Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact) 
, Alex Richards
Sunday, May 17, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Enlargeable graphic
See a state-by-state comparison and Nevada's ranking
Related Document
Sun Archives
- Deadlines and dead ends (4-26-2009)
- Chamber, unions clash on government pay, perks (2-26-2009)
- Gibbons' budget hits retired state workers hard (1-19-2009)
- State retirees' health costs loom large (3-16-2008)
Sun Coverage
Sun Blogs
Nevada has fewer public employees than nearly every state in the union, but government workers here are among the nation’s most handsomely rewarded, according to a Sun analysis of census data.
Nevada public employees make 16 percent above the national average, trailing only California, New York and a few other places where the cost of living is much higher than in Nevada.
Due in large part to those generous salaries, Nevada’s government workers also have some of the best retirement benefits of any public employees in the country.
The Nevada numbers, however, are not entirely what they seem.
Total pay and benefits for government employees in the state are driven sharply higher by a small class of workers whose pay is far above national averages — police, firefighters and other local government employees.
When those workers are stripped from the calculation, the numbers show that state employees earn a bit more than the national average. Teachers, however, earn 3 percent less than the national average, according to the Sun analysis, and they will be falling further behind after pay cuts expected this year.
At the other end of the pay spectrum, the average firefighter in Nevada makes nearly $95,000, or 48 percent more than the national average. Local police officers make nearly $79,000, or 30 percent more than the national average.
Often the well-paid workers push up Nevada’s average by earning extraordinary amounts of overtime.
The overtime hours are the result of an odd policy choice by local government officials. They have decided paying the overtime is cheaper than hiring and training new employees.
The Sun analysis comports with most of the findings of a much-discussed study commissioned by the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce. The findings are important at the moment because the Democratic-controlled Legislature, trying to close a yawning budget gap, is considering changes in the Public Employees Retirement System and the Public Employee Benefits Program, as well as the statute governing collective bargaining for local employees.
Republicans in the Legislature, prodded on by the list of demands of the Las Vegas Chamber, have made any tax increase to fill the state’s $3 billion budget hole contingent on at least some changes in these pay and benefit policies.
The chamber says the retirement system and health benefits program, which have an $11.25 billion unfunded liability, must be changed to avoid long-term fiscal problems. The liabilities break down to $7.25 billion for the retirement system, which is 76 percent funded, and $4 billion for health benefits.
For comparison, the budget being considered by the Legislature to run the entire state government for the next two years is about $7 billion.
Detective David Kallas, director of government affairs for the Police Protective Association, said the targeting of public employees by the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce is outrageous. He said police, firefighters and teachers have not driven the state into its current crisis.
Public employees never made subprime loans to those who could not afford to repay, did not develop a glut of homes with borrowed money, and did not leverage to the hilt to build lavish Strip casinos, Kallas said.
He called the chamber’s and Republicans’ attack on public employees opportunistic and disingenuous. Kallas criticized the Republican insistence on supporting taxes only if cuts are made in government pay and benefits.
Local government unions have made concessions or are in negotiations to do so, even though they were not contractually obligated to do so. Firefighters, police, teacher and nurses unions are running radio ads to this effect.
Kallas also said police overtime is often the result of private functions, such as corporate events or concerts on the Strip, for which Metro is reimbursed by the private party. Moreover, police officers do not earn retirement credit for these hours.
He said police officers would like to see the force expanded and a reduction of mandatory overtime because they are concerned fatigue is a threat to their safety.
Rusty McAllister, president of the Professional Firefighters of Nevada, said firefighters work overtime because local governments in Southern Nevada have made the calculation that it is cheaper than hiring more firefighters, thereby forcing him to defend a policy that is not the firefighters’ doing.
McAllister and Kallas asserted that state and local government fiscal problems cannot be solved by layoffs or cutting public employee pay because they don’t make up a big enough slice of the pie.
Still, no one disputes that police and firefighters are paid well, and their retirement benefits outstrip those of many private sector workers.
Employees who work 28 years earn enough credit for retirement pay that equals 75 percent of the average of their pay — an average calculated based on highest earnings during 36 consecutive months. That 75 percent, which is 2.67 percent per year for 28 years, is the maximum.
For workers who earn overtime in those 36 consecutive months, however, 75 percent of their pay can be significant. (The overtime is only credited toward retirement if it is “call back” overtime, wherein the employee is summoned from off-duty status. A recent change requires the “call back” to be an emergency, according to Kallas, who sits on the PERS board.)
Many retirement systems in the United States specify a minimum age at which you can retire, regardless of how many years have been worked. But public employees in Nevada can retire at any age as long as they have worked for 30 years — 25 years for members of the police and fire services.
Moreover, public employees are also entitled to a health care subsidy. Workers who retire before they are eligible for Medicare at age 65 have 57 percent of their health program paid for when they purchase from the state’s benefit plan. This can be significant.
In the private market, the average annual premium for someone at age 60 is $5,090, according to a study by America’s Health Insurance Plans. By contrast, a Nevada government retiree who had 15 years on the job can buy a plan for $2,160 a year.
Compared with other states, Nevada’s plan falls in the middle range of generosity. Some states, including California and Texas, cover 100 percent.
In their defense, Nevada public employees note that they are among the 28 percent of public sector workers nationwide who do not participate in Social Security. This means they do not pay the
6.2 percent payroll tax, and the state does not to have to pay a 6.2 percent share, either.
The unions say this saves the state money. Alicia Munnell and Mauricio Soto, of Boston College’s Center for Retirement Research, say Nevada governments save between 5 percent and 6 percent of payroll by keeping their workers outside Social Security.
The unions also say that being one of the retirement systems not participating in Social Security distorts the comparison of PERS with other states. In states where workers participate in Social Security, they receive their pensions, but also a monthly Social Security check. Not so in Nevada, which means retirees are not as far above the national average as the charts would otherwise indicate.
But Gary Burtless, a labor economist at the centrist Brookings Institution, said that not being part of Social Security is most likely an advantage for Nevada government workers. They enjoy the tax break, but also, if at any time in their lives they worked a Social Security covered job — including any job in the private sector — they would still receive benefits. And, because Social Security’s benefit structure is very progressive, their benefits could be substantial even if they contributed little in the way of taxes to the system.
That is partially true, although as Munnell and Soto note in a report titled “State and Local Pensions are Different from Private Plans,” Congress created two rules to significantly reduce this kind of double-dipping.
What’s absolutely clear is that like most public sector workers, Nevada’s public employees who stick it out earn a pension that is far better than those of most Americans in the private sector. In one sense, that’s not surprising. They tend to make more money and are more highly skilled than the population as a whole, so it is not surprising they would have better pensions.
But it also reflects the vastly changed pension landscape nationwide. Government pensions remain mostly what’s called “defined benefit,” meaning that after retiring, the worker gets a guaranteed regular check in a predetermined amount.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 83 percent of state and local government employees have access to a defined benefit plan.
The private sector has greatly curtailed defined benefit plans. Just 21 percent of private sector employees have them today.
“Private plans are mostly 401(k)s,” Munnell and Soto wrote in their report. A 401(k) is what’s known as a “defined contribution” plan, meaning the worker sets aside a portion of earnings every paycheck into an investment account, sometimes with his employer contributing a portion. The worker receives tax benefits, but must make his own investment decisions and shoulders the risk inherent in those investments.
Munnell and Soto continue: “Less than half of the workforce is covered (by private pension plans), and everyone participates in Social Security.” Finally, Public defined benefit plans, “tend to provide larger benefits than their private sector counterparts, and most offer post-retirement cost-of-living adjustments, which are virtually unheard of in the private sector.”
The obvious questions are: Why should taxpayers support a pension system that they likely lack access to if they are in the private sector? And, should public sector workers be forced into the same defined contribution program as most of the rest of us?
For defenders of public employee retirement systems, the response is an emphatic no.
Beth Almeida is executive director of the National Institute on Retirement Security, a group that advocates for defined benefit plans.
Just because many private sector employers no longer offer retirement security doesn’t mean public sector employees should also be deprived of dignity in their later years, she said.
Almeida noted that of companies with 500 employees or more, employers spend an average of 6.2 percent of their payroll on pension costs, plus another 6.2 percent for Social Security contributions.
In other words, big private sector employers are often paying more in retirement costs than governments. Munnell and Soto generally agree with that conclusion.
Almeida said data show that defined benefit plans earn a better return because of actuarial advantages: The pension trustee only has to plan for the lifetime of the average pensioner; workers with 401(k) plans have no idea how long they will live, so each one has to plan for living the longest life.
Also, professional pension managers tend to be better stock pickers than the average person. The difference is between 1 percent and 2 percent a year, Almeida said.
This may be true, but it doesn’t change the fact that policymakers of Nevada and its local governments have made a significant, and quite curious, policy choice: Nevada has very few public employees, but a small subset of them are extremely well paid, and will be until they die.
Alex Richards reported from Las Vegas.
Once again everyone is lumping state workers such as people that maintain the state roads,state corrections officers,DMV and so on.
If you break it down between for example A Metro Corrections (Las Vegas) and a State Corrections Officer there is a difference starting at 45 percent difference in pay as well as benefits. Local (County & City) have collective bargaining agreements where as State Corrections Officers do not.
The Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce a very conservative organization and anti union and has not done it's research. That should trouble the legislature on how it was presented by simple break down. The LVCC needs not place everyone in the same boat to score points.
The Chamber's report has been shown to have had many methodological flaws, often comparing public service workers for whom there is no analogous category in the profit-seeking sector.
