Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

bits.enigma.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 132 posts

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#81

Post by walshemj »

cmarschner wrote: post #73
zachsnow wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were Swedish you might not consider it private information. Being from the US I do, but I don't consider my age private. It's difficult to say where a culture should draw the line, in an objective way.

How is that a privacy concern in the US if you find the salaries of over a million people on a government website? I find that a bit disturbing.

It's certainly personal data within the meaning of the law in all the EU states.

Everyone on here has a blue fit over the NSA but is fine with this!

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#83

Post by asveikau »

dandelany wrote: post #72
asveikau wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I've lost something in all the details, how is this list compiled? I was born in DC and grew up in the area, as such I know a lot of current federal employees who should be on a 2012 list. I grepped for a handful of names of folks I know personally and so far found only one. (For privacy reasons I will not share the names of non-matches here.) Update: Ok, I've found two now. Still many more non-matches than mat…

The data is from this dataset: http://php.app.com/fed_employees11/search.php ...obtained by Asbury Park Press via a FOIA. It doesn’t include FBI, CIA, Defense Department, or IRS employees, or employees involved in security work, nuclear materials or national security matters.

Judging by some of the names that are missing I am guessing congressional staff is also absent? And similarly, CBO?

Edit: Just after your quoted part it says:

> does not cover the White House, Congress, the Postal Service, and independent agencies and commissions.

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#84

Post by MaysonL »

csmatt wrote: post #36
kalleboo wrote: post #13

You could probably make some amazing visualizations of this data. In Sweden, all the tax records are public information. You can literally look up how much your neighbor makes in a year. So each year after tax season, the tabloids all print up huge lists of "the richest people in YOUR neighborhood!". I've always been disappointed that with all this data, they've never gone beyond that and visualized the data geograph…

I'm not judging one way or another, but is privacy not something the Swedish people are interested in?

Given that the government already knows, and either your employer or your accountant knows, and your bank has a pretty good idea, why do you think your income is to any meaningful extent still private?

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#85

Post by aestra »

walshemj wrote: post #79
aestra wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ignorant thing to say. Public libraries do more than cater to homeless people and children. They also employee the advanced degree educated professional librarians you are talking about too.

But they are correct a librarian is a professional just the same as an engineer

Indeed! Librarians are often very highly educated, the couple I know have masters degrees. If you need something, no matter how obscure, you can ask a librarian, they will know how to get it for you.

I was disagreeing that public libraries cater to only the lowly forms of society (homeless and children) and don't require educated librarians. They do more than babysit and they employ such librarians. They also employ, for example, teenagers to stock shelves.

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#86

Post by chernevik »

phaus wrote: post #18
Dirlewanger wrote: post #10

Great UI, love it. Didn't realize how many cushy jobs the government has...damn. Now I know why my parents kept telling me to look in the public sector first and foremost.

Most of the people who are making 100-200k would make at the very least double that if they were in the private sector. A GS-15 is equivalent to a Brigadier General(Who would be in charge of thousands of people). Now, keep in mind that some technology positions have inflated GS ranks because it was the only way they could get the salaries high enough to attract talent. Security analysts and programmers don't come che…

The government has significantly _lower_ turnover than the private sector, which isn't what microeconomics says we would see if the workers could make that much more by leaving. It's more consistent with the suggestion that the workers would make considerably less if they left.

So:

1. Microeconomics is seriously, perhaps completely, wrong; or, 2. Federal employees are much more motivated by non-financial rewards, such as the satisfaction of public service, than the rest of us, and are, therefore, better people than the rest of us; or, 3. They couldn't make more in the private sector, and would probably make less.

Take your pick.

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#87

Post by aianus »

maaku wrote: post #21
robmcm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or very cushy, (if you don't mind not getting paid).

I'm not sure how being out of work without pay is cushy...

Maybe you have more money than vacation time? This is a nice way to take a break without anyone looking down on you or forbidding you.

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#88

Post by mhurron »

MaysonL wrote: post #84
csmatt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not judging one way or another, but is privacy not something the Swedish people are interested in?

Given that the government already knows, and either your employer or your accountant knows, and your bank has a pretty good idea, why do you think your income is to any meaningful extent still private?

Your neighbor knows how much you make? Everyone you've listed has a need to know, that doesn't mean that everyone has a need to know.

Your doctor knows, your parents know and your insurance company probably knows, but does that mean you broadcast to the world that you have a third testicle?

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#89

Post by sologoub »

MaysonL wrote: post #84
csmatt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not judging one way or another, but is privacy not something the Swedish people are interested in?

Given that the government already knows, and either your employer or your accountant knows, and your bank has a pretty good idea, why do you think your income is to any meaningful extent still private?

Personally, I wouldn't want it shared with the world. The people/organizations you have listed are somewhat trusted entities.

Income data can be used for a slew of criminal activity. I wonder if you can correlate the release of the data with burglaries or other crimes spiking in the relatively wealthier households, compared to their neighbors.

Re: US Federal Employee Salaries (2012)

#90

Post by mcguire »

eli wrote: post #16
robmcm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or very cushy, (if you don't mind not getting paid).

I know many people who were furloughed this week and not a single one of them is happy.

You can't say that anymore!

I'm not a government employee, directly, but I am a contractor that has been furloughed for two weeks now, and I'm happier than I've been in a long while. And no, I won't get back pay; the first two weeks were "administrative leave", which I have to make up (typically with vacation time), and starting this week the charge code is leave without pay.

Apparently, my job sucks worse than I thought.

Post reply on HN