Education

The U.S. government's general system pay scale in a nutshell

Reports indicate that those working for the government pull in slightly higher salaries than their private industry counterparts. In this blog, I take a look at the U.S. government's general system pay scale.

Last time in this blog, I provided some details from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that indicate employees for the federal government are better paid than private sector employees. I promised in the last part of that blog to attempt to explain the government's general system pay scale (the pay scale that is geared toward those in administrative or professional roles).

I wish I hadn't promised that because in doing research on the topic, I thought my eyes were going to spin out of my head. But I'll attempt to explain it here and, if you're the type who likes to dabble in molecular biology, you should be fine picking up the finer points. So here we go:

The system consists of 15 grades (or levels), starting at GS-1 and continuing to GS-15. (Employees aren't always hired in at the GS-1 level; some are hired in above that due to prior experience or a college education. If you had a great academic career, then you could qualify for Superior Academic Achievement, which would qualify you for a GS-7 position.)

Within each grade, there are 10 steps that can increase your pay by about 3% at each step (this is in addition to pay adjustments in response to pay increase in the private sector, like a cost-of-living raise).

Got that? Yeah, me neither.

Let's continue. You can expect to receive a raise by moving up one step at a time within your grade, EXCEPT FOR:

  • A one-year waiting period for the first three step increases;
  • Then a two-year waiting period for the next three increases;
  • Then a three-year waiting period for the next step increases.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Those waiting periods? They hold unless a federal supervisor authorizes a QSI (quality step increase) in between. Or their particular position is on a "career ladder."

A career ladder lets someone who is hired in at, for example, GS-5 to skip up to GS-7 if he does well on the learning curve.

Figure A shows the outline of the General System Pay Scale.

Figure A

OK, this is actually a DNA molecule, but that's what the system looks like in my head.

Now, as convoluted as this system appears, I can see where it would have advantages over the salary systems in the private sector. For example, sometimes companies in the private sector will try to satisfy an employee's desire to move up by assigning a new title but no increase in salary. This, of course, wouldn't be possible in the government system.

In the coming weeks, I'll be looking at other factors that differentiate between working in government vs. private industry.

About

Toni Bowers is Managing Editor of TechRepublic and is the award-winning blogger of the Career Management blog. She has edited newsletters, books, and web sites pertaining to software, IT career, and IT management issues.

43 comments
drowningnotwaving
drowningnotwaving

... had me on the floor. I trust you wont mind when I steal that DNA comparison (and take full personal credit, of course!) ??

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

Non-Government employees are reluctant to openly question or criticize the pay and benefits of government employees. I've seen it too many times. Government employees have it made in the shade; I - AND THEY - know that for a fact, regardless of the spin they try to put on it. Government employees have a ticket on a gravy train, while the non-government employees are paying the fare. Without debate, government employees earn more and have better benefits; and it's ALL ON THE BACKS of the taxpayers - and on the back of the debt being passed on to future generations (including their very own kids). Government employees are not, for the most part, [i]public servants[/i], but rather public leaches. I'll stand by my words, because the [i]"who serves whom"[/i] question is obvious. Let the flames begin. Edit: It should go without saying (but I guess I have to say it). I'm talking about the civilian government workforce, not the military.

melekali
melekali

...it is very stable and really not that complicated.

Greenman76
Greenman76

I'm sorry I don't see how the system is complicated. Every job has a GS rating or range attached to it. A janitor position can range from GS-1 to GS-3 while a secretary GS-5 to GS-6. A degree can be used in place of experience when applying. A bachelor's degree will get you into a GS-5 posistion for example. In order to move up you need at least a years experience in the previous rating. So far pretty simple. Now I've never worked anywhere that everyone doing the same job made the exact same amount of money. This is where the steps come in. Yes they do go up periodically as stated. If someone works as a secretary their whole life and never moves up into management, they would still get pay raises. They will eventually max out at GS-6 step 10. In order to move up in the GS level you would need a move to a higher rated position. One thing people fail to realize with Federal employment, It's Union! I've never seen a Union that doesn't give yearly raises and have a set pay schedule. If you're not good at counting I can see how this would be confusing. The yearly raise has nothing to do with the grade scale. This was a law that Ronald Reagan had put into place to help match Federal pay with inflation. So far every president since it was put into law has opted to use the economic hardship clause to keep from giving the full amount. You say you did research? Did you just click on the first link that came up on your google/bing search?