But even more flawed is the Chamber's discussion of the supposed "unfunded liability" of health care for retirees and retirement pensions. If we look at these costs in context of the entire state budget, these supposed "unfunded liabilities" amount to less than 4% of what the state is constitutionally and legislatively mandated to pay for over the next 30 years -- ie, education, law enforcement, prisons and medicaid.
See a detailed discussion of these benefits in context here
http://unlvfaculty.blogspot.com/2009/02/...
A few more facts to put the Chamber's claim in context:
According to studies done by the non-partisan (and business funded) Center for State and Local Government Excellence, 45 of 50 states pay at least partially for the health insurance premiums of retirees, and 19 states (not including Nevada) pay 100% of premiums for retired public service workers. Moreover, of the 26 states which do not pre-pay their liability, Nevada has the 7th smallest liability in total dollars and the 7th smallest by liability as a % of budget. See slge.org.
Firefighters are way overpaid.
"Gary Burtless, a labor economist at the centrist Brookings Institution, said that not being part of Social Security is most likely an advantage for Nevada government workers. They enjoy the tax break, but also, if at any time in their lives they worked a Social Security covered job -- including any job in the private sector -- they would still receive benefits. And, because Social Security's benefit structure is very progressive, their benefits could be substantial even if they contributed little in the way of taxes to the system."
This is spin from Brookings. I contributed SS over the course of my career which in total was based on 1.2 million of wages. Like everyone else when I get my annual statement the estimate of my monthly payment continues to steeply decline because I no longer contribute. Maybe if someone locked up retirement at a young age and tool a private sector job in the second half of a career they would fair better but I'm unsure of this.
The numbers tell it all. Is a fire fighter making $96,000 a year really better than a fire fighter making $70,000 a year? How did these get so out of whack? The fire fighters bought politicians with campaign donations and enough time off to do election work.
Firefighters and police need to be compensated above anyone else, public or private. This is a no-brainer.
I hate to break it to some of you, but the data is backed up by the U.S. government. They too show that Nevada's state and local workers are well paid when compared to state and local workers in other states.
Mr. Brown, you should know better than to throw in a statement like "and business funded" when talking about the methodology of a report. Who funds them doesn't change the facts or errors within the report. It is fallacious to make their sponsors a part of your critique.
Second, while their may be no private sector counterpart, remember, private sector jobs create value. At best a public sector job creates no net value for society (at least we cannot determine its value since the money was taken involuntarily from another to create the job. Though it is safe to say that most government jobs create no net value for society).
Thanks to these reporters and the Sun for providing real information, unlike the daily newspaper that offers opinion in place of fact. As a teacher, I am sick of being lumped in with "public employees." And not only does teacher pay stink for a college graduate with a profession in which you continue to have to take classes etc., but if you compared the working conditions of a teacher to that of a firefighter, that gap would be even huger than the pay gap. No wonder those guys always look so happy, so relaxed, so healthy, so in control... My life is chronic stress, as is true for many teachers.
Also, thank you to Gregory Brown for providing more facts. As far as I'm concerned, the Chamber of Commerce is an enemy of teachers, and thus of public education.
Goodness, I just read Mr. Gibbons' comment here. (Any relation?)
Private sector jobs create value, and public sector jobs don't? Did you really say such a thing? No, there's no "value" in buildings not burning down, or in drinking water being safe, or in roads, or in citizens learning the three R's...
Where are such dangerous ideologues bred?
Patrick Gibbons. Hilarious as usual. You should re-read Gregory Brown's post since you clearly did not understand the reason for his reference to the funding source.
Gregory Brown has provided facts to balance what has been a flawed, one-sided discussion of NV PERS and PEBP. You, like the Chamber, just choose to ignore any facts that contradict your opinion.
I don't know about police and fire but I do know the cities have to pay a certain premium in order to attract people with certain skill sets to live here. Las Vegas, and Nevada in general has one of the lowest rates of people with college degrees in the country. Alot of these people with degrees work for the local governments. Why would someone with an engineering degree come work here for same or less pay that they could make where they are from?
Point being, if your going to have the center piece of your economy be gambling and "sin" your going to have to pay people to live here.
lasvegas2009, such a calm voice of reason in a crazy world, eh? What a NUT. And obviously none to bright.
Yeah, there's PATRICK too, he never gives up. Working on a Sunday, Patrick? Boy, that Sheldon Adelson is a slave-driver. And AGAIN, you fail to point out the fact that, while fairly compensated, Nevada has LESS STATE AND LOCAL WORKERS than most any other state. So yes, they work hard, get paid.
"Firefighters are way overpaid."
They are hiring so unless you are afraid of getting in too high a tax bracket perhaps you might want to consider applying for one of the advertised positions... Complaining about other folks professions and pay cannot earn you a very big paycheck.
pmmart--actually, according to the Clark County Fire Dept. website, they are not accepting applications.
Public spending was essential to creating jobs in the Great Depression. Look at these hundreds of billions now pouring in to everything. This economy will be turning around within months IMO -- found a cool site; Balkingpoints ; incredible satellite view of earth
There is no reason they should be making 95,000/yr.
Pay teachers a living wage, and pay cap firefighters.
Maybe we need to return to a time when you paid a fee, placed a metal tag on your house and if you had a fire and the fire department came they would put it out, if no metal tag then your house would burn down. Then you wont have to complain anymore about paying taxes for those overpaid firefighters. But then again there would still be complaining because it seems that is all some have time to do.
Slots and particularly Neiman1,
For Pete's sake, SHUT UP!! You both only serve to embarrass yourselves and you obviously don't care.
I wholeheartedly agree that teachers should earn a decent living wage and obtain increases also, just like the rest of the working masses. And just so you know and so that you don't further embarrass yourself. If a FF makes 95,000.00 a year, he/she's been on the force for a while and have rightfully obtained increases throughout the years. That's not the starting salary!!! Helloooooooooooooooooooo?!?!?!?
There are a host of fire departments in the valley; Boulder, Henderson, Clark County, North Las Vegas and City of Las Vegas. They all hold recruitment seminars and recruitment academies various times of the year. So instead of sitting in the back seat telling the driver how to drive, get your behind in the FRONT seat and see what it's like to actually drive.
I'm with you AFVET. We need to take care of the cops and fire fighters (those who take care of us).
Nevada is at the bottom of adults who have a college degree, which is clear from reading what people say here, that sad thing is, these people are some of the brightest the community has to offer, there are a bunch of inbred people like vegas2009 out there, by the way, say hi to your wife, I mean cousin. I am a teacher, I am concerned about what I make, not others. People are so venomous here and the net impact on them is going to be next to nothing when it comes to dollars. Public jobs have been available for years in this state, why didn't all you complaining get
one? My guess is you make more money doing what you are doing, or you were not qualified. Either way it isn't our fault, move to another state if it is so bad here. Oh, and Vegas 2009, you want to live somewhere where there is no public education? move to Africa, I here that is a great place to raise a family.
I find it interesting with the local so called press when a survey shows that something in Nevada ranks at the bottom of the list, it's terrible and should be fixed and government doesn't know what it is doing. When a survey shows something in Nevada ranks at the top of a list (rare) or near to it, it's terrible and government employees are to blame. If the survey shows something in Nevada ranks in the middle, certainly improvement is necessary because government employees certainly are lazy. Private sector is the answer to everything in the eyes of the local press. Right now I don't think the private sector has anything to be proud of given the current mess. Government employees in Nevada are awesome. We do it better with fewer workers. What is it that says Nevada public employee pay and benefits are too high and should be cut. Compared to the private sector? I think that the press, the Chamber and private sector business should look to the low pay and substandard benefits they provide the private secotr employee rather than drag down those public employees who are fairly paid and compensated (teachers being the exception). Maybe the two local papers could even look at improving their own business compared to other papers in this country.
How very interesting.
The weasel is in the hen house.
There should be a capped salary for police, fire, and govt. workers. The salary should be based on a 24 hour day, not on an hourly wage.
Overtime should never be paid, or then again when the boys/girls are just lying around the house they should not be on the clock.
I guess that would hold true for the rest of the state/fed employees. I don't want my house to burn down, but then again I don't want my tax money burned up either.
There are stories of many fires being started by firemen to ensure that the public retain their services. That statement goes a long way for many areas of govt., which is why we have laws to prevent the housing of troops in private homes. In other words we shall not allow govt. to be over-bearing on the public.
Let's just say that if you think a military fireman, or policeman etc... is paid an appropriate salary for services why the disparity. Not to mention a military person will be in a combat zone too with their life on the line. Sorry for the wake-up call.
There should never be a negotiated wage for govt. employees. It should be based on skill not emotion, and any increases should be based on the consumer price index (CPI).There should never be anyone who is a part of the system vested interest) involved in the wage chart creation or control of it.
To the Guys and Gals who provide our services, Thank You. The city and society needs you, but everybody is replaceable, as are politicians, you all work for the public.
This is not a critique, or disapproval of the service provided by the fine hard working rank and file, just a concern that wages are floating out of reach for the public to sustain.
Once again as noted many times before, the cutting of overtime means hiring more people to cover that work performed. It would still cost the same to the public! So lets cut all public employees, let fire, police, and ems be performed by a private company that the public would still pay for and see how fast they run the companies into the ground. Again anyone working for the private sector does not have any room to brag about how well the private is or can run things.
Teachers are under paid, Police are paid about right and firefighters are grossly overpaid. I know a few firefighters and they even know they are overpaid. They even laugh about it sometimes.
lets not forget.....these are contracts negotiated in good faith with employers...dont blame the people who worked for them...blame the employers who agreed
Las Vegas is no different that the rest of the country...teachers....good teachers are way underpaid. And NO I'm not or have been a teacher.
The Police Departments have been playing the local government for years. They use the Local governments against each other driving up wages.
