Civil Servants under attack by the Right Wing.

[Trajan]

Your use of the word whilst suggests you are English and/or are living elsewhere, so I will assume the substance of your resentful complaint about civil servants living lives of "opulent luxury" reflects a social order other than here in the U.S. Because the salary range and benefit structure of typical American civil service positions has for the past half century closely equated to positions with similar qualifications in the private sector.

The outstanding advantages of civil service are job security and desirable benefits. These advantages exist for the purpose of competing with the private sector in attracting qualifed and competent personnel.

The entry level requirement for my civil service job was a minimum of two years law school. Promotion to supervisory level called for at least a BA or BS. I'm retired now and I can assure you that my salary range did not exceed that of the average college graduate in the private sector. In fact my son-in-law, a union truck driver, who has only a GED received in the military, drives over-the-road for United Parcel Service and earns more than I did. He does put in a lot of overtime but he likes his job and he will retire with a good pension and benefits.

There are some civil service jobs which pay a substantial wage and offer a generous pension with early retirement and excellent benefits, but these are highly stressful jobs or those which involve a substantial risk to life, such as firefighter. I don't know what the average firefighter's salary is but I wouldn't take that job for three times as much. And the fate of over three hundred of them in the 9/11 World Trade Center collapse is one example of why.

So I don't think your impression of civil service is based on the American example.

Yes ,I have heard the "best and brightest" argument used many times in concert with the high wages of public workers. It's bunk.
A few years ago an article in the Bergen Record of NJ ran a story which made a lot of people in the pubic worker sector very angry.
The writer used the borough of Fort Lee. This town,at the foot of the Geo Washington Bridge has a population of about 11,000. The municipal payroll included about 350 people... over 130 were being paid over $100,000 per year. Many of them in mid level administrative jobs, Dept of Public works labor and other non- education required jobs.
The argument supporting the high wages was the Borough need to attract the best and brightest....That's a load of horse manure. The fact of the matter is the unions representing these workers get these wages because the town is powerless to resist union demands. Besides, the union bosses offer political support($$$) to those elected officials who are "cooperative"....
Best and brightest? Bull cookies.

I agree the wages and benefits for municipal workers are high, but the argument that their compensation should be lowered is a canard. Why shouldn't the wages and benefits of private sector workers rise?
Think about the arguments in vogue today. If we cut taxes people will have more money to spend and stimulate the economy. Now consider if the private sector emulated the public one, the salaries between the top and the bottom would be tiered. Supervisors would make 5% more than line staff; managers 5% more than supervisors, Directors 5% more than managers and so on. Only the top dog would make a greater salary, and that would not be one in seven figures.
As more wealth is shared more products and services would sell and the economy would grow, taxes would rise and deficit spending would be a thing of the past.
Envy of public workers benefits and salary is a manufactured one, manufactured by the most wealthy Americans, generally far right and Republican voters who believe they deserve great wealth and those who are not wealthy are morally corrupt.
Corporations and business are no different than union bosses, both bribe public officials for their own benefit.
The idea that bringing down others raises those whose envy is a product of emotional arguments is absurd. If you don't earn enough organize. Capital needs labor so don't be surprised when your demands for higher wages, better benefits and safer working condition reult in your termination. You can be replaced, there are many south of our border ready and willing to take your job and be happy with it. And if you doubt business and industry would do so you live in a fantasy world.

sorry,won't wash.

I worked in both, I was a top performer at a very highly competitive no.1 corp. entity until April 09 and now am a federal/state employee.

the defined pension plan and forever FREE med. care more than makes up for the beating I took as to the difference in take home pay.

aside from all of time I get off and am given, I had to work 6 years before I saw the accrual hours for days off I got straight away.

Working hours? I don't work near as hard and whats more the demands put upon me and most important of all, the expectations are like night and day.

wanna guess why? starts with a U.....

 

[thereisnospoon]

It was probably buffered by the fact the Clinton administration offered all sorts of educational programs to people displaced by his initiatives. I actually was in a "debate" of sorts with a vet that blamed Clinton for his dischage. Through a Clinton program he learned Windows NT administration and got a job as an Admin for a bank. And he was STILL pissed at Clinton!

