder...does that fact mean that we now have second-world status?

                    • 1 vote
                    #17.4 - Wed Mar 9, 2011 9:30 AM EST
                    Reply
                    Bootstraps

                    Collective Bargaining is a Fiscal Issue

                    Madison—Today Governor Walker’s office released more specific examples to show how collective bargaining fiscally impacts government and how reforming collective bargaining can improve government.

                    No Volunteer Crossing Guards Allowed

                    A Wausau public employee union filed a grievance to prohibit a local volunteer from serving as a school crossing guard. The 86-year-old lives just two blocks away and serves everyday free of charge.

                    Principal Steve Miller says, "He said, you know, this gives me a reason to get up in the morning to come and help these kids in the neighborhood."

                    But for a local union that represents crossing guards, it isn't that simple. Representatives didn't want to go on camera but say if a crossing guard is needed, then one should be officially hired by the city.

                    Source: WAOW-TV, 1/27/10

                    $6,000 Extra for Carrying a Pager

                    Some state employees, due to the nature of their positions, are required to carry pagers during off-duty hours in order to respond to emergency situations. Due to the collective bargaining agreements, these employees are compensated an extra five hours of pay each week, <span>whether they are paged or not</span>.

                    For an employee earning an average salary of $50,000 per year, this requirement can cost more than $6,000 in additional compensation.

                    Source: 2008-09 Agreement between the State of Wisconsin and AFSCME Council 24

                    Arbitrator Reinstates Porn-Watching Teacher

                    A Cedarburg school teacher was reinstated by an arbitrator after being fired for viewing pornography on a school computer. The school district ultimately succeeded in terminating the teacher only after taking the case to the Wisconsin Supreme Court at great cost to the taxpayers.

                    Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 8/23/08

                    ‘Outstanding First Year Teacher’ Laid Off

                    Milwaukee Public Schools teacher Megan Sampson was laid off less than one week after being named Outstanding First Year Teacher by the Wisconsin Council of English Teachers. She lost her job because the collective bargaining agreement requires layoffs to be made based on seniority rather than merit.

                    Informed that her union had rejected a lower-cost health care plan, that still would have required zero contribution from teachers, Sampson said, “Given the opportunity, of course I would switch to a different plan to save my job, or the jobs of 10 other teachers.

                    Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/14/10

                    Union Opposes Cost-Saving Lawn Mowing Program

                    As a cost cutting measure, Racine County began using county inmates to cut the grass in medians and right-of-ways at no cost to the taxpayers. A county employee union filed a grievance indicating it was the right of government workers to cut the grass, even though it would cost the taxpayers dramatically more.

                    Source: Racine Journal Times, 5/12/10

                    A Year’s Worth of Pay for 30 Days of Work

                    Under the Green Bay School District’s collectively bargained Emeritus Program, teachers can retire and receive a year’s worth of salary for working only 30 days over a three year period. This is paid in addition to their already guaranteed pension and health care payouts.

                    Source: WLUK-TV, 3/3/11

                    The $150,000 Bus Driver

                    In 2009, the City of Madison’s highest paid employee was a bus driver who earned $159,258, including $109,892 in overtime, guaranteed by a collective bargaining agreement. In total, seven City of Madison bus drivers made more than $100,000 per year in 2009.

                    "That's the (drivers') contract," said Transit and Parking Commission Chairman Gary Poulson.

                    Source: Wisconsin State Journal, 2/7/10

                    $150,000 Correctional Officers

                    Correctional Officer collective bargaining agreements allow officers a practice known as “sick leave stacking.” Officers can call in sick for a shift, receiving 8 hours of sick pay, and then are allowed to work the very next shift, earning time-and-a-half for overtime. This results in the officer receiving 2.5 times his or her rate of pay, while still only working 8 hours.

                    In part because of these practices, 13 correctional officers made more than $100,000 in 2009, despite earning base wages of less than $60,000 per year. The officers received an average of $66,000 in overtime pay for an average annual salary of more than $123,000 with the highest paid receiving $151,181.

                    Source: Department of Corrections

                    Previously the Governors office released these examples of the fiscal impact of collective bargaining:

                    <span>Paid-Time off for Union Activities</span>

                    In Milwaukee County alone, because the union collectively bargained for paid time off, fourteen employees receive salary and benefits for doing union business. Of the fourteen, three are on full-time release for union business. Milwaukee County spent over $170,000 in salary alone for these employees to only participate in union activities such as collective bargaining.