Metro will go to the county and say look at what the Henderson pd makes, we should make more than them or we will lose all of our recruits.
Each Police department does the same thing when its time to renegotiate their contracts. Its a never ending cycle. Until local governments actually stand up to the Unions, it won't end.
During the last round of negotiations, the union was concerned about housing prices rising and the cost of living, and everyone got raises. So now that housing prices has normalized, so should the pay of cops.
Firefighters and policemen should know that there's no free lunch. The money for their exhorbitant salaries and pensions has to come from somewhere, and where it's coming from is schools,universities, and hospitals. While they are enjoying their retirements, their grandchildren will be attending shabby schools with large classes, and their parents will never see any kind of medical insurance reform. I will always vote no on education bond issues because I know that any time the state borrows money or raises taxes it's really to support exhorbitant pensions for public employees.
Why is it the same conversation every time one of these bias articles comes out? Why is that the people of this city think they know everything about a career or careers that they have never performed themselves?
LV2009, you are clearly uneducated and have no children who need an education based on your statements. I won't even waste my breath on addressing all of the stupidity in your comments.
neiman1, what's wrong with you, why are you so bitter? Maybe you tried to be a firefighter and couldn't make it? Get the facts, firefighters don't start off making $95,000 a year. In fact, they don't even start off making $70,000 a year. If a firefighter is pulling in anything close to either one of those numbers, they have worked their butts off to get it. It's called overtime and/or years on the job. I know we've already had this discussion once but let me go over it again with you. A firefighter works a minimum of 240 hours a month. A 40 hour work week is only 160 hours a month. You do the math and see who's working more hours. Even if you took away a couple hours a shift for the supposed sleep they get, they would still be working a whole lot more than those of us that work a 40 hour work week. Why shouldn't a firefighter who's been on for years and years not make that much money? Anyone who stays at a job for numerous years gets pay increases. If you're so jealous of what they make, maybe you should try and become a firefighter. Not likely to happen though!
Gunslinger (cool name by the way) Why shouldn't the firefighters get paid for the measly few hours a night they sleep (at best)? They are away from their families during that time and are at work. They are not at home doing what it is they would like to be doing. It's difficult to get sleep when you are getting up every 20 minutes to go on a call, and when it's not you getting up it's the guy next to you and all the tones going off that you can't get any sleep anyways. And really, how many stories of firefighters starting fires are there really? How many of them are firefighters in Las Vegas? Why even try and use that argument when it doesn't apply to our firefighters?
How come I never hear anyone complaining about the wages of all of the big wigs who sit in their air conditioned offices dressed in their fancy expensive suits, sipping on their Starbucks? My guess is because all of you complainers are those people, who have nothing better to do then sit in your comfy chair and get on the internet and make nasty comments about the men and women who protect us and educate our children. If that's not the case, if you work for some job that you hate, or you're grossly underpaid, then shut up and go apply for one of these "wonderful" government jobs. The problem is, you probably don't have the qualifications, or the intelligence!
One last thought. I always knew that firefighters had a lower than average life expectancy, but than I read this letter to the editor, and it made me think of other things also. This letter states that in order for a firefighter to receive these awesome retirement benefits that everyone complains about, they would have to be on the department for thirty years. The average hire age of a firefighter (not necessarily Vegas, because I don't have the stats on that) is 26. Thirty years added on to that is 56. The average life expectancy for a firefighter is 62 (that's the highest age I've ever seen reported for the avg. life expectancy of a firefighter). So what that means is that a firefighter gets to enjoy their awesome retirement benefits for an average of six years before they die. Wow, they should be so ashamed of themselves for being allowed to enjoy a good retirement for six years. It kind of put things into perspective for me, maybe (probably not though) it could do the same for some of you negative people.
future RN
Ditto- Your name sounds hopeful, or have you achieved your goal.
I was only adding to the comment made in an earlier post, that if you don't like the LVFD you let your house burn down or put it out yourself.
There are unscrupulous people in all professions, and yes do I think that some fire fighters could stoop to that level of arson to make a point, yes, don't you. If push came to shove, and there was a dramatic reduction of workforce, you might see a steep increase of fires in the city.
Now on to your life expectancy of 56, wow that seams low. It used to be 45 for the military, which meant that 5 years after retirement you crooked, but the point is that our military are compensated much less. Oh, and by the way after the last 10 years of wars, that number may even be lower.
I have never begrudged anyone the right to employment or earnings, my point is that when contracts are handled by the same folks as the ones who are affected by them then there is room for corruption, wouldn't you agree or are you unaware of these matters. I will go you one further, I say that it holds true in the hiring process as well. If you are the one doing the hiring then you shouldn't write the test, the questions and answers should remain secret till the envelope is opened on the hire date appointment for the recruits, then everyone's on the same footing, seeing the questions for the first time without leaking out to whomever the insiders want to be advantaged.
I just try to live an honest life, so at the end of the day I sleep well. Criminal comes in many forms as does enabling.
One more point: I worked 10 hour shifts regularly and 14 hour shifts for alerts in the military. That was a 50 hour work week, and it could even rise to 75 hours a week. Could you imagine soldiers saying, I will not fight a war, no overtime until you talk to the union stewarded, or we will strike for a pay raise. I don't think so. The last time anyone (air traffic controllers) tried that they got fired.
Ciao!
Firegfighters $94K a year!!! Wow, not bad for only having a high school diploma. No wonder I see these guys driving those ridiculously big trucks plastered with all that ego massaging firefighter crap all over the place. It makes sense, they are completely getting over and they cant control themselves.
Teachers make $30K a year and a firefighter makes $100K. There is something majorly wrong here Nevada!
They all need a big pay cut.
More dangerous is the ideology that believes selfless men and women can take from one and give to another and lead society to a better future. So many have tried and so many have died because of this.
As for "value" let's think for a moment. Let's say the government comes up with a law that says in order to get your drivers license they add in an extra layer of bureaucracy at the DMV that requires you to sign some special pink sheet of paper which is then doubled checked and filed by a state employee. We take money from the taxpayer to pay for this job.
This job wouldn't exist if government had not have created it. But other jobs do not exist because government has taken money from taxpayers to pay for this job. If you were to take your money and buy groceries with it, maybe some teenager would have a job stocking shelves at your local grocery store. We know the teenager is creating value because you voluntarily chose to spend your money at this store, thus creating this job. You value food, so the grocery store works to provide you what you want. They've hired a kid to serve you so you get what you want.
The government job? We have no idea what value it creates. At best, it creates no net value for society. At worst it drains wealth from society because it is simply a job of looking at a pink piece of paper and filing it away.
That job creates no additional wealth for Nevada. Meanwhile that teenage kid bagging groceries and stocking shelves is creating real wealth. You value additional groceries, increasing the capital for the grocer store to expand and enhance its service so more people will be happy with their products and service, thus using their store and enhancing sales and profits further.
I admit, this is a little more complex than simply assuming that government will always do good, and I admit it didn't come to me the first time a round. I suggest reading Milton Freidman's "Free to Choose" to start.
Facts,
I am not wrong in my assessment, though you misunderstood. Mr. Brown alluded to the funding for the group that conducted the research. The allusion was a backhanded attempt at discrediting the report. This is a fallacious and meaningless attack. I pointed out that he should stick to his facts on why they are wrong, rather than who funds them. After all a counterpoint could come to Mr. Brown that his opinion exists only because he is funded by the government which wants more spending. This too would be fallacious as it would ignore his potentially valid points.
Patrick,
When the kid gets out of school and, instead of bagging groceries forever, can get a high paying job because they have an education, society is better off. It is something called an externality, and was recognized years ago by someone named Adam Smith, in "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations."
School teachers create real value. So does a government sponsored legal system that enforces contracts, protecting property rights. Governments are created among men to protect and enhance their rights.
Smith recognized, as did the founding fathers of this country, that the benefits of public education go beyond the person who receives it. Businesses do not have to teach their employees to read, write, and do math because the state does it. Taxes are how they pay for those services they receive.
Smith believed in minimal government: national defense, and a justice system to enforce contracts. He also argued for a couple exceptions to his laissez faire philosophy: public education and regulation of speculation in the financial markets. Why? Because the benefits of government in those two areas far exceed the costs.
This country became the world's great superpower after WWII because we gave a free, government sponsored, college education to every man and woman who served. It made us the best educated country on earth. The correlation between income growth in nations and the human capital of their populations is undeniable.
You are the beneficiary of tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer education in Oklahoma and Pennsylvania, and you used to work for the government as a school teacher. Do you deny your ability to get a job today is enhanced by the thousands spent on you by those governments? Did you have a public K-12 education? If so, those thousands of dollars you got for free, and the education you obtained, permitted you to go to OU and Penn State at taxpayer expense.
Are you not a better person because of it? Or, are you saying that you got yours, and you don't see any need to pass it forward or pay it back?
Do you fancy yourself an academic, Patrick?
Or as just a cog in a propaganda machine?
Or both?
I am married to a firefighter and am royally sick of people complaining that they make 100K a year. For one thing, base pay for a firefighter is nowhere near 100K. Base pay is considerably less, and is based not on a 40 hour work week but on a 56 hour work week. They never work less than 56 hours per week. The 100K salary comes in because of overtime which is offered based on staffing needs to ensure public safety. When you talk about a firefighter bringing in 100K, you are talking about a person who is working 80 to 100 hours per week if not more. The individual spends all that time away from their family and much of the time with the family in a semi-coma dealing with the effects of chronic sleep deprivation. Yes, life expectancy is reduced.
