695: King County cuts budget 9.7% (transit cut 1/3)
Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth
http://www.seattle-pi.com/local/budy24.shtml
Nora Hiatt
give up his team of police chauffers. The cost of the drivers would
save 140,000 for other more important things.
Nora
Mike
Nora Hiatt wrote in message <383C9E3C...@sprintmail.com>...
Nora Hiatt
Yugo's. :) OR! If Ron "service cuts" Sims wants a car and driver it
sould be a marked King County Sheriffs car. You know the kind with the
fiberglass back seat where the BAD GUYS normally sit?
Nora
Leif O. Thorvaldson
"pimpmobile" -- all flash and no substance.
Leif
Mike <geo...@myob.com> wrote in message
news:81k318$f2f$1...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net...
Nora Hiatt
"Leif O. Thorvaldson" wrote:
>
> Limousine liberals are another breed. Sims is a wannabe. Sorta like a
> "pimpmobile" -- all flash and no substance.
>
I don't think his position warrants a car and driver. He isn't the
govenor or anything.
Nora
Druid
Firemen)?
Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth
>
> Why can't Civil Servants take a reduction in pay,(except Police and
> Firemen)?
>
Why should they have to? They already get paid less than their
counterparts in the private sector. If the public doesn't want to pay a
sufficient level of taxes, then they get reduced services.
Fringe Ryder
Ray, again I have to call your bluff. I believe your wrong, and probably
even know that you're wrong, about this.
Please post your evidence that for a typical position, civil servants make
LESS after taxes and benefits than their private counterparts.
Specifically, look at jobs that clearly are similar in both venues...
security, receptionist, secretary, administrator.
Don't forget that many of these people save a substantial amount
immediately in reduced taxes, and that they tend to have very comprehensive
benefits packages.
Thanks
- EMail must delete "delete" embedded in domain
Mike
Eric da Red wrote in message ...
>In article <383F701E...@sprintmail.com>,
>and see what perks a CEO of a similarly sized private company would
>receive.
Bill Gates has a police officer drive him around in a limo? Nope. Gates
drives himself (and last time he was on TV at the wheel, it was an SUV).
Gates is also famous for flying coach. I've seen him interviewed at SeaTac
eating a burger at Burger King.
Fringe Ryder
>
>What reduced taxes?
Ability to opt out of Social Security. This does not apply to all civil
positions, of course, but it is a factor.
Eric da Red
>"Leif O. Thorvaldson" wrote:
>>
>> Limousine liberals are another breed. Sims is a wannabe. Sorta like a
>> "pimpmobile" -- all flash and no substance.
>I don't think his position warrants a car and driver. He isn't the
>govenor or anything.
Consider the number of King County employees and the size of the budget,
and see what perks a CEO of a similarly sized private company would
receive.
--
Inadequate Public Investment In Education Of The Week: It wouldnt be an
issue if the government didnt have so much waiste! What is the waist
figure? something like $250,000 daily! the funds would go twice as far
with a little less waiste!
Eric da Red
Fringe Ryder <fri...@fringedeleteweb.com> wrote:
>"Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth" <gofo...@home.com> sez:
>>Druid wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't Civil Servants take a reduction in pay,(except Police and
>>> Firemen)?
>>>
>>
>>Why should they have to? They already get paid less than their
>>counterparts in the private sector. If the public doesn't want to pay a
>>sufficient level of taxes, then they get reduced services.
>
>Ray, again I have to call your bluff. I believe your wrong, and probably
>even know that you're wrong, about this.
>
>Please post your evidence that for a typical position, civil servants make
>LESS after taxes and benefits than their private counterparts.
>
>Specifically, look at jobs that clearly are similar in both venues...
>security, receptionist, secretary, administrator.
When I worked for the state, EVERYONE who left the department for the
private sector got a substantial increase in pay.
Perhaps my experience was extraordinary, or maybe not.
>Don't forget that many of these people save a substantial amount
>immediately in reduced taxes,
What reduced taxes?