                    <span>Surrender of Management Rights</span>

                    Because of collecting bargaining, unions have included provisions in employee contracts that have a direct fiscal impact such as not allowing management to schedule workers based on operational needs and requiring notice and approval by the union prior to scheduling changes. As County Executive Walker attempted to reduce work hours based on budget pressures and workload requirements by instituting a 35 hour work week to avoid layoffs, which the union opposed. Additionally, government cannot explore privatization of functions that could save taxpayers money.

                    <span>WEA Trust</span><span> </span>

                    Currently many school districts participate in WEA trust because WEAC collectively bargains to get as many school districts across the state to participate in this union run health insurance plan as possible. Union leadership benefits from members participating in this plan. If school districts enrolled in the state employee health plan, it would save school districts up to $68 million per year. Beyond that if school districts had the flexibility to look for health insurance coverage outside of WEA trust or the state plan, additional savings would likely be realized.

                    <span> </span>

                    <span>Viagra for Teachers</span>

                    The Milwaukee Teachers Education Association (MTEA) tried to use a policy established by collective bargaining to obtain health insurance coverage that specifically paid for Viagra. Cost to taxpayers is $786,000 a year.

                    Reference: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/milwaukee-schools-ban-viagra-teachers-union-sues-discrimination/story?id=11378595

                    <span>Unrealistic Overtime Provisions</span>

                    On a state level, the Department of Corrections allows correctional workers who call in sick to collect overtime if they work a shift on the exact same day. The specific provision that allows this to happen was collectively bargained for in their contract. Cost to taxpayers $4.8 million.

                    • 4 votes
                    Reply#18 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:01 AM EST
                    mtpromises

                    the 86 year old crossing guard is taking money from someone else's pocket. he's retired and if he wants to volunteer at something, go work a soup kitchen or go to a retirement home and help out those less fortunate than him

                    most people who are required to be 'on call' get paid extra--personally, I avoid jobs that have an on-call requirement, on-call sucks

                    a teacher looked at porn? OMG, let's spend buku bucks on fancy lawyers going to the supreme court with it--pretty pathetic, considering all they would have had to do would be to establish procedures that state that porn viewin on school property would be grounds for dismissal

                    seniority should mean something-- it doesn't in non union jobs, so that way the boss's cousin can take your job and you got nothing to say about it

                    the private prison industry loves to make money off the labor of their inmates

                    • 2 votes
                    #18.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:15 AM EST
                    Townes Van ZandtDeleted
                    Philip Grant

                    This is just the kind of nit picking bull crap that those in high office want you to get into. You sit and isolate some cases of what you call "abuse" to justify allowing the powerful to put their foot up your neighbors ass.

                    You will never see the people engineering these take overs and spreading this discontent on grocery line with you or at gas station. Their kids don't go to school with your kids, but that union worker you're griping about does.

                    Go ahead, fight with your neighbor over a slice, while someone else walks away the pie.

                    You'll be next!!

                    • 2 votes
                    #18.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:10 AM EST
                    waukone

                    As in any large organizations these issues piss people off - but don't get mad at the 99% who are doing their jobs and working with the rules they have.

                    Get pissed off and demand renegotiate and fix the contracts - to destroy collective bargaining because of these issues. Union Members vote out union officials who abuse the system as we should vote out politicians who do stupid things.

                    You don't destroy the government because of stupid.

                    For a healthy balance the unions/gov/corporations must be in balance without anyone group having to much power. Right now the corporations have all the power.

                    • 1 vote
                    #18.4 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:46 AM EST
                    Reply
                    sherri2012

                    Agreed that 50 is too young for people to be able to retire, given that we are living much longer these days. Still:

                    "It's not a matter of fairness," he said. "It's a matter of evolution."

                    No, it's a matter of DEvolution....devolution and decline of prosperity for American workers.

                    As the prosperity of Americans in the private work force continues to devolve, they have begun to look with envy upon those in the public work force who yet retain the type of benefits that the private work force, by and large, has itself lost. In large part, these include a pension for life in one's old age, as opposed to the harsh reality for the private worker: a retirement funded by a 401k that runs out if the worker "lives too long," resulting I suppose in zero income for the hapless worker who is now in all likelihood way too old and/or infirm to be able to work for a living.

                    The solution is not to strip these kinds of benefits away from public sector workers...the solution is to get them back for the private sector. A reasonably comfortable retirement with dignity forms an essential part of the decent standard of life rightfully expected by the citizens of a prosperous nation.

