Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

Although in this case he was dishonest.

Man should get paid!
Severance pay sucks!

That aside, what do you think happened to make his pay go from 77k in 2000 to 360k?
(and misreport it?)

Well, in his defense, he is a rebel, so it's OK.

indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

Eh given the other benefits with the job (pension, etc.) I think the salary should be about 1/2 of what it is (180k is a lot even in mass).

Reverend Monkeypants: Man should get paid!
Severance pay sucks!

That aside, what do you think happened to make his pay go from 77k in 2000 to 360k?
(and misreport it?)

My guess is that he paid a visit to Greece and saw how it's done there.

Just sayin' - there's a ton of hard working highly effective professionals in public service jobs who aren't making $360k/year. What the fark made him different?

I can't begin to fathom what the justification was or how this only NOW came to light. Those records should have been public knowledge all along.

indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

One is in the private sector where money is given by choice to the individual or corporation by the consumers.

One is collecting tax payer money in a monopolistic government system.

There is a difference...

It is unbelievable that taxpayers tolerate paying for the retirement of public employees.

Yepo, it's Massachusetts.

I know the rule when making a monster movie is to not let the "monster" appear on-screen until the 2nd or 3rd reel, but why did the author of this story put the real bomb-shell on Page Two? (most readers don't get that far)

McLaughlin is preparing to retire and collect perhaps the largest pension in Massachusetts history. Based on his total compensation and years of service, McLaughlin could qualify for a pension of $278,842 for life.

He will probably get another government job after the media/public forgets about him. Let the taxpayers pay for his silence.

These kind of shenanigans have been going on for years under Deval Patrick's administration. The only reason he's getting upset about it now is so he can garner favor with the large majority of the public who are finally getting to the breaking point.

The man makes $360,000, doesn't that make him a job creator?
Wonder how many more jobs he would create if we just lower his taxes.

indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

came for this.

/although in this case it appears he was a dirty thief

RELIGION OF GREECE

The Globe reported Sunday that McLaughlin had told state housing officials he made only $160,000, less than half his true salary, something he chalked up to "the rebel in me.''

This is the real story. I think he should be fired immediately with no pension for deliberately lying, but maybe that's just "the rebel in me".

MilesTeg: indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

One is in the private sector where money is given by choice to the individual or corporation by the consumers.

One is collecting tax payer money in a monopolistic government system.

There is a difference...

Let's suppose that the chief executive of a large rental property management company in the private sector could expect to make $300K - 400K. Is it then absurd? Remember, you need to offer reasonable compensation to induce competent, talented management staff to come to work for you rather than for a private firm.

Hydra: MilesTeg: indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

One is in the private sector where money is given by choice to the individual or corporation by the consumers.

One is collecting tax payer money in a monopolistic government system.

There is a difference...

Was going to say this; now, I'll just say, "This!"

/$360K places him well within the "millionaires and billionaires" earning above $250K
//he's a 1%er
///there must be "good" 1%ers and "bad" 1%ers....

$250K isn't in the 1% in Massachusetts. Maybe in Ohio. Try again.

MilesTeg: indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

One is in the private sector where money is given by choice to the individual or corporation by the consumers.

One is collecting tax payer money in a monopolistic government system.

There is a difference...

Yeah but it underscores a bigger problem of the upper management getting compensated more than the actual value of their services. It doesn't matter if they are private sector, bureaucratic, or elected.

Great Odins Raven: It is unbelievable that taxpayers tolerate paying for the retirement of public employees.

dingdingding.

Hydra: /didn't they teach you anything about debating and arguments in law school?

$250K and "the 1%" are separate demographics/issues. You're the one who is confusing the two, partially because you're dishonest and believe in moving the goalposts to win your ridiculous troll argument.

Second, your "good 1%" "bad 1%" statement was a strawman argument.

Why is it that people like you think you are going to win an argument by insulting my education?

This happens in businesses and charities, not just government:



The president of Portland, Oregon's Goodwill stores paid himself $830,000 in 2004, while mentally and physically challenged employees earned minimum wage, and others worked as volunteers. And, the merchandise is all donated. (new window)

Hydra: You do understand the difference between the private sector and the public sector, right?

The government has the coercive power to tax people - you can't refuse to pay your taxes without going to jail.

A private corporation does NOT have this luxury - a person is not forced to buy the product/service that a company provides.

You don't like paying public employees comparable wages/benefits compared to the private sector? You can always vote. Don't be surprised when you can't find talented people to manage the public sector when you offer $30,000 a year and a cut-rate pension for a job that requires an MBA and 10 years of management experience.

Mass is a crooked state so full of cronyism that's hard to imagine. Just look at the Big Dig for a perfect example of their wack methodology. And the Red Sox suck. And their bars close early. And their chicks are fat.

K.B.O. Winston: This guy sounds like a crook, but I'm tired of people who made long-term, no-glory, low-risk investments (like taking a government job when your friends were taking dot-com gigs) getting harassed now by people who gambled and lost.

Problem is, those people who took those long term "low risk" jobs also made sure they were compensated the same as people who actually took the risk and lost. If they had lower compensation, in line with their lower risk, then you'd have a point.

indylaw: Hydra: You do understand the difference between the private sector and the public sector, right?

The government has the coercive power to tax people - you can't refuse to pay your taxes without going to jail.