This is what I was offered;

We will give you resume training, and for that we will take 1/2 the money we owe you up front, then take the other 1/2 from you by taking it from your tax return.

that's the help I got, I never even heard of a clinton program to help any Vet. All I heard was the big fuck you from a draft dodger.

Just told you what I experienced..it may not have happened to everyone.

And I wasn't big on tossing anyone out on their asses. Governments shouldn't break contracts without good cause.

The reason is the taxpayers cannot subsidize these perks and high wages anymore.
Do you really think paying over $1,000 per month in property taxes is reasonable?

 

[MikeK]

Yes ,I have heard the "best and brightest" argument used many times in concert with the high wages of public workers. It's bunk.
A few years ago an article in the Bergen Record of NJ ran a story which made a lot of people in the pubic worker sector very angry.

[...]

I lived for most of my life in New York City and I was employed by New York City. While I'm retired and presently live in New Jersey I know virtually nothing about civil service policies here but I've noticed that New Jersey civil service workers have become the focus of public resentment. Based on some of the things I've recently read and heard there might be some valid cause for the complaints against New Jersey's civil service policies. But I see an impression taking form which presumes the same circumstances exist in the civil service policies of every state and municipality in America, which simply isn't true.

I know that most if not all New York City civil service unions base their salary and benefit negotiations on private sector analogues. But I am not aware of any New York City or New York State civil service union whose members derive the kind of excessive benefits presently attributed to New Jersey's union members. So I'm inclined to believe this generalized and all-encompassing attack on civil service unions is in fact the successful effect of a calculated effort on the part of an emerging corporatocracy, which is eminently represented by New Jersey's extreme right-wing Conservative governor Christy.

Ever since Ronald Reagan commenced the destruction of the American middle class there has been an incremental dissolution of unions along with nearly absolute stagnation of wages in all areas of commerce. There has been a consistently rising pattern of unemployment via the exportation of jobs and the consequent transfer of wealth from the hands of the dimished American working class to the coffers of a 1% minority -- the American neo-nobility. The super-rich.

There is no question that America is becoming a two-class society, the rich and the poor. It has taken thirty years for the corporatists who control our government via subornation to undo almost all of that which has been accomplished by FDR's New Deal. At this time the only thing standing in the way of total economic oppression by the rapidly emerging ruling class are the remaining labor unions. And because the corporatists do not have direct hands-on influence over the civil service unions it appears they are attempting to turn the public against this remaining bastion of middle class stability.

If the civil service wage and benefit standards have managed to outpace some segments of the private sector it is not because civil servants are greedy and spoiled. It's because the corporatocracy has managed to depress the wage and benefit standard of private sector employees -- which is why their CEOs are taking home multi-million and billion dollar bonuses. So instead of raising the bridge by giving more to their employees their current strategy is to lower the water by focusing their attack on the civil service unions in the hope of turning the public against them.

If New Jersey's unions are indeed out of line we need to take a closer look at them and make corrections where appropriate. But in the meantime I respectfully recommend that we do not allow what appears to be corporatist manipulation to incite us into working against our own interests by helping to lower the wage standard across the board. Instead we need to concentrate on raising the wage standard in the private sector by putting pressure on the super-rich who are pocketing our share of this Nation's wealth resources.

Don't let them turn us against the unions because the unions are all we have. They raise the bar for all of us!

 

[Trajan]

Yes ,I have heard the "best and brightest" argument used many times in concert with the high wages of public workers. It's bunk.
A few years ago an article in the Bergen Record of NJ ran a story which made a lot of people in the pubic worker sector very angry.

[...]

I lived for most of my life in New York City and I was employed by New York City. While I'm retired and presently live in New Jersey I know virtually nothing about civil service policies here but I've noticed that New Jersey civil service workers have become the focus of public resentment. Based on some of the things I've recently read and heard there might be some valid cause for the complaints against New Jersey's civil service policies. But I see an impression taking form which presumes the same circumstances exist in the civil service policies of every state and municipality in America, which simply isn't true.

I know that most if not all New York City civil service unions base their salary and benefit negotiations on private sector analogues. But I am not aware of any New York City or New York State civil service union whose members derive the kind of excessive benefits presently attributed to New Jersey's union members. So I'm inclined to believe this generalized and all-encompassing attack on civil service unions is in fact the successful effect of a calculated effort on the part of an emerging corporatocracy, which is eminently represented by New Jersey's extreme right-wing Conservative governor Christy.

