California State Workers Still Overpaid At $7.25 Per Hour

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has started the 2010-2011 fiscal year off right, with a state appeals court ruling yesterday that allows him to proceed with his plan to cut state workers' pay to the federal minimum wage until the state has a signed budget.

The ruling comes in a suit Schwarzenegger filed in 2008, during another delay in passing a budget, when state Comptroller John Chiang ignored his order to cease payments (beyond the federal minimum) to about 200,000 state workers. Chiang is now using the punch card defense, arguing that the minimum wage can't be implemented because of the state's antiquated payroll software.

The reduction would leave state workers making about $15,000 per year. Under normal circumstances, the average state worker makes $65,000 per year -- far more than the state's private sector workers. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, per capita personal income in California was $42,325 in 2009. (Private sector pay in the state has also, in contrast to state worker compensation, been falling throughout the recession: In 2008 per capita income was $43,852.)

Jon "Flash Report" Fleischman interviews Lynelle Jolley, Communications Director at the Department of Personnel Administration:

FLASH: Who does this effect?

JOLLEY: Virtually the entire executive branch of State government, except for those represented by unions that recently struck bargaining agreements with the Administration that make major pension concessions in exchange for continuous appropriation of their payroll. That appropriation ensures they will receive normal wages even when the budget is late, during the time their contracts are in effect.

FLASH: When does it go into effect?

JOLLEY: It covers the July pay period, which started today. Paychecks for this pay period are issued at the end of the month.

And if you pride yourself on your dedication to constitutional arcana, read the comment on Flash's story and consider your ass kicked for the day. A state worker argues that he should in fact not be getting paid at all, because the 10th Amendment denies the federal government authority over what minimum wage state governments have to pay their workers. That's dedication, people.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • AlmightyJB||

    Chicago approves tough new handgun restrictions

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201.....o_gun_laws

  • Adam Sullivan||

    That'll teach those pesky SCOTUS types.

  • Suki||

    +1

  • Pedant||

    Anyone with a functioning cerebrum could have foreseen that finding the handgun ban unconstitutional would immediately lead to states and municipalities limiting/regulating handguns to a point just short of a ban. The Court went out of its way to make clear that the Second Amendment did not forbid states from enacting such laws:

    We made it clear in Heller that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulatory measures as "prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill," "laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." We repeat those assurances here. Despite municipal respondents’ doomsday proclamations, incorporation does not imperil every law regulating firearms.

    So question to the lawyers: if the Court can make the above allowance, why does it not just come out and say what the constitutional boundaries are? Are the Justices such attention whores that they're willing to allow states to pass possibly unconstitutional laws and infringe upon civil liberties, all so they get another, separate case in which to be the center of the media spotlight? Or are they just lazy? Or do they know there's no consistent standard, so they just pull shit out of their ass on a case-by-case basis?

  • microwave oven||

    They want to wait until Kagan is on the court until such barriers are drawn.

  • ||

    The court is only allowed to rule on matters that are before it. If they went further into hypothetical cases that could come before them in the future, it would not be binding on future decisions, it would just be dicta.

  • Pedant||

    Is the prohibitionist-mollifying language in the quote above also dicta?

  • juris imprudent||

    The biggest problem in both Heller and McDonald is the Court has gone out of its way to avoid clarity on the standard of review. Had they simply said "strict scrutiny" everyone, even that roaring asshole Daley, would've known what they could not get away with and there would be no need for further litigation in DC or Chicago. Unfortunately, that spineless dickhead Kennedy is undoubtedly to blame as I'm sure he would've defected from the majority on that condition.

  • Pendulum||

    I disagree. My theory: Scalia and Alito are committed to disenfranchising felons for life, which is totally incompatible with strict scrutiny. That's why they don't articulate a standard.

  • AlmightyJB||

    "except for those represented by unions"

    So the people that actually don't do anything get to keep their inflated salaries.

  • ||

    This. Although when the contract is up things should get really interesting.

