j_b

An exact comparison of working for profit versus providing public service isn't possible. The author obviously chose to retain the characteristics that are meaningful, like level of education. All of this seems very subjective. that's because to do science requires special tools and people who picked humanities don't have these tools. It has little to do with difficulty. Well, the logic and reasoning exhibited in your posts don't evoke science to me. So, focusing on form is obviously not entirely conclusive.

You are confused. There isn't a one-to-one correlation between earning potential and "difficult" degree in the private sector. If it wasn't the case there wouldn't be so many Physicists driving cabs.

an MBA degree is a masters in science? since when? Do you have any idea what goes into acquiring an MBA through an evening program compared to a masters in education? Umm. No. If you slowly read the above they are seperate sentences that provide differnt examples of how the Rutgers study lumps degrees. Example 1: Should be comparing (as an example) MS physics to MS physics. Example 2: What the Rutgers study is doing - comparing a MS History to MBA (as an example). Example 3: Rutgers study is comparing degree LEVEL only so a Masters in Education is the same as a Masters in a science field in this study. Hope that is clear now. I don't have any picture books to assist. I don't need a picture book to figure that you are biased against humanities and other liberal arts degrees, which in fcat are often more valuable to achieve certain tasks like teaching people (for example) than a science degree.

did you forget your pom-poms again?

It's not my fault if you can't see the difference between a study conducted by academics with a record of scholarly achievement and another study conducted by a corporate propaganda outfit with a record of disinformation. I wouldn't describe cherry-picking high wages out of an employee database as "scientific bias for objectivity" an MBA degree is a masters in science? since when? Do you have any idea what goes into acquiring an MBA through an evening program compared to a masters in education? whenever you cite the study (Keefe alone published several reports in 2011) you are discussing with specific arguments, I'll reply.

It appears that several majors peaks (Rosa, Blanc) in the Alps were first skied around the turn of the 19th century (first Haute Route in 1903) so a decade ahead may be a low estimate. But, you have obviously thought about this a lot more than I have.

The Challenge of Rainier (which I clearly read too long ago) includes a great letter by Jean Landry discussing the circumstances and the climb itself 40 years after the facts: Landry's letter

right out of the Essex County Conservative Examiner? LOLZ I guess you didn't feel like you could give the link to that gibberish: "the study is seriously flawed and makes some untenable assumptions, chief among them that the numbers of public employees are appropriate for a free society."

Here you go: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute crickets ...

Here you go: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute

The gist of the Rudgers study: Jeffrey Keefe, an associate professor at the university’s School of Management and Labor Relations, said public employees do not make more than comparable private employees. According to Keefe, comparing private and public employees with the same educational level, experience and work schedule shows private employees make 11 percent more in wages and 5 percent more in total compensation than public workers. "It’s hard to show that public workers are overpaid compared to private sector workers," said Keefe, but he quickly added: "Even though their wages are lower, it’s also hard to argue they are underpaid.’’ In other words, it’s not simple. Using the latest federal data, Keefe said the average total compensation for workers in the private sector with bachelor’s degrees is $89,041 compared with $56,641 for public workers. For workers with professional degrees — lawyers, say, or doctors — the gap is more dramatic: $175,141 in the private sector, $79,330 in the public. Where public outdoes private is among workers without much education. The average compensation for a public worker without a high school diploma is $41,000, compared with $27,719. With diplomas, employees in both sectors make $44,000. Public workers are more educated than private — 57 percent have college degrees and higher, compared with 44 percent. Because workers in all sectors are paid according to education and skill levels, lumping them all together — the least skilled with the most — is misleading.

No. AEI is an organization paid at 100% by corporate interests and has a long record of publishing propaganda favorable to their sponsors. Whereas, unions paid independent scholars working for an academic institution with a long record of scholarly achievement to do a study on the topic.

Unions paid independent scholars to do a study which is far cry from "scholars" working for a think tank entirely financed by corporations. AEI is a propaganda outfit and one of the worse. Nothing more.

"Faces frozen and clothes torn during the ascent" It looks like they ditched the skis before or at Camp Muir. 1922 was around the beginning of alpine ski mountaineering in the Alps but perhaps they found good cramponning above 10,000' and taking skis to the summit wasn't worthwhile. Do you know which way they went above Muir?

I am not using the Seattle Times as primary source. I have listed plenty of academic studies that show what they found. I am emphasizing the Seattle Times because they did a local study and they are other otherwise a regressive rag. AEI is a neoliberal think tank that has constantly been at the forefront of deregulation, privatization of the public domain, outsourcing, denial of climate change, union busting, etc. I wouldn't put one once of credibility toward the analysis of this propaganda outfit as I haven't for any of the previous frauds they claimed were "scholarly work". Who gives a fig about "your personal experience" enthralled as if it were a system analysis. My personal experience doesn't match yours in any way and I don't spend half my time trying to claim it is the end all of public work mores.

...as opposed to your incessant spew of verbal diarrhea effecting any change in government. I do believe that national discourse is affected by social media. You probably do too or you wouldn't be obfuscating incessantly (like you just did) on this board.

What's below the academic threshold is pretending that us talking about spending cuts all day is going to force politicians to do their job, which includes campaigning for quality public services (that also depend on public employee compensation) and a slew of other actions like putting the unconstitutional supermajority nonsense in front of the state supreme court or cutting corporate tax breaks for outsourcers (and insourcers like Boeing), etc ..

You are really slow on the uptake. I have already linked to the Seattle Times analysis of state salaries showing that median wages are lower for ~3/4 of public employee occupations than their equivalent in the private sector. The irony of your ignorant statements is your not realizing that top public salaries are consistently less than in the private sector whereas salaries at the bottom of the scale are usually greater than in the private sector. right, "dumbfuck" is a lot more to the point.

It's the continual parade of the troll brigade. First, I don't bash capitalism, I bash unfettered capitalism and corporatism. Second, contrarily to you morons, I know that if we want a quality public service, public employee wages can't be too far out of whack with wages for comparable occupations in the private sector. As said many times already, public employee wages are already on average lower than in the private sector for equivalent professions. I know that you morons wouldn't like anything better than our prized public institutions to commit harakiri for the sake of your free market fundamentalism but excuse me for not falling for your rank stupidity.

Contrarily to you I am not a dogmatist and a combination of market and regulatory discretion to decide on wages seems adequate to me. I challenge you to show that those non-tenure profs aren't mostly medical professionals (or some other high earning profession) but I am not holding my breath considering your demonstrated lack of intellectual honesty.

Education? Did you look at the list of top-paid state employees? How much does a top neurosurgeon earn in the private sector? or do you feel we can staff one of the top medical program in the country with those who perform near the bottom of their class? Are you a troll?

i'm sure the irony of a chinese national teaching the virtues of democracy would be lost on your children Didn't you know that the basketball coaches, neurosurgeons, etc found at the top of the Washington state employee salary list are really big on collective bargaining? All of this whining about top public employee salaries is really symptomatic of the crass demagoguery of the right wing. They would outsource our world class institutions like UW hospital in a jiff.

That's the database used by the Seattle Times who actually analyzed the data, dumbo ...

I am glad to read you are finally acknowledging your bit part role in pushing the race to the bottom that underlies this economic crisis. Note that I won't say that you are anti-American or whatever garbage you'd come up with if the situation was reversed.

More cherry-picking incoming from the same people who claimed that corporate types warranted their bonuses or they'd go somewhere else.