shodges119
shodges119

There are several things not even mentioned in this article. When comparing Federal IT against Private sector jobs. Does the Private Sector Job require a Security Clearance. This can range from secret to TS SCI with Lifestyle Poly. Huge difference in pay. A program manager in the private sector probably does not hold this clearance, so the position becomes harder to fill. Also DISA has installed 8570 Compliancy as a mandate which require IA Certification along with Platform Certification. Senior Managers are now to some degree required to have a CISSP and a Platform Cert such as CCNP/MCIPT or MCSE. If your IT billet is in an Acquisistion Billet you also have to get level 1,2 and 3 level certified for contracting. I would take this into consideration when trying to compare apples to oranges. It would be more like comparing a PHD to a bachelors. The requirements are insane and thus why people find it very difficult to even get a call back when applying for a government position. It would cost too much to get the individual cleared and certified for administrative access. Therefore they pay more for these requirements to already be met. This is a response to both subjects about Federal Pay and comaparing to public jobs. I posted here instead of posting to both.

LocoLobo
LocoLobo

The system is convoluted, obfuscatory and overly complex on purpose. This allows the flexibility to the individual agencies and supervisors to allow or deny pay increases to individual employees. Since the rules are impossible to understand, an astute manager can always find a phrase that will support what they are doing.

DC_Federal_Employee
DC_Federal_Employee

Nice job with taking a complex pay system and breaking it down for anyone to understand. Not an easy task. Probably the #1 reason for federal pay creeping up and in some cases surpassing private sector has to do with the GS pay scale 'creep'. In addition to moving up in steps on the pay scale federal employees also get an across-the-board pay hike every January ranging from 1-4% depending on locality. So some employees really get two raises a year depending on what step level they are at. Also, the January pay raise expands the pay scales so they keep on moving up. Using the DC area as an example here are the scales for 2010: http://opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/dcb.asp now compare with 2009: http://opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/dcb.asp now compare with...let's say 2005: http://opm.gov/oca/05tables/html/dcb.asp Once an employee reaches step 10 and their position doesn't allow/require for a higher grade level they can either a: get a higher grade job at another agency or b: stay put as a GS-xx step 10 and still watch their salary increase. Just look at the pay charts above to see.

TheChas
TheChas

I don't begrudge the government workers I have had personal contact with a single penny of what they are paid. While my most common contact has been with the State DMV, I have had contact with other local police, fire and city hall workers. The abuse I see these people put up with from the general public makes me wonder how they can handle the stress. Form not filled out right, take it out on the clerk. Wrong or missing documents, take it out on the clerk. Property tax or water bill higher than you would like, take it out on the clerk. Pulled over for a traffic law violation, take it out on the officer. When you pay the fine, take it out again on the clerk. On a recent trip to the DMV, the clerk wanted to jump over the counter and hug me. If possible, she would have given me a discount. Why? I had all of my forms correctly filled out, Had all of the information that was needed, and had actually read the sign and knew I had to pay a fee for using a credit card. Bonus, I did not complain to the clerk about anything. So yes, I think that government workers (at least those who deal directly with the public) deserve every penny they earn. Now, the managers and directors who scrimp all year and then spend any leftover funds lavishly, I don't feel the same about them. On the other hand, that is part of the system that needs to change. Funds not spent for the intended benefit to the public should not be able to be spent on office decor or accouterments. I am also a firm believer that the pay scale for elected officials should be tied to how well they help or hurt the public. I would like to see all elected officials and top level department managers have their pay tied to the median after tax income of the population they serve. Chas

jmarkovic32
jmarkovic32

While the rest of us have to take pay cuts or endure salary freezes, if the government is in debt, they just pass a bullsh** law that gives themselves a raise on the already strapped taxed payers. There's no such thing as a "bad quarter" in the public sector. They just raise taxes. I guess the private sector can raise the prices of their goods and services as well, but consumers can choose not to pay it. Let us try to choose not to pay our taxes and see what happens. The fact that it's Union makes it twice as bad. They'll never be able to downsize or cut salaries when revenue doesn't meet expectations, they'll just pull the noose tighter on the American tax payer.