  • Adam Sullivan||

    What would be interesting would be to see these pampered state unionized employees go on strike. Strike pay from the Union is less than minimum wage. And they have to picket. And imagine what would happen if Californians realized that "Assistant Benefits Analyst III" is an un-needed job and the thousands we employ would not be missed.

    I'd love to see a public workers strike.

  • In Time Of War||

    Come to Washington, our teachers go on strike all the time.

  • xx||

    In Spain, there have already been several civil-servant strikes to protest the 5% paycut they're being forced to take.

    Nobody noticed.

    The metro workers in Madrid called a strike, and decided to violate their contractual requirement to provide minimum service requirements.....THAT got people's attention. Overall, I think the union lost in the court of public opinion, but at least they got noticed.

    We'll see how a planned general strike in September plays out.

  • Apartment Ferret Farmer||

    Read the whole thing:

    except for those represented by unions that recently struck bargaining agreements with the Administration that make major pension concessions

    They cut thier pensions...this is what the whole thing is about. Making government unionized workers take budget cuts and pay cuts. The people who are still getting payed took those cuts.

    You can't bitch about the unions that actually did the right thing.

  • ||

    Oh, you would be surprised at the things we complain about.

  • AlmightyJB||

    The only reason they took the pension cuts is that they had no choice. California can't print money nor could they possibly borrow enough to cover those outrageous pensions. Even the SEIU has to deal with reality sometimes (but only when forced to). It certainly had nothing to do with the unions "doing the right thing". I can and I will bitch about them.

  • ||

    Apartment Ferret Farmer|7.3.10 @ 12:39PM|#
    "Read the whole thing:
    except for those represented by unions that recently struck bargaining agreements with the Administration that make major pension concessions..."

    Let's just say that's a bit, uh, economical with the truth:
    "The pay cut would not apply to about 37,000 state workers represented by six unions that have tentatively agreed to concessions. However, those agreements must be approved by union membership and the Legislature."
    IOWs, some have made conditional 'promises', not accomplished fact.

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....z0seX334Uq

  • ||

    So people who are represented by a union do nothing? My husband, who, as a correctional officer, baby-sits pedophiles, sociopaths, murderers, rapists, and any other detriment of society you can think of is only worth $7.25/hr? Working everyday with the possibility of getting shanked, jumped, "gassed" (look it up, it's really pleasant), or catching some blood born illness like Hep C, AIDS, or even TB does nothing? Do you realize how ignorant you are? What do YOU do for a living? Yeah, $7.25/hr. is enough to pay our basic bills and mortgage. Sure. Before you go ahead and judge people, maybe you should try to put on their shoes for a DAY and see how long you last.

  • JoshINHB||

    His Job's sure not worth 120K a year.

  • ||

    I would like to know where you got your statistics .How about Arnold telling the Feds. to take over the healthcare of the Inmates if they didn't like the way the State was handling it. How about Inmates that get hormone shots 3 times a day at $1,200 a shot when it's not life threatening but just because they want to be a girl in a mens prison.How about Inmates getting their teeth fixed while in the military they just pull them out.

  • ||

    Well, no. What the government has done is say they will pay $7.25 an hour right now and until the budget is finalized, then they will pay the balance owed of the regular salaries.

    Of course, if the CA legislature is incapable of getting their heads out of their asses, then $7.25 per hour sticks indefinitely.

    Oh, and the public union worker who got sued to force him to cut these reduced paychecks is in the pockets of the public workers' union to the tune of six figures in reelection campaign contributions, and is making noises about ignoring the current court order too.

  • Atanarjuat||

    Go check out the unemployment rate for private sector workers, then quit yer bitchin.

  • JohnD||

    If he is a corrections officer, he is getting paid about what he's worth. Mst of those guys are thugs and bullies who get their jollies by abusing prisioners.

  • ||

    ah, libertarian broad brush bigotry.

    kind of reminds me of "progressive bigotry"...

