Rasmussen: Gov’t workers a lot more optimistic on economy than private sector

posted at 12:55 pm on December 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Rasmussen discovered an interesting, but entirely predictable, trend in its consumer-confidence polling.  While a near majority of private-sector employees see the economy as deteriorating, the opposite is true of public-sector employees.  Forty-six percent of government workers think the economy is improving:

Government employees are much more bullish about the economy than those who work in the private sector. That’s a big change from the beginning of the year when those on the public payroll were a bit more pessimistic than private sector workers.

Data from the Rasmussen Consumer Index from the past seven days shows that a plurality of government workers think the economy is getting better while those who work in the private sector tend to have the opposite view. Those in the government sector are also more upbeat about the current state of the economy and their own personal finances.

Today, 46% of government employees say the economy is getting better while just 31% say it’s getting worse. Among those who work in the private sector, the numbers are reversed: 32% say better and 49% worse.

Twenty-four percent (24%) of government employees rate the economy as good or excellent while just nine percent (9%) of those in the private sector are so upbeat.

Fifty-five percent (55%) in the private sector rate the economy as poor, a pessimism shared by 38% of those on the public payroll.

Why might that be?  For one thing, government work has been a growth industry over the last few years.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the rapid increase of government employment since the last recession ended in 2003.  While the number contracted slightly in the middle of 2009, government jobs have already begun growing again.  At the moment, the level of government jobs is only 35,000 off from its August 2008 peak:

Compare that to the curve seen for the private sector, where over 3 million jobs have disappeared in Barack Obama’s first year (111,793,000 in January to 108,495,000 in November):

The Democratic agenda includes bailouts for states and rapid expansion of federal oversight in the energy and health-care sectors.  What government worker wouldn’t be encouraged by that kind of job security?

Small wonder Obama and his government employees keep talking about the “recovery.”  They seem to be focused like a laser on adding more government jobs, and clueless about the private sector losses.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

leanin’ out them “fat cats….”

ted c on December 28, 2009 at 12:57 PM

“the system worked”

Mord on December 28, 2009 at 12:57 PM

B +

ted c on December 28, 2009 at 12:58 PM

There spending money like drunken Senators (i.e., Max Baucus).

WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Minorities only need apply to those goobermint jobs.

White guys will go deeper in to the thriving underground economy.

rickyricardo on December 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM

The “Duh Factor” is strong in this post, Ed.

Such nice, cushy Fed jobs for so many!

Intrepid on December 28, 2009 at 1:00 PM

When you work for the Nanny State, what could go wrong? Then again, socialism is great until you run out of somebody else’s money….

November 2010 elections are going to be a bloodbath. Gonna make ’94 look like a wienie roast…..sucks to be a DEM.

adamsmith on December 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM

When everybody suffers, we all win! Yes we can…

Mojave Mark on December 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Government workers are lovin’ the recession because their buying power is increasing (their wages never go down while prices do).

dtestard on December 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM

They have plenty to be optomistic about. They never get laid off – just no replaced when they leave. They get still get raises and perks. It’s really discussing.

Blake on December 28, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Ed, dude… I finally can point out a typo of yours. (I have for so long been embarrassed by how bad my own spelling is compared to yours)

optimistic, not optomistic

I used to work for a newspaper, and the thing that was spell checked the LEAST was the HEADLINE. I’ve seen misspelled headlines many times.

I feel really good about myself again Ed, thanks.

Danzo on December 28, 2009 at 1:03 PM

And when the Federal government figures out that they have too many people they pay $25K for you to retire.

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 1:06 PM

When you consider the fact that government never makes any cuts, they should all be quoting Alfred E. Newman. What, me worry?

singlemalt_18 on December 28, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Make the payscale for all government employees match the payscale for the US military and we’d see a drop in those numbers I assure you.

Mord on December 28, 2009 at 1:09 PM

LOL, Danzo! Thanks, I fixed it.