The salaries are competitive because the Las Vegas Valley expanded rapidly in population, and it was difficult to attract qualified candidates. It is more economical to pay overtime to existing firefighters than to continue with new hires, but the goal of the departments is to reduce overtime through more hiring anyhow...ONLY because of the public perception of jealous morons who hop up and down in rage at what the firefighters make, but who would never want to live a firefighter's lifestyle. The new hiring would in fact increase the taxpayer's burden, but at least certain people would be happy because they would not have to see a firefighter in a flashy truck and pee their pants in jealous rage. However, the new hiring is progressing slowly because the overtime is primarily going to firefighter / paramedics and it is very hard to attract qualified pramedic candidates. Sorry they have not been able to reduce our standard of living, quickly enough to please you!
1) An education adds value, yes. But are we passed the point of diminishing returns on the investment? Probably. Meaning, we are spending more and more and getting relatively little in return. Thus we are not creating value but wasting wealth.
2) Government regulation often destroys wealth, not enhances it. Yes, the minimalist state would help enhance wealth by enforcing the contract, but please explain how requiring a state license to work as an interior designer enhances wealth?
3) Public education departed long ago as to what public education meant many years ago and it has continued to grow and depart from its original path, always expanding its mission and wildly expanding its costs. Milton Friedman wrote of the problems of public education growing rapidly out of control back in the 1960s. Since then the national average of per pupil spending has increased more than 200% after adjusting for inflation.
4) We are still the wealthiest nation on the planet and our K-12 system is one of the developed world's worse. It wasn't because of our educational system that gave us wealth but of the freedom in our economy to build wealth. Russia and Cuba had far more doctors and engineers per capita and a completely free system of education, yet you cannot argue that they were ever wealthier than we were.
5) I paid nonresident tuition and fees at both schools, so I pretty much covered my own costs. I wrongly believed that simply earning a degree would net me job offers anywhere I want (that is what young people are told these days. Get a college degree and you'll earn $1 million more over your lifetime. I learned the hard way that a college degree is not all its cracked up to be and that adults running the system aren't all that honest about the scam.
6) Had I known better, or not been offered subsidized loans (which distorted my understanding of the cost) I may have elected to earn a degree in Physics (which I was originally accepted to study as a freshman or mechanical or architectural engineering (which I was accepted to study at Virginia Tech and Oklahoma) or I could have gone to the Apprentice School and been paid a good wage to learn how to be a welder or pipe fitter at the shipyard. All I know, is that if I had the appropriate information I wouldn't have spent 6 years earning 3 degrees in History and Political Science from the nations top public universities. I would have earned some degrees that helped me develop real marketable skills.
Patrick, what an interesting post, but it raises many questions that I hope you will endeavor to answer.
Why did you change majors from Physics? Did you consult with the school's counselors about the career path(s) your degree choices could lead to? bill777 says you were a teacher--is that true? Don't you think your degrees helped you get that job? How many years did you teach and why did you leave teaching?
Patrick,
The only one past the point of diminishing returns is you. Everyone, and I mean everyone, who understands anything about economic growth, and the research about it, tells us that education is the primary driver of income in the modern world, and has been basically forever.
As Thomas Friedman has frequently pointed out, we have spent the last 30 years capturing the best Indian and Chinese engineers because we weren't training our own, but now they are staying home. Anyone who is not worried for the future of our country because of the lack of scientists and engineers isn't thinking.
Also note:
Unemployment Rate, high school dropouts: 14.8%
Unemployment Rate, high school grads: 9.3%
Unemployment Rate, college grads: 4.4%
College grads less likely to need government assistance, less likely to end up in jail, more likely to be paying taxes. One year in jail costs more than 4 years of college. Education actually lowers the cost of government over time.
p.s. The license for the interior designer enhances the wealth of the interior designer, not the wealth of society. So are you saying individuals should be more concerned about society than themselves?
How right you are Patrick.
If you just study the career path of the average blue collar worker verse the college graduate you will find some interesting numbers.
That is to say, over a 20 year period, how much is left for each individual after expenses (school loans, or money spent for education).
Just look at a Firemans salary, on avg. to start 50,000 per year - 0 for education. Given that salary as an avg. times 10 years equals 500,000. - 0 for education. Then the next 10 years promote or increase the salary to 70,000. times 10 years equals 700,000. - 0 for education. Now as it has been said by supporters and wifes, only seniority personal make big salaries, bump the salary to 90,000. times 10 years equals 900,000. - 0 for education.
Based on a 30 year career not counting benifits, that comes to 2.1 million - 0 for education and all with only a high school diploma, or GED.
Someone else, do the numbers minus cost of education, of course, for an avg. college grad. after they find work, and I don't mean work as a busboy, but in their discipline of study.
So let me guess Zin the firefighters in other cities dont work the same schedules as your spouse? Las Vegas firefighers are the only ones that have 56 hour work weeks? Being paid 40% over the national average is called being over paid no matter what the profession, especially when it comes to a government job.
Fire fighters need to start working for a salary instead of an hourly rate. There is nothing more frustrating knowing that my child will NEVER get a decent education in Las Vegas, but when I see 6 fire fighters pull into Albertsons to do the shopping for the house they are probably earning $40 an hour to decide between wheat and white bread.
Nothing personal Zin, but you have to admit the pay discrepancy is astounding, unless you think teachers and cops mean less to the community than our fire fighters.
$95,000 a year average sounds like a good wage for working a 40 hr a week job. That would be quite a gig for the firefighters if it were true. But firefighters are on the job a minimum 56 hours a week. $95,000 a year for working 56 hours a week also sounds good. But that is also not the case. What is the case? FF's work the 56 hours a week then work an additional 24 hours a week on top of the 56 hours. So lets now see how appealing this is. For working an average of 80 hours a week the firefighters are making $95,000. That would be more in line with working two 40 hour a week jobs paying $42,500 each. Now that is more in line with every other blue collar worker. In addition, it costs you the tax payer less to pay a little overtime than to hire additional personal to cover the sick and vacation leave of existing employee's. So why all the fuss? You have a group of anti-union, anti-government, large money finger pointers that are trying to divide and conquer the little guy. Namely the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce. You attack a small group of union members and working class individuals and you meet little resistance. You attack everyone at once and it becomes more difficult. So lets single out the firefighters, police and other "public servants." I'm starting to understand how other animal species are able to eat their young. Humans are not much different.
I'm reading allot about how teachers need more pay. I agree that teachers could use a higher rate of pay providing we get back to basics. Americans need to be allowed to help with this process and we need to hold parents accountable for their lack of involvement.
We've created this monster, only we can fix the monster. I would like you all to look around and see exactly who is teaching our kids and what they're being taught. Who is overseeing the education programs and what our children are learning. They're not doing a very good job and it will only get worse before it gets better.
When have you ever seen a public sector with government involvement be productive let alone produce success? Just because they're elected, doesn't make them smart; they're just better liars than their opponents.
As an example: Public works inspectors are more than likely rejects from the construction trade, been fired so many times they couldn't keep a job, bounced from job to job, they now provide inspection services for an agency on their payroll. Remember, they can never be fired once they become a public employee.
That goes the same for our elected officials, they ran for office because they couldn't succeed in the real world so they figured our a system where lying, cheating, and stealing is legal and they get PAID For it and most people love giving to them year after year after year.
With respects to comparing the police and fire department with other public bodies, c'mon. These very people put their lives on the line; they get killed doing their job. Ask yourself how much would you want to be paid to die while doing my job? They don't make enough as far as I am concerned. The issues with our tax-dollars and our budget shortfalls aren't with these two groups, look who you are voting into office and what isn't working. Career politicians and dumbness. Remember, just because they wear a suit and tie, they're good liars, doesn't make them smart.
I'd say, examine the past, it isn't rocket science. Who, what, when, where, and why. It is all the elected officials who are career politicians. Pass laws no more PACS, when you leave office you're done, no more consultants after being in office. Move on, you've done your duty, you're not welcome anymore.
Bill,
There is a major problem with statistics concerning college graduates and anything related to them. You, who profess to be a statistician, should know something called "Self selection bias"
That is, people who go to college are already likely to have the skills necessary to succeed. To put it another way, those people would do better and be more skilled compared to all others, even if college never existed in the first place.
As for diminishing returns, you've assumed wrongly that more spending will lead to greater results. Remember our discussion on the inflation adjusted per pupil spending? In 1960 the average per pupil spending was less than $400. Today it is around $9,000. Adjusted for inflation that is more than a 200 percent increase. Many today, including those who argue that education needs more money, do not believe education has improved all that much (if at all) from 1960. In fact many big spenders look back on those days as some sort of golden age.
Education is important, but spending on education is not. How wisely and effectively we spend that money is what matters. It is very likely that we are wasting money on ineffective programs. (Again, Russia had far more engineers per capita than we did, they didn't miraculously gain tons of wealth because of that).
"The license for the interior designer enhances the wealth of the interior designer, not the wealth of society. So are you saying individuals should be more concerned about society than themselves?"
-No merely pointing out that government can do more harm than good. A case you just made very well for me despite the fact that you believe government enhances wealth. Thanks.
Vulcan, I am a topped out firefighter that makes less than $27.00 an hour, not anywhere near the $40.00 you estimated. Get it straight.... What is your hourly wage? ($30). How many hours a week do you work? (40)? As for picking up groceries, how may meals have you had to miss or delay eating? Getting a call during meal time is common with the fire department. Firefighters are on call for 24 hours straight. Call comes in, we come to help, even for you. Forget that meal that was warm, smelling good and was ready to be eaten. If it goes bad, not to worry, it was only our own cash that we wasted. We'll just go have some take out. Oh yeh, we pay for that too.
ctoe:
Your worth far more than the $27.00 an hour even worth more than $40.00 an hour.