  • ||

    I know, all these supposed free-marketeers are so sure they know what this person's job is really worth, and what he should really be paid. Or they write him off as a thug and a bully who deserves whatever us ethical folk want to throw at him. Meanwhile, the market, i.e. voters, is demanding more and more jails, which presumably need people to staff them. Unfortunately, the real problem here (which should be familiar to most real libertarians) is that Americans want a lot of social services, but they don't want to be taxed to pay for them.

  • ||

    My husband, who, as a correctional officer

    Live by the state die by the state...or at least go broke by the state.

    Anyway unless you are blind the whole rest of the county has lost millions of jobs. Most in the private sector and not represented by a union. your Husband only got a temporary pay cut because his union refuses to realize that the state that pays him is as broke as the rest of us.

  • ||

    Tammy, your husband's union spends large amounts of money to keep victimless crimes punishable by long prison sentences.

    Wanting to lock up a guy selling pot for 25 years because you have no marketable skills, other than being a meathead with a nightstick, is deplorable.

    Also, if you are going to justify your husband's pay based upon the danger inherent in his job, then you should provide some statistics showing that his job is more hazardous than other jobs. Disregarding, of course, that a job should pay in relation to market value instead of physical danger or exertion.

  • ||

    Physical danger and exertion affect the supply side of the market value formula, so it's not correct to say pay shouldn't depend on them. Also, you're dealing with a monopoly employer, so the process of setting wages is perverted anyway. It's hard to assess market value.

  • ||

    Good for you! Tammy G!
    I agree

  • Rob Robideau||

    It's a deal at half the price!

  • ||

    Great alt text. One of his best one liners.

  • Some Guy||

    Of course we all know that they'll approve something before July is over, so this will never actually happen. But whatever.

    This is just like an epic, "We're going to lay off every teacher in the state" headline that comes every August.

  • Rachael||

    How do we know they are going to pass it before the end of July? Have you lived in this state the last few years? Do you remember how long it took the legislature to agree on a budget last year?

  • Steve Chaos||

    +1 for the Total Recall alt-text reference.

  • Brian Trust||

    From the linked article:

    But the ruling would not actually save the state money: State workers who experience pay cuts would be reimbursed once a state budget is in place. Most state employees are paid at the end of the month, so if a budget is in place before the end of July, they would not receive a reduced paycheck.

    So big deal. The workers feel a pinch for a short time, but they pay will just increase temporarily once a budget is in place.

  • ||

    I betcha ole Arnolds salary didt drop at all. What a joke.

    Lou
    www.anon-surfing.at.tc

  • Graham Wellington||

    Alright, I'm starting to question the 'bot' status of these posts...

  • ||

    If I remember correctly, he waived the salary when he took office.

  • ||

    He gets $1/year.

  • anarch||

    bot gets $1/year?

  • Almanian||

    ...and worth every penny of it!

  • ||

    That's all he needs!

  • Rachael||

    He has elected to receive no pay for his governating services. I can understand your comment, but it does not apply in this specific situation.

  • ||

    Does this mean Arnold is a Republican again?

  • BakedPenguin||

    He never stopped being one. Being GOP means never having to be sorry about big government, just making the occasional mealy-mouthed platitude about smaller government.

  • ||

    It was a rhetorical question, but I comprehend your potato.

  • State Worker||

    Can I get paid minimum wage to riot?

  • rsb||

    arnold's salary is $1 per year.

  • kp||

    Arnold is already worth over $200 million. He doesn't need the dollar.

  • .||

    But he needs the prestige and power. Why else do it?

  • ||

    He likes his state and wants to see it run better...

    It does seem impossible but you forget he did replace perhaps the worse Governor in history. Gray Davis.

  • JoshINHB||

    Can I get paid minimum wage to riot?

    No that's a violation of SEIU work rules.

    You can't do it for less than $25hr.

  • ||

    A state worker argues that he should in fact not be getting paid at all, because the 10th Amendment denies the federal government authority over what minimum wage state governments have to pay their workers. That's dedication, people.

    This kinda cheered me up. Then I remembered that the rest of his colleagues probably don't feel the same way.

    Any word on whether or not Ahnold and his staff are taking in minimum wage?

