One of my anonymous contributors suggested the following John Derbyshire post my way, from National Review's "The Corner" (which in turn is a quote from a reader letter, so if you can follow that chain of semi-anonymous references, good luck):
He notes (see here) that the average salary for a city employee of
Joilet, Illinois is $83,500/yr. The average taxpayer cost per city
employee once you calculate in the pension is $127,000/yr. And city
employees make no contribution to their health
care coverage and are not particularly interested in changing
that. The average household income
in Joliet is $47,700.
The post continues to highlight the differences between public and private sector compensation... focusing on the GUARANTEED public sector pension, versus what someone in the private sector has to lay away over a lifetime of work to attempt to secure a similar GUARANTEED annual payment in perpetuity (something like $1,000,000 in the bank in high-quality, low-return investments for each $20,000 per year of interest to live off of).
In short, those our political class now calls "the rich" for taxation purposes are barely making a dent in securing their own pension equivalent to government employees. This security is one of the biggest aspects of public compensation, and it gives a lie to the fact that government employees are in some way "public servants" making great sacrifices.
Derbyshire concludes:
I see no help for this poor guy. He's a goner — sorry, pal. It's not
too late to save the children,
though. Make sure you tell them, morning noon and night — GET A
GOVERNMENT JOB!
As someone who worked for the government, I disagree. No matter how big the government bribes salaries get relative to the private sector, I will tell my children to pursue a calling where incentives to excel are in abundance and excellence is rewarded.