4 ms·
All I said is that it might be excessive to pay 40% of public employee's individually [1] 40k more a year than the median household income [2] in the area. Don
by rkk3 5y ago
All I said is that it might be excessive to pay 40% of public employee's individually [1] 40k more a year than the median household income [2] in the area.
Don't equate that with arguing for Austerity.
https://www.openthebooks.com/forbes-why-san-francisco-is-in-trouble--19000-highly-compensated-city-employees-earned-150000-in-pay--perks/ https://www.openthebooks.com/forbes-why-san-francisco-is-in-... [1]
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/sanfranciscocitycalifornia https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/sanfranciscocitycalifornia [2]
- all2well 5y agoAre you not arguing that public sector employees in San Francisco should get a pay cut?
- rkk3 5y agoNot really, all I did was question the OP scoffing that an 150k salary is not a lot of money. My mother is a public school teacher.
- kesselvon 5y agoIt's not a lot of money in San Francisco, where you're fighting with every tech company employee for housing
- rkk3 5y agoDo you have a quantitive way of making the distinction of what "a lot" is? 150k is substantially more than the average SF household, and is about 83 percentile for individuals. https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/ https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/
- bobthepanda 5y agoAverage home prices in SF is 1.3M, so a household of two teachers would give them a P/E ratio of 5. The P/E ratio for the average US home is 4.4. Are teachers overpaid, or are people in SF underpaid relative to the value of a house?
- kesselvon 5y agoa P/E ratio of 4.4 is nuts. The fact that we normalized that is wild. Same for committing 30% of net income to housing.