  • ||

    Boy, you'd think some folks would do a bit of research...
    He gets $1/year. Probably illegal.

  • ||

    Chiang is now using the punch card defense, arguing that the minimum wage can't be implemented because of the state's antiquated payroll software.


    _________________________________________________

    The system was designed more than 60 years ago and was last revamped in 1970.


    ___________________________________________________

    A-fucking-mazing. I can't even make a SWAG at the anount of money California has wasted by not upgrading it's payroll system since 1970 (using 1968 technology at best).

    You can bet there are fossilized unionized employees making $100K a year keep the antiquated piece of shit sputtering along. You could have started working for the California comptroller in payroll in 1970 and never had to upgrade your accounting or computer skills for your entire fucking career.

    Now some state worshipping dipshit (likely a government employeee) should be along to inform us (again) that state workers are payed more than their private sector counterparts due to greater education, responsibility and skills.

  • Astrid||

    I have an Amiga in my basement if California needs some new equipment. Though on a serious note, what the fuck have they been spending money on for the past 40 years?

  • ||

    I'm seriously flabbergasted here. What the hell are they using? Univac 418-IIIs and teletypes for I/O devices?

    We're talking about goddamed core memory here folks.

  • -||

    Do you know what the IRS is using? Sometimes obsolescence is a good thing.

  • BakedPenguin||

    C'mon, J sub - do you expect those Fortran and COBOL programmers to learn something new?

  • ||

    Isn't most of China still using the abacus?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Could be - almost certainly in the sticks. I know it's still used a lot in rural Russia.

  • ||

    Can an abacus count to a trillion?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Too busy with fusion to Google?

    From a cursory look at this Wiki page, they only count millions (up to 9,999,999).

  • ||

    Too busy with fusion to Google?

    Yes. Not that my remark wasn't a rhetorical one.

  • CE||

    Hey, an abacus never runs out of power, and can't be hacked.

  • ||

    I'm personally skeptical of the punch card defense. Not because I know anything about the state's computer systems, but because
    a) Chiang made it clear in 2008 he was on the side of unions and was going to do his best to block any pay reductions (either the minimum wage stunt or furloughs) and thus is untrustworthy on the subject and
    b) adjustments for the furloughs went through just fine.

  • Suki||

    Similar to b) was the first thing that came to mind and I'll bet his little system handles raises just fine.

  • juris imprudent||

    You think someone programmed the pay system to only use absolute values?

  • xx||

    After all, negative numbers MUST be a mistake!

  • CE||

    Just like in the ratings agencies' housing price change models, circa 2005....

  • JoshINHB||

    You can bet there are fossilized unionized employees making $100K a year keep the antiquated piece of shit sputtering along. You could have started working for the California comptroller in payroll in 1970 and never had to upgrade your accounting or computer skills for your entire fucking career.

    Not quite right.
    If you started in 1970 you would've retired in 2000 with a 120k year pension.

  • Hobie Hanson||

    "the average state worker makes $65,000 per year -- far more than the state's private sector workers."

    That's because the state doesn't run fast-food joints, discount retailers, and gas stations. The jobs the state offers are always going to skew toward the skilled, high paying side of the spectrum.

  • Astrid||

    So could you explain to me the sort of skilled labor it takes for the lady at the DMV to hand me a ticket with a number on it?

  • Steff||

    Ha! Really? Most of the ones I've met couldn't find their asses with both hands. They barely know English. And their service is horrible.

  • Knee Jerk||

    They barely know English.

    Racist!

  • ||

    What pray tell is racist about a government employee who cannot formulate a sentence in the language said employee's instructions are given in?

    That this occurs at taxpayer expense is shameful at best.

  • Knee Jerk||

    Um, it was snark?

  • Almanian||

    Snarkist!

  • tarran||

    That's because the state doesn't run fast-food joints, discount retailers, and gas stations

    That's because those types of businesses require competence to keep from going bankrupt. Most state employees are unfit for even those jobs.