Ed Morrissey on December 28, 2009 at 1:12 PM

A. Government workers don’t get laid off.
B. They have excellent retirement
C. Government workers don’t produce anything. They process BS paperwork.

Only the folks working at the unemployment office are tripping out about the economy, but then they have to listen to thousands of people screaming about it.

dogsoldier on December 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM

I reject the premise of a government “worker”. Military excluded.

SouthernGent on December 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM

Twenty-four percent (24%) of government employees rate the economy as good or excellent while just nine percent (9%) of those in the private sector are so upbeat.

Confirmed: Obama’s core support of 33% is braindead.

BuckeyeSam on December 28, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Thank heavens Barry has bolstered the ranks of government employees, which reminds me of a punch line from Steve Martin: “The most amazing thing to me is, I get paid for doin’ this.”

anXdem on December 28, 2009 at 1:14 PM

And when the Federal government figures out that they have too many people they pay $25K for you to retire.

Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Government Employees Owe $3 Billion in Back Taxes

No wonder they love their jobs so much, they don’t even pay their taxes.

Knucklehead on December 28, 2009 at 1:15 PM

STOP SENDING MONEY to the government.

jukin on December 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Because even in the worst of times, budgets increase by 5 percent every year, benefits keep accruing, new days off keep getting invented… it’s like a real-life Candyland for adults.

greggriffith on December 28, 2009 at 1:18 PM

If my job paid an average of $75,000 a year and likely hit the low six figures, and if I knew that no matter how much I screwed up I couldn’t be fired, I’d be feeling optimistic, too.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Only the folks working at the unemployment office are tripping out about the economy, but then they have to listen to thousands of people screaming about it.
dogsoldier on December 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM

The greatest job to have in the Ogabe era is one at the unemployment office; there will always be something to do.

Bishop on December 28, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Everyone should have at least one family member working in the federal government to ensure they get their family’s tax dollars back sans defense.

WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 1:24 PM

The bureaucrats are financing their jobs/votes with our grand children’s money. It takes two government employees to do the job of one private sector worker. My contempt for Washington knows no bounds.

orlandocajun on December 28, 2009 at 1:24 PM

The greatest job to have in the Ogabe era is one at the unemployment office; there will always be something to do.

Bishop on December 28, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Could the unemployment office be the Post Office of the 2010′s? Will employees go Unemploymental? If people went postal cause the mail never stops, people may go unemploymental since the claims will never stop.

WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 1:26 PM

One thing we can all agree on: The recession is over. Again.

LibTired on December 28, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Minorities only need apply to those goobermint jobs.

White guys will go deeper in to the thriving underground economy.

rickyricardo on December 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM

That is so damn true!

bernzright777 on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

If my job paid an average of $75,000 a year and likely hit the low six figures, and if I knew that no matter how much I screwed up I couldn’t be fired, I’d be feeling optimistic, too.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 1:22 PM

There are 2.7 million federal workers. The six figure income you mention applies to roughly 3% of that total. The average fed salary is 71000 which means half make less and half make more. those that make more have usually been in the civil service for 10+ years. Anyone working in the commercial sector would likely change jobs if their pay never rose.

I reject the premise of a government “worker”. Military excluded.

SouthernGent on December 28, 2009 at 1:13 PM

A fairly large percentage of the federal jobs are filled by retired military and vets. More often than not the loyalty they had to the country remains even when the uniform is not part of their attire.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Don’t know about you but I already work for the government…

About 9 months out of a year… and without any benefits.

TXUS on December 28, 2009 at 1:33 PM

STOP SENDING MONEY to the government.

jukin on December 28, 2009 at 1:16 PM

That may be the next step Jukin.

russcote on December 28, 2009 at 1:35 PM

The average fed salary is 71000 which means half make less and half make more.
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Average does not mean what you say, Mean does.

WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 1:35 PM

When it comes down to it, Congress, the Senate and Barack are little more than glorified Government workers. I hope they all get fired in the near future.

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Minorities only need apply to those goobermint jobs.

