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.
lying really doesn't help your cause. in fact it infuriates people even more. you keep using words like SACRIFICE. what does the average federal employee sacrifice? please your rhetoric would probably work on someone who has never worked a day in the federal government, but i have my friend. i know how it is. they make so much of a sacrifice that the usa today did an article on it in which it details how federal pay is ahead of private industry pay in 8 out of 10 categories. don't believe me? here ya go:
"These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis."
If any government employee has sacrificed to serve, it's those at the state and local levels (the same folks fighting to keep what little they have). Don't believe me? Here's another highlight for ya:
"•State and local. State government employees had an average salary of $47,231 in 2008, about 5% less than comparable jobs in the private sector. City and county workers earned an average of $43,589, about 2% more than private workers in similar jobs. State and local workers have higher total compensation than private workers when the value of benefits is included."
That's some sacrifice I tell ya...
First, you need to re-read what I wrote. You're mixing some of the things I have said with other people's stuff. I never said anything not showing up, or that you never worked for the government, or anything else you're accusing me of saying. If you re-read what I original wrote to GaBison, you will see that I said in the first paragraph about having a government job that is more stable is a tradeoff for higher pay.
Again your article is flawed because the article fails to present the idea of how much experience these individuals have. You can't compare a nurse that has worked 20 years with the government, with one that have only worked 5 years at a certain company. Like I said, government workers tend to have more seniority than private workers, but if you compare individuals position to position based off of equal experience, like a computer programming manager in the government versus a computer programming manager in the private sector you will see a difference. Just to say nurses make more in the government is not a fair comparison because there are a lot of factors that go into it:
1. What geographic location do these private sector nurses work as opposed to federal workers? A nurse that works in Stafford VA would probably make less money than one in Bethesda MD. Most government employees work near major cities therefore they tend to make more based off of location.
2. Do they have the same years of experience? Most government workers tend to stay longer, so they tend to EARN higher pay than one who jumps from job-to-job. That doesn't mean they get paid more, but they eventually earn more over their career.
There is nothing in the article that indicates that these were factors used to compare the salaries.
To be competetive for a federal position, you usually have to have better than an 'average' resume.
I do not think that the federal white collared positions offer particularly good pay. Maybe someone who is piddling along in their career (or taking less pay for a position they wanted intentionally) would look at federal pay, and thing 'that's pretty good', but anyone that's excelling in their field would not find them competitive.
Sure there are lawyers peppered across the country who earn the average $126k or less, but I don't personally know a single first year lawyer who made that little, let alone a skilled lawyer with experience.
I honestly don't know how the blue collared jobs stack up. I was making ~30k as a line cook in PA from when I was 15-22. That's a lot closer to the federal pay than the national average, and I didn't have any culinary degree.
First, you need to re-read what I wrote. You're mixing some of the things I have said with other people's stuff. I never said anything not showing up, or that you never worked for the government, or anything else you're accusing me of saying. If you re-read what I original wrote to GaBison, you will see that I said in the first paragraph about having a government job that is more stable is a tradeoff for higher pay.
Again your article is flawed because the article fails to present the idea of how much experience these individuals have. You can't compare a nurse that has worked 20 years with the government, with one that have only worked 5 years at a certain company. Like I said, government workers tend to have more seniority than private workers, but if you compare individuals position to position based off of equal experience, like a computer programming manager in the government versus a computer programming manager in the private sector you will see a difference. Just to say nurses make more in the government is not a fair comparison because there are a lot of factors that go into it:
1. What geographic location do these private sector nurses work as opposed to federal workers? A nurse that works in Stafford VA would probably make less money than one in Bethesda MD. Most government employees work near major cities therefore they tend to make more based off of location.
2. Do they have the same years of experience? Most government workers tend to stay longer, so they tend to EARN higher pay than one who jumps from job-to-job. That doesn't mean they get paid more, but they eventually earn more over their career.
There is nothing in the article that indicates that these were factors used to compare the salaries.
You are totally missing the point. If you have taken statistics then you will know that average (or mean) takes into account a range of values to come up with the average. Just because YOU don't make the average does not make the data wrong.
The federal government budget never decreases overall, regardless of economic reality.
If you can make more money, and get better benefits in the private sector then why aren't you in it?
To be competetive for a federal position, you usually have to have better than an 'average' resume.
I do not think that the federal white collared positions offer particularly good pay. Maybe someone who is piddling along in their career (or taking less pay for a position they wanted intentionally) would look at federal pay, and thing 'that's pretty good', but anyone that's excelling in their field would not find them competitive.
what would you consider a federal white collar position? If I were thinking of the ultimate white collar position, i'd be thinking of doctors. Doctors who work for the feds make nearly identical salaries to the private sector. This doesn't include the $50k benefits that federal employees enjoy vs. the $10k benefits that private sector employees scrum by on.