  • Rachael||

    You apparently don't know all the jobs that state workers are employed to do (or for that matter, many state workers.) Whatever populatol you are getting

  • Rachael||

    I was trying to say (before my computer freaked out on me) that whatever population you are basing your statistical analysis on is a very small pool of state workers with some of the more rudimentary jobs (apparently) which would definitely give you inaccurate data, so I suppose it can be forgiven.

  • microwave oven||

    The average founder of Google gets paid $1. Somehow I think this average stuff is a bunch of bullshit.

  • Butts Wagner||

    Hobie Hanson, You're Weird

  • JoshINHB||

  • JohnD||

    personally, I've never met a skilled state worker. I think that must be a myth.

  • ||

    Prescience is a gift. I try not to abuse it.

    Now some state worshipping dipshit (likely a government employeee) should be along to inform us (again) that state workers are payed more than their private sector counterparts due to greater education, responsibility and skills.
  • microwave oven||

    Also no stock options and bonuses. And there is a salary cap. Just saying.

  • ||

    I've never had stock options but I have received bonuses in both public and private sector employment.

  • ||

    Unless Hobie is "real", I suspect that was a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • ||

    I thought you cheated. Good one.

  • microwave oven||

    Also no stock options and bonuses. And there is a salary cap. Just saying.

  • CE||

    I've received thousands of stock options, all of which turned out to be worthless. But the state stood ready to cash in its share, just in case they were....

  • ||

    The link to the interview goes to SF Gate, not the Flash Report.

  • Tim Cavanaugh||

    Damn technology. Fixed now. Thanks for the heads up.

  • S||

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCEeAn6_QJo
    Here in this Fucking hole we call L.A.
    The only way to fix it is to flush it all away
    Any fucking time, any fucking day
    Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona Bay

  • ||

    "Who does this effect?"

    How does this question work? You point at a common result and ask "Who does this?"

  • robc||

    Off Topic but interesting to some here: I have the song Galacian Girls stuck in my head. Problem - I only no one verse and I also have no idea what a baliset sounds like, so I dont need if Im internally singing it correctly.

    In case you were wondering how it got stuck there, I was thinking about all the water I was wasting as I was cleaning up after homebrewing today.

  • -||

    What was the question?

  • zoltan||

    Sweet threadjack, robc.

  • Rick||

    While I agree that these workers make too much, this solution won't work. These people are voters, and all it will take is a candidate who will promise to restore these salaries. This is the problem of having people become dependent on the government. When the government needs to make cuts, which affect people, those people will vote in their interests.

    These jobs should be phased out gradually to let the private sector take over. This will take time, but it has a more chance of sticking.

  • ||

    Removing their franchise would be a good idea. Along with breaking the backs of the government employee unions.

  • ||

    Yes, forbidding government employees and people who are supported by state subsidies from voting would probably be an ideal simple rule that would limit the creeping expansion of power.

    There would be much less incentive for people to vote themselves money from the treasury. Or, anyway, they could only do it once.

    But it's unlikely to happen any time soon. Maybe when the inevitable financial collapse happens, people will be so pissed off at people supported by state funding that this idea will get some traction.

  • ||

    well, an ideal simple rule that goes against the very core of our nation's political system - one man (woman, non-gender specific human), one vote.

  • PR||

    Someone with integrity would recuse themself from voting to enrich themselves at everyone else's expense. There is a difference between being a public servant and feeding at the trough.

  • ||

    Rick|7.3.10 @ 4:58PM|#
    "While I agree that these workers make too much, this solution won't work. These people are voters, and all it will take is a candidate who will promise to restore these salaries...."

    Possibly.
    But remember the democrats are owned by the unions. Hitting the owners in the pocket book may be a good tactic to show those owned aren't capable of delivering the goods.

  • ||

    At least this makes forest fires and mudslides more enjoyable. Only government workers can afford those kind of houses.

  • Kolohe||

    Chiang is now using the punch card defense,
    As was said above, how the heck does Chiang and his peeps handle pay raises, step increases, promotions, and all that jazz?

