MyFox
 

Tallmanok2's Blog

by Tallmanok2 from Wayne, Mi

Last Post 17 days, 7 hours Ago


I think it's time that we start bringing Public Employee's pay in line with the pay scale of the private sector. We Could save millions, but I bet we won't see that proposed in the Budget Cuts
11 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 11
Page 1 of 1
wolakp read my blog
Oct 18, 2007 | 9:02 PM

TALL,

Is this you? I didn't know you knew what budget cuts were? I would figure raising taxes to pay more for the State employees. You know I had to bust your chops.

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 19, 2007 | 8:51 AM

Tall, The MOST important factor influencing the rate of pay of an employee is the kind of job the person performs. The individuals occupying the executive positions of the organization are responsible for establishing and developing the strategy of the organization.
Also, If you look up the comparable stats of public vs private in any given job field, the private sector is paid handsomely versus the public.
Case in point, Granholm makes roughly $140,000 plus a $60,000 expense budget. Compare this to the following:
2003 salary and wages
Anheuser-Busch $4.9 mil
Boeing - $2.4 mil
Caterpillar $2.8 mil
Comcast - $8.3 mil
IBM - $6.9 mil
SBC- $8.6 mil

Now believe me, the last thing I want to do is stick up for Jenny, but in the big scheme of things, pay for performance is the right way to go. Now if Jenny ran any of these companies the way she has ran Michigan, she would have been out on her kester long time ago. (more thaan likely with a Nice golden parachute).
Maybe the politicians should have taken a "good-will" cut in pay. But would adding that extra pocket change have changed anything?
Ratt

Tallmanok2 read my blog view my photos
Oct 19, 2007 | 9:09 AM

Ratt,

I'm not talking about elected officials I am talking about normal everyday workers. Here's a case in point I worked in the private sector in a factory my retirement for 22 years is about 650 a mouth. My brother works at a State Home for boy's and when he retires at 25 years he will get 2400 a month from his retirement. Not to mention they earn like six weeks vacation each year, and paid sick days. Now remember there are more State workers that there are people in the plants. That is a lot of money wasted.

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 19, 2007 | 9:29 AM

Well, I guess your brother picked the better job. A look at overall compensation packages is better than cashing in on a high hourly wage to start with.
I know that in the Human Resources field that I have my degree in, For a HR Manager with 7-10 yrs experience in the private sector can get $75-140 th per year, in the public sector this person would be lucky to make $45 to 60 th per year. Now include the benefits package and long term bens, which job would be better? Only the person who accepts this job would know based on their specific intents.
Ratt

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 19, 2007 | 9:32 AM

By saying that all these state workers should take a paycut to "save the state money" you are sounding more socialistic than ever. Take from the rich to give to the poor. In this case, take from those that earn a living to support a failing state and return the money to the "poor" for additional welfare programs.
Not my idea of a great republic.
Ratt

car7858 read my blog view my photos
Oct 21, 2007 | 1:15 AM

I think they should make it a more level playing field by taxing the rich as equally as the poor. If everyone paid their fair share in taxes, alot of the burdens would be eased. Tax shelters are for the advantage of people that prefer not to pay their fair share. All people's incomes and assets should be taxed equally and fairly. I consider tax shelters in the same category as an offshore bank account-Just another way to avoid paying the taxes most pay. We are indeed a capitalist country, ruled not by the people but the almighty dollar.

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 21, 2007 | 10:25 AM

Here are the numbers. You'll be stunned. The overwhelming majority of federal income taxes are paid by the very highest income earners. The top 1% of income earners pay about 32% of all income taxes. The top 5% pays 51.4%. The top 10% of high income earners, pay 63.5%. The top 20% of income earners pays 78% of all federal income taxes. The top 20%.

Now, if you're going to have a tax cut that is broad-based and reaches 78% of the people, I'm sorry, you're going to be cutting taxes on the top 20%. It's unavoidable! And guess what? It worked! It stimulated the economy. Where would we be without them?

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 21, 2007 | 10:26 AM

Here's the final number. The bottom four-fifths, 80% - the bottom 80% of income earners pay just 20%, 22% of the federal income tax burden. The bottom 80% pay only 20% of the burden. Now, how in the world can anybody with a brain come forth and say, "I am against tax cuts for the rich. I'm only going to have a tax cut for the middle class." If you give a tax cut to people in the bottom 20%, you're not going to stimulate anything. They're not paying any taxes anyway.
See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/ny_times_top_20__
pay_80__of_taxes_.guest.html
Ratt

Ratt_Killer read my blog view my photos
Oct 21, 2007 | 10:31 AM

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_e
arners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html
Ratt

car7858 read my blog view my photos
Oct 27, 2007 | 11:39 AM

And the only ones capable of hiding their "savings" to avoid their real fair share in certain financial markets. Having accountants and lawyers and doctors in such convenient locations as Miami Beach, Las Vegas, and other vacation hotspots so they can get a business tax write-off, for one.

car7858 read my blog view my photos
Oct 27, 2007 | 11:40 AM

And the only ones capable of hiding their "savings" to avoid their real fair share in certain financial markets. Having accountants and lawyers and doctors in such convenient locations as Miami Beach, Las Vegas, and other vacation hotspots so they can get a business tax write-off, for one.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




Tallmanok2

I am an American Indian. I developed Muscular Dystrophy in 2001 at the ripe old age of 44. I spend my days mostly on line and with my Ex-wife, and kids. I guess you could say I'm a Democrat but I am most interested in what any candidate can do to improve the world in which we live. I know I really spell poorly but I take solace in the fact that neither could Einstein. LOL

Member Since: 10/3/2006