461–470 of 547 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Private sector pensions are for the most part long gone. Why should public sector keep them. Because we don't want a race to the bottom?
Because they're a way to compensate highly skilled government workers for the fact that their salaries aren't competitive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never heard it phrased like this specifically but there is absolutely a mindset during interviews that the applicant gets the job unless you can find a specific reason not to give it to them. To @dragonwriter's point the rules surrounding Civil Service are even more extreme. Here is a real world example of CS hiring procedures: 0. CS Commission sets a minimum written score for oral interviews. Score is arbitrary…
You'd be hard pressed to convince me that someone who fought for their country in the military should not be preferred as a civil servant. It seems like a very strong qualification for these jobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's popular to say things like some government employees are "folks who can't hack it in civilian life," but there's basically no evidence this is true. Have you ever worked for government? I'm a civilian contractor in a software architecture role to a public safety agency in a state government. Half the "senior application developers" haven't written code in 15 years and don't know what a unit test is. There are…
I work at a Fortune 500 (non-tech) company, and your first two paragraphs are very familiar. I’m not sure why people often act like the government has a monopoly on lazy and incompetent people.
These things happen everywhere, but in the private sector, that inefficiency only lasts as long as the rest of the company carries it. It's the taxpayer funding and political difficulty in fixing that make the incompetence of government employees more problematic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is absolutely not legal though, which is why I asked for a citation, as it would be pretty big news.
It WAS big news. It was called the Snowden leaks. For example, the government argues to this day that it is ok to do drag net collection of phone meta data. Having access to every single person that you have called, counts as spying in my book, even if they aren't listening in to the conversations specifically.
I certainly agree with you regarding previous handling of phone metadata, among other issues such as secret interpretations of law, but I was satisfied by changes/fixes made in the USA Freedom Act[1]. What current issue are still outstanding which you believe need to be addressed? (Serious, I like to learn and would be great to know if I am missing something).
[1] https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ23/PLAW-114publ23.pdf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It worked better for you and I'm glad to hear that. For some people, the stability of a Govt. job, the regularity of promotions, the lack of long term uncertainty and perhaps the absence of as high expectations makes it worthwhile to pursue a job that pays less.
Actually, this stability and security was another big reason I chose not to join Government. I had done a few internships in the public service, and what I saw horrified me. When you have job security and low expectations placed on you, it's wonderful. When everyone does, it's horrible. There is relatively little room for the lazy and useless in the private sector.
Spoken like someone who has not spent much time in the private sector.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they seem to turn out libertarian and conservative arguments Better ignore everything they say, then! > Top 20 per cent of families pay 56 per cent of all taxes in Canada If that's wrong, then why not cite why? If it's correct, I suspect there's a good reason for it (e.g. progressive tax structures work and are objectively a good thing for society).
It is not wrong, but it is irrelevant except as propaganda: it frames the cost of government services as being borne by the wealthy and suggests the wealthy are being charitable already or that they should have some extra say over where their money goes. In fact it is the labor of the poor, extracted by the wealthy, then partially recovered from them in taxes that funds society. The wealthy hold the wealth not becaus…
Who did JK Rowing rob to get her money?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that we can (and should!) raise government pay scales, but we must also make it easier to fire people (or manage them downwards) for incompetence. Government work is for two types of people (and there's some overlap on the Euler diagram): patriots, and folks who can't hack it in civilian life. It's not just a 'perception of gov't incompetence': it's a widespread phenomenon. Government employees tend to…
It's popular to say things like some government employees are "folks who can't hack it in civilian life," but there's basically no evidence this is true. First of all, let's make sure we look at the full scope of civilian life with a sober eye. Anyone working the counter at your local Post Office could easily work the register at any grocery store in your town. And any medium to large company has plenty of internal p…
I worked at NASA for 6 years and almost fell out of my chair when I read this. Switching from NASA to Google was the most stark contrast of incompetent people late in their careers having political infights to keep "their" funding to people who didn't care about funding and just did the fucking work.
I can think of 10 people I worked with at NASA who absolutely could never hold a professional position in a place that requires revenue or useful contributions.
It seems like it's pretty hard for the government to compete with private industry in compensation. Federal pay grades are capped by Congress, and the top grade is around ~$150k a year [1]. And note that since it's the top of the scale, you have to start people off lower so that there is salary progression. Pretty sure a top cryptographer or security expert should be worth several times that, especially if they are a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work at a Fortune 500 (non-tech) company, and your first two paragraphs are very familiar. I’m not sure why people often act like the government has a monopoly on lazy and incompetent people.
Do taxpayers pay for your Fortune 500 company's employees' salaries? These things happen everywhere, but in the private sector, that inefficiency only lasts as long as the rest of the company carries it. It's the taxpayer funding and political difficulty in fixing that make the incompetence of government employees more problematic.
I guess you could give up medical care, internet and having an education, but if you're going to do that why not just 'vote with your wallet' with your taxes too and move abroad.