                    If we can't accomplish this, then I suppose we'll just continue our devolution towards third-world lifestyles for all Americans (except, of course, for our elites).

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#19 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:01 AM EST
                    babina

                    After the trillion dollar bailouts GW Bush and his treasury secretary Hank Paulson insisted we had to do, none of which was paid for, when we wanted Wall Street hedge fund managers and executives to take lower salaries and not take bonuses in the millions of dollars we were told it was owed to them because they had contracts and/or somehow they earned those bonuses, or somehow the talent would leave, blah, blah, blah.

                    When we wanted the tax cuts for individuals earning over $250,000 per year to expire, we were told that $250,000 per year was living at the poverty level, no one could live on that, blah, blah, blah.

                    When teachers, police, firefighters, and other public workers are earning a middle class living wage with decent benefits, it's unreasonable? Teachers and these other occupations have contracts, they are talent, they earn their salary and benefits and in many cases give up the "instant gratification salary" you find in the private sector in exchange for benefits.

                    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-3-2011/crisis-in-the-dairyland---for-richer-and-poorer---teachers-and-wall-street

                    And how do you compare the education and years of training to become a teacher to assembling motorcycles on a production line?

                    Massive fraud on Wall Street is reponsible for the state and federal deficits. Not teachers, not policeman, not firefighters, not public workers.

                    If were true that public workers having no baragaining rights would result in budget surpluses, then Texas would be rolling in a surplus. Instead, Texas has a budget deficit that may be as high as $27 billion. Even with the "advantage" of not having to pay for benefits negotiated through collective bargaining, Texas still faces a worse budget crisis than Wisconsin and most every other state.

                    • 3 votes
                    Reply#20 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:02 AM EST
                    bontox

                    All aboard the bitter, resentful train to “I gave up a long time ago and so should you”…

                    So, the cornerstone of this article is an ex-Harley Davidson employee who now bartends. She is jealous of cops and teachers because they have a pension. Amazing. The god-dude in there too…the one saying that the protesters got it all and should not want more. What does that mean!? The protesters have said they will give more even though they are by no means affluent, but don’t take away their right to bargain. I haven’t seen any of them say they want more.

                    My take away from this article can be summed up like this:

                    Instead of being jealous of those who get shot at for a living (cops), those who teach our children how to comprehend the basics of math and language (teachers) and those who save our lives when no one else will (firefighters), etc. how about we stand up for those in the private sector, too? Meaning, instead of calling it “evolution” that the working class loses more and more rights and dignity we should push the private sector to at the very least be AS GOOD as the public sector.

                    Really, there is a lot of money to be made in the USA. I do not believe for an instant that mega-corporations will stop doing business here if they have to pay more in taxes and supply base benefits to employees. Let’s say that preposterous argument holds some water…the one that dictates big corporations will run away from billions of dollars in profits if they invest a little to make a lot. FINE! Run away then!

                    Why am I for calling the bluff of a mega-corporation exodus? Because is it not the small business owner who is the engine of our economy? How is it bad at all for say Best Buy to close all of its doors and for hundreds of thousands of small business across the country opening their doors for business instead?

                    • 7 votes
                    Reply#21 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:11 AM EST
                    Townes Van ZandtDeleted
                    Coral Atlas

                    America is not broke ... just a lot of dumb workers fighting over table scraps.

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#23 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:33 AM EST
                    bontox

                    Your view point is cruel and shrewd. Thanks…but that hurt.

                    • 1 vote
                    #23.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:39 AM EST
                    Coral Atlas

                    bontox - not cruel - just the truth - and yes the truth does hurt -so let's do something about it instead of eating the crap that the GOP is shoveling in the mouths of ALL workers!

                      #23.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 4:23 PM EST
                      Reply
                      Mark Johnson-2809748

                      www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmWrCIuIgJ4

                        Reply#24 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:35 AM EST
                        Mark Johnson-2809748

                        <a href="">Our Way</a>

                        • 1 vote
                        #24.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:49 AM EST
                        Mark Johnson-2809748

                        I give up. :) Copy and past to watch the PSA. Wisconsin protests meet the Laverne and Shirley theme song...

                          #24.2 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:02 AM EST
                          JustMeSayingMyThing

                          If you want the link to be live just add a http:// to the front of it. or....if you use the anchor text structure <a href="">Our Way</a> right between those two quotes you put the URL including the http :)

                            #24.3 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:04 AM EST
                            Reply
                            bontox

                            “All the talk about whether they deserve he pay and benefits is irrelevant. Private sector workers are hurting. To force them to provide a better life for public employees than they have themselves is ridiculous.” - Townes Van Zandt

                            This one made my head hurt. Townes, when did the economic downturn become the private sectors own cuddly hell? The public sector is hurting too! Here is a personal case in point, my brother works for the state. He hasn’t seen a pay raise in a decade. Recently and over the course of a few months he has seen his department loose over half of its personnel (with an uptick in work and they are now backlogged to the detriment of the service they provide to the public and private sector) due to mass layoffs.

                            Most of those fired were a few month/years short of their full retirement...

                            Do you feel better now that you know designated public sector Americans have it just as sad and bad as you do? Is this your pleasure?

                            Here is a weird idea: instead of wallowing is self-contempt maybe you could…I don’t know…stand up and demand that the privet sector get in line with that which employs the oh so wealthy, uber-rich nurse driving the 1990 Honda Civic and living in her studio apartment after a 12 hour work day?

                            Then again, you too can wipe peoples butts for decades and have a whopping $30,000.00 a year in pension to exist on when you retire...sometime in your 60s or 70s. All you have to do is go to school, learn a skill and keep showing up for work. That is until there is an economic downturn and some of your fellow Americans decide that you are way too uppity with your old car that doesn’t have bald tiers like theirs does.

                            • 5 votes
                            Reply#25 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:37 AM EST
                            Tchem

                            stand up and demand that the privet sector get in line with that which employs the oh so wealthy, uber-rich nurse driving the 1990 Honda Civic and living in her studio apartment after a 12 hour work day?

                            Good points bontox! Unfortunately, there are too many in this generation of entitlements that would choose not to spend the time learning (without pay & with a accumulation of thousands in student loan debt) and developing a work ethic...even when they know what a benefit this will have for the success of their children. Money taken from the taxpayer and given to someone who has no intentions of ever becoming a productive member of society is outright theft...and a drain on this country!

                            • 1 vote
                            #25.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:31 AM EST
                            Reply
                            fstwarrior

                            I am a Federal Employee. When I retire at age 70, with 30 years Fed Service, I will receive 1.1% of my average high three, which at this time, is averaging $73,000. My retirement will be $24,090 a year, or $2007 a month before taxes. Social Security sent me a notice two weeks ago that said if I work until age 70, my SS will be $1,844.00 a month (after working for 55 years and paying in to SS). Right now, I'm paying $1,244 a month in health care, $88 for life, and $608 for a savings plan (yes, the gvnmnt is paying their share also). The savings plan will give me $258 a month. My total earnings, before taxes, when I retire will be $4,109 a month - AFTER taxes, it will be $3,201.

                            THEN the excitement begins - house payment, house insurance, groceries, car payment, car insurance, health insurance, life insurance, utilities, daughter's "extra-curricular" activities, gas for cars - and no "extra" treats, and my left-over income for each month will equal $141.00. Heaven forbid something break in the house or on the cars or on one of us, or that we need dental work (nope, no ins).

                            Yes Erin - I used to be a bartender, working my way through college for a degree and made a bunch of money (most unreported). I have also earned an additional degree and two Master's degrees - just to satisfy the requirements for my job.

                            My bud in the private sector is making $212,000 - same job, less education requirements - plus pension plus 3/4 salary upon retirement after 20 years. Oh, yeah - he's union.

                            Explain to me Erin, how we government employees have it so much better than you.

                            • 8 votes
                            Reply#26 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 10:47 AM EST
                            Tchem

                            Good points fstwarrior! Some folks have because they have earned it, and some don't have because they have not yet earned it. Some have all their needs provided for even though they have never earned it, and never have the intentions of earning it.

                              #26.1 - Tue Mar 8, 2011 11:35 AM EST
                              Reply
                              Jump to discussion page: 1 2
                              Leave a Comment:
                              You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                              You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                              (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                              Newsvine Privacy Statement
                              As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                              FUN STUFF:
                              • Leaderboard |
                              • E-Mail Alerts |
                              • Top of the Vine |
                              • Newsvine Live |
                              • Newsvine Archives |
                              • The Greenhouse
                              COMPANY STUFF:
                              • Code of Honor |
                              • Company Info |
                              • Contact Us |
                              • Jobs |
                              • User Agreement |
                              • Privacy Policy |
                              • About our ads
                              LEGAL STUFF:
                              • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                              • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                              • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com