As an example: if you were an EMT in my field of work and working on public works projects where your line of work / service isn't available, we're required by contract to employee such personal, the starting rate of pay for just having an EMT certification is $63.24 hour. This is common in the outskirts of California, Washington State, Oregon, and other areas of the USA.
When you speak with your unions, don't allow them to reduce your pay.
Our elected officials create and spend so much waste in my line of work it makes me sick. When they are held accountable and stop spending billions on wasteful projects, bad designs, and begin to use common sense then I could see giving; until then, tell everyone to look in their own backyard and make changes.
As an example the county is spending $4.6 million on a project just because they wanted too, no legal standing just pure politics working at its best. I done billions in my line work and I've witnessed first hand how much waste our government spends
.
Example again; How much do our elected officials spend on flowers for the offices? How much do they spend watering hour's plants in the offices? How much did they spend on the paving the roadways with bad asphalt mix design? How much to they spend on decorative concrete? How much did they spend on colored asphalt? This is well in excess of 100 million.
What people fail to realize is that our elected officials are not held accountable. They want opulence verses will it work without the glimmer, gold and silver lining?
People stop whining over the little items; start looking at what the root cause of America's problems is and fix that.
by the way, the 100 million is just 1 year of waste.
Patrick,
When did I say government creates wealth? Didn't. Human capital creates wealth. Education is the key. Smith says to us that the government should participate in education because of the externalities it creates.
I also have never said that more spending = better education. I have said that NPRI can't show using proper statistics that it doesn't. You assume that I think the converse is true. I don't know, though I suspect that the question is very complicated -- the right money in the right place works. More administrators don't.
The biggest change in education since 1960 is that most of the best, smartest students won't go anywhere near teaching because of what they view as low pay and poor working conditions.
Also, what you're saying is that you believe that high school dropouts are less capable individuals than high school grads who are less capable than college grads. There is some bias there, but in a state where only 55% graduate high school and 10% ever graduate from college, there are an awful lot of talented kids in all three of those categories.
Oh so we could have a system of private education then? You would be fine with that? We would still have education but now it would be for profit. (You still have to prove that per pupil spending statistics are improper. That means finding out whether or not district data impacts the state's mean in a statistically significant way. You have admitted that you don't know of a way and even stated that there is no way (there is).
Teachers are better paid today than at any point. The problem teachers face isn't bad working conditions but better options. Before a woman's options were teaching and nursing. Now she can be a doctor, engineer, architect, pilot...anything. That has been devastating to teaching because now a lot of really smart females want jobs with even more pay. Smart people can get better jobs which is why a good chunk of teachers today are recruited out of the bottom 1/3rd of the college graduate pool.
To your last statement, yes, probably demonstrating that we have developed an elitist attitude and overvalued the college education.
Patrick, please stop--you're embarrassing yourself.
If what you are saying is true, you are proving the point that if we want to improve education, we need to pay teachers more so that the better skilled/qualified will consider it a viable career option.
Patrick,
I agree Mr. Facts, he just agreed that we need to pay teachers more to get better teachers!
Please stop misquoting me, Patrick.
You wrote: For example, I can conduct a cross sectional analysis on per pupil spending by state using method 1: simply averaging per pupil spending and method 2: adding up all spending and dividing it by all students. On a national basis the difference is just about $200 (out of $9,000 or so -- this is current spending per pupil not total spending). In this case I know the variance between states has little impact on the average.
How do you know the variance doesn't matter? T-test? F-test? Or the newly invented "P"-test? I want to do real statistics, and the data you have doesn't allow it. You want to "eye ball" the data, but your vision isn't exactly 20/20.
And, I have been asking you to compare variance within the state with variance between. How in your "method" did you take into account the within groups variance in each state?
Search "State may add to cost of firefighters" to read an article from this weekend.
The median pay for a clark county firefighter is $123,000 per year. this means that half of the firefighters in clark county actually make MORE than $123,000 per year, and half make less. the median is actually a much better barometer of actual firefighter pay than is an "average" which can be skewed widely by a few really high or really low numbers.
And please no more talk of the "salary per hour" of firefighters here. the base salary doesn't count any of the many and very lucrative "special pays" that a firefighter receives, often for training or education that was completed WHILE BEING PAID, and the training itself was PAID FOR. no firefighters are simply paid their "base salary".
And the fact that firefighters are ridiculously overpaid (almost TWICE as much as firefighters in other large cities), especially in relation to our schoolteachers, doesn't even take into account that schoolteachers have a minimum 4 year bachelors degree! and anyone who has completed a degree can attest to the high cost and degree of hard work associated with obtaining a degree.
the bottom line, are our firefighters overpaid? well as the brave men and women of other large city fire departments perform the same (or even more dangerous) job for much less pay, any rational, UNBIASED individual would say yes, they should be paid no more than firefighters in other large cities, adjusting for cost of living differences.
Most of you have absolutely NO IDEA what goes on in the course of the day of a FF, do you? LOTS of criticism. I'm ashamed cuz these guys would do anything to save your house, trailer, car even your life and they don't know you from a can of paint.
geenab65 - you are absolutely right! firefighting is a very noble profession. and I also believe that the firefighters paid 40% less of taxpayers dollars in other major cities would also do anything to save your house, trailer, car, or even your life.
Average Joe.
You really don't have a clue do you? You come out with the statement that the medium pay for FF's in Clark County is $123,000 and at the same time say that you don't want to talk about the "salary per hour" of FF's. You say that a base salary doesn't count. So I would assume that it does not matter to you if you work a 40 hour week, 80 hour week, or 104 hour week. You would still only want to receive the base amount of your pay. I started out as a FF in the 1980's with an income of approximately $35,000 with no overtime. Most of us had second jobs. We carried 18 extra FF's at full salaries and benefits to handle any vacation or sick leave usage. To reduce costs, the city eliminated these extra positions to be more fiscally prudent to the taxpayers. Since fire stations can not just be closed, FF's accepted the mandatory overtime to fill in when needed. This was additional time that took us away from our families and added to the burden of an already difficult work schedule of 56 hours a week. So what is your problem? You would rather spend more and get less?
Average Joe, why the hate? The fire fighters are not the cause of this recession. We constantly have training, so what is your point? Would you rather us come to your house with little or no training?
Ultimately, the issue is not that firefighters in ClARK COUNTY are over paid, it is that THEY are more than too willing to be over worked....to provide for adequate protection that the public expects.
If you want to close down stations or eliminate ambulances or fire trucks to eliminate overtime, please feel free to speak to your elected officials. That is the only way you will cut firefighter income without raising your taxes.
public employees make 31% more than private sector employees in the same job. They get an average of 40% more in perks. see link
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/state_local...
public sector employees also dont have to worry about being fired unless they commit double murder on the job.
We have a number of statisticians in this blog. I actually had some college courses in statistic's and in most instances I've found that the percentages are completely worthless unless taken in context... Most private sector CEO's get far more compensation than their counter parts in the public sector. But that doesn't mean that CEO's in the public sector do not also get highly compensated.
I understand that many in the private sector may have lost their jobs or are in fear of losing their jobs because of this economic slowdown. But that does not justify having a private vs public employee backlash. We are all working grunts, just like you. We are not the decision makers. We are blue collar men and women trying to do our jobs well and to provide for our families. If you make twice as much as me by either getting paid more or working longer hours than I do, good for you. I feel that I am being paid a fair wage for the work I do. No more, no less. I do not feel that I have ever been overpaid. What I have done is work very long hours over the years.
Average Joe, all I can say is that I wish you well and hope that you never have any kind of tragedy.
ctoe, why the hate?
I have never denigrated the firefighting profession. quite the contrary, I am on record for stating it is a noble profession. but why do firefighters in clark county "deserve" higher salaries (more of our taxpayer dollars) than firefighters in chicago or san francisco or multiple other large cities with higher costs of living and dangerous old high rise buildings?
If the working conditions and required hours are as brutal as you portray, why is there almost no turnover in the local fire departments? I work out several times a week at different gyms, and more often than not, there is a fire crew in blue T-shirts working out for 2 hours while their truck is parked outside. I'm sure not every shift is that easy, but the fact remains, that all of the "hours of work" that you count would not count as "hours worked" in most hourly paid jobs. how come ALL of the other large cities in the United States can have well trained professional firefighters for only a little more than HALF of what they are paid in clark county?
And you're right, the firefighters are not the cause of this recession, but why are you as a profession not making ANY concessions in this time of dire economic need for many in this city? why is the union which represents you unwilling to yield even a fraction of your cost of living raises when other families are losing their jobs and homes? this is not the behavior of true "heroes".
you cite making $35,000 starting salary in the 1980's as a hardship? in the 1980's $35,000 per year without a college degree was A LOT OF MONEY!!! Just for perspective, I started as an Army infantryman in the 1980's with an income of approximately $10,000 per year, with probably the same level of education you had.
Again, thank you for your service, the point of this discussion was never to disparage your profession or the sacrifices it entails. But the fact that we pay our firefighters 40% MORE than other major metropolitan departments illustrates mismanagement of our tax dollars by the government. and many of us are tired of paying high taxes into the always open hand of government. why should we have to close down stations or eliminate services, when EVERY other major metropolitan fire department does a fine job with LESS MONEY in the form of salaries, especially when the cost of living in other metropolitan areas is considered.
Gunslinger, I wish you would pay attention. I believe in my previous post I said "The average life expectancy for a firefighter is 62 (that's the highest age I've ever seen reported for the avg. life expectancy of a firefighter)". I don't think I ever said anything about it being 56. But hey, that just proves how accurate the rest of your information is! It seems that all of your information is just opinion such as saying that 56 SEAMS low and that the life expectancy MAY be lower for military and that IF push came to shove you MIGHT see an increase in fires in the city. These are all maybes, what ifs, and possibilities. Also, in regards to your comment about the firefighters striking and that not being allowed in the military, same goes for the firefighters. Maybe I missed it, but can you give me an example of when our firefighters have ever striked? I don't think you can, because it has NOT occurred and never will because like the military they also are not allowed to strike. You might be getting them mixed up with the wonderful private sector, AMR who just recently went on strike until they received a pay raise!