White guys will go deeper in to the thriving underground economy.

rickyricardo on December 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM

That is so damn true!

bernzright777 on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Wrong! see page 48 at the link
http://www.opm.gov/feddata/factbook/2007/2007FACTBOOK.pdf
whites make up 68 percent of the federal civilian workforce and 72% of the civilian labor force

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:37 PM

. The average fed salary is 71000 which means half make less and half make more.
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

No that would be true if the median were 71,000.
Gee what a shock, a fed worker who doesn’t understand basic mathematics concepts. Lemme guess, you’re an accountant who tracks jobs saved right?

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:37 PM

If you can’t do, teach.

If you can’t teach, teach phys ed.

If you can’t teach phys ed., work for the government.

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Lemme guess, you’re an accountant who tracks jobs saved right?

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:37 PM

No retired mil enlisted who opted for stability instead of a much higher commercial salary. Median/Average – the point is that most federal workers are not getting rich from gov service.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

There are two Americas: Those who are paid lavish salaries by taxpayers, and those who aren’t.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

No question that there is a thriving variety of ‘underground economies’. It’s becoming one of the few ways left to survive. It’s also one of the few ways to keep the greedy Gov. and the welfare crowd out of things. Long may it live and prosper!

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Sounds like you couldn’t get hired for a federal spot and are a little bitter.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM

Oh Good! Things were getting really slow, just the “government workers are all lazy neer-do-wells” kind of red meat over what essentially is a meaningless poll beyond pointing out that real economic recovery isn’t found in the public sector.

Nevertheless, it is as wrong to attack all government employees as it is to call all citizens of Nebraska greedy takers just because Ben Nelson sold them out.

highhopes on December 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM

My dad use to work at the National Bureau of Standards (now NIST). He retired in the mid-1970s. (He served in the Navy during World War II.) They did some research and development work into all sorts of things that we take for granted today. However, they seemed to be the exception, rather than the rule.

They would get really frustrated with how government employment worked even back then. They had to hire minority workers for affirmative action, but yet they couldn’t get anyone to take the jobs because those people could get more money elsewhere. So, those jobs went unfilled. Sometimes they had people who really didn’t work, yet they couldn’t get rid of them.

My dad didn’t do any private sector work until he retired when he started his own business and did basically the same work he did when he worked for NBS. Prior to that he had some chances to go to private industry where he could make more money and have better benefits. My dad was concerned about layoffs, which happened in the electronics industry often, so he never made the jump.

The best thing he got out of the deal was that he could have a survivors pension. When my dad passed away in the mid-1980s my mom still got a good portion of his pension benefits. That has helped her greatly. However, we never had things like dental insurance and other perks that they did in private industry.

I had tried several times during my lifetime to get a federal job. Each time I ran into major incompetence in the human resources groups. The people involved in processing, interviewing and hiring didn’t have a clue about what they were doing. That basically weeds out anyone intelligent and competent as we aren’t going to put up with that nonsense. Really sad.

I wonder how many of these federal workers will have a job a few years from now when the government runs out of money and deep budget cuts are necessary to save the government budget.

MeAlice on December 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

As a federal “worker” you retire in your mid 50s. Then collect full pension/benefits for 20-30 years. Plus the 6 weeks vacation a year, $0 cost health insurance during your days “working”.

You’re right nobody’s getting rich. But fed employees live a middle to upper middle class lifestyle for doing nothing but shuffling papers 6 hours a day.

I would be ashamed to publicly let anyone know I was so useless as to work for the govt. I have more respect for the garbage collector than I do for you.

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM

There are two Americas: Those who are paid lavish salaries by taxpayers, and those who aren’t.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

With a federal workforce of 2.7 million the numbers you cite apply to less than 4% of all fed workers.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Why might that be??

Because they’re mis-educated socially functional quasi-morons????

phreshone on December 28, 2009 at 1:45 PM

“Why might that be?”