Ever since Ronald Reagan commenced the destruction of the American middle class there has been an incremental dissolution of unions along with nearly absolute stagnation of wages in all areas of commerce. There has been a consistently rising pattern of unemployment via the exportation of jobs and the consequent transfer of wealth from the hands of the dimished American working class to the coffers of a 1% minority -- the American neo-nobility. The super-rich.

There is no question that America is becoming a two-class society, the rich and the poor. It has taken thirty years for the corporatists who control our government via subornation to undo almost all of that which has been accomplished by FDR's New Deal. At this time the only thing standing in the way of total economic oppression by the rapidly emerging ruling class are the remaining labor unions. And because the corporatists do not have direct hands-on influence over the civil service unions it appears they are attempting to turn the public against this remaining bastion of middle class stability.

If the civil service wage and benefit standards have managed to outpace some segments of the private sector it is not because civil servants are greedy and spoiled. It's because the corporatocracy has managed to depress the wage and benefit standard of private sector employees -- which is why their CEOs are taking home multi-million and billion dollar bonuses. So instead of raising the bridge by giving more to their employees their current strategy is to lower the water by focusing their attack on the civil service unions in the hope of turning the public against them.

If New Jersey's unions are indeed out of line we need to take a closer look at them and make corrections where appropriate. But in the meantime I respectfully recommend that we do not allow what appears to be corporatist manipulation to incite us into working against our own interests by helping to lower the wage standard across the board. Instead we need to concentrate on raising the wage standard in the private sector by putting pressure on the super-rich who are pocketing our share of this Nation's wealth resources.

Don't let them turn us against the unions because the unions are all we have. They raise the bar for all of us!

the wage standard is fine in the private sector. just because thers a symbiotic relationship between a politician seeking sppt and rewarding those sppters doesn't mean every else is getting screwed.

 

[rhodescholar]

You fuck up the Quote hypertext tags..and wound up calling the wrong poster, idiot.

Stil waiting for the liberal asshole to come up with facts as opposed to derailing the thread. And no XXXXXXX , I spoke to exactly who I intended. If you are too stupid to follow the conversation, please be quiet.

 

[rhodescholar]

the wage standard is fine in the private sector. just because thers a symbiotic relationship between a politician seeking sppt and rewarding those sppters doesn't mean every else is getting screwed.

Are you saying you do not believe there is a conflict of interest here, that the politicians who are supposed to be negotiating in good faith, defending the taxpayers' interests but handing out unsustainable benefits to government workers in return for their votes is anything but criminal negligence and outright theft?

 

[Sallow]

Sallow's a one trick pony... thow crap, drop back, grab some more.

In Coultervakia, we came up with a name for this type of poster, a "feral baboon." They make a lot of noise and fling a lot of shit, but in the end they contribute nothing.

Well I figure I contribute enough in Taxes to pay for your foodstamps and welfare. Part of which probably goes to help the tabacco and alcohol industries..

 

[Sallow]

You fuck up the Quote hypertext tags..and wound up calling the wrong poster, idiot.

Stil waiting for the liberal asshole to come up with facts as opposed to derailing the thread. And no XXXXXXX , I spoke to exactly who I intended. If you are too stupid to follow the conversation, please be quiet.

The only XXXXXXX here is between your legs. Girly man.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well I figure I contribute enough in Taxes to pay for your foodstamps and welfare.

Figuring isn't your strong suite, it requires IQ points and you just don't have many.

Notice again, when presented with tangible arguments, you scurry up the nearest tree, shriek and throw feces...

Get thee to a baboonary.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The only XXXXXXX here is between your legs. Girly man.

Uh.... WHY are you between his legs, oh feral one?

 

[rhodescholar]

I know that most if not all New York City civil service unions base their salary and benefit negotiations on private sector analogues.

This is completely false.

So I'm inclined to believe this generalized and all-encompassing attack on civil service unions is in fact the successful effect of a calculated effort on the part of an emerging corporatocracy, which is eminently represented by New Jersey's extreme right-wing Conservative governor Christy.

So every politician, who recognizes that their state has been spending far too much to buy votes and be re-elected - is an "extremist"?

How about educating yourself, instead of laughable speculation:

The Beholden State by Steven Malanga, City Journal Spring 2010

Ever since Ronald Reagan commenced the destruction of the American middle class there has been an incremental dissolution of unions along with nearly absolute stagnation of wages in all areas of commerce.

So the fact that the rest of the world, like india, china, etc., are now developing economies that can compete with America's, and create the same product at far lower cost - was totally Reagan's fault? Wha?

There has been a consistently rising pattern of unemployment via the exportation of jobs

If you own a business that manufactures a product, and can do so for 1/8th cost in china, why would that business owner continue to manufacture it in the US? Where is it written that he "owes" his workers anything?

And your rant is off-topic, this thread is about PUBLIC WORKERS.

And because the corporatists do not have direct hands-on influence over the civil service unions it appears they are attempting to turn the public against this remaining bastion of middle class stability.

Uhhh,wrong. I see my tax dollars going to pay for police officers making $300,000 per year. I see civil service workers getting free health care and other benefits I cannot get in the private sector, while enjoying complete job security - all on my dime. I am NOT rich, but like many others sweating it out in this economy, will not accept a protected class of workers any longer.

If the civil service wage and benefit standards have managed to outpace some segments of the private sector it is not because civil servants are greedy and spoiled.

It's because their union bosses - as my link above showed - have learned to game the system and deliver votes to despicable, slime politicians failing to act in good faith.

Don't let them turn us against the unions because the unions are all we have. They raise the bar for all of us!

Another nonsensical strawman. I am for PRIVATE sector unions, but am totally AGAINST them in the public sector.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The reason is the taxpayers cannot subsidize these perks and high wages anymore.
Do you really think paying over $1,000 per month in property taxes is reasonable?

I live in Yorktown, VA - which many consider the mid-south.


Our property tax is $0.6575 per $100 of assessed value. Our home is valued at about $375,000 which means our property taxes are $2432.75 PER YEAR. ( LINK )


How about linking to your tax rates for your locality please. See property taxes (those associated with home ownership) are a function of the tax rate and the value of the home.

So it would be interesting to see what the condition are in your area. At the .6575 rate, the house would have to be valued at 1.7 million.. Or on the other hand you could get to that same tax rate by charging almost 5 times the tax as a 3.250 rate per $100 produces a tax bill of just over $12,000 per year ($1,000 per month).


So do you have an extremely expensive house and a low tax rate, or does your area have an extremely high tax rate even for modest houses?




>>>>

 

[rhodescholar]

The only XXXXXXX here is between your legs. Girly man.

Is this cocksucking idiot Shogun?

 

[rhodescholar]

How about linking to your tax rates for your locality please. See property taxes (those associated with home ownership) are a function of the tax rate and the value of the home.

So it would be interesting to see what the condition are in your area. At the .6575 rate, the house would have to be valued at 1.7 million.. Or on the other hand you could get to that same tax rate by charging almost 5 times the tax as a 3.250 rate per $100 produces a tax bill of just over $12,000 per year ($1,000 per month).

So do you have an extremely expensive house and a low tax rate, or does your area have an extremely high tax rate even for modest houses?

A house in Westchester county in NYS that sells for $700K will have property tax of well in excess of $12K. IIRC, 5 or 6 of the highest property-taxed counties in the US are in NYS.

 

[WorldWatcher]

A house in Westchester county in NYS that sells for $700K will have property tax of well in excess of $12K. IIRC, 5 or 6 of the highest property-taxed counties in the US are in NYS.

OK, I think I get it.

Even though thereisnospoon's location is listed at mid-south it appears you are trying to justify his/her figure by picking an area that he/she doesn't pay taxes. BTW - at $700,000 on the home that would be about a rate of 1.75 per 100 of assessed value.


So thereisnospoon what is the value of your home and what rate do you actually pay in the "mid-south"?



>>>>

 

[rhodescholar]

OK, I think I get it. Even though thereisnospoon's location is listed at mid-south it appears you are trying to justify his/her figure by picking an area that he/she doesn't pay taxes. BTW - at $700,000 on the home that would be about a rate of 1.75 per 100 of assessed value.So thereisnospoon what is the value of your home and what rate do you actually pay in the "mid-south"?

Highest property taxes in the country - Sep. 30, 2010

"Westchester County, N.Y., has the highest property taxes of all 792 high-population counties (65,000 and up) in the United States."

