Federal Pay Continues to Skyrocket: Both Parties Are Out of Control

In 2008 the average federal worker earned twice that of his private-industry counterpart in wages and benefits: $120,000 per year versus $60,000.

Check out the difference in slope of the two lines. Yowza. Federal pay and benefits are up 58% since 2000 compared to just 28% in the private sector.

Of course, when you consider the massive productivity advantage government workers enjoy over their private counterparts, it all makes sense..

Well, it's all the Democrats fault undoubtedly. Wait, looks like it was Bush.

• The George W. Bush years were very lucrative for federal workers. In 2000, the average compensation (wages and benefits) of federal workers was 66 percent higher than the average compensation in the U.S. private sector. The new data show that average federal compensation is now more than double the average in the private sector.

• If you drive through Northern Virginia, you will find nearly entire neighborhoods of $500,000 to $900,000 homes owned by government workers or contractors. Then you can drive five streets over and find $200,000 to $400,000 homes owned by those who pay the salaries for those government employees. It’s a fascinating distribution of wealth. Most government employees and contractors could not earn more than $60,000 on the free market. Their only chance to make that kind of money comes from having an employer that not only never has to make a profit but can forcibly take money through taxation.

The answer is that both are deeply to blame. Don't be fooled. There's nary a difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to growth of government. Both parties are completely, sadistically, out of control. There is NO spending restraint on either side of the aisle, just hot air, promises, and purple unicorns. Oh and bubbles.

Comments

[Vuke:]

Governments everywhere are out of control. Internal inertia makes this unfixable until an economic collapse arouses an angry reaction.

That will come. Make ready.

Oct 27 08:53 AM

[Lightway:]

This sounds like a thinly veiled counterattack against the government for going after private sector bonuses and pay caps. The article also does not dig deep into Federal pay issues, such as cost of living adjustments, which were in part driven up due to skyrocketing housing costs.

How did the woman quoted in the article come up with the "five streets over" figure? Did she catalog every single house, its value, and the occupants occupation? That's some pretty shoddy statistics collection based on a poorly constructed anecdote that is making really broad assumptions.

Also, how dare people actually make good money for a living? Why, this sort of activity should be outlawed, and all Federal job functions outsourced to China and India for pennies on the dollar!

Oct 27 10:53 AM

[ctjaeger:]

From the tone of your post, it would sound as if you are a government employee. The simple point of the article is that federal government employee's have enjoyed a much greater rise in their incomes than have workers in the private sector. Since government doesn't produce anything and relies on the private sector for 100% of it's revenue, it would seem that the two trend lines should at least match. Federal employment has had net job growth through this recession compared to the private sector.

At these levels and at a 20% federal income tax rate, it takes five government workers to pay enough in income taxes to pay for one additional government worker. It takes almost 10 private sector workers to pay enough in income taxes to pay for one government worker. I'm not sure that type of leverage is sustainable over the long-term. Not only are the federal employment rolls growing, their overall compensation is growing faster than in the private sector. Certainly anyone can see a looming problem in those facts.


On Oct 27 10:53 AM Lightway wrote:

> This sounds like a thinly veiled counterattack against the government
> for going after private sector bonuses and pay caps. The article
> also does not dig deep into Federal pay issues, such as cost of living
> adjustments, which were in part driven up due to skyrocketing housing
> costs.
>
> How did the woman quoted in the article come up with the "five streets
> over" figure? Did she catalog every single house, its value, and
> the occupants occupation? That's some pretty shoddy statistics collection
> based on a poorly constructed anecdote that is making really broad
> assumptions.
>
> Also, how dare people actually make good money for a living? Why,
> this sort of activity should be outlawed, and all Federal job functions
> outsourced to China and India for pennies on the dollar!

Oct 27 11:27 AM

[Lightway:]

I do not work for the Federal government or any government.

Perhaps we should look at more relevant private sector issues such as equitable distribution of compensation. Yes I know that is a foul phrase to some with a particular ideological slant, some would even exaggerate and accuse it of implying socialism. However, executives making multi-million dollar bonuses, and lavished with obscene packages like golden parachutes (wish I could get millions for getting fired) while simultaneously laying off staff, seems to be a much greater pay issue than people making an honest living keeping the country running. These executives bring little marginal return of value relative to the gross amount of compensation they are being given, and as a shareholder I would tend to question their return of value back to the company. Factor in executive compensation in the private sector versus executive compensation in the Federal government, and let's see the disparity.

Even still, we have seen absolutely no aggregate figures on what kind of tax burden the average tax payer has to keep the Federal employee work force employed. All we have is this out of context chart, and even then, don't you think the trillions of tax payer money spent bailing out mismanaged private sector companies eclipses, by an exponential order of magnitude, the cost of paying for people trying to make an honest living? What about dated weapons systems such as the B-2 and a fictional missile defense shield? How much are those costing us?

The assumption being made in those links simply suggests Federal workers do not provide any value whatsoever back to society, which is simply nothing more than an ideological rant window dressed with an out of context graph.

On Oct 27 11:27 AM ctjaeger wrote:

> From the tone of your post, it would sound as if you are a government
> employee. The simple point of the article is that federal government
> employee's have enjoyed a much greater rise in their incomes than
> have workers in the private sector. Since government doesn't produce
> anything and relies on the private sector for 100% of it's revenue,
> it would seem that the two trend lines should at least match. Federal
> employment has had net job growth through this recession compared
> to the private sector.
>
> At these levels and at a 20% federal income tax rate, it takes five
> government workers to pay enough in income taxes to pay for one additional
> government worker. It takes almost 10 private sector workers to
> pay enough in income taxes to pay for one government worker. I'm
> not sure that type of leverage is sustainable over the long-term.
> Not only are the federal employment rolls growing, their overall
> compensation is growing faster than in the private sector. Certainly
> anyone can see a looming problem in those facts.

Oct 27 03:38 PM

[TinyTim:]

Yeah, this is a real pisser.
Glad somebody but me see's it and the fact that the party doesn't matter.
The first thing Janet Napolitano said when she became head of Homeland Security is "this is a baby agency and we need to grow it quickly."
I wonder how much of the income disparity is based on pension benefits.
"Civil servants" get DB pensions. These are extinct in the private sector.

At the risk of sounding Jeffersonian, we need to move the Fed functions back to the state and local levels where there is more accountability. Add term limits and balanced budget amendment for all. Lastly, income taxes should be collected by the states and flow uphill to the Fed. Starve the beast.

"all Federal job functions outsourced to China and India"
best idea I've read today.

Oct 27 04:01 PM

[TinyTim:]

"The assumption being made in those links simply suggests Federal workers do not provide any value whatsoever back to society, "

"Any value whatsoever" is a bit harsh.
I'd like to see these Federal workers get systematically ranked & rated per the custom at GE and Intel and charted for income versus rank.
Then drop the bottom 15% and decide if the current work load justifies their replacement.

The issue is whether the value they provide is worth the tax dollars they drain sucking on the government teat.
Then compare to the private sector.

Oct 27 04:12 PM

[Lightway:]

Enron had a very similar performance evaluation system to what you're describing

> I'd like to see these Federal workers get systematically ranked
> rated per the custom at GE and Intel and charted for income versus
> rank.
> Then drop the bottom 15% and decide if the current work load justifies
> their replacement.
>

Oct 27 04:29 PM

[TinyTim:]

Yup.
I believe Jack Welch was responsible.
Practices like this are why labor unions are still needed.
Nothing like knee-capping your cubemate to keep your job.

Speaking of which, aren't civil servants mostly protected by unions or review boards.

Oct 27 08:11 PM