Don’t penalize government employees for wealthy’s tax cut
Don’t penalize government employees for wealthy’s tax cut
Sadly Mr. Beeksma has it all wrong about the Trump canceled federal employee pay raise.
First, I don’t know where he got his statistic. I could not duplicate them in an Internet search. But most importantly, he is comparing apples and oranges.
To just compare the broad private sector to government wages is totally wrong. The private sector includes many levels of jobs many of which are low paying low skill non-professional jobs. For the most part any of these types of jobs needed in the federal government are contracted out and are not part of the base calculations for federal pay.
Further, the federal workforce consists of many high skill positions such as physicians, scientists, engineers and others with high levels of education requirements. Comparing this workforce composition to the general population is simply illogical and wrong.
I worked for the federal government for over 30 years and also private industry. In my experience, the federal employees were generally more skilled, more conscientious and more dedicated to their work. Most people don’t have a clue how important a quality dedicated government workforce is to their well-being and daily life.
It is simply wrong to penalize the government employees to help offset this president’s multi-billion dollar tax cut for corporate America and the very wealthy. Good news is the Trump folks probably lost about two million votes.
John Gordon, Princeville
Subscribe today for unlimited access.
Already a subscriber?
Login
Not ready to subscribe?
Register for limited access.
If you have a print subscription but require digital access,
activate your account.
Mr. Gordon glossed over the the point of Mr. Beeksma’s letter and, instead, turned into an attack on Trump. I’m middle income, take the standard deduction, and very happy with the tax law that Congress passed and the president signed. Back on point, the working wealthy on Kauai are the county workforce.
I appreciate John Gordon’s comments. That is what this forum is for. I worked for the U.S. Treasury for many years and would concur that many federal workers are smart and dedicated.
I am not sure about John Gordon’s competence though, if he can’t even do a simple google search. All he had to do was google my second or third sentence and he will see plenty of references.
A generation ago in 1990, federal employees were paid 39% more than private. They also had doctors, engineers, etc.
Given the lower level of competition stress in those jobs, there is no need for them to be paid 80% more than the rest of us. This 80% figure is based on political maneuvering, not on what is necessary and fair.
You do know what an apple and and orange are don’t you?
Maybe we assume too much!
That “80%” comes from adding the average benefit potential to the average salary without saying that you’ve done it or deducting the fees paid for those benefits
The troubling part of this is that Beeksma studied economics once and he knows this is dishonest. This is a classic apple and orange comparison and is a disgustingly dishonest game played with statistics!
Federal employees have deluxe benefit packages which cost a lot and are part of their compensation. “Just Saying” comments are getting just loony.
Beeksma didn’t say he added those benefits to the wages and didn’t deduct what they pay. Health care paycheck fees alone went up 6% for Feds this year.
That was dishonest use of the numbers!
Sorry John – but the fact that you don’t understand what fuels our economy for every level of income we forgive. The fact that you elevate “Government” employment to the same level as private is preposterous. You may be going in the right direction, however, when the Government requires employees to PRODUCE OR BE EASILY FIRED, you may have a small point!
Obviously, the writer is a Democrat that actually believes the leftist anti-Trump propaganda that is simply geared to convince liberal Kool-Aid drinkers that the claim of “tax cuts for the rich” is actually true. A typical political electioneering lie.
“The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes for average American households in every state and every congressional district. The reform will produce larger incomes, more jobs, more investment, and, ultimately, more economic opportunity. In 2018, taxpayers will save an average of $1,400, and married couples with two children will save $2,917. Over the next 10 years, because of a larger economy driven by tax cuts and the tax cuts themselves, the typical American household will benefit from more than $26,000 more in take-home pay, or $44,697 for a family of four. These benefits could be even greater if the tax law is made permanent and could disappear if the tax cuts are repealed. ” Authors:
Kevin Dayaratna, Parker Sheppard and Adam Michel
John Gordon rightfully mentioned Trump because 1. He is cancelling pay raises for Federal employees 2. Why would you vote for a guy that refuses to even consider pay raises for Federal employees, but is willing to spend 12 billion to bailout U.S. soybean farmers for his ding-a-ling trade war? Wake up and smell da kope! Not covfefe.
Wow! According to you Manurewhy, “Over the next 10 years… the typical American household will benefit from more than $26,000 more in take-home pay”. Nice try with your fake statistics from clowns at the Heritage Foundation! Hahaha! A bunch of sad white men that wear nice suits instead of pointy hoods with pukas in them.
By the way, with the extra $50 a week I’ll be getting every week for the next 10 years, is that net or gross? I hope net, so I can invest my $26,000 (ten years from now when I invent my time machine) in the stock market while it is booming! Only to see the market crash AGAIN, lose all my money, and have my tax dollars go to bailout banks and corporations that stole my money in the first place.
Manawai, go hanawai the plants in your yard, not the people of Kauai.
Oh, one last thought. How’s your “Socialist” security checks that you cash, was it on time? Wow! Give those Federal employees a raise! Oh, neva mind… according to you, Chicken Beeksma, Joe Pubic, Walmart Roberts, and Lee Gordo Oswald, they don’t deserve it!
Federal Employees more skilled & better workers? Your so biased and wrong.
They should get their raise based on performance and not automatically across the board. Every employer has their 10 percent or less of workers that produces below or average work. These workers should not receive a RAISE.
Those that perform above average are the ones that deserve the raise.
The wealth holders were handed a large tax reduction equalling millions for those like the self serving trump. It has increased our deficit but now trump feels it can be partly made up on federal workers salaries. Pathetic and wrong.
Here’s what I’m taking away from the comments critical of Mr. Gordon:
1. Government employees make way more than their private industry equivalents.
2. Government employees don’t have to do any work (or very much work) to make their fantastic salaries.
If those two statements are true then why aren’t all the complainers standing in line for one of those easy, high-paying government jobs?
In just the last quarter, the tax cut triggered a record breaking $437 billion buyback of stock by corporate america. Who does that benefit? The top 10% (in income) of households own 84% of all stocks. When it’s said that this was a tax cut for the wealthy, that was true! The fairy tale was that it would boost manufacturing infrastructure investment and create jobs for the middle class. The trouble with republican trickle down fairy tales is that they are fairy tales!