  • ||

    I think people need to remember that not all state workers get earn that $65,000 annual salary stated in the above article. I am a maintenance for Jedediah State Parks and barely make enough to support my family. If it wasn't for my wife to luckily get a job we might be on the street with kids! I agree that too many state workers (the ones that wear a suit all day) do get paid too much! The laborers are the one that lose out during times like these.

  • ||

    Joey|7.3.10 @ 11:03PM|#
    "I think people need to remember that not all state workers get earn that $65,000 annual salary stated in the above article. I am a maintenance for Jedediah State Parks and barely make enough to support my family. If it wasn't for my wife to luckily get a job we might be on the street with kids!"
    Well, there's a couple of questions here:
    1) What does it take to fire someone in your position?
    2) You chose this job knowing it wasn't highly paid?
    3) What are your benefits?

    "I agree that too many state workers (the ones that wear a suit all day) do get paid too much! The laborers are the one that lose out during times like these."
    Uh, 'class politics' is pretty tired.

  • ||

    Chang, the Treasurer says the State's computer software lacks the ability to change the paychecks down to $7.25 per hour. You can all draw your own conclusions from that one.

  • ||

    People ought to really get a grip here: the issue for all of us is that living wages and benefits, for which unions fought since the Great Depession--this is all being taken away. Where are our factories? Where are the skilled jobs? Can today's smug computer geek get dirty and help repair the nations collapsed, antiquated infrastructure?

    Also, not all state workers are rude, over-weight, poor english speaking DMV workers. Focus on the fact that there are fewer and fewer honest ways to make a living these days. That is your real problem, friends.

    Lastly, were you STUPID enough to have voted for this fascist, imported freak-show that we're supposed to believe is a governor? SHAME ON YOU AND YOUR STUPIDITY IF YOU DID!

  • ||

    I'm trying to figure out whether to applaud the sarcastic parody of liberal thinking here, or to be appalled because this is a real person saying such idiocies and who actually believes such shite.

  • ||

    Can today's smug computer geek get dirty and help repair the nations collapsed, antiquated infrastructure?

    They probably have a better shot than the average state employee. At least they won't demand five weeks vacation and a defined-benefit pension plan.

  • ||

    As a state employee i would like to see that $65000 a year... show me where this comes from.... and if your so mad at our wages, then simply apply for the job... you say were overpaid, then join us... I dont see how my wages that come from federal funding will make a difference in this states general fund... but then again lets bail out big corporations and blame the state worker for this dilema we face... I would like to see how much notice it will make if state workers walked... then you will cry for us to go back to work to process your unemployment checks, process your DMV issues, gaurd your family from those sent to prison...

  • ||

    haha! Please quit your job. Please oh please oh please.

  • Brian Trust||

    You're a CA state worker but your wages come from federal funding, which means taxpayers from other states are paying your wages? And you think this is okay?

    Also, if you check around, you'd notice that the government bailing out corporations and banks isn't something cheered for around here either.

    There are plenty of areas in which the government doesn't need to be involved, which would mean far far fewer state employed workers. So go ahead and walk, please.

  • josey||

    ...you say were overpaid, then join us...

    No, you fucking leech -- instead, why don't you try doing a job that people actually want you to do.

    Here's a foolproof way to tell if that's the case: when your customers actuall wants the service you're providing, you won't need to threaten them in order to get their business.

    When the tax court sentences someone to prison because they didn't want to purchase the service you're currently providing, you're standing right there next to the officers who drag him away. The billy club and the Glock might as well be in your own hand -- that's how you make your living.

  • Kid Fisto||

    Get in there you big furry oaf! I don't care what you smell!

  • ||

    So - as a private sector employee - I have to wonder why the current public sector employees don't push for a tax cut and a hiring freeze.

    1) You don't have as much competition coming up for your higher level job (unless you've never been promoted and seniority rules have gone out the window.)
    2) You keep your high pay
    3) You earn above the State's median pay - by our 'Progressive' tax rules you're already paying more back in taxes than the rest of us (except for the high school burger-flippers)
    4) You take the moral high ground in the fight. The 'Look what we sacrificed!!!' type crap.