Because,
A) They get regular raises, and,
B) They are never fired or laid off.
Remember this exchange from Blazing Saddles?
Taggart: “Who the Hell are you?”
Bart: “You’re looking at the new sherriff of Rock Ridge.”
Railroad workers: “Oooooh-whee” “Right on” “Ci-vil Ser-vice“(slaps five all around)

What’s not to be optimistic about?

mrt721 on December 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM

the point is that most federal workers are not getting rich from gov service

.
This is the same mantra I hear from family members who work for the Feds in this or that capacity. Not ‘rich’ per say but well more than comfortable with very nice paid for or almost homes, med and dental benefits that while they must pay in are good to excellent. Pensions(not subject to Social Security whims) that they can leave 100% of to spouses when they die and it’s impossible to fire even the most incompetent. Of course they are complacent, what’s not to like.

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 1:47 PM

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Sounds like you couldn’t get hired for a federal spot and are a little bitter.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM

Oh no, my secret’s out.

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:48 PM

As a federal “worker” you retire in your mid 50s. Then collect full pension/benefits for 20-30 years. Plus the 6 weeks vacation a year, $0 cost health insurance during your days “working”.

You’re right nobody’s getting rich. But fed employees live a middle to upper middle class lifestyle for doing nothing but shuffling papers 6 hours a day.

I would be ashamed to publicly let anyone know I was so useless as to work for the govt. I have more respect for the garbage collector than I do for you.

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:43 PM

1. the maximum amount of paid leave is 26 days a year for workers with 15+ years of service
2. Full pension is not the same as full salary that one was receiving. 30 years service means about 30K per year on average
3. Shuffling papers for six hours a day is simply not true for most fed workers. Securing infrastructure, keeping the airways safe, ensuring dams and power grids keep working, analyzing intelligence, etc. are just some of the jobs performed.
4. I’m proud of what I do and your last statement leaves me convinced that you couldn’t get a fed job and are bitter.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:49 PM

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Do you know what one worker for Lockheed costs the government? Whatever their salary is double it and you get a rough idea. But that is a commercial job funded by the taxpayers.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM

My friend in the IRS says that Obama has added numerous “executive” positions. Great salaries, of course.

The problem with Bush? He kept too tight of a leash. He says that they saw the crash coming but were not allowed to take actions under Bush. (This involved off-shore tax havens.)

Obama has “corrected” course, but the problem is there’s no intelligence behind it. So the new execs. have no real jobs.

AnninCA on December 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Bradkey,

You are pathetic amigo. Proud to work for the federal govt? The federal govt is a last resort. It’s basically a social safety net for people who have neither the skills or education to be functioning members of society.

You might as well be proud of living on welfare for 30 years. At least those people are honest in that they they leech from society and make no pretenses otherwise. Parasites such as yourself also leech from society but pretend to contribute.

You’re a thief and a liar.

angryed on December 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Duh!!!!!!!

MaiDee on December 28, 2009 at 1:55 PM

When my dad retired he had two options on his pension.

1. Full retirement, but in the event he died there were no survivor’s benefits.

2. A reduced pension, but it guaranteed benefits for survivors in the event he passed away first.

Thankfully my dad chose option #2.

I think today that the federal government has dental benefits, but when my dad worked for NBS they didn’t have that option.

MeAlice on December 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Full pension is not the same as full salary

No, but 80% with regular cost of living increases is not to be scoffed at plus continuing bennies. Perhaps you don’t realize that many private sector pensioners do NOT get regular cost of living increases or any at all for that matter. Perhaps you do not realize that many private sector retirees live on 12K a year SS(may be slightly higher or lower) but thanks to Medicare and other programs manage to make it from year to year. They worked just as hard for just a long doing just as useful jobs but do not have it as cushy as Federal retirees. Now, I don’t begrudge you or mean to downplay your contribution–but the fact is that, in general,Federal and State retirees have it pretty good compared to much of the rest of the population.

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Do you know what one worker for Lockheed costs the government? Whatever their salary is double it and you get a rough idea.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Sounds like we have a lot of stupid people working in government if they can’t even put together a sensible contract with Lockheed. No offense.

