Yes, once benefits are added to the equation, compensation in the public sector is roughly equivalent to that of the private sector. But there's an even dirtier secret that no one will tell you...
If you actually gave managers the flexibility to be entrepreneurial, they would be willing to work for less money. Look no further than the nonprofit sector. Why doesn't working for the government have the same appeal as volunteering for the Peace Corps? Because nobody actually feels like their making a difference in a bureaucracy. It doesn't have to be that way. :: ash *Ash Roughani* California Moderate Party (916) 835-9607 | CAMod.org t: @CAModOrg <https://twitter.com/CAModOrg> | facebook<https://www.facebook.com/CAModBeta> This email may contain privileged content I prefer you not share with others. On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Billy, > > On Mar 14, 2012, at 10:58 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > How about at least competitive salaries ? Otherwise you lose your > talent to > > the private sector. > > > > I'm with Ash. The problem isn't salaries -- compensation is roughly > equivalent; worse salaries, but better benefits. > > The problem is that most government work is bureaucratic rather than > creative. That is what sucks the life out of people, in Big Biz or Big Gov. > > To this extent, our Libertarian friends are right -- we need vastly > streamlined government. The difference is that I believe such a reformation > would make government *stronger*, not weaker, by increasing its leverage > over the economy. > > E > > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community < > [email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