 

[MikeK]

the wage standard is fine in the private sector. just because thers a symbiotic relationship between a politician seeking sppt and rewarding those sppters doesn't mean every else is getting screwed.

The private sector wage standard is far from fine:
Economy: Will Middle Class America Ever See A Real Raise Again? - ABC News

If the private sector wage standard were what it should be there would not be such resentment for public sector employees. In other words, if A were not so down B would not appear to be so up.

A war against the middle class is being waged by the super-rich. What they are doing now is getting us to fight among ourselves.

 

[Sallow]

Well I figure I contribute enough in Taxes to pay for your foodstamps and welfare.

Figuring isn't your strong suite, it requires IQ points and you just don't have many.

Notice again, when presented with tangible arguments, you scurry up the nearest tree, shriek and throw feces...

Get thee to a baboonary.

Back to your petrie dish!

 

[Trajan]

The reason is the taxpayers cannot subsidize these perks and high wages anymore.
Do you really think paying over $1,000 per month in property taxes is reasonable?

I live in Yorktown, VA - which many consider the mid-south.


Our property tax is $0.6575 per $100 of assessed value. Our home is valued at about $375,000 which means our property taxes are $2432.75 PER YEAR. ( LINK )


How about linking to your tax rates for your locality please. See property taxes (those associated with home ownership) are a function of the tax rate and the value of the home.

So it would be interesting to see what the condition are in your area. At the .6575 rate, the house would have to be valued at 1.7 million.. Or on the other hand you could get to that same tax rate by charging almost 5 times the tax as a 3.250 rate per $100 produces a tax bill of just over $12,000 per year ($1,000 per month).


So do you have an extremely expensive house and a low tax rate, or does your area have an extremely high tax rate even for modest houses?




>>>>

the cali tax assessment is based on the purchase value when you buy your home.

My mother in law lives in a house valued at 650k they have had for 25 years, they pay 1600 bucks a year.

History of Taxation •
Proposition 13
Property taxes in the state of California have been the subject of controversy for as long as the state has assessed taxes. Before Proposition 13 passed in 1978, property taxes could increase dramatically from year to year based on the assessed value of the home. During the seventies, the real estate market experienced dramatic growth and we all witnessed the rapid escalation in the value of our homes. Because assessors were required to keep assessed values current, property taxes were skyrocketing at a substantial rate. However, increases in the assessed value were not made every year thus resulting in a major tax jolt for homeowners every few years. Since the passage of Proposition 13, a couple of things have happened. The property tax rate was set at a 1% cap. This means that the amount in property taxes you have to pay can only be up to 1% of the assessed value of your home. The assessed value of homes cannot exceed the 1975-76 assessed value and can increase based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) by no more than 2% per year. If a transfer of ownership takes place or improvements are made, the property will be subject to a reassessment at the current market value. The newly assessed value will then increase on a yearly basis not to exceed 2% per year. The decrease in property taxes as a gross percentage of the assessed value of homes has forced local agencies (cities, counties, and other special districts) to find other sources of funding. These local agencies were given more authority to levy local non-ad valorem property taxes as a result of the passage of Proposition 13; however, the “special taxes” must be approved by two-thirds of the voters. Proposition 13 was intended to protect taxpayers from unanticipated increases in property taxes, to provide effective tax relief, and to require voter approval of tax increases.

more at;

California Tax Data

thank god and Jarvis and Reagan for prop 13.

 

[WorldWatcher]

OK, I think I get it. Even though thereisnospoon's location is listed at mid-south it appears you are trying to justify his/her figure by picking an area that he/she doesn't pay taxes. BTW - at $700,000 on the home that would be about a rate of 1.75 per 100 of assessed value.So thereisnospoon what is the value of your home and what rate do you actually pay in the "mid-south"?

Highest property taxes in the country - Sep. 30, 2010

"Westchester County, N.Y., has the highest property taxes of all 792 high-population counties (65,000 and up) in the United States."

I didn't say that cherry-picking one of the most expensive counties wouldn't result in taxes in that range.

So most people live in $1,700,000 homes? Or even $700,000 homes?


Funny he didn't point out that Louisanna had a median property tax bill of $243 per year.




The point being that pulling a number out of thin air is not representative of very much. Are there people that pay $12,000 a year in property taxes? Sure, but most of us don't live in million dollar homes.



>>>>