By the way, to all you uneducated fools (man I feel like a broken record!) our firefighters do work a salaried position unless overtime is worked. When a firefighter works overtime, it's not a couple hours or 8 hours or whatever and often times it's not voluntary. When a firefighter works overtime, it is a minimum of 24 hours, sometimes even 48. Everyone wants to compare the public sector to the private. Well, why should our firefighters not get paid overtime but the private sector such as AMR and MedicWest get paid hourly, and overtime. That just doesn't make sense to me. Why should one work for free and the other not? Maybe because you guys are all haters, jealous whiney babies. Like I said, if the job is so appealing get off your behind and go apply! You have just as much right as the next guy.
To all our firefighters, thank you for everything you do for this city everyday. Thank you for all the sleepless nights, the missed dinners, the time you are away from your families. Thank you for all the heartache you endure everyday when you go on medical calls and have to watch a helpless baby die after trying so hard to revive him. Thank you for exposing your lungs to the nasty toxins in the fires that are sometimes even intentionally set by the fools of this city. Thank you for getting up in the middle of the night to deal with the stomachache of probably some of these fools who put you down and degrade you. Thanks for being selfless and helping everyone, even those that don't understand how truly blessed they are to have you when they are in need! You guys ROCK!
Okay, here's a link to show everyone that there are a number of departments in the country that make more than the firefighters of Nevada. http://www.firelink.com/careers/articles...
Maybe our firefighters can complain about how it's not fair that they make less than these departments. Maybe every receptionist, every chef, every attorney, every nurse, maybe every job across the country can be paid the same wages, just to make all you whiners happy. Just an FYI: our department is one of EIGHT in the whole WORLD that is considered to be ISO CLASS I with an international accreditation from the CFAI. For all of you smarties who don't understand what I'm saying please see the link provided. This is why our firefighters deserve to be paid more than some of the other cities in our country. Does it make sense to pay more to attract the best? Apparently it does since that is obviously what has happened in Nevada according to their international rank! http://www.lasvegasnevada.gov/publicatio...
By our firefighters maintaining this awesome achievement we are given lower insurance rates along with other perks.
As far as overtime goes, allow me to educate you! As I'm sure most of you are aware of NOW (thanks to those who actually know what they're talking about), most of the firefighters who are making these "high" salaries are working overtime. How would you like to be getting ready to head home on Christmas morning to see your family, only to be told that you are NOT going to be going home, you "get to" work overtime today! YAY! Hey, at least you'll get some overtime right? Totally a fair and even trade. You may not think that this is a common occurrence, but you are sadly mistaken. What would you rather have, more firefighters, no overtime and higher taxes, or we can pay these guys overtime and not pay an astronomical increase in taxes? Of course if you chose to pay the least of the two, that would mean you would have to stop complaining and blaming the firefighters for all of our financial problems.
Another thought...everyone wants to talk about the firefighters being "heroes" and taking a pay cut. How about we ask the politicians to take the first pay cut and then we can talk? All of you folks in the private sector that have had recent pay cuts, I have a hard time believing that it was a voluntary action done out of the kindness of your hearts. Very sweet of you to think of your companies!
average joe: I always see firefighters at the Starbucks in L.A. that I go to. They don't seem too stresssed out. They are probably looking at some colossal retirement packages. Tomorrow I'm voting NO on Props. 1A, 1B, and 1C, as is most of California. lol. Those election ads on TV showing firefighters warning about layoffs and public safety were a joke. Maybe if they had used an actor doing an imitation of Steve McQueen in "The Towering Inferno", I would have changed my mind about how to vote in the election.
Future RN, you have a pretty clear picture of the fire departments environment. Thank you for your input.
Average Joe, if you had went to the web site that Future RN had provided, some of your confussion and questions would have been answered.
1) New Jersey
Median Salary: $28.41
Job Openings: 200
h4. 2) California
Median Salary: $28.19
Job Openings: 1,500
h4. 3) Washington
Median Salary: $24.71
Job Openings: 190
h4. 4) New York
Median Salary: $23.93
Job Postings: 380
5) Maryland
Median Pay: $28.06
Job Postings: 310
6) Connecticut
Median Pay: $22.94
Job Postings: 150
7) Oregon
Median Pay: $22.30 Job Postings: 150
8) Nevada
Median Salary: $21.82 Job Postings: 110
h4. 9) Pennsylvania
Median Salary: $21.65
Job Postings: 200
h4. 10) Massachusetts
Median Salary: $21.40 Job Postings: 530
While we are in the top ten, we are not the top in salaries. There are even some more rural departments that do not pay their firefighters at all. They are volunteer departments. But that type of organization is hard to administer in an urban setting and still have high standards. As for your insistance about the 40% statistic, I would suggest not comparing apples to oranges. Does the other departments include overtime as a means of keeping cost down. I lived in Arkansas for a time where they use about 8 employee's per truck to collect the garbage from the back yards of home owners, when we only use 2 employee's per truck and collect it from the curb. I would place money that our garbage collectors make a much higher salary than those who work in Arkansas, but you will not hear me say anything negative. Just because a statistic states that our firefighters make 40% more than another local, does not really mean a whole lot by itself. If the municipality eliminates overtime by hiring additional employee's, they are then going to pay more for the service.
Overtime in Nevada is not subject to retirement contributions. But hiring more employees will add to health care costs, retirement costs, protective equipment and training costs, unemployment and disability insurance costs, additional sick and vacation costs, etc. So do you want a lean/mean fire department or one that has been bloated to include 20 additional floating employees that costs the tax payers a whole lot more.
Average Joe, you mentioned how much more the cost of living was in other locations. There is a reason for that.You stated that you considered firefighters working more hours to make more money is an example of "mismanagement of our tax dollars by the government." I say that it is just the opposite. The entities that pay less (by not using overtime) but hire more firefighters end up costing the their tax payers a whole lot more, thus your high taxes. As a result, it costs the people more in taxes. I call this mismanagement.....
future RN:
The comments I made are just that, my opinion. I didn't know this thread was an absolute correctness debate without room for opinions.
While you may feel emotional about this subject, I assure you I am not, though you do come across as desperate in some of your posts. I understand your praise for FF, as do most of us, just don't box us into not caring or appreciating the service they provide to rational the budget for their department.
It is well known that they do not set their wages, but they do have negotiators to do their bidding for them. The system is broken and your failure to understand the difference between appreciating FF service and their living wages confounds me. When the cost of living is going up then pay them increases, but when it is going down, a stop is in order.
Some folks and you want to paint a sorry picture of hardship so we don't feel bad about how much in taxes are spent for govt. (FF, PD, and GE). Well, sorry, you get no sympathy here, and yes just like the comments that state, "I hope you don't need their service", please, what is that suppose to mean, if not evil double talk. Your white as snow is fading y e l l o w.
I retract that 56/62 slip, not as an apology, but in recognition of my error, I need not say much in the way of weather or not you make me laugh but I do enjoy you, much.
One last thing, just becuase people have a different point of veiw doesen't mean they are haters. Right or wrong put the claws away before the fur flies.
forget about it!
Ctoe,
56 hours a week. So is that 6 days a week you work? Do you ever get any days off or get a vacation? I know you guys do. Lets be fair Ctoe, my accounting firm doesnt pay me to sleep, shop or wash my car.
I am not taking away from what you guys stand for. I can just say that teachers and cops have had more impact on my life than any firefighter has. I dont think I would have gone to college and become a CPA if my teachers were treated they way they are here. I am a proud product of the public education system I came from and I was the first to go to college in my family. My son has to go to private school so I can make sure he has the same opportunities that I had. This public education system is terrible and downright appalling that the community has allowed it to happen.
I am also mocking the fact that you guys do roll very large here in LV. This is my 5th city to live in and the only one where I see the firefighter stuff thrown down our throats. Cruising down charleston with a huge truck on my rear, as it passes I see that red/yellow plate and those helmet decals on the windows. I realize you guys are heroes, but there are many other heroes who are okay without getting the credit your guys seem to lust for. You are a civil servant too, does humility even play a role?
One more note, I was a little shocked to find out that a firefighter was living on the same street as that of a combined income family of a CPA and a registered nurse. They bought their house around the same time as us. Like I said, not bad for a high school diploma.
Yes, I will dial 911 if my house catches on fire or I need medical assistance because my taxes still pay your salary. I am just saying that I would start to bridge the gap is all.
Vulcan,
Since this blog is getting old you probably will not get this response. But I wanted to make a couple of comments if you did return. First let me state that you make some good observations. But you also have made a couple of bad ones.
First the good:
1) public education in Clark County is horrendous as a general rule. There are good teachers and good administrators still, but they are getting more and more difficult to find.
2)I agree with you about the red and yellow plates on their big trucks or other expensive vehicle. I drive a van or my Toyota corolla. I used to have those plates on my corolla. It used to be out of pride in our profession, but I also feel that it has turned into something more prideful. I currently do not have plates or stickers on my vehicle. Also, I don't like some of the attitudes that are given by either some of the cops or FF's. Where is the humility in our profession?
Now the bad observations:
1) Derogatory high school diploma comment. I have a Bachelors Degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Economics. My wife is an RN just as yours is. Since the position of FF is in demand, those with higher educations usually get the jobs over those who don't. Could I be the FF who lives in your neighborhood? Obviously you must make more than my $27.00 an hour since you seem to feel that your location is more exclusive than what a FF should be able to afford. How much do you make an hour? What a comment, "I was a little shocked to find out that a firefighter was living on the same street." I would say that you need a little humility and should not be throwing rocks when you are living in a glass house yourself.