> and that they tend to have very comprehensive
>benefits packages.
>
>Thanks
--
Clave
news:s467pb...@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <383F701E...@sprintmail.com>,
> Nora Hiatt <Nora...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Leif O. Thorvaldson" wrote:
> >>
> >> Limousine liberals are another breed. Sims is a wannabe. Sorta like a
> >> "pimpmobile" -- all flash and no substance.
>
> >I don't think his position warrants a car and driver. He isn't the
> >govenor or anything.
>
> Consider the number of King County employees and the size of the budget,
> and see what perks a CEO of a similarly sized private company would
> receive.
Consider the rabid hatred of the man exhibited in these newsgroups. I don't
think a driver and bodyguard are unwarranted at all.
Jim
SMITH29
"Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth" wrote:
>
> Druid wrote:
> >
> > Why can't Civil Servants take a reduction in pay,(except Police and
> > Firemen)?
> >
>
> Why should they have to? They already get paid less than their
> counterparts in the private sector. If the public doesn't want to pay a
> sufficient level of taxes, then they get reduced services.
xxxx
I'm so glad it finaly sunk in.
Took long enough!!!
29
SMITH29
Nora Hiatt wrote:
>
> "Leif O. Thorvaldson" wrote:
> >
> > Limousine liberals are another breed. Sims is a wannabe. Sorta like a
> > "pimpmobile" -- all flash and no substance.
> >
> I don't think his position warrants a car and driver. He isn't the
> govenor or anything.
>
> Nora
xxxxx
He should drive his own car and be reimbursed at the standard rate.
He is a county employee and should be treated as such.
If he needs a county vehicle give him a spare garbage truck.
That be the "BIG" SUV.
29
,-0
wa...@blarg.net
<fri...@fringedeleteweb.com> wrote:
>"Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth" <gofo...@home.com> sez:
>>Druid wrote:
>>>
>>> Why can't Civil Servants take a reduction in pay,(except Police and
>>> Firemen)?
>>>
>>
>>Why should they have to? They already get paid less than their
>>counterparts in the private sector. If the public doesn't want to pay a
>>sufficient level of taxes, then they get reduced services.
>
>Ray, again I have to call your bluff. I believe your wrong, and probably
>even know that you're wrong, about this.
>
>Please post your evidence that for a typical position, civil servants make
>LESS after taxes and benefits than their private counterparts.
>
>Specifically, look at jobs that clearly are similar in both venues...
>security, receptionist, secretary, administrator.
>
>Don't forget that many of these people save a substantial amount
>immediately in reduced taxes, and that they tend to have very comprehensive
>benefits packages.
Really? As it happens, I know some people who work for the City of
Seattle in my own field.
Civil servants get NO exemptions or discounts on any federal, state,
or local taxes. Many large companies have a "company store" which
sells goods that the company buys anyway to employees at below-retail
prices, and more have "employee discounts" on the company's own
products; but City of Seattle employees get no such privileges.
Their benefit package is slightly sub-standard for large stable
employers. As one example, employees at large private companies can
be fully vested in the retirement program (meaning the employer's
matching contribution becomes employee property) after as little as
two years, but employees at the City of Seattle are never fully vested
except to the extent that the employer's matching contribution has
been included in pension checks already received.
As for pay, they get about $50K-$60K a year; the metropolitan-Seattle
average for the same field is about $130K.
Fringe Ryder
>As for pay, they get about $50K-$60K a year; the metropolitan-Seattle
>average for the same field is about $130K.
What field is THAT? Even EXPERIENCED computer programmers don't make $130K
average salary in Seattle... or Redmond, for that matter.
Please post some real numbers. That number and lack of information makes
it sound quite unrealistic.
Eric da Red
Fringe Ryder <fri...@fringedeleteweb.com> wrote:
>berg...@drizzle.com (Eric da Red) sez:
>>
>>What reduced taxes?
>Ability to opt out of Social Security.