Ronnie on December 28, 2009 at 2:02 PM

The issue with gov’t retirement is one that I hate. First of all, I saw what private corporations were doing to workers. They were changing from defined pension plans to 401K with great promises. Well, we see how that worked out.

They essentially stripped people of their retirement plans.

Gov’t workers were spared. We’re all, naturally, mad.

But the switch to undefined plans had unintended consequences, too.

AnninCA on December 28, 2009 at 2:03 PM

There are groups in the federal government that do work that actually contributes to the economy. For example, my dad worked on the atomic clock and closed captioning for television. These are things we take for granted today.

Before he worked for NBS he worked for the Department of the Army after he left the Navy. One of the things he did was assist with maintaining anti-aircraft artillery (the old Skysweeper guns).

There are some pieces of various departments that are helpful, such as parts of the FAA, DOT, etc., that we would have difficulty operating without. Other departments are pure waste.

Blanket statements don’t work when it comes to federal jobs. Each piece has to be evaluated on its merits.

MeAlice on December 28, 2009 at 2:03 PM

Sounds like we have a lot of stupid people working in government if they can’t even put together a sensible contract with Lockheed. No offense.

Ronnie on December 28, 2009 at 2:02 PM

I think the system is the problem, not the people. Just my 2 cents.

The system blocks logic.

AnninCA on December 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM

If you put 1,000 people in a room and ask them to raise their hands if they received a raise in the last 12 months, you can bet those that raise their hands are either working for the government, or their company has a contract with the government.

PappaMac on December 28, 2009 at 2:05 PM

Will employees go Unemploymental? If people went postal cause the mail never stops, people may go unemploymental since the claims will never stop.

WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I don’t know about the workers, but folks in the line said they were happy they didn’t have to go to another area office that had to hire armed guards because of the knife fights in the lines.

Someone in the office said the councilors were only supposed to see 35 “clients” a day which made me and a couple construction guys next to me laugh out loud. There are only 3 “councilors” in the office and by 0720 the place was standing room only with more showing up every minute.

dogsoldier on December 28, 2009 at 2:09 PM

Yes. Some private retireees who worked for places with aggressive unions like Lockheed, GM et al, do very well. But most of the folks did not and do not. As for becoming defensive about Fed pensions, with me it’s not necessary. It is what it is. But please do not try to tell us that Fed workers are not in the better levels of salary and pension treatment, they are right up there.

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 2:10 PM

I think the system is the problem

AnninCA on December 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM

I disagree.

/napolitano

LibTired on December 28, 2009 at 2:12 PM

I think the system is the problem, not the people.

AnninCA on December 28, 2009 at 2:04 PM

When I go to the Post Office, I rarely find myself talking to a stupid system.

Ronnie on December 28, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Why is the government worker spending time reading comments on HotAir?

If everyone on the government payroll had to take an immediate 10% pay cut how many would quit? Virtually none. That shows you how overpaid these workers are.

There should be no public pensions. If you want to plan for retirement, you should fund an IRA.

There should be no government unions. Who are these unions organizing against? We the people. The “management” doesn’t care because they are spending our money, and our children’s money.

Ted Torgerson on December 28, 2009 at 2:16 PM

With a federal workforce of 2.7 million the numbers you cite apply to less than 4% of all fed workers.
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Would you like to do the math about the exponential expansion of jobs and salaries? Obama’s administration is still young:

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.

The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules.

Without looking up the exact figures, he average compensation for private sector employees is around $40,000 a year. For public jobs it’s $70,000. Moreover, the benefits/pensions that public sector employees get are far, far more generous than private plans.

And the cherry on top of the ice-cream sundae is that Obama has the gall to refer to private sector employees as “fat cats” but never, ever does it occur to him to apply the same appellation to his best, most generous fat-cat buddies, like Andy Stern of the S.E.I.U.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM

So let me see. They’re ok about the economy, and their jobs rely on tax dollars. More, and more go without a job, so taxes revenues go down. What happens when no one can find a job, or pay taxes? They’ll work for free?