Physicians, surgeons$176,050$177,102-$1,052
Sure there are lawyers peppered across the country who earn the average $126k or less, but I don't personally know a single first year lawyer who made that little, let alone a skilled lawyer with experience.
i'm sorry but that's just bull. the average lawyer makes:
Lawyer$123,660$126,763-$3,103
You are either really old or really blessed to not know of ANY single 1st year lawyer who made less than $123K a year. I can name a few, in fact you can thank me later but here's one:
I honestly don't know how the blue collared jobs stack up. I was making ~30k as a line cook in PA from when I was 15-22. That's a lot closer to the federal pay than the national average, and I didn't have any culinary degree.
you made 30k a year at 15 years old as a line cook in PA? man i think you are so out of touch with reality that either your memory is bad or you make so much money that 100k = 10k in your eyes.
You are totally missing the point. If you have taken statistics then you will know that average (or mean) takes into account a range of values to come up with the average. Just because YOU don't make the average does not make the data wrong.
The federal government budget never decreases overall, regardless of economic reality.
If you can make more money, and get better benefits in the private sector then why aren't you in it?
What is wrong with you? Are you just arguing just to argue because you aren't even reading anything I said. I know what an average is, but did you understand what I said about more government workers staying longer in their jobs and eventually making more money than private sector workers. If a worker in the private sector stayed at one company for a lot of years, in most positions they would make more money than the government, but it is rare for them to stay long. In these days and times it is very rare for an individual to stay in one place because of the amount of layoffs, transfers, and other factors that lead people to change jobs. With that said, there are going to be more government workers that make more money than them because they have stayed long enough for their salary to increase. But if you compare the AVERAGE of employees in the government who work the same position in the private sector, who work in the same area and who have the same amount of experience, then you would have more compelling results. Taking the average of all the workers in a certain field doesn't prove anything when there are other factors that contribute to their salary. Are you trying to say that geography has no barring on salary? What about experience?
To say the federal government budget never decreases is a complete lie. It all depends on the circumstances, but usually agencies and programs that have a high priority are not affected as much. I mean would you want them to shut down the Department of Defense permanently? These are essential jobs, so of course you have to maintain a certain level of funding but even the DoD has had programs cut.
And to answer your question AGAIN, which I previously stated before, I took the government job because it was more stable and provided me a better opportunity to keep a job versus losing jobs left and right. I didn't come to the government to make money. Money isn't my top priority. I have a wife and a daughter that needs their husband/father to maintain a stable job. Other people motivation is to get the money, I'm not knocking them, more power to them, probably even easier because they are single, but for me to have a family I needed stability. That's why I chose the government. Trust me, I can easily make close to 6-figures right now, but the lifestyle that comes with that is not for me.
i'm sorry but that's just bull. the average lawyer makes:
Lawyer$123,660$126,763-$3,103 You are either really old or really blessed to not know of ANY single 1st year lawyer who made less than $123K a year. I can name a few, in fact you can thank me later but here's one:
Nice article. You may want to read it. From the last paragraph:
The school’s Web site says 97.6 percent of the Class of 2009 got jobs in law firms, government, business or academia, with a median “private sector” salary of $160,000; $35,000 in the “public sector” and $57,000 in “government."
Are we done here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by (-)
you made 30k a year at 15 years old as a line cook in PA? man i think you are so out of touch with reality that either your memory is bad or you make so much money that 100k = 10k in your eyes.
I made $15/hour. If it makes you feel any better, I only was paid $12 while they were training me.
How about this. We take the budget cuts out of foreign aid.
I'll go you one better. Take it out of DOD. Instead of their 601B$...they now have 500B to play with this year. Tell SECDEF to stop playing politics and work within his new budget.
Nice article. You may want to read it. From the last paragraph:
The school’s Web site says 97.6 percent of the Class of 2009 got jobs in law firms, government, business or academia, with a median “private sector” salary of $160,000; $35,000 in the “public sector” and $57,000 in “government."
Are we done here?
READING IS FUNDAMENTAL
guess you decided to forget about the folk that make 35k in the public sector and 57k in the government.
I made $15/hour. If it makes you feel any better, I only was paid $12 while they were training me.
$15 an hour at 15 years old pulling in 30k a year...sure pal, i believe ya.
I'll go you one better. Take it out of DOD. Instead of their 601B$...they now have 500B to play with this year. Tell SECDEF to stop playing politics and work within his new budget.
the defense lobbyi...i mean contractors wouldn't allow that to EVER happen
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.
your rhetoric would probably work on someone who has never worked a day in the federal government, but i have my friend. i know how it is. they make so much of a sacrifice that the usa today did an article on it in which it details how federal pay is ahead of private industry pay in 8 out of 10 categories. don't believe me? here ya go:
