The NYT is struggling with the statistics that show that state and local government workers are better compensated than private workers. Moreover, the are “rarely fired” and have better retirement benefits.

They frame the question as one of value judgment: are they paid too much?

My answer is a resounding YES! Unlike our president’s wife, I cannot imagine a worse outcome for our country than seeing the best and the brightest of our youth opting for the “safety” of a government job. Such a choice has been typical of Third World countries and a shift in the preference of the young from public to private work has been a sure sign of economic development there. I have seen that happen both in China and India.

Let’s admit the obvious. Wealth is created by the private sector. It is consumed by the public one. A country is bound to be better off where talented ambitious persons are busy creating wealth.

Moreover, those distributors tend to be more ideological and, hence, make governing more difficult. At least, that is NYT reporter John Harwood’s assumption. In an article entitled For New Congress, Data Shows Why Polarization Abounds Here is the data:

 

If you assume that Harwood blames the polarization on the rise in the number of public service workers in Congress, you’ll be wrong. He ignores the 220% rise and blames the difficulty on the meagre 11% rise in business persons and, of course, the 134% rise in freshmen. In fact, Harwood does not write a single word about the elephant in the room, the rise in Congress members emanating from public service. Not even a word to undermine the possibility that that rise is responsible for the polarization he bemoans.

Why? Your guess is as good as mine.

For more, see my History News Network blog Deja vu

Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here