I wonder how they feel knowing they have a job funded by tax payers, and their boss wants to obliterate the private sector? When that happens, will their salaries go down? I’m betting so.

capejasmine on December 28, 2009 at 2:24 PM

Color me surprised. Might the number of 6-figure salaried positions exploding in the federal government have something to do with it?

ya2daup on December 28, 2009 at 2:24 PM

There are 2.7 million federal workers.

You mean 2.7 million people on the federal payroll. Whether they work or not, and whether any work they do produces anything of any value, is a different story.

The average fed salary is 71000

Sorry my recollection was $4,000/year off. This is still, according to research, significantly more than what free enterprise workers average in jobs with similar descriptions.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 2:25 PM

“Compare that to the curve seen for the private sector, where over 3 million jobs have disappeared in Barack Obama’s first year (111,793,000 in January to 108,495,000 in November)”

Well, let’s see if we can roll back the Gumming Sector job spike graph a smidge next November and in November 2012, shall we?

VoyskaPVO on December 28, 2009 at 2:33 PM

Arcg! Gumming==Gummint==Government!

VoyskaPVO on December 28, 2009 at 2:34 PM

Argh! Arcg!==Argh!

VoyskaPVO on December 28, 2009 at 2:35 PM

Sorry my recollection was $4,000/year off. This is still, according to research, significantly more than what free enterprise workers average in jobs with similar descriptions.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 2:25 PM

Funny with all the government bashing people don’t bring up those union jobs where people just sit around doing nothing. Not to mention the proportional absurdity of paying somebody $75 (salary and benefits) to do semi-skilled labor. I just wonder how UAW members feel vis-a-vis the polling.

highhopes on December 28, 2009 at 2:35 PM

And the cherry on top of the ice-cream sundae is that Obama has the gall to refer to private sector employees as “fat cats” but never, ever does it occur to him to apply the same appellation to his best, most generous fat-cat buddies, like Andy Stern of the S.E.I.U.

You’ve got that right. It seems to depend on who is collecting the cash whether it’s ‘fat catness’or not. I know most pols are as two faced as they come, but this administration doesn’t seem to mind waving it in everyone’s face…tacit nose thumbing at all of us just like those hypocrites on the hill.

jeanie on December 28, 2009 at 2:35 PM

Why is the government worker spending time reading comments on HotAir? [he is on leave]

If everyone on the government payroll had to take an immediate 10% pay cut how many would quit? Virtually none. That shows you how overpaid these workers are. [then you shouldn’t complain when the Bush tax cuts are eliminated]

There should be no public pensions. If you want to plan for retirement, you should fund an IRA. [gov workers are encouraged to fund IRA and 401K because the pension is not nearly enough to truly retire on]

There should be no government unions. Who are these unions organizing against? We the people. The “management” doesn’t care because they are spending our money, and our children’s money. [union members cannot strike and they generally are for the wage grade laborers which ensure safe working conditions and fairness in hiring/firing]

Ted Torgerson on December 28, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Anyway we look at this it is NOT GOOD!

xler8bmw on December 28, 2009 at 2:37 PM

The average fed salary is 71000 which means half make less and half make more
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM

Woops, Bradky fails to understand the difference between “average” and “median”.

And defend this, Bradky. I double dare you.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:39 PM

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Not everyone in the DOD is making 6 figures. Take a look at the military pay rates and consider what the average joe has to do to get the pay. When I was in basic training we figured up we were making $0.16 per hour. Also, they have cut the retirement benefits of the military.

If you don’t know, the only sector of the government that ever gets cut is the military, not the DOD civilians, but the actual uniform folks, ie, the ones going out side the wire and doing the dying.

Claimsratt on December 28, 2009 at 2:43 PM

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:39 PM

Once every few months I make a mistake – sue me. but you have walked quite a ways from the point that only 4% or less of federal workers make six figures.

As for your link what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 2:44 PM

sorry about the grammatical errors … public education, you know.

