REPRESENTATIVES. It's a perfect title. Use it.

[Dr_Mitch]

Time to blow of a bit of steam:

I feel the time is right to cut the salary of government employees down to match the average American's income, and maybe tie the two together. As well as doing the same for Congressional representatives. Cutting out the Congress' free healthcare is also required, and all other benefits that aren't common to the average American. Except for a travel and living allowance, since they do indeed need to work in two places that are typically very far apart. These people should be REPRESENTING, not taking us for a ride WHILE TELLING US WHAT WE CAN DO. Power is actually NOT the goal of a government or its employees, but SERVICE TO CITIZENS is. In pure economical terms, a Congressional employee does not produce any profit, and is a total loss. I think this should be stated at the tops of ballots: "Your congressperson is a total economic loss. Vote well."

And what's with these people running their numbers during the campaign? If you spent your time working on 1,200 new laws and regulations, I sure hope they replaced 12,000 or more outdated and obsolete ones. And that these new laws eliminated some waste, and maybe generated some profit, maybe even via one of the government corporations that are left solvent.

And I don't want to see $15 billion spent on another aircraft carrier until an existing one is worn out.

It's time for an efficient business model to apply to the government, with certain exceptions. Let the good times roll.

 

[dutchwrangler]

As far as I'm concerned the only job of these Congressional hacks is to defend the Constitution. The duty of government is to protect individual liberty... not regulate us to death with a never ending stream of regulations and "laws".

 

[Jefpainthorse]

You may want to check what govt employees make
Park rangers and other blue collar types are not getting rich... And most city and state workers in Oklahoma are not making a ton of money either

As far as taking pay cuts across the board... How bout you go first....

 

[vvvvvvv]

Nice MySpace page.

I feel the time is right to cut the salary of government employees down to match the average American's income, and maybe tie the two together.

First, you might want to check what a non-administrative government employee's salary actually is.

Second, why should private and public income be "tied together"?

As well as doing the same for Congressional representatives.

While in a Utopia, Representatives and Senators would be public servants, that is simply not the case in the real world. There needs to be some incentive to succeed.

Cutting out the Congress' free healthcare is also required, and all other benefits that aren't common to the average American.

You do realize that's an urban legend, right? Members of Congress pay an annual fee to belong to an HMO that covers them only while they are in Washington. For coverage outside of Washington and for their families, they must go the same route as the "average American".

In pure economical terms, a Congressional employee does not produce any profit, and is a total loss. I think this should be stated at the tops of ballots: "Your congressperson is a total economic loss. Vote well."

They are expected to produce a profit economically in terms of taxation.

And I don't want to see $15 billion spent on another aircraft carrier until an existing one is worn out.

So we should never upgrade our equipment to more economical technology until the old piece completely dies?

It's time for an efficient business model to apply to the government, with certain exceptions.

The government is meant to be inefficient. An efficient government would be a nightmare. Think about it.

 

[Rabbitcreekok]

I do believe this is what he was referring to concerning Average Federal Employee Salaries :

Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.

The latest figures I have heard is the average for 2010 is up to around $135,000. That is the AVERAGE salary and benefits, not the upper end.

 

[Mitch Rapp]

And I don't want to see $15 billion spent on another aircraft carrier until an existing one is worn out.

This is probably one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Besides the obvious lunacy of "wearing out" a carrier, when we build a carrier who do you think the government is paying? The Government is using our money to pay us to build something, with materiels bought from us. One of the BEST things the government can do to help the economy at times is to fund and more military upgrades, so long as they are done correctly.

 

[vvvvvvv]

I do believe this is what he was referring to concerning Average Federal Employee Salaries :

Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.

The latest figures I have heard is the average for 2010 is up to around $135,000. That is the AVERAGE salary and benefits, not the upper end.

But, it's not a job-to-job comparison.

Administrators in the .gov world make a salary comparable to (and sometimes lower than) their private counterparts. The problem with comparing overall averages is that government is mostly administration.

For example, you don't see too many government construction workers, government sanitation workers, government plumbers, government custodial workers, etc. Most government jobs are white collar, while most private jobs are blue collar.

In other words, comparing the overall average salary of federal workers with the private sector is an apples to oranges comparison that is very misleading.

Why do people point out this comparison? To keep pandering to the public's emotional attachment of perceived fairness.

 

[Glocktogo]

 

[vvvvvvv]

Another oil spill?

 

[penman53]

But, it's not a job-to-job comparison.

Administrators in the .gov world make a salary comparable to (and sometimes lower than) their private counterparts. The problem with comparing overall averages is that government is mostly administration.

For example, you don't see too many government construction workers, government sanitation workers, government plumbers, government custodial workers, etc. Most government jobs are white collar, while most private jobs are blue collar.

In other words, comparing the overall average salary of federal workers with the private sector is an apples to oranges comparison that is very misleading.

Why do people point out this comparison? To keep pandering to the public's emotional attachment of perceived fairness.

There are all kinds of blue collar federal and state employees. The federal employees are on the Wage Grade WG pay scale. Get your facts straight o?