Sep 09
Which job gets the lifetime pension?
I basically agree with Gavin McInnes take that firefighters have an easy, very rarely dangerous job, and do not deserve the lavish pension, pay and retirement benefits they get.
I’d suggest cutting the pay and benefits til the entrance tests don’t have a waiting list.
This is not to say that some aren’t brave on occasion, but like most cops that don’t use their gun in the line of duty, most fireman never get a chance to be 9/11 brave.
We need to cut public costs, and no job is sacred.
September 9th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
In all the screeching about cutting government, we’ve given little thought to how America would be organized if the work force drops dramatically. How well off will we be if the main occupation is taking in each other’s laundry? There is more to life than a lower marginal tax rate for the wealthy. What would be the the standard of living if the total flow of money were to drop by a third? The view of the top economic class seems to overlook the basics of economics that if the volume of money shrinks and we want a minimum standard for everyone, the only source of money for maintenance of the lower classes is the rich.
The purpose of government is to do what society benefits greatly from, but that would not be done by profit-making entities because the ROI is too low. It’s called market failure.
The screechers should get off the poor-taxed-us story and focus on building the economy to maintain a sufficient average standard of living. And no, a lower tax rate is not the magic formula that releases enough pent-up energy to solve our economic dilemmas.
The outlook is not chaos; it is some re-arrangement of economics with disappointment by most for the lower total economic happiness. We will muddle through.
September 9th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Havent you been reading this blog? I’m not particularly worried about the rich, but about the effect this over spending, over taxing, over regulation has on ALL of us, but ESPECIALLY the poor and lower middle class.
If I can use screeching back at you… quick “screeching” about what I DON’T write and respond INSTEAD to what I do write.
As to this particular post… it makes NO SENSE to over pay anybody.
And Keynes is wrong. GDP spent by government isn’t really GDP, its stolen money usually misused and poorly invested. That is what bites us in the end.
September 10th, 2010 at 8:26 am
“over spending, over taxing, over regulation” is not a problem of the lower economic classes; it is a complaint of the rich. The lower classes problem is that opportunity for good jobs is steadily shrinking and standard of living is dropping with it. The middle class is steadily shrinking as the economic inequality gap grows. The answer of the rich is to cut the programs that benefit the lower classes and cut taxes on the rich so that the rich can keep a greater portion of their growing income and therby magically transform the economics into a win-win for rich and poor. Wishful thinking! Read some of the latest stuff from AEI since Arthur Brooks became head.
Unfortunately for the Tea Party hopes of cutting government, the lower classes will not stand for a wholesale reduction in programs that help them deal with the shrinking pool of available income. For the moment the politicians are paralyzed because in an election year they cannot bring themselves to cut programs or raise taxes as they merely pray for heavenly help against the brutal economics of world competition They still have hope as their only strategy.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:28 am
it’s been your way for decades, and it hasn’t worked out well has it.
September 10th, 2010 at 9:36 am
The PROBLEM isn’t the class divide. The PROBLEM is the poor utilization of investment. This AFFECTS poor people earlier than rich people. Something you can SEE now if head is removed from Obama banners.
The government takes trillions and invests it POORLY. That money WILL BE SPENT. Just how wise is the question. Right now it is spent stupidly on NEGATIVE RETURN activities.
Get your head out of Marxist class crap and into Adam Smith and Hayek.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Cops too, I suppose, although I would argue not that we make too much, but that there are too many of us. The LASD, for example has only about 1/4 of 9000 deputies on patrol. What are the rest of them doing? OPD similar, 80 or so out of 230.
When I hear they are doing a hooker sting or raiding a medicinal marijuana store, I know there are too many without enough real police work to do.
I do feel that I work harder that the average fireman. I see them watching a lot of TV, make-work training, polishing of trucks, and grocery shopping. The last real fire I went to was in May.
September 10th, 2010 at 12:43 pm
How many firemen is too enough is an insurance question since they exist to insure that a fire will not destroy the city. You face that question every day when you buy insurance.You might consider it good news that firemen have little to do just as you would not like to have to collect on your insurance after a disaster.
September 10th, 2010 at 1:36 pm
I doubt that is the reason for the number of fireman, although I’m sure wrongful death lawsuits for non-fire related emergencies might have something to do with it. 1906 was a long time ago. When was the last time a major fire threatened a city?
Firemen arent preventing fires, improved building materials and codes are. So why am I paying them to make lasagna and watch DVD’s?