teeeceee
teeeceee

My father who was a WWII Army AF vet and a 33 year GS employee in army aviation, was once called a "blood sucker on the government" by a person on the street in DC. I know he worked long and hard hours in Corpus Christi TX during the Viet Nam incursion turning shot up and wrecked helicopters back around to fly again, and serve our troops. Later in his career in GS management, he was instrumental in selling helicopters and support activities to foreign governments, including Iran, before its revolution. He was sitting in the hall outside the Shah's office when Henry Kissinger made the deal with him, that got all of the other oil producing countries (read Saudi Arabia) ticked off enough to form OPEC. He worked hard and conscientiously did his job, while others that were paid more than him did not. He often mentioned the engineers (GS) in his building at AVSCOM in St. Louis that did nothing but read newspapers and magazines all day. Years later I was hired into a GS 9 position at Aviano AFB (NATO) in Italy. The position was created for me (I was the only cert, the deputy commander made sure of that) so that I could be prepared to replace the departing section chief for a Data Automation Shop in the 31st FW stationed there. In that position, I worked my ass off, in an overworked shop (3 people including myself, 1 other GS, and one NAF employee)that supported 450 PCs, various servers that ran lodging, and food, internet cafes, phones, etc, and anything else associated with IT that plugged into the wall receptacle and some that did not. Meanwhile there were many GS 9's over there that spent their time at the golf course, or goofing off, or doing nothing all day, day in and day out. Thank goodness I am not there anymore, and have a niche IT job as systems manager for a trustee of the US courts. Looking at the pay scales published in this thread, I make more now than I would have if I had stayed in GS and was still in Italy, and without all of the killer stress that came with that section chief job working for the USAFE. By the way, many of the GS people over there, include logistical support (housing and lots of other things paid for) and COLA that boosts salaries way above the private sector. My wife was a DODEA school teacher there, and she got the "full ride" She grossed close to 100K as a middle school teacher on the base there. Another gripe I have is that almost all GS job postings are overly complex, with specific requirements listed that intentionally are designed to exclude private sector applicants from qualifying, so that the functional unit that has a fill can hire someone internally or locally, that they can "Cert" for the job, thus playing favorites, and being able to get whomever they want to fill a job, while excluding more qualified applicants. Now, flame about these witnessed truths as you despair about the massive deficits!

Dr_Zinj
Dr_Zinj

Anyone who thinks they're paid too much is cordially invited to first spend a year in Iraq or Afghanistan at the same pay and conditions for a first term enlistee. Then we'll talk.

santeewelding
santeewelding

But beside the point. When it hits the fan, I mused today, unionized correctional personnel will cause a general lockup, cut power and water, walk off the job, throwing the keys over their shoulder, and solve that problem in a great big hurry. Faster so in winter. What the hell are you going to do about it?

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

[i]...government employees earn more and have better benefits; and it's ALL ON THE BACKS of the taxpayers... [/i] That may true at state level, but bears only a mild resemblance to truth at the federal level. Federal employees have most of the same deductions from pay that you do: Income tax, FICA withholding, medical/dental, and retirement/401k. Like you, federal employees also pay state income tax in their state of residence, as well as property tax, sales tax, and any other applicable taxes. As for the rest of your post, having been a government employee for over 75% of my working life, all I'll say is that, in my on-the-job experience, public leaches do exist, but not nearly in the numbers you suppose.

makinuptime
makinuptime

Great job on IT Pros and security. I would appreciate if you would continue on and fill in all aspects missed in original articles. She didn't have the words(article number)to do it justice. You seem to have some insight. Please take it away!!

Kam Guerra
Kam Guerra

There's really no difference in pay between no clearance and clearance.

tsmith71553
tsmith71553

no difference here, private vs public sector ...

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

There's a HUGE difference between vital government functions - military, fire protection, police protection, et al - and government [i]social engineering[/i] functions and/or government tasks that could be filled by private enterprise. Why am I seemingly the only one who makes that distinction? But no, whenever I call for [i]less government[/i], people cite military, fire, and police, and suggest I want to do away with those things. It's disingenuous at best, extremely dishonest at worst. By the way, I read a story recently about cops in Oregon who makes more than a quarter of a million dollars a year - and they get away with it because of their union contracts. You people who LOVE big government and make excuses for it are ......... (restrain yourself, Maxwell).

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

People look out for their own best interest, and they pursue their future accordingly. Government workers are no different. However, the government is taking advantage of this. Having said that, I do begrudge the government employment schemes (and other schemes) that draw people into their ranks. I also begrudge the unionization of government workers for a variety of reasons. I also begrudge the government for paying an individual a certain amount of $$ (pay and benefits) without putting those tasks out to bid, so to speak. One example: The government pays a civil engineer well into the six figures (plus GREAT benefits) to do the same thing a private sector civil engineer is paid $75k per year to do. Is that being fair to the taxpayer? I suggest not. If the government shouldn't award [i]no bid contracts[/i] to companies (like Halliburton) for BIG tasks, why shouldn't they also put any number of tasks out to bid? Moreover, civilian government workers retire on the backs of the taxpayer, while private workers, for the most part, have to provide for their own retirement. The government civil engineer, for example, can retire with upwards of 80 percent pay at the ripe old age of 57, while the private sector civil engineer will be forced to work into his/her 60s and 70s to pay for it. Like I asked, who really [i]serves[/i] whom? You're from Michigan, Chas, and you should be an eye witness to the damage unionization can do to an industry. And what has happened to Michigan and the auto industry is a warning to what will happen to government. Unionization of government employees, in my opinion, is on the list of the top five things that will destroy America from within. And you and I are paying that bill!

jonrosen
jonrosen

I know how much some of this is true. The whole 'union' thing in particular being that unless you pretty much go up to someone and kill them, you cannot get fired from being a government employee. This goes for the post office (yep, the good old snail mail people) to people who were hired for jobs they should have only been contractors for. Now, I will admit that the gov't and the workers for it have a place. But if, like the USPS, they've got hundreds if not millions of people where there isn't enough work for them to do anything, we shouldn't be paying FULL wages to someone to sit at home and do nothing. Just like people in the office shouldn't have their only work be 'makework' because 'well, we hired them, we can;'t fire them, need them to do something I guess'

Retired_USAF
Retired_USAF

YOUR COMMENT: Another gripe I have is that almost all GS job postings are overly complex, with specific requirements listed that intentionally are designed to exclude private sector applicants from qualifying, so that the functional unit that has a fill can hire someone internally or locally, that they can "Cert" for the job, thus playing favorites, and being able to get whomever they want to fill a job, while excluding more qualified applicants. MY REPLY: You are do off base here. First of all, yes, veterans are given hiring preferences, which they should. Second, "job postings are overly complex" is a crock of manure. When I first got out of the USAF, I refused to work in the government (state or federal). Then after time, I considered it. After looking at the job postings, I gained core "requirements" from my CIVILIAN POSITIONS. Finally, as a knit-picker, you are also wrong about "...Aviano AFB (NATO) in Italy..." THERE ARE NO AIR FORCE BASES overseas in foreign countries (non-US possessions, etc), OFFICIALLY THEY ARE CALLED "AIR BASES" (NO "FORCE" IN THE NAME). Before you give an example like Guam Andersen AFB, Guam, keep in mind that that is a US Possession, not a "foreign country", so my comment of THERE ARE NO AIR FORCE BASES overseas in foreign countries (non-US possessions, etc), OFFICIALLY THEY ARE CALLED "AIR BASES" (NO "FORCE" IN THE NAME), still apply. Also before you use an example like RAF (Royal Air Force) Fairford, England to dispute my commemt..my comment still applies, because that is a Royal Air Force (English - Great Britian's military) base that has US military assigned to it.

Retired_USAF
Retired_USAF

Your statement is actually incorrect, sort of. People in the Military, and ones that just recently got out, isn't officially counted in the employment/unemployment rate. I know, I use to be in the service. So if you are a purist, the military aren't employees.

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

(but I guess I have to say it). I'm talking about the civilian government workforce, not the military.

LocoLobo
LocoLobo

At least here it is. We pay all the above mentioned except the 401k. I would love to have a 401k. We have "deferred compensation" without any matching funds, that amounts to putting your money into mutual funds or a cheap savings account. As far as the work goes.. Yes there a leaches. But they exist in private enterprise as well. Here I've seen state workers bring in their tools from home to complete projects; put in long hours with or without compensation; then get terminated for not kowtowing to the powers that be.

shodges119
shodges119

The point being when the government hires you they try not to cut your pay. Assuming you have worked outside the government prior to taking the job they ask you for a W2. Then they make an offer. If you have the clearance and certifications your pay is usually relatively close to what you made on the outside. Most contract companies value a clearance and that ends up being reflected in your Government position to some degree. IE.. I have seen Government Jobs that do not require a clearance hover around GS 7 - 10 where as a job requiring a TS SCI may get you in the door as a 13 or higher. Just experience talking.

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

I barely reviewed and edited my message before your reply (or not). Nonetheless, let ..... me ..... slow ..... down ..... and ..... take ..... a ..... breath.

santeewelding
santeewelding

Take a breath. This, I say to you, from yonder back row of the choir.

shodges119
shodges119

Let me assure the new Government retirement program does not permit anyone to get remotely close to 80%, Hell the old one didn't either unless you were in the governemnt from the time to were 17 - 65. Your speaking from the wrong hole. I amd 34 and have 11 years in Government Service. If I work until I am 57 I will barely break 35 - 40%. Alot has changed over the last 20 years. Please research the facts.

teeeceee
teeeceee

I love it when discussion threads devolve into arguments over semantics and gated opinions. I BASE my responses (read opinions)on observation only, as all of you do I am sure, gained through a lifetime of experience. The thread here was Civilian vs GS Pay Scales and I chimed in with what I have seen and experienced, having been exposed to both worlds. I conceed the following: To Retired_USAF- OK already, there are NO AF bases outside this country. US aricraft that are stationed at a foreign air base are only there temporarily (since the Bosnian wars in Aeroporto Militare di Aviano's case) to support a mission (to keep the sea lanes open in the Med, and to keep the Serbs and Baltic Muslims from killing each other. Also, Jewel of NATO- We taxpayers are funding a massive buildup of new facilities to support the presence of USAF personnel AND their families there. That includes new schools, youth centers, child care facilities, as well as logistic support for the airmen and their families. I have witnessed construction delays, cost overruns, and shoddy construction, brought on by having to deal with a host nation SOFAs, and local contractors, milking the US gov cow. We could save the taxpayers billions, if we were to withdraw all of our troops from foreign bases, build out the Navy to extend our security on the FREE oceans of the world, develop better ICBMs and air launched cruise missles and long range unmanned drones and bombers, get off of the oil dime through development of alterate energy sources that we have had the technology to exploit since the 70s or even earlier, and just stop worrying about Al Queda. If left alone, those people over there would eventually sort it out (kill each other by the thousands, and the rest of the world can be held hostage to their oil and their conflicts, not us. IMHO! To "the military is different": Yes, the military is a necessary function funded via Congress using the funds provided by the tax paying citizens of the US. Should the military be funded to the extent that it causes harm to the people that are taxed to fund it, due to loss of, or cuts in entitlements like SS or infrastructure needs in the homeland? That also brings into mind the question of do we really need the bloat of burocracy (sic, cannot find that one in spell check, pedantic freaks) that is our federal government and all of the unnecessary GS jobs that creates, that we tax strapped civilians have to go into more debt to support? IMHO. Enough said, because these threads are just opinions anyway, and I have mine, and you have yours. Thanks for sharing them, I love it!

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

The military [u]is[/u] different. I'll answer your question with a question I once asked during a discussion on entitlement programs: Given that the military has made possible this country's continued existence, and that this continued existence has made possible the economic success that is paying for the programs you support, shouldn't the military be funded sufficiently to ensure the continuation of those programs?

santeewelding
santeewelding

Is a "faction". There is no way around, about, or through it. Do I, really, need to remind you of this?

maxwell edison
maxwell edison

..... and should be separate from all other discussions regarding the size and scope of government. Do you agree or disagree? I served in the active duty military for six years. I know what it's all about. The military is apples. Everything else is oranges.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

Those of you who think you know it all are extremely annoying to those of us who do.

santeewelding
santeewelding

I flew into and out of the place in a Navy C-47 during the early 60s, at which time, I'm sure, it was a naval facility. _________ "into" instead of "in"; there are pedants about.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

