Where Are the Wingnuts

[KaskadskyjKozak]

I think the answers have been - build the economy, sustain middle class jobs, offer universal health care, etc. While all great ideas, if you were discussing the issue with the mayor of San Jose, or many other jurisdictions, he would patiently lean across the desk and say "Yes, but what am I to do now, in my City?".

 

Still waiting for that answer.

 

There are no reasonable answers to fallacious questions. Cutting your hand off will stop your finger from bleeding, but you won't have stopped the bleeding. As matter of fact, you'll have made matters worse: permanently decreasing public employee compensation will further degrade public services and reinforce the race to the bottom.

 

"fallacious questions"

[j_b]

You also need to be given a dictionary or you think you can handle that part?

[JayB]

I think the answers have been - build the economy, sustain middle class jobs, offer universal health care, etc. While all great ideas, if you were discussing the issue with the mayor of San Jose, or many other jurisdictions, he would patiently lean across the desk and say "Yes, but what am I to do now, in my City?".

 

Still waiting for that answer.

 

There are no reasonable answers to fallacious questions. Cutting your hand off will stop your finger from bleeding, but you won't have stopped the bleeding. As matter of fact, you'll have made matters worse: permanently decreasing public employee compensation will further degrade public services and reinforce the race to the bottom.

 

If pensions, work-rules, seniority based pay, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc then California world beater in every category of public sector performance. It isn't.

 

Virginia outscores California, Illinois, NJ, NY, Wisconsin, etc in every category.

 

http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/gpp_report_card.aspx

 

There *are* states with collective bargaining rules that score well, The data certainly don't support the claim that collective bargaining is necessary for the efficient delivery of high quality public services, effective public administration, etc.

[j_b]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit. Little to no infrastructure is easy to maintain but it doesn't mean that it is adequate.

 

Giving a B for money management to Texas and its $23 billion shortfall, also raises significant question on the value of that report.

Edited March 18, 2011 by j_b

[JayB]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit.

 

The vast majority of employers in this country manage to attract and retain employees who are sufficiently qualified to do their jobs without imposing massive, potentially bankrupting future pension obligations on themselves.

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit. Little to no infrastructure is easy to maintain but it doesn't mean that it is adequate.

 

Giving a B for money management to Texas and its $23 billion shortfall, also raises significant question on the value of that report.

 

What data have you got to support the claim that the absence of collective bargaining leads to a general decline in public sector performance?

[j_b]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit.

 

The vast majority of employers in this country manage to attract and retain employees who are sufficiently qualified to do their jobs without imposing massive, potentially bankrupting future pension obligations on themselves.

 

 

Non sequitur! Private sector employees receive higher total compensation than public sector employee for equivalent schooling, experience, seniority, etc ...

[prole]

The vast majority of employers in this country manage to attract and retain employees who are sufficiently qualified to do their jobs without imposing massive, potentially bankrupting future pension obligations on themselves.

 

Hence the new retirement plan for most Americans: Work Until You Die. Don't get me wrong though, the shareholders are doing great!

[j_b]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit. Little to no infrastructure is easy to maintain but it doesn't mean that it is adequate.

 

Giving a B for money management to Texas and its $23 billion shortfall, also raises significant question on the value of that report.

 

What data have you got to support the claim that the absence of collective bargaining leads to a general decline in public sector performance?

 

why does your question have no relation to the points made in my post?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

why does your question have no relation to the points made in my post?

 

Yeah Jay, knock it off with your "fallacious questions"?

[JayB]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit.

 

The vast majority of employers in this country manage to attract and retain employees who are sufficiently qualified to do their jobs without imposing massive, potentially bankrupting future pension obligations on themselves.

 

 

Non sequitur! Private sector employees receive higher total compensation than public sector employee for equivalent schooling, experience, seniority, etc ...

 

Yes. Pretend that what you got your degree in, which school you went to, what you've been doing with it, etc and fail to account for the actual cost of retiree pension and healtcare benefits you can get a regression analysis to crank out a set of statistical aggregates that says that someone with a Master's degree in Physical Education should be making more than someone with a BS in EE, etc, etc.

 

The simple fact that people who are *actually* being underpaid for their skills tend to remedy the situation by accepting higher compensation elsewhere is another confounding variable. Certainly doesn't square with this or any other data about public sector quit rates vs private sector quit rates.