This only applied to me when I worked as a teaching assistant in grad
school (and only then after a lengthy lawsuit). It did not apply in any
of the full-time jobs I've had working for government agencies.
> This does not apply to all civil
>positions, of course, but it is a factor.
Not a very common one, apparently.
Jim Lovejoy
>
> wa...@blarg.net sez:
> >As for pay, they get about $50K-$60K a year; the metropolitan-Seattle
> >average for the same field is about $130K.
>
> What field is THAT? Even EXPERIENCED computer programmers don't make $130K
> average salary in Seattle... or Redmond, for that matter.
The State of Washington, which collects statistics on this disagrees
with you. According to them, programmers get $400k.
Take it up with them.
bill bonde
SMITH29 <"smith29(not)"@home.com> wrote in message
news:38434874...@home.com...
>
>
> "Ray, Kim and Dane Goforth" wrote:
> >
> > Druid wrote:
> > >
> > > Why can't Civil Servants take a reduction in pay,(except Police and
> > > Firemen)?
> > >
> >
> > Why should they have to? They already get paid less than their
> > counterparts in the private sector. If the public doesn't want to pay a
> > sufficient level of taxes, then they get reduced services.
> I'm so glad it finaly sunk in.
> Took long enough!!!
>
URLs?
Fringe Ryder
>Fringe Ryder wrote:
>>
>> wa...@blarg.net sez:
>> >As for pay, they get about $50K-$60K a year; the metropolitan-Seattle
>> >average for the same field is about $130K.
>>
>> What field is THAT? Even EXPERIENCED computer programmers don't make $130K
>> average salary in Seattle... or Redmond, for that matter.
>
>The State of Washington, which collects statistics on this disagrees
>with you. According to them, programmers get $400k.
Jim, you didn't read carefully. They factored in stock options and other
non-salary compensation. Try again.
Glenn
Jim Lovejoy
I would think that stock options should be counted.
Clave
news:3845C9B8...@ix.netcom.com...
Options aren't worth anything until cashed in, and so any value you place on
them is subjective, skewing the numbers.
Jim
Fringe Ryder
True, although I believe the numbers he had WERE on cashed-in options. But
they're still not salary, and, as you say, worthless until vested and
cashed... with many being worthless then.
Salary is income. Stock options are free lotto tickets.
Fringe Ryder
>Fringe Ryder wrote:
>>
>> Jim Lovejoy <ji...@ix.netcom.com> sez:
>>
>> >Fringe Ryder wrote:
>> >>
>> >> wa...@blarg.net sez:
>> >> >As for pay, they get about $50K-$60K a year; the metropolitan-Seattle
>> >> >average for the same field is about $130K.
>> >>
>> >> What field is THAT? Even EXPERIENCED computer programmers don't make $130K
>> >> average salary in Seattle... or Redmond, for that matter.
>> >
>> >The State of Washington, which collects statistics on this disagrees
>> >with you. According to them, programmers get $400k.
>>
>> Jim, you didn't read carefully. They factored in stock options and other
>> non-salary compensation. Try again.
>
>I would think that stock options should be counted.
Here's why I disagree....
I've worked at six companies with stock options. Of these, two wound up
having the stock go up in value. One of those two I was at for quite a
while and did okay with (which was often defined as $80K profits after four
years, this being ten years ago, i.e. $20K average) and the other I didn't
last a year at due to management issues. That one was one of two places
I've been at with greater than 100% annual turn-over. (But their stock did
skyrocket.)
In order for stock options to be compensation, you've got to stay at the
company long enough to vest, AND the company has to do well, AND it can't
be mismanaged from above. You have no control over most of it, including
success or failure of the company.
Which is why I liken stock option to a bunch of lotto tickets. The odds of
winning are great only if at Microsoft.
Jim Lovejoy
Yes, but the value of the stock options was counted only after they were
not only vested, but cashed in. Which makes it like only counting the
lotto tickets after they come up winners.