A private corporation does NOT have this luxury - a person is not forced to buy the product/service that a company provides.

You don't like paying public employees comparable wages/benefits compared to the private sector? You can always vote. Don't be surprised when you can't find talented people to manage the public sector when you offer $30,000 a year and a cut-rate pension for a job that requires an MBA and 10 years of management experience.

There aren't any numbers between 30,000 and 360,000? Because I can think of a few.

But good luck balancing a budget when you insist on paying all public employees 360,000. (either that or slave wages, no middle ground).

I used to work in Chelsea, MA, running group homes for the mentally-ill. My starting salary was $18,500, and skyrocketed to $22,300 after 3 years (this was in the late 90s). That town was / is an absolutely shiat hole. This guy should be drawn and quartered. The fact he lied about it tells me he knew his salary was outrageous and had something to hide, so when he says he "earned every penny" he's lying again.

Hydra: indylaw: Let's suppose that the chief executive of a large rental property management company in the private sector could expect to make $300K - 400K. Is it then absurd? Remember, you need to offer reasonable compensation to induce competent, talented management staff to come to work for you rather than for a private firm.

You do understand the difference between the private sector and the public sector, right?

The government has the coercive power to tax people - you can't refuse to pay your taxes without going to jail.

A private corporation does NOT have this luxury - a person is not forced to buy the product/service that a company provides.

This housing authority is largely funded by the government - a coercive entity. It has no fear of loss or bankruptcy in an economic sense and can perpetuate itself due to the flaws in our political process. It's not funded by private citizens who bear a risk of losing their original investment.

WTF does this have to do with the subject at hand? Are you saying that cheaper incompetent coercive governance is more acceptable than more expensive competent coercive governance?

How about outrage over having to pay anything to "affodable" housing when it's just a scam to enable the cronically unemployed?

ANd execute that guinie mobster.

mynameisdouglas: Great Odins Raven: It is unbelievable that taxpayers tolerate paying for the retirement of public employees.

dingdingding.

More like "dingaling".

This whole stupid argument reads like a "Goofus and Gallant" story.
"Gallant graduated from college and took a job in the local government.
Goofus got a job with a high-profile venture capital company.

Gallant's job offered him a steady paycheck, decent benefits, and a pension when he retired after 30 years.
Goofus' job offered him a company car, a time-share in Maui, assloads of bonuses, and all the cocaine and hookers he could want.

Gallant's salary was less than he could have made in the private sector, but the job security was good.
Goofus' job had no security whatsoever and was subject to the slightest whims of the markets and his clients.

Gallant bought a little house, got married, raised a couple of kids and put money away for their education and his retirement just in case something happened to his job.
Goofus blew all his cash on sh*t he really didn't need to buy, thinking he would always be rich.

Gallant retired last year from his government job with a modest pension and savings, and lives comfortably.
Goofus' business went straight to sh*t back in 2008, and now he is assistant manager at a convenience store because he didn't plan ahead.

Gallant supports pensions and retirement plans for public sector employees.
Goofus spends his time writing hate posts on FARK about public sector employees' pensions and hating on people like Gallant.

People like Gallant take the jobs in the public sector because of the stability and retirement prospects, even at lower pay relative to their private sector counterparts. Back in the 80's people actually laughed at those who opted for public sector work rather than hop on the economic gravy train barreling through the country at the time. Now many 30 years and many recessions and downturns later those people who stuck it out and stayed in the public sector have to deal with the jealousy of the haters who laughed at them before.

Pathetic.

If you want to be outraged, look at the salaries of some CEOs in nonprofit organizations... A few years ago even NPR had two employees making over 1 mill per year. These nonprofits claim it's to "attract talent"... money-lusting talent. Nonprofit capitalism!

NationalHero: Mass is a crooked state so full of cronyism that's hard to imagine. Just look at the Big Dig for a perfect example of their wack methodology. And the Red Sox suck. And their bars close early. And their chicks are fat.

I live in Mass and can verify each and every one of the well thought out points.

indylaw: MilesTeg: indylaw: Make $20 million a year moving rich people's money around and you're a hard-working job creator.

Make $360,000 managing a large agency that helps keep people from homelessness and you're a dirty thief.

One is in the private sector where money is given by choice to the individual or corporation by the consumers.

One is collecting tax payer money in a monopolistic government system.

There is a difference...

Let's suppose that the chief executive of a large rental property management company in the private sector could expect to make $300K - 400K. Is it then absurd? Remember, you need to offer reasonable compensation to induce competent, talented management staff to come to work for you rather than for a private firm.

That's a fallacy that really needs to stop. Civil service should never garner the same wages as corporate America. Higher payscales include the inherant risk that you can actually lose your job based on performance. No such risk exists for government employees. Even if it did include the risk, it still shouldn't include the higher wages as you're doing a service to your community. That's in part, it's own reward.

HYdra..

seriously waiting for him to come back with the "2/10 you need to try harder"
arguement. It is the ol' fallback when logic looses.

Providing housing to people is not a legitimate government function. That's the root of the problem. The bigger the government gets, the more opportunities for corruption. Vote Ron Paul!

rewind2846 People like Gallant take the jobs in the public sector because of the stability and retirement prospects, even at lower pay relative to their private sector counterparts.

Except in this case the government sector pays as much or more than the private sector, with bloated pensions to cap it off. Yea, I'm calling BS on this as well.

fark the man, occupy boston!