Claimsratt on December 28, 2009 at 2:44 PM

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:17 PM

oh yeah, the military is prevented from forming a union.

Claimsratt on December 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM

This is still, according to research, significantly more than what free enterprise workers average in jobs with similar descriptions.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 2:25 PM

It all depends on what the job is. My education and experience have resulted in offers in private sector of 85K and above. I opted for govt because it is stable and along with my military retirement pay make it a reasonably good choice even though the pay is 20K less than the commercial sector.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 2:48 PM

Unemployment numbers will probably take a dip. The Gobment is already hiring census workers. $11./hr. .55 a mile. Expect a knock on your door starting next month. They will use these temporary job numbers to imply the businesses are starting to hire.

Itchee Dryback on December 28, 2009 at 2:53 PM

Claimsratt on December 28, 2009 at 2:43 PM

I’m not going to defend the low pay of the military. It’s the fat cat bureaucrats I have a problem with.

…but you have walked quite a ways from the point that only 4% or less of federal workers make six figures.
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 2:44 PM

As I said in my response, the salaries are growing exponentially, and the administration is just getting started. Moreover, by your own statement, the median is $71,000. So while they don’t make “6 figures”, $71,000 is nearly double $40,000, so I don’t really give a rat’s ass about your 4% statistic.

As for your link what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

It’s all about the corruption of a Kleptocracy. At the rate they’re going, thanks to Obama’s (Socialist) union buddies, it won’t be long before Newsweek can say, we are all Socialists government workers now.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 2:56 PM

I see some pretty broad brushes in use here. What I don’t understand is the hostility on the part of some people toward government workers. I’m a retired cop, I put in 21 years and pulled the pin. I made a lot less over the years than a lot of people in private sector jobs, but that was my choice. Having said that, I loved my job and never regretted choosing it. To those of you that are so vehemently anti public sector and think government work is so cushy, why don’t you take a civil service test then? The grass is always greener on the other side. We all make choices and give up something to gain something else. Why are people who chose a government job so worthy of contempt?

Dan859 on December 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Dan859 on December 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM

It goes without saying that Policemen, firemen, military are essential to the functioning of government, and I venture to guess that no one here begrudges these positions. A lot of these other jobs – not so much, and all too often they are doled out as patronage, which cannot be said for your admirable, merit-based work.

Since Obama has taken power, the number of government employees and their pay has increased to unprecedented size – and this threatens not only our nation’s fiscal health but, in conjunction with empowering the unions, it is clearly an attempt to secure a permanent Democrat majority – with the goal of destroying our capitalist foundations.

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 3:46 PM

Well all those new ‘health advisory committees’ are going to need employees. Obviously a new ‘green, growth’ industry. Just ask Barry.

GarandFan on December 28, 2009 at 3:46 PM

The Democratic agenda includes bailouts for states and rapid expansion of federal oversight in the energy and health-care sectors.

Wrong!, nothing “democratic” about it. Democrat agenda would be more in line.

royzer on December 28, 2009 at 3:50 PM

GarandFan on December 28, 2009 at 3:46 PM

Ah yes, but how many private sector health care/insurance industry workers will lose their jobs eventually?

Buy Danish on December 28, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Median/Average – the point is that most federal workers are not getting rich from gov service.

Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Who said they were getting rich? Haven’t read all the posts, but I think the point was that the average civilian was about 44k and the average goober 71k…and over all, what do they produce except more government?

Itchee Dryback on December 28, 2009 at 3:55 PM

In 2012, after the republican victory there will be a spike downwards as all the democrats get laid off and then there will be a 4 year upward trend as Americans get back to being Americans.

royzer on December 28, 2009 at 3:55 PM

Funny with all the government bashing people don’t bring up those union jobs where people just sit around doing nothing.

You mean like AFSCME members?

the hostility on the part of some people toward government workers.