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t04.htm/

[j_b]

Voluntary turnover in Virginia is slightly higher than the national average. Most classified employees who leave do so after one to three years of service, though another 27 percent of turnover comes from employees with 11 or more years of service. The commonwealth has taken an aggressive approach to address employee retention, offering various flexible fringe benefits that amount to nearly 50 percent of salary. Managers are implementing market-adjusted broad pay plans and monetary rewards. Virtually all employees are eligible for a pay-for performance program. Virginia has avoided salary compression; few employees are at the top of their pay grades.

 

I fail to see an argument to cut public employee benefits in there. In fact, they did the exact opposite to help retain employees.

[JayB]

Since when is offering less and less for a position going to attract and allow to retain quality applicants? since it doesn't involve banksters, and financial analysts perhaps? Would you please try to ease up on the opportunism and be a little consistent in your argumentation.

 

I am very dubious of the methodology used in a report that gives a higher grade for infrastructure to states without significant mass transit. Little to no infrastructure is easy to maintain but it doesn't mean that it is adequate.

 

Giving a B for money management to Texas and its $23 billion shortfall, also raises significant question on the value of that report.

 

What data have you got to support the claim that the absence of collective bargaining leads to a general decline in public sector performance?

 

why does your question have no relation to the points made in my post?

 

You said the support used dubious methodology. Bring an equally comprehensive study to the table that shows that granting collective bargaining rights to public employees in the US is critical for public sector performance.

[j_b]

it doesn't follow. The quality of the study you chose has nothing to do with the existence of other studies.

[j_b]

Yes. Pretend that what you got your degree in, which school you went to, what you've been doing with it, etc and fail to account for the actual cost of retiree pension and healtcare benefits you can get a regression analysis to crank out a set of statistical aggregates that says that someone with a Master's degree in Physical Education should be making more than someone with a BS in EE, etc, etc.

 

Muy rico! you certainly didn't provide us with a regression analysis when you cherry picked one public employee to illustrate your claim that public employees were paid too much. weasel!

 

The simple fact that people who are *actually* being underpaid for their skills tend to remedy the situation by accepting higher compensation elsewhere is another confounding variable. Certainly doesn't square with this or any other data about public sector quit rates vs private sector quit rates.

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t04.htm/

 

Not everybody is solely motivated by how much money they get at the end of the month. Many people are willing to trade some of their earning potential for a better work environment, etc ..

 

I am not entirely sure what you expect to understand from 'quit levels' in this economic climate.

[j_b]

Debunking the Myth of the Over-compensated Public Employee

 

The data analysis in this paper [..] indicate that public employees, both state and local government, are not overpaid. Comparisons controlling for education, experience, hours of work, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity and disability, reveal no significant overpayment but a slight undercompensation of public employees when compared to private employee compensation costs on a per hour basis. On average, full-time state and local employees are undercompensated by 3.7%, in comparison to otherwise similar private-sector workers. The public employee compensation penalty is smaller for local government employees (1.8%) than state government workers (7.6%).

 

debunking_the_myth_of_the_overcompensated_public_employee

[Jim]

In general public sector workers are less motivated than private sector workers, which should translate to lower output and public sector workers are risk-averse. This might not affect output levels, but might indicate that they should be willing to accept lower pay in exchange for the greater job security of the public sector.

 

From the Brookings study of other studies on compensation:

 

At the end of the day, we will probably never know for sure whether state and local workers are overpaid on average in terms of total compensation. This makes it hard to address the directly relevant question of whether these workers receive extravagant pensions. We know pensions are higher and more secure on average than in the private sector,.........................

 

Meanwhile in WA:

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2014527782_edit18bud.html

 

Another middle road summary of other reports: http://reason.org/news/show/public-sector-private-sector-salary

 

 

[rob]

In general public sector workers are less motivated than private sector workers

 

Source?

 

Wouldn't this mean we should have privatized police and fire? They would be more motivated!

[Jim]

Sorry if I didn't make that clear - my opinion. Maybe overstated - better to state (IMO) that in my experience a greater portion were under motivated and the vast majority were more stable-seeking than risk takers.

[j_b]

What drivel. Why don't you go say this to the face of nurses and teachers who make up the majority of public sector workers. Outrageous.

 

And no, Reason magazine isn't "middle of the road". It's a Libertarian outfit spewing CATO (i.e. KOCh's brother) propaganda, as the article you cited makes abundantly clear.

Edited March 18, 2011 by j_b

[Jim]

Teachers in particular I'd say are underpaid - the others, nurses, cops, firemen, lawyers, etc. get paid for overtime. Curious how teachers miss out.

 

Rather than criticize the source (notice who paid for the study you cited) it would be something original to discuss the issue. Brookings is pretty middle of the road and their study says it's difficult if not impossible to make comparisons in WAGES and output. The do note the higher pensions in public sector - what they don't address is how unsustainable the programs are.