2) "56 hours a week. So is that 6 days a week you work?" That is 56 hours a week with no overtime worked, and it can be up to 72 hours straight without getting off work in some circumstances. I am certain that your accounting firm allows you to go home after 8-10 hours a day and work 40 hours a week in most cases. I also think that you would be allowed vacation and sick leave. I would also wager that you get paid more for working your 40 hours a week than I do for working the 56 hours. Tell me I'm wrong....
Hey, since our state legislators are so hot on bringing "per pupil spending" (a figure that has no basis in relevancy anyway) to the national average, how about we bring public employee spending down to the national average?
"They [public employees] tend to make more money and are more highly skilled than the population as a whole, so it is not surprising they would have better pensions."
Are you kidding me???!!! "More highly skilled?"
Been to the DMV? Ever visit with the borderline retarded individuals at the Department of Taxation? ...Or UNLV, or the CCSD, or any other state government office laely? If these people were in the public sector, they would not make it a day. They are out half of the time anyway.
Facts and Bill
As usual you misunderstand. You miss the details.
We should pay teachers more, IF, teachers prove they deserve more. They have to prove it first and that means showing us they can actually teach students - thus we need to know how much students learn over the year?
Its called merit pay.
With merit pay we can attract high quality teachers because they'll be rewarded for their work, not demoralized for making half as much as a teacher with 15 years experience who works half as hard.
This isn't rocket science gentlemen, its a basic understand of incentives. Incentives matter.
More "Think Tank" logic, Patrick?
I guess you heroic, overworked firefighters and teachers did a poor job in your ads pushing for a yes on Props. 1A, 1B, and 1C in California. They were defeated by a landslide. LOL. There will be no tax increases or borrowing to come up with the money to hand out raises for you guys. California is headed for bankruptcy again, and the fiscal disaster will be better than the finale of "24".
I would love to know what all of you people do for a living who talk so much crap on the firefighters, police officers and teachers. There are few jobs in this world that I can think of that deserve a higher pay than these three professions. It sickens me to hear all of you complain about the pay these people receive. They have to put up with so much on a daily basis, more than any of us are truly aware of. I don't think the teachers should have to prove anything to us to get the pay they deserve. When you hire someone, you pay them a decent wage, and if they don't perform adequately than you fire them. These teachers are babysitters these days and not because they don't have the skills to do their job, not it's because they have ungrateful parents like some of you and they have parents who don't know how to discipline their kids. So, instead of teachers getting to teach their kids math or science or english, they are too busy trying to teach them how to behave!
Manfromuncle - you think it's so great that your teachers aren't going to get raises in California? You're right...big win for you! Wow! Wait until California becomes like Nevada and you can't get any teachers to move there. It's a terrible thing, when a 21 dealer at a casino can pull in two or three times what a teacher makes, and at least double what many of the firefighters and police officers make. Hey everyone where's the education of those black jack dealers? I'm sure some of them are educated, but mostly just because they left their jobs that required a degree in order to pursue a job that makes more money. I met a nurse one day when I was getting immunizations for nursing school, she told me "don't be a nurse, be a black jack dealer". Her son who is a black jack dealer makes twice as much as she does. I don't hear people ranting about the pay of those casino workers.
One last thing, I'm tired of hearing everyone complain about firefighters having a diploma or a GED and that's all. To get on the fire department, these guys do everything they can to increase their chances, including getting an education. Many, many of the firefighters have a degree of some sort. And, what about the firefighters who are paramedics? Is that not a degree? I believe that CSN has a paramedic school that is grueling just as the nursing school is that I attend. How about the 6 months of the academy that these firefighters attend. It's a classroom environment. They have text books and many tests that they take just like all of you who have degrees. Why is it not an education, because it didn't come from some prestigious college? BULL! You people will just take a stab at these guys every chance you get!
Vulcan - You truly do not think ahead do you? You say that teachers and cops have more of an impact on your life than any firefighter. The problem with that statement is that it will only take one incidence of needing a firefighter for that statement to become false. When you are in need of a firefighter, it is most often a life threatening experience for you or a loved one. I do appreciate everything that the teachers and police officer do, don't get me wrong. I just think that there's a lot that firefighters do that you people don't even know about. You're forgetting that a huge percentage of a fireman's day is spent running medical calls.
Patrick,
ROTFLMAO.
You never mentioned "merit" once, you said plainly that we need to pay more to get good people to become teachers, and you implied rather strongly that the lack of enough good teachers is a fundamental problem with with today's education system. I agree.
You also backchanneled me on your "answer" to my question about your statement: "How do you know the variance doesn't matter? T-test? F-test? Or the newly invented "P"-test? I want to do real statistics, and the data you have doesn't allow it. You want to "eye ball" the data, but your vision isn't exactly 20/20."
Your response: "Bill, basic scientific ediquette requires you to prove that my statement is false if you raise the objection."
Nonsense. Basic scientific etiquette is that you provide all of the background supporting any statement you make. That is what I asked for. You said "In this case I know the variance between states has little impact on the average."
All I have asked for is what scientific test you applied (t, F, Chi-square, etc.) to determine that. You obviously didn't do anything but eyeball the data.
As I have said to you many times Patrick, I don't think you actually believe the nonsense you spout. If you did, you would say, "I believe X, and here's some data that support X."
You say, "Here's data, which proves X, so I believe X."
In the first case, your belief if not dependent on the validity of the data, in the second it is. You constantly put yourself in the position of having to make wildly unsupportable statements to keep your data alive, because losing the data battle means you give up your belief.
Believe in what you believe in. Hold true to your faith. Forget the desire to put 5th grade statistics on the table, and you'll be much better off.
I suppose every job should be compared to other jobs regardless of expertise or demand to justify its wage or any increases.
Parking attendants make good money too; there are a host of jobs to be had which don't require degrees to perform. Janitorial is another, and in the silicone valley those folks who worked for the tech-biz, who exercised their stock options before the tech bubble burst became millionaires. That said, not all janitors should be entitled to profit sharing or company stock options. Moreover, they should not be allowed to dictate their wage scale as a govt. servant, nor should any other govt. servant.
Their not servants you say, then they need to pay for everything they use (firehouse, trucks, equip.) you name it, they pay, and all the education given them while employed, they pay. It would be too expensive for them to operate profitable you say; or too much in start up costs, it goes on and on. The bottom line is, they could not do it and most elder statesmen know it. The FF labor, blood, sweat, and tears are needed and appreciated, but they are still servants, can I say it anymore clearly.
The point is that no matter how emotional one gets over the acute status of the LVFD' rank and file, it is still a servants job, which serves at the pleasure of its citizen. Quit putting the cart before the horse, let the tax payer decide their wages and the wages of all public servants without hindrance from vested corrupt public servants who play pro-quos. Then single handedly without oversight or accountability force inflation upon everyone by allowing such unrealistic remunerations.
Isn't that how sanitations workers got their wage increases in the late 60', before they were just garbage men, picking-up trash, but just as with many other govt jobs (honey pots) the position was renamed with a status job title (as if Joe Public wouldn't notice) and then gaven a new higher salary scale. Now smart people wouldn't mind having that prestigious titled job and we don't have trash on our streets.
I yield the remainder of my time.
Gunslinger, you are an idiot!
Bill, I have talked continuously about merit pay. Surely your reading comprehension skills are high enough to notice this?
And yes, scientific research etiquette requires you, who makes a counter claim in disagreement with another, to prove their accusations are correct. If a district can spend so much that they can significantly alter the state's mean, you need to prove it.
You have not done this. You can't just say "you are wrong, now prove that I'm wrong" that isn't how research is conducted. Please continue with your studies you will learn a way.
Patrick,
That has nothing to do with what I have said. You know better.
You have said that the variance between states has little impact on the average. You offer no statistical proof. I cannot have an intelligent argument with an unarmed man.
I have not said you are wrong, I have asked you to produce the supporting statistics so I can determine their validity. You have refused to do so.
Suppose that Rhode Island has only 4 school districts (each with 500 students), with the following data:
Spending - Mean ACT Score
1. $15,000 - 36
2. $10,000 - 24
3. $7,500 - 18
4. $5,000 - 12
Average $9,375 - 22.5
Note that if you spend three times as much, you get three times the result.
Suppose that Maine has only 4 school districts (each with 500 students) with the following data:
Spending - Mean ACT Score
1. $14,500 - 36
2. $9,500 - 28
3. $7,000 - 18
4. $4,500 - 12
Average $8,875 - 23.5
Note that if you spend three times as much, you get three times the result.
You have stated that it is possible to compare Maine and Rhode Island by knowing nothing other than their mean TOTAL spending and test scores.
Well, dude, in my example, within each state three times as much money gets three times as much result. Between the states, Maine gets slightly better results than Rhode Island for slightly less money. So you would say that spending on schools doesn't matter. It obviously does in this example. If I spend more I get substantial increases in test scores.
You, to make your statement that the variance doesn't matter, must assume away the example I have given, or TEST statistically to determine that it doesn't exist.
I only want you to understand what you are doing, explain it, and tell me whether you have tested or are assuming, and why. If you tested, I want to see the test. I cannot come to a conclusion about you work without knowing what you did.
Bill,
Prove it. Actually prove it. People have researched this subject so google search it, but actually prove it. Don't give made up examples, prove your counterpoint. You have yet to do this.
It appears as if you only disagree for the sake of disagreeing, not because you have a valid point, or even a valid way of testing your point.