It’s hostility to federal government workers, like those at the State Department who couldn’t be bothered to check warnings on Adulmutallab against current visa lists – not toward local government workers (who in my county do good things and do them efficiently and well), and certainly not toward police at all levels.

bgoldman on December 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Dan859 on December 28, 2009 at 3:32 PM

Dan thank you for your service of being a police officer. But, you made an interesting point which is why it makes many of us private sector people MAD. As you said you didn’t make as much as private sector…….as well you shouldn’t on the tax payer. That is the problem now people go into the government sector local, state, fed and are maing more and getting more than the private sector. Which shouldn’t be happening if you’re going to serve your country by working for it that is great but, you shouldn’t be making a windfall on the tax payer.

There use to be a time that working for the government was not for profit. That is what the private sector is for and we take all of the risk. Unlike union or government jobs where you get the protection of being let go now that the union has penetrated the government sector it is just as fruitful to work as the private sector THAT IS WRONG the tax payer picks up the tab!

Since when should it be ok for the tax payer to pick up the tab for rest of life pensions for 25 years of work, high salaries, health benefits for life among other things. Then you go work in the provate sector or nepotism gets you another government job????? How is that right?

xler8bmw on December 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM

With a federal workforce of 2.7 million..
Bradky on December 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM

“Workers” or “workers + retired pensioners”, after 20 yrs or in the case of legislators 1 or 2 terms pulling a very high percentage of full pay?
Does that seem like a “level playing field”? *snic*

Why does an organization the pays its average worker almost twice the pay of civilian worker produce such crap work with multiple levels of make work, accomplish nothing tasks? Can you name 1 job that the government does better and cheaper than the private sector?

Itchee Dryback on December 28, 2009 at 4:05 PM

In 2012, after the republican victory there will be a spike downwards as all the democrats get laid off and then there will be a 4 year upward trend as Americans get back to being Americans.

royzer on December 28, 2009 at 3:55 PM

That would be nice, but the only way the number of goobermint jobs will decrease, would be for redundant agencies and programs to be cut. When that is attempted, watch all the people start to try and justify the need..your need for them and the program or position to remain ungored, because they are working for your benefit, and of course…the children.

Itchee Dryback on December 28, 2009 at 4:17 PM

I am a fed employee. Beginning of my career, I earned less than industry average. Now I am above thanks to automatic COLAs tied to Social Security which are rigged to ensure elderly voters are happy. Health care benefits are not free, but they are relatively cheap. Dental coverage is worthless. I wish I could drop it and keep the cash. At 15+ years you get 8 hours annual and 4 hours sick per full time pay period (2 weeks). I do work, but honestly, less than would be required in private industry. All in all, I plan on staying on until retirement or they drag me kicking and screaming out of the building.

deadman on December 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Since when should it be ok for the tax payer to pick up the tab for rest of life pensions for 25 years of work, high salaries, health benefits for life among other things.
xler8bmw on December 28, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Since that was the deal offered to us in exchange for all the downsides the job had; working nights/weekends/holidays for years at a time; for being insulted, spit on, assaulted, shot at; for having to watch good, innocent people die; for having to listen to some pervert explain it really wasn’t his fault he molested his 8 yr old stepdaughter because she came on to him and he couldn’t help himself. There’s more, but you get the idea. Through it all, I loved my job, bad days notwithstanding, and I’d do it again. I earned my pension. Now, after the fact, you seem to want to begrudge me it.

Then you go work in the provate sector or nepotism gets you another government job????? How is that right?

So, I don’t have the right to enter the private sector workplace and compete with others? Nepotism? In civil service? Please.

Dan859 on December 28, 2009 at 5:01 PM

My problem with government pensions is that they are not properly on the books–and won’t be so long as government runs things. Every government pension should be funded via an annuity purchased within eighteen months of the person’s retirement–less if the retiree was employed for over four years. That puts the cost in the here-and-now rather than in the far future when some other taxpayer has to cover it. And if it’s funded by way of bonds, then the bonds are a visible obligation on the books, not a part of general expenses like the pension is.

njcommuter on December 28, 2009 at 5:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2