Transparency in salaries

ABC is reporting on a new "transparency" movement on salaries led in part by a Tik Tok spox/influencer. I heard the usual, especially POC and pay gap. However, unless you also ask about benefits and history with the company, it's meaningless. Elementary school teachers, look it up, make about $75/hour according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics if you factor in benefits. And it's much higher for those in administrative positions. Nothing makes people more unhappy than saying teaching is one of the best paying professions in the U.S. Also, government workers, which are heavily female and black, make far more than the private sector. Norma has the facts. Media lie. Politicians lie. Unions lie.

Total benefit costs consist of five major categories and include 18 benefit costs:
• Paid leave - vacation, holiday, sick, and personal leave;
• Supplemental pay - overtime and premium, shift differentials, and nonproduction bonuses;
• Insurance - life, health, short-term and long-term disability;
• Retirement and savings - defined benefit and defined contribution; and
• Legally required benefits - Social Security [refers to Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program], Medicare, federal and state unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf 

Look specifically at Table 2 and Table 3 by occupational group. If BLS is wrong about teachers, then it's also wrong about accountants and truck drivers.

That said, I think teaching is one of the most difficult and important jobs; it's just too bad that their union leaders are such crooks.

The corruption of banks

It's bad enough that our taxes fund the deaths of the unborn due to clever politicians' machinations--now our banks and investments with women in the board room are tainted? This is to further entrench the idea that a job can replace a family and the lie that abortion is "women's health care."

 
"One of America's largest banking corporations [Citigroup] is reportedly shelling out cash [for travel] to help employees circumvent state abortion laws." (The Blaze)

You may recall, this is how we ended up with employee benefits tied to jobs, which then later were assumed to be necessary for all. After WWII when there was a shortage of good workers with salaries and wages frozen (The Stabilization Act), larger companies began offering paid health insurance to circumvent government laws.

Follow the money

The SECOND most important reason for Democrats to demand "Medicare for All" or "single payer" (government) insurance is that $300 Billion exemption employers get for insuring their workers with a quality product tailored to their needs. Democrats believe that exemption is a "loophole" and really belongs to them to pass around to their friends so they can stay in office. The government actually built this odd system after WWII when it imposed controls on wages, and employers added benefits to get the best employees.

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-does-tax-exclusion-employer-sponsored-health-insurance-work

The first reason and biggest is control over your life choices and third is your health data which can be sold to the highest bidder.

Fourth is the victimhood mentality that has been pounded into minds of mush since the 1970s in public schools and higher education. It's a vote getter. It's more apparent in Gen-X and Millennials than Boomers, and almost unknown in my generation. In that mind set, it isn't fair that Whole Foods shoppers have better insurance than Walmart shoppers, even though the WF shopper is a "virtue signaler," better educated and well paid, and looks down on the schlubs who shop at Walmart, clean their homes and keep their toilets and automobiles running. In a "fair" world, everyone would only shop at Walmart and Whole Foods wouldn't exist. Choice wouldn't exist.

Teachers’ salaries—not what you think

Some questioned my figures for hourly wages for teachers (in a post about the union strike in Colorado on Facebook) being on average $60/hour.  However, the latest I've found is $61.91--$41.41 is the wage, and $20.50 the benefits. Sept. 2018 figures. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf.

Benefits for public employees are far more generous than private sector. "Total employer compensation costs for private industry workers averaged $34.53 per hour worked in September 2018. Total employer compensation costs for state and local government workers averaged $50.03 per hour worked in September 2018. "

For the most part we don't pay federal income tax on our benefits, and the government is lusting after that--believing it belongs to the federal government. The employers get a write off too. Imagine the "windfall" to the federal government to waste with just the medical deductions from workers and the business write off costs for the employers.

Kamala Harris must be swooning at the thought!

Falling on the insurance sword is an act of patriotism, Democrats believe

“The millions of Americans who are receiving [health insurance] termination notices because their current coverage does not conform to Health and Human Services Department rules may not realize this is by design. Maybe they trusted President Obama's repeated falsehood that people who liked their health plans could keep them. But Americans should understand that this month's mass cancellation wave has been the President's political goal since 2008. Liberals believe they must destroy the market in order to save it.”

The plans Americans wanted and were willing to pay for have been outlawed and called “substandard,” as though our kindly, benevolent, wonderful leader was saving us from something awful. The purpose of having these expensive policies many don’t want and can’t afford, is to kill the insurance market and drive people to the exchanges. The government needs those bodies!

Fall on the insurance sword in a patriotic act for the most high leader who only wants what’s best for you.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230420080457916354118031265

Benefits for gay couples, but not straight?

There are lots of reasons heterosexual couples don't get married, but live in "committed" relationships whereby benefits and legal and medical power of attorney might be helpful, or a tuition break for the girlfriend's out of wedlock teenager, or a gym membership, etc.

One or both might still be married to someone else.

If one or the other married, they might lose their alimony or a deceased spouse's benefits.

They are related to each other and live in one of the states that have consanguinity laws. One half of the states prohibit the marriage of first cousins. Some states also prohibit the marriage of a step-parent and a child, or an in-law and a child. But marriage among cousins is extremely common among immigrant groups.

One or both accept polygamy and don't wish to separate from their legal spouse.

Both have adult children from previous marriages and don't want to do anything to change the line of inheritance for wealth for their children, and prefer to take care of their partner in other ways.

They are different religions and can't come to an agreement and don't want to upset their parents.

They look down on the other's ethnicity or cultural group and don't want the association (Korean/Japanese or different first nations group or Sharia/Sunni).

They've been through a nasty divorce several times and have completely soured on the idea of marriage, but not relationships.

They are very close to former in-laws and don't wish to bring in a "new" spouse to the relationship mix.

Their place of employment has nepotism rules and one would lose a job or be transferred if they were married.

Same-Sex Benefits Ban Roils El Paso - WSJ.com

The Tax Treatment of Domestic Partner Benefits - NYTimes.com

New Benefits for Same-Sex Partners - NYTimes.com

Health Benefits: Dependent Certification - Benefits - The Ohio State University

So how long before the federal government, corporations and universities decide to be fair to straight, shacking-up couples?

Reducing health benefits

Avery Johnson reported today that "More companies are reducing health benefits or passing rising health care costs onto employees." (WSJ, 9-16-09, citing 2 surveys)

Isn't that a surprise? They knew they'd get either Hillarycare or Obamacare, they know they can't handle all the mandates, and the illegal, undocumented workers and their relatives, so they are passing along the costs.

How dumb are American employees? Don't they know how perks work? When I was employed at Ohio State, each year I received a benefits booklet. It showed two salary figures---what I was paid, and what it cost the university to employ me. The second figure was at least 25% higher than what I was paid--it added in the value of my vacation time, my sick leave, my health care, OSU's retirement contribution, plus all the other stuff I'd never use and didn't want--gymnasium use, tuition waivers, health care fairs, computer labs--so many I can't even remember them all. The advantage to "buying" your health care from your employer's plan is that it is one of those "tax loop holes" Obamacare will close in order to cover those 30 million. You'll probably soon be taxed for it off the top (because university employees had their own retirement system, we did pay into Medicare).