Now, What About Those Gold-Plated Benefits?
Monday November 29th, 2010 • Posted by Craig Eyermann at 2:41pm PDT • 4 Comments
Today, President Obama announced that his administration would freeze the pay of federal employees at their current level for two years. Well, that’s a start, if the following chart from Political Calculations showing the relative pay and benefits of federal workers with respect to the average income earner in the private sector is any indication.
Going by these figures, if all the people who work in the private sector get 6% annual raises in each of the next two years, their average pay of $60,046 would indeed finally rise to nearly match the average pay of federal workers if just their pay were frozen!
But, what about those outsize benefits federal government employees get? If we’re really concerned about getting federal spending and pay under control, wouldn’t it also make sense to bring the benefits of federal government employees into alignment with what the average employee in the private sector receives as well?
-
Fretwell says:
The average pay should never ever exceed the average of the private sector for starters
-
Don Levit says:
We need to be concerned about the federal employees’ benefits, because, unfortunately, they are “funded” like Medicare and Social Security.
The trust fund makes it no easier to pay benefits than without a trust fund.
The only “benefit” the trust fund provides for federal employees is a “draw” on the Treasury without an appropriation.
Battleships are “funded” the same way as federal retiree benefits—with current revenues and debt. The only difference is that battleships need an appropriation, while federal retirees don’t as long as there is a positive balance in the trust “Fund’s Balance with the Treasury.”
I have a good governmental link and excerpts to back up these statements if anyone is interested. -
Jesse says:
The real problem with gov’t salaries is that the very employees in question to receive raises (by a vote) are the ones voting. The ones voting to protect these liabilities are the very ones who benefit from their protection. In the private sector, this is often referred to as a conflict of interest. We really need to start re-thinking this, it’s not that they are *all bad* but that this policy can only lead to these results. This is why private-sector employers do not let their employees vote on their own pay increases. I see no other outcome being probable than people voting themselves increased wages and/or benefits it’s simply human nature.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Search
By linking to Amazon.com from this page, The Independent Institute earns referral fees of 4% to 15% from whatever you buy. Bookmark the above link and you can support the Institute when you do your normal shopping!
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- libertarian jerry on Feds Apply Full Court Press
- libertarian jerry on A Government Too Vast
- Henry Bowman on The IRS Admits Its Corruption
- Sawtooth46 on The IRS Admits Its Corruption
- Jerome Bigge on Duck, Obamabuse is coming
Recent Posts on The Independent Institute’s Other Blog, The Beacon
- Stupid Regulations May 17, 2013 Randall Holcombe
- Healthcare and the Poor: Why Money Works Better than Waiting May 15, 2013 John C. Goodman
- Why Government Shouldn’t Build Things (Part 3) May 13, 2013 Mary Theroux
- No Longer Fruitcakes. . . May 13, 2013 Alvaro Vargas Llosa
- Both the Right and Left Go Wrong on Healthcare Prices May 13, 2013 John C. Goodman
- What Medical Tourism Tells Us about Our Healthcare System May 8, 2013 John C. Goodman
- When Government Gets “Arty,” Hang Onto Your Wallet (and Children) May 6, 2013 Mary Theroux
- Guantanamo: America’s Great Shame May 6, 2013 Anthony Gregory
Blogroll
- (Tab)ulation, The
- Agitator, The
- Agoraphilia
- Alpha.Sources
- AntiWar Blog
- Anything Peaceful
- Austrian Addiction
- Beacon, The
- Bovard
- But What the Hell Do I Know…
- Cafe Hayek
- Cato@Liberty
- Citizen Economists
- Commons, The
- Conservative Economics
- Coordination Problem
- Crash Landing
- Culture of Congestion
- Division of Labour
- Downsize DC
- Econ Log
- Economic Way of Thinking, The
- Economics in Plain English
- Ed Policy
- El Instituto Independiente Blog
- Enterprise Blog, The
- Federalist
- Financial Armageddon
- Fly Bottle, The
- Foundry, The
- Freakonomics
- Free Advice
- Free Exchange
- FreedomWorks Blog
- Greg Mankiw’s Blog
- Hawblog
- Healthcare Economist
- Hit & Run
- Jeff Miron
- John Stossel’s Take
- Kids Prefer Cheese
- Liberty and Power
- LRC Blog
- Macro and Other Market Musings
- Managerial Econ
- Marginal Revolution
- Market Urbanism
- Maverecon
- Max Borders
- Mess That Greenspan Made, The
- Mises Economics Blog
- Neutral Source
- Newmark's Door
- OpenMarket
- Organizations and Markets
- Perfect Substitute, The
- Perpetual Three-Dot Column, The
- Peter Gordon's Blog
- PowerBlog
- Pro Libertate
- Rogue Economist Rants
- Skeptical CPA
- Stefan Karlsson
- Straus Military Reform Project
- ThinkMarkets
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
It’s become a racket. There’s many qoutes by the founding fathers who warned us of this eventual fleecing