OT- CONTEST!!! Guess public sector household earnings

User Forum Topic
Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 1:12pm

We are going to have a contest and the winner gets a decent bottle of wine. I just got back from a potential clients and saw their year end paystubs for last year. I did not list the property because it didnt fit what I thought I could do. Its a dual income household. Both work in the public sector. One in health care and the other in public safety. Lets see who can guess the 2011 gross earnings for the household not including any benefits paid for by their employer.

Have at it and dont be afraid of going over.

Contest runs through Monday.

Submitted by MostlyLurk on January 13, 2012 - 1:19pm.

$320,000

Submitted by markmax33 on January 13, 2012 - 1:26pm.

$245,000

Submitted by FormerSanDiegan on January 13, 2012 - 1:49pm.

$325,724.68

Submitted by bearishgurl on January 13, 2012 - 2:09pm.

$206,400

Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 2:24pm.

Just want to clarify that this is payroll and does not include contributions for healthcare or retirement plan so make your guesses accordingly. FWIW, One of them appears to get close to an additional 30% of their pay contributed toward a retirement benefit.

Also bear in mind that these earnings are virtually guaranteed and that there is little to no chance of loosing ones job so the wages should reflect that type of job security one typically sacrifices wages for.

Submitted by rent4now on January 13, 2012 - 2:13pm.

195k

Submitted by sdduuuude on January 13, 2012 - 2:26pm.

$160K

Submitted by bearishgurl on January 13, 2012 - 2:35pm.

sdrealtor wrote:
Just want to clarify that this is payroll and does not include contributions for healthcare or retirement plan so make your guesses accordingly. FWIW, One of them appears to get close to an additional 30% of their pay contributed toward a retirement benefit...

Undoubtedly, this is the "safety worker" half of this couple ... OR an unclassified executive (who is unrepresented and worked out their own employment contract with the gov'mt).

Submitted by bearishgurl on January 13, 2012 - 2:36pm.

If you don't mind my asking, why is this well-paid-and-secure couple seeking to sell their property short??

Submitted by recordsclerk on January 13, 2012 - 2:40pm.

274K

Submitted by enron_by_the_sea on January 13, 2012 - 2:52pm.

295K

Submitted by blahblahblah on January 13, 2012 - 3:00pm.

$235K.

Submitted by Coronita on January 13, 2012 - 3:09pm.

372,000

Submitted by harvey on January 13, 2012 - 3:16pm.

173K

Submitted by an on January 13, 2012 - 3:41pm.

$236k

Submitted by an on January 13, 2012 - 3:42pm.

dup

Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 3:42pm.

While we are guessing it's interesting to note the range is from 160 to 372k. Applying the old rule of thumb that's says you can afford a house of three times earnings it would appear this hypothetical family could afford prices from 480 to 1.116m without stretching. Is it any wonder prices are so high?

Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 3:42pm.

While we are guessing it's interesting to note the range is from 160 to 372k. Applying the old rule of thumb that's says you can afford a house of three times earnings it would appear this hypothetical family could afford prices from 480 to 1.116m without stretching. Is it any wonder prices are so high?

Submitted by tdelamater on January 13, 2012 - 3:50pm.

250k

Submitted by scaredyclassic on January 13, 2012 - 4:43pm.

$296,834.09.

Submitted by ucodegen on January 13, 2012 - 4:43pm.

$385,000

Submitted by poorgradstudent on January 13, 2012 - 4:58pm.

With extremely limited information, I'm going to guess $300K.

I'm also going to guess based on experience and education, these two could clear $350-500K in the private sector, before bonuses. I'm also going to guess they are both well above the median income in their departments; one is probably at the equivalent of "VP" level, the other the equivalent of a highly skilled technician. Both probably have professional degrees beyond a bachelor's.

Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 6:05pm.

To add more income one has a bachelors if that that. the other has a post grad degree and probably makes as much or more than they would in private sector without the risk doing so would require in the private sector.

edit: Person with advanced degree makes exactly the median of someone in private sector however someone in private sector would not have the same benefits or job security.

Submitted by an on January 13, 2012 - 6:00pm.

poorgradstudent wrote:
With extremely limited information, I'm going to guess $300K.

I'm also going to guess based on experience and education, these two could clear $350-500K in the private sector, before bonuses. I'm also going to guess they are both well above the median income in their departments; one is probably at the equivalent of "VP" level, the other the equivalent of a highly skilled technician. Both probably have professional degrees beyond a bachelor's.


Having a a Master or a Ph.D. doesn't always mean more money. It depends on what you got your Master/Ph.D. in.

You stated that there's extremely limited information in the beginning, but then you go and say they can clear $350-500k in the private sector and are probably at VP level. So, which is it, extremely limited information or enough information to make these kinds of assumptions?

Submitted by sdrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 8:23pm.

One more question. Is anyone else concerned that a household of 2 public sector employees (not executive level postions) have incomes placing them in the top 1 or 2% of US Households?