 

So - more arm waving or do you have a solution to the newly released state budget forecast. Or is it more of equality, apple pie, and freedom? Practical solutions would be a new high point

[j_b]

You are prejudiced against public employees and it stinks. You should be ashamed of yourself for furthering the demonizing of public employees.

 

The arguments in that article are exactly the CATO arguments that JayB has been regurgitating here. Right wingers have nothing to counter the various studies showing that when accounting for many variables, public employees are underpaid. Your carrying water for them isn't going to change any of it.

 

 

[Hugh Conway]

I think the answers have been - build the economy, sustain middle class jobs, offer universal health care, etc. While all great ideas, if you were discussing the issue with the mayor of San Jose, or many other jurisdictions, he would patiently lean across the desk and say "Yes, but what am I to do now, in my City?".

 

Still waiting for that answer.

 

There are no reasonable answers to fallacious questions. Cutting your hand off will stop your finger from bleeding, but you won't have stopped the bleeding. As matter of fact, you'll have made matters worse: permanently decreasing public employee compensation will further degrade public services and reinforce the race to the bottom.

 

If pensions, work-rules, seniority based pay, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc then California world beater in every category of public sector performance. It isn't.

 

Virginia outscores California, Illinois, NJ, NY, Wisconsin, etc in every category.

 

http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/gpp_report_card.aspx

 

There *are* states with collective bargaining rules that score well, The data certainly don't support the claim that collective bargaining is necessary for the efficient delivery of high quality public services, effective public administration, etc.

 

 

And yet, without collective bargaining, Virginia's schools still suck. Surely this would suggest there isn't a link at best? Hell, having lived in that state I'm surprised anyone would trot it out as a model for anything - except never ending suburban sprawl, regional incompetence and general shittiness. But Jay's packing up the Buick and moving out to Virginny!

 

Oh dear, those dirty little facts getting in the way of Jay's ideology

[tvashtarkatena]

How does one gauge the 'motivation' of a bus driver or DOT clerk? As long as the bus gets driven and I get my driver's license, I'm good.

 

Many public sector jobs (not all, but many) are repetitive by nature. Obviously, they 'attract' folks who are good with that. Repetitive private sector jobs, which would be most of them, attract pretty much the same.

 

But then, there are police, fire, etc - who seem to be as 'motivated' as anyone in the private sector, which is no stalwart bastion of 'motivation' by any remote stretch of the imagination.

 

And then again, there are the legions of private sector workers whose motivation cannot be distinguished from that of a slug on a cold morning.

 

Of the many public and private workers I know personally, I see absolutely no difference in level of 'motivation' - what they put into their work. The teachers, police, fire fighters, public defenders, politicians, military, and other public workers I know seem to occupy the upper echelons of 'motivated'.

 

I have to wonder if Jim is comparing a lower level, repetitive public job to a higher level, interesting private one in his 'motivation' comparison.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

I think the answers have been - build the economy, sustain middle class jobs, offer universal health care, etc. While all great ideas, if you were discussing the issue with the mayor of San Jose, or many other jurisdictions, he would patiently lean across the desk and say "Yes, but what am I to do now, in my City?".

 

Still waiting for that answer.

 

There are no reasonable answers to fallacious questions. Cutting your hand off will stop your finger from bleeding, but you won't have stopped the bleeding. As matter of fact, you'll have made matters worse: permanently decreasing public employee compensation will further degrade public services and reinforce the race to the bottom.

 

If pensions, work-rules, seniority based pay, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc then California world beater in every category of public sector performance. It isn't.

 

Virginia outscores California, Illinois, NJ, NY, Wisconsin, etc in every category.

 

http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/gpp_report_card.aspx

 

There *are* states with collective bargaining rules that score well, The data certainly don't support the claim that collective bargaining is necessary for the efficient delivery of high quality public services, effective public administration, etc.

 

 

And yet, without collective bargaining, Virginia's schools still suck. Surely this would suggest there isn't a link at best? Hell, having lived in that state I'm surprised anyone would trot it out as a model for anything - except never ending suburban sprawl, regional incompetence and general shittiness. But Jay's packing up the Buick and moving out to Virginny!

 

Oh dear, those dirty little facts getting in the way of Jay's ideology

 

JayB would prefer if the U.S. followed the Texas model of governance. He's apparently not willing to live in such a shithole himself, however, preferring instead the bask in the benefits of a more enlightened, liberal state.

 

What not-so-closeted hipster wouldn't?

 

Ah, the Angry Hairless Monkey and its many contradictions.