The correct phrase is "nit-picking," as in "to be excessively concerned with or critical of inconsequential details." Nits are the eggs of parasitic insects, such as lice. Knitting, of course, is looping yarn to create a garment.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

as my bio makes perfectly clear. I know this information, you know this information, anybody on active duty knows this information, and, whether we like it or not, most of the rest don't care. edit: And give a guy a break on the Moffet typo... :)

megabaum
megabaum

A few things, first in this scenario, I guess I'm just happy that there are still some jobs that are going to Americans. Second, I'm just fine with my tax dollars helping to ensure GS employees have built in guarantees, as you said they deserve it! We have much bigger fish to fry in this country. Third, as another poster mentioned, there are certainly "blood suckers" in both private and government organizations alike. Finally, in effect are you really sure that having socialized jobs, that fall outside the business rules of capitalism is a bad thing? Or maybe you'd rather suggest the US government just privatize these jobs, off-shore 30% of the workforce and hire H1Bs to drive down salaries & benefits for the poor remaining souls. Now that's the way of the private sector, yeah Capitalism! No thanks man.

Retired_USAF
Retired_USAF

==================== YOUR COMMENT: GS employees do have built in garauntees that private sector employees doing the same jobs do not have. MY COMMENT: Again, you are off base. Think about CIVILIAN people that have "tenure" (like at universeies), it is basically impossible to get rid of them! Although I don't work as a "GS", I've known enough of them. Yes, they may have some "guarantees", as you call them. But, you didn't stop and think, that these "guarantees", as you stress, is nothing more than the same as UNIONS in civlian life. Why? There is union(s) for government (civilian) employees. Just because the civilian unions for civilian companies can't do their job for the employees, that's not a government employee problem. ================== YOUR COMMENT: I would ask however, what is making Aviano Air BASE (Aeroporto Militare di Aviano)"The Jewel of NATO", costing we tax strapped tax payers in the US? How long do we need to be the policemen of the entire world? MY COMMENT: Ok, I guess that you want Al-Qaeda, etc take over the world. Bases like Aviano are needed to stage quicker strikes, if needed. You will probably say that we have bases in the middle east to do strikes from. I guess you have never heard of the phrase, "don't put all your eggs in one basket". Relying on just bases in the middle east for striking purposes is ludicrous. ====================

Retired_USAF
Retired_USAF

Again, I stress, as I originally said, there are no "AIR FORCE BASE" in foreign countries; I repeat "there are no "AIR FORCE BASE" in foreign countries". They, per the USAF is officially designated "AIR BASE" (note no word "FORCE"). As for your comment "He's going to make you explain Moffet Field": First, it is Moffett Field, not Moffet Field. Second, it isn't overseas, but in the United States, 2 miles north of Mountain View, in California. Third, the ford "FORCE" as I have said previously, refers for AIR BASES, and I stress AIR BASES in foreign countries, not the USA. Finally, Moffett Field is NOT an Air Force Base, but an AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE, officially. An ANG base officially is different, in designation from active duty USAF base, like Scott AFB, IL; Lackland AFB, TX, etc. Take Rickenbacker ANGB, OH as an example. Orginally it was Lockbourne AFB, OH, then renamed to Rickenbacker AFB, OH in 1974. Then in April, 1980, it was transferred from the Strategic Air Command to the Air National Guard, thus making it Rickenbacker ANGB, OH. Only active duty USAF bases, in the USA may be designated with "AIR FORCE BASE".

teeeceee
teeeceee

I expected a veteran to jump all over my post. I have no argument with veteran's preference, they deserve it, even if that "minimally qualified to perform the duties of the position" clause excludes a lot of qualified applicants for specific positions. We will not get into that however. Sorry for the mis-nomer on the basing definition. I would ask however, what is making Aviano Air BASE (Aeroporto Militare di Aviano)"The Jewel of NATO", costing we tax strapped tax payers in the US? How long do we need to be the policemen of the entire world? I guess as long as we rely on that oil that has to travel through the Mediterranean Sea to get to us uber consumers in the US. Now back to the thread. GS employees do have built in garauntees that private sector employees doing the same jobs do not have. In effect those are socialized jobs that fall outside the business rules of capitalism. In essence we have a socialist organization that supports a free market society. Does that elitism sound familiar? Where has that occurred in the last 70 years beside s here in the US? I think that is similar to how it used to work in the USSR. Choke on that conservatives!

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

He's going to make you explain Moffet Field. :p

Editor's Picks