Should the Occupy Wall Street folks move to Occupy City Hall?

Submitted by blahblahblah on January 13, 2012 - 8:38pm.

AN wrote:
$236k

Curse you! The old "Price is Right" trick. At least I know someone else is thinking the same way I am...

I'm guessing 1 person making $140K, the other making $96K, something along those lines.

As everyone knows, in the public sector it's the benefits that really count...

Submitted by an on January 13, 2012 - 10:00pm.

CONCHO wrote:
AN wrote:
$236k

Curse you! The old "Price is Right" trick. At least I know someone else is thinking the same way I am...

I'm guessing 1 person making $140K, the other making $96K, something along those lines.

As everyone knows, in the public sector it's the benefits that really count...


You got it :-D

Submitted by temeculaguy on January 13, 2012 - 11:21pm.

My guess is 350k

Here's the problem with the quiz, the perception and the reality. Ignore their title, what is their real role in whatever their profession is?

The guy who sells cellphones at a kiosk at the mall and the president of verizon are both "cell phone salesmen" but they aren't compensated in the same way. Ignoring their title, a fireman might make 85k and drive the truck. A batallion chief might just seem like a fireman to you, but he may be in charge of 100 firemem, yet to some people, they are the same. I think they should be compensated differently and they probaby are.

There's also another huge variable, quantity of work, as in how many hours do they work? I have hundreds of employees that report to me and I spent most of my morning today in budgeting and forecasting meetings. Public or private, employees cost far more than the actual money you give them. Their benefits cost money, their vacation and sick leave cost their employer money, their training costs their employer money, when their mom dies it costs their employer money. Anyone with an employee has to figure out what an employee actually costs them and sometimes it's cheaper to overwork an existing employee than hire an additional one, because overtime rates are sometimes cheaper than the total compensation for a seperate employee. For public employee's I'm certain this is probably the case because of the pension costs, but it holds true for private sector employees who get some form of employer matching 401k.

So these two public employees may have elected to work 6o hours a week each, essentially earning three salaries. Their employer may have run the numbers and decided it's cheaper than hiring a third employee. Like it or not, envy it or not, bosses (public and private)look at their bottom line and that's why some people seem to be making out. The same principle applies to consultants and contracted employees. My people may envy the hourly rate of a consultant but they lack the big picture information that I have, which is the overpaid consultant is actually cheaper for the company because all they get is cash, no insurance, vacation, berievement leave, etc.

One other note on the quantity of hours issue, more than once in my career, my subordinates have outearned me. Why? Because they work more hours than I do, by choice.

I also have a personal friend who is one of those hated high paid public employees. His name was in the paper as one of the top ten earning government employees, earning more than double what the posted salary that his position should be paid. The average newspaper reader probably cursed his name. But he was putting his kids through college, including at least one in ivy league medical school and some of his kids were spending their summers treating people in third world countries and in ghettos in this country. He worked 7 days a week, 12-16 hours a day, for a few years. Volunteered for anything and everything, because his work was financing the saving of lives and he felt it was his way of saving the world. So people were mad at him because they think a public employee shouldn't make almost 200k, f%^&k those people. I suppose he could have just gotten loans and defaulted on them like everyone else, or just had our government send financial aid to those poor people, but I admire him, while many are angry and envious of him. If they only knew what a humble and simple life he leads, they just see the numbers.

Will it make you feel better that a chunk of his pension is already earmarked to pay back all those medical school loans, because even an extra 100k doesn't finance 3 kids through school. I told him to get fired, then it would all be free, as a taxpayer, would you prefer that? Keep that in mind, 55% of studetns in public universities don't actually pay, you do. That costs you more than all the cops and firemen.

Submitted by urbanrealtor on January 13, 2012 - 11:57pm.

sdrealtor wrote:
We are going to have a contest and the winner gets a decent bottle of wine. I just got back from a potential clients and saw their year end paystubs for last year. I did not list the property because it didnt fit what I thought I could do. Its a dual income household. Both work in the public sector. One in health care and the other in public safety. Lets see who can guess the 2011 gross earnings for the household not including any benefits paid for by their employer.

Have at it and dont be afraid of going over.

Contest runs through Monday.

Well shit dave.

Might as well ask the same question of you and me.
Considering that we both work in real estate and that market is fully subsidized by a socialist/public debt market.

The only reason we have super cheap mortgage rates is because those bonds are bought by taxpayers with a gov't guarantee.

In other words, we agents are on the dole. Taxes are what pays for things like houses in north county and bottles of nice wine.

So, sit poolside and sip some Consilience or Fess Parker and tell me how much we taxpayers are getting screwed.

Actually, make that a Cinnabar rustic primitivo.

I like my hypocrisy with an dryish tannin-oak bite.

Submitted by afx114 on January 14, 2012 - 12:12am.

Closest without going over? In that case, I bid $1, Mr. Barker.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.