    I call out all State employees - Do the smart thing and promote a tax-cut!!!

  • ||

    I would like to see how much notice it will make if state workers walked...

    Atlas Shrugged reflux?

  • ||

    to "Tulpa": what is that attempt at esoteric metaphor supposed to mean? Address the issue: scapegoating state workers during the greatest economic collapse since our ancestors were in bread-lines.

  • ||

    It's not an "economic collapse". It's higher than average unemployment due in part to braindead increases in the minimum wage plus stifling of business investment due to worries about what crap the federal government will do next.

  • ||

    No, dead wrong. We can barely produce anything anymore. Do you have any idea what is happening in OH, MI, IN, upstate NY, etc? Have you seen the actual conditions of our infrastructure? It's fourth of July weekend and "what British brawn was unable to obtain throw brute force she has obtained through free-trade"-young Abe Lincoln, circa 1844.

    It's the worst economic collapse in history and it is nowhere near over.

  • ||

    List of countries by GDP:

    1 United States 14,256,275
    2 Japan 5,068,059
    3 People's Republic of China 4,908,982
    4 Germany 3,352,742
    5 France 2,675,951
    6 United Kingdom 2,183,607

  • ||

    Do you have any idea what is happening in OH, MI, IN, upstate NY, etc?

    Yes. People are moving from areas whose economies are centered on dying industries to areas of the country that are more productive.

    Were you lamenting when all the gold rush towns in Nevada and California decayed to the point of nonexistence?

  • ||

    I'm sure gdobbs is upset about the decline of our formerly thriving buggy whip manufacturing sector too.

  • ||

    It's the worst economic collapse in history and it is nowhere near over.

    So now you're claiming the economic downturn that Obama's idiotic economic policies have made worse is now even worse then the Great Depression FDR caused?

  • ||

    Oh, and it's not "scapegoating state workers" if the amount being paid state workers is the cause of the fucking problem -- which it is.

    You can only scapegoat the nonculpable.

  • ||

    Government IT mantra:

    "COBOL today, COBOL tomorrow, COBOL forever!...God help us!

  • ||

    COBOL and governmental efficiencies: Ditch your COBOL contractors at your own risk, as the Governor of California found out. (12/01/2009)

  • PR||

    Civil service reform. It's coming MNG. It's coming for you.

  • CE||

    Back off those COBOL programmers. They saved us from the Y2K meltdown, remember.

  • ||

    amazing times we live in. 15 BILLION shelled out for welfare most being illegals from mexico per year. and poor working middle class getting screwed by its nazi Governator. Cut the welfare budget problem solved.

  • zoltan||

    [Citation please]

  • dave||

    you people that think the cut is good are wrong. correctional officers are taking cuts are you kidding me. who works in a prison for 7.25 and hr. you go work in a priosn and risk getting killed

  • ||

    This story reports state employees wages average are $65,000.00 per year per the Department of Personnel Administration. I have to wonder why when people refer to that table they never report that the footnote attached to it states that the average wage reported covers full-time and part-time state employees in Executive Branch. I have not been able to find the average wage of state employees but no one I work with locally makes that amount of money and looking at other saleries in the state jobs it is my personal opinon that the average wage of state employees is no where near $65,000.00. I say check your sources and then maybe your story will change or does it not really matter what a state employee gets psid because the attitude is one of hang em high. Consider that California state employees per capita are in the bottom 10% which means that we do a whole lot more with less.

  • Andy||

    Those who think Tim Cavanaugh's article hold's accurate stats and facts should review the article in the Sacramento Bee @ www.sacbee.com/2010/07/06/2870.....-this.html

    ...Arnold is just an Actor(or an ex-weightlifter, depending on how you look at it) and it should have remained that way.

  • Sal||

    Fuck yourself you pussy

  • ||

    The 10th ammendment does say that BUT California hasn't repealed their own state minimum wage. So the workers SHOULD DEFINIETLY be getting paid but at the standard that the state of California sets not the federal goverment. So concider YOUR ASS kicked.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement