Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow. This is just emblematic of several other posts in this thread. Like all workers the average fed pays taxes, buys goods and services, has a 401 k which contributes to investments -- just like any other worker in the U.S.
Blaming federal workers for the housing market crash? Really? How about the brilliantly overpaid Wall Street financial wonders who threw actual credit checking out the window, engaged in some fairly shady accounting practices and primed by legislation lobbied for by the banking industry to ease regulations on those very practices.
But you say we should keep spending on defense. There was a wise President who warned of defense spending causing an defense industry complex -- a web wherein spending on defense products (mulltimillion dollar arms) and the jobs those created would become an issue for the USA. I wish we had listed to Dwight D. Eisenhower. But now we are where we are -- discretionary spending by the government is mostly on defense -- this is not the greatest place to be with respect to maintaining a solid economy.
Also, I think there are federal positions that do things with no comparison in the private sphere. I would suspect that national park rangers, NASA scientists, and Los Alamos National Lab employees would fall into that Much of their work is in the structure of the federal government research, conservation, or defense infrastructure, which typically is aggregated in specific locations across the country. Those areas would be strongly impacted if the plug were pulled. I also know that scientists at least are extremely hardworking, and usually put in far more hours than they even submit for pay. Most of those with PhDs and years of experience and highly specialized skills earn between $50 and $100k. Rangers I know often earn between $35k and $60k. Hardly fatcats. If their positions were privatized, I suspect salaries would be higher.
Nah, truly, I'd say 50 percent. We need to cut government big time, because the government workers are the main beneficiary of my taxes and they don't spend any money in the private sector at all, instead choosing to hoard it for themselves. That's exactly why the housing market crashed.
We should probably keep spending on defense though.
I hate to point out how ridiculous some of you statements re but, " they don't spend any money in the private sector at all". Really?
Are you saying they don't buy houses, groceries, clothes, cars, etc? They don't do ANY shopping on the areas where they live?They don't pay for electricity or gas? They don't pay local taxes at all?
I think you are a little senile.
A 50% cut right off the bat wouldn't be any good.
Once you start to phase out some Agencies you could probably get down to the 50% level.
Since I'm guessing I'm the only Fed on this board, let me give you the insider perspective. First, one minor correction: by 2014 20% of the federal workforce will be eligible to retire with full benefits. Right now a lot of the retirement eligible people are staying put until the economy stabilizes. Furthermore a lot of agencies have frozen hiring, decreased money for salaries, or implemented downsizing like 2 vacancies before 1 job is announced. With little upward mobility, a lot of our more qualified personnel are leaving the Fed for the private sector.
A lot of the people at the higher end of the payscale aren't supervisors, but professionals like lawyers and medical personnel. The Fed needs to pay competitive wages to attract qualified applicants. It also depends on the agency. The Department of Defense is the worst offender for padded HQ positions, as they have multiple HQ's for everything (and don't forget those 'liaisons' between the HQ's). A lot of the smaller agencies are MUCH tighter with their upper management positions, some have been described as 'a knifefight' to get.
If I wanted to cut the Fed, this is how I'd do it:
1. Start relocating jobs outside the DC area. This is a high cost area, and every Fed here is paid 14% above what the Federal governement pays in most parts of the U.S. With modern technology and communications, there's no real reason to cluster so many Feds around the DC area.
2. Mandatory retirement at age 62. This would free up a lot of the upper management position for new blood and help reopen the promotion pipeline, letting us keep our best people.
3. Implement a max size on the civilian workforce (one already exists for uniformed military personnel); then a 2:1 vacancy replacement until we get below that cap. At DoD, it should be 3:1 and include HQ consolidations.
You are by no means NOT the only fed on this board. I am a retired fed from DC and have posted so on this very thread. There are many more.
Agencies are here because it the headquarters for the agencies.
If they were located across the U.S it would cost a hell-of-a-lot to transport all the honchos to D.C every time there was a meeting they had to attend.
That is the point. Government employees are paid too much, by us 'the taxpayer'. Your pay should be cut to equal what someone in your field makes in the private sector.
Another, "I am right" poster with little knowledge of the subject.
I took a PAY CUT to worked for Uncle Sam.
I had contractors making more then me and I was in charge of them.
Tell me, what do you do and how much are you paid?
I'm pretty sure that Federal workers are on a 2 year pay freeze.
The op is talking a pay cut, not a freeze - which I agree with.
Reduce their salaries at least 10 percent, and that will make
up for the unwarranted cost of living raises they received
during the artificial housing boom 2000 - 2008.
The op is talking a pay cut, not a freeze - which I agree with.
Reduce their salaries at least 10 percent, and that will make
up for the unwarranted cost of living raises they received
during the artificial housing boom 2000 - 2008.
And after that, lay off 1/4 of them as well
I'd be quite impressed if you were one of those federal workers and were willing to take a 10% paycut or even the possibility of losing your job to help the country out financially.
But i'm sure you are very comfortable in your lifestyle where its very easy to expect others to make all the sacrifices.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