Bill,
I see your error and I have corrected you a dozen times. Per pupil spending is a weighted average. The state's ACT scores would also be a weighted average. This pretty much takes care of your complaint.
RN:
Hot like chile
future RN
apparently in your firefighter groupie world, anybody who disagrees with you or has their own opinion is an "idiot".
It's a grim day after the election here in Calif. Props. 1A, 1B, 1C were voted down by a landslide. The state is looking at a $20 BILLION deficit. Teachers hurt themselves by staging demonstrations in front of the L.A. Unified School District headquarters because they came off like a bunch of bullies. Students and illegals who marched with them looked like a bunch of idiots who never heard of Bear Sterns or Countrywide.
The housing bubble has burst--the next bubbles that are going to burst are the credit card bubble and the student loan bubble. Teachers and guidance counselors should be telling students NOT to go to college if they can't afford it--but instead they are just shills for Sallie Mae and they just tell everybody "go to college" They should be making every effort to tell students that you can't default on student loan debt and that student loan debt has ruined many lives--but they don't care. Teachers should be telling illegals that it's pointless for them to go to college because no employer will ever hire them.
There are plenty of dishonest educators out there and it's okay if they get whacked because of the budget deficit.
Patrick,
You know nothing about statistics. People like you have "researched" the problem many times. I have yet to see any real research.
I repeat: what statistical test did you run to make your statement that variance doesn't matter?
I know your answer: divert the discussion, because you and I know you didn't run a single one.
Bill, prove that it matters, don't quote your text book. Actually dig in the data and prove that it matters in state per pupil spending. I know exactly what you are talking about, I know your concerns, but I also know that when you dig in the data you'll find that variance between districts does not significantly impact the mean. You, however, raised this objection and must prove that the district averages impact the mean in a way that makes state by state comparison meaningless.
You don't seem to be interested in doing this work, however.
"what statistical test did you run to make your statement that variance doesn't matter?" I'm waiting for yours, you're the one who said it matters. What don't you get about that simple concept. Prove your point.
I'll even start you on your way Bill, send me your email address and I"ll give you the breakdown of per pupil spending for Nevada's school districts, including student population size and total spending.
Patrick,
It really is painful to read your posts. Let me explain what I get from your posts:
You say that 'studies show' that there is no relationship between spending and test results and you make that conclusion based on looking at state data. Bill says he would like to look at the data or studies, please reveal your source. You say 'you disputed me, you prove it'. I'm not telling you my sources because of scientific etiquette. Google it.
So do you have any sources to back up these facts? Because Bill makes good points based on facts. I don't see your facts. Were you really a teacher?
Thanks Father. Patrick is simply making stuff up at this point.
He says: "send me your email address" when he and I have been exchanging back channel emails for two weeks.
He didn't do any statistical tests, which is why he won't release his validating data: he doesn't have any.
Ok Bill, explain it again. You've said it 3 times the same way. Give me the advanced explanation. Not freshman, not sophomores, but graduate level. Explain why it is so important and then, I want you to give me reasons why it might not be important.
By the way, I've already compiled a database of 15,000 school districts' spending, per pupil spending, and student enrollment, how far have you gotten in proving your point?
"Father"
Bill actually never asked for any source, he referred to a regression analysis done on K-12 per pupil current spending as reported by the U.S Census Bureau compared to 4th grade reading scores on the NAEP exam. All sources were linked in the article he referenced, if he so desired to check them"he has not done so.
He is complaining that the variance between districts within a state will impact the mean in such a way as to render the state mean useless. He assumes that that large spending districts will distort that mean and possibly distort test scores. Though he seems to assume that they distort spending upward but not test scores. Thus we'll see high spending but low test scores within a state making it difficult to compare with others.
As I've mentioned before, per pupil spending is done on a weighted average so it takes care of these "big spending districts" because, as it turns out, big spending districts are often rural districts. They have few students to spread the cost around for expensive items like school buildings, transportation and administrators. Its called diseconomy of scale.
I've even offered to give him my data on Nevada district spending, he's yet to send me his email so I can give it to him. This would at least allow him to prove or disprove his theory on Nevada.
Bill, in case you weren't paying attention, emails via the Las Vegas Sun, don't have your actual email address on them. You actually have to tell me what it is.
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick:
How you and I have been exchanging emails isn't important. You saying we haven't when we have is. You can send me your data any time you want.
First, I have a lot more education in a much more scientific discipline than you do, and I do statistics every single day for a living.
I have nothing to say about how the variance within a state will affect the mean. Get over it and listen to what I am saying.
1. You want to compare the means of X (spending) and Y (test scores) for states A and B. There are statistical tests that will tell you whether or not the two values of X and the two values of Y are the same or different. To use them, you must know the variance of X in each state and the variance of Y in each state.
2. The values are means. To claim that the mean of X and the mean of Y in each state can be validly compared to represent the entire distribution within that state, you must assume that either (a) the distribution of X within that state is entirely random with regard Y, or (b) that the distribution of X with regard to Y within that state is identical to the distribution of X with regard to Y between the states.
Either way, you must discover and test the underlying distribution before you can validly compare the means. It doesn't matter whether or not the underlying distribution changes the value of the mean, it matters whether the relationship between the means is independent of those underlying distributions.
I am saying NOTHING about how the underlying distribution affects the VALUE of either mean. I am saying you must determine the underlying distribution to understand the validity of the COMPARISON of X to Y across states.
You also made the statement that: "I also know that when you dig in the data you'll find that variance between districts does not significantly impact the mean."
Please again state and show what statistical test you used to justify that statement. I am not saying that spending matters or that it doesn't, because I have yet to see a statistically valid demonstration either way. You are saying, but you need to demonstrate your analysis using some technique that a statistician would actually recognize.
Oh, and the study you told me about used only school districts above $10,000 per student, when the California average is $8,200. It is not a random sample, though it *might* be evidence that, once you reach a certain point, additional spending is not helpful. I don't see how it tells you that a $4,000 per year school district wouldn't be better off getting a couple thousand more a year per kid.
Bill,
I can't send you an excel spreadsheet through the Las Vegas Sun, surely you know this?
Patrick, you want to send me 17 data points. Cut and paste.
bill,
patrick seems very happy to engage you. just send him your email so this thread can get back on topic.
Patrick,
You should really be paying Bill for the statistics lesson he's giving you. Since he probably doesn't want to give you his personal email address (can you really blame him?), why don't you post your spreadsheet to your NPRI website and send him a link through the Sun's email.
Father,
Actually I did't really understand what Bill was getting at so I sent his statements to some PhD friends to see if they could interpret (an economist and one who studies nothing but education statistics). Both concluded that Bill is talking nonsense, which is why I didn't understand. At best, they determined that Bill is horrible at explaining his ideas.
Here is one of their comments:
1) You don't compare two completely different variables' means to determine if they are "the same or different." Am I missing something there?
2) Is this guy talking about cross-district variances? If he is, then he's ignorant because they would be unweighted and that's meaningless.
3) If he's talking about statewide cross-student variances, that might be knowable, but there's already ample evidence that the spread doesn't make a significant difference to your thesis. Test score variances across students can be hard to get.
4) His second point is just nonsense.
5) There could be a point that comparing means across states is very much like comparing means across districts. Some are bigger than others. But, even the smallest state has a large sample, by any stretch of the imagination, so that's not an issue.
6) So I'm just curious. How far does this alleged criticism extend? I can't compare mean student scores between two different classrooms because I need the variances?
7) I mean, does this guy have some notion that these distributions are anything but normal? I've never seen data in education that significantly veered from the normal distribution assumption.
Bill, I have more than 13,000 district data points, which could allow you to do an ANOVA, but that would be pointless because state averages are weighted.
You could have easily found this data if you wanted, but you haven't even tried.
According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, the 2007 Median Annual Income from Retirement Annuity and/or Employment-based Pension is:
Private: $8,400
Public: $18,288
So I am suppose to give up my outrageously high retirement of $18,288 a year, which I worked for 30 years to accrue, so that I can rely on what was supposed to be a supplemental system (401k) to provide me with $8,400 a year? And I should do this because private sector employees were foolish enough to agree to 401k's on their own, without the assistance of collective bargaining?
With 401k's, we Americans who can't seem to save money (the average person has no more than $1000 in savings) are supposed to protect (no dipping into funds early!) and manage our own retirement within the volatility of the stock market and pray for the best, rather than having a team of financial experts manage a fund for us?
That's really a good idea? Really?
Furthermore the Chamber and their puppet Patrick have taken it upon themselves to waste time and money attacking public retirement (How does this promote local businesses?), but what ingenious plan have the LV Chamber of Commerce and the small, albeit loud, right-wing minority developed to rescue our local businesses when baby boomers retire and find out what they actually have in their 401k?
Who is going to be able to fly to Vegas and stay in a casino on an $8,000 annual retirement?
Why aren't private sector employees fighting for a pension rather than trying to take someone else's retirement away?
Why aren't the 400 billionaires who own the private companies and who call themselves Americans pitching in to recreate a middle-class America with the benefits and dignified retirement that we all deserve?
ok, so let me start by saying that I am a state employee, and a Correctional Officer. The pay that was listed in the article above is for City and County employees. here is the website for the state employment https://nvapps.state.nv.us/NEATS/Recruit...
and as such I expect you people to do some research. State Peace Officers are the lowest paid departments in the greater las vegas area.
we get paid the wages that we do, because we put our lives on the line every day!
WE ARE UNDER PAID, NOT OVER PAID!!!
I risk my life every day so that your family can be safe, remember that when you want to take our pay.
do a ride along some time, or do a tour of a prison, or visit a fire house some time.
here is a little saying as my closing: I dont do my job for the money, but dont pay me and see if i show up.