[kscaldef]

That argument doesn't hold water.

a) The people with jobs without benefits are paying minuscule taxes, so it's wrong to say they are paying for the benefits of public sector employees in that sense.

b) Every time they buy something from a company that does provide benefits to some or all of its employees, those people are "paying" for someone else's benefits. But no one seems to complain about that.

This whole thing is an apples & oranges comparison. Right now, there's a class of jobs that gets benefits and a class of jobs that doesn't. Federal government jobs are overwhelmingly in the first category. Comparing them to the overall population of private sector jobs is silly.

[anamax]

> a) The people with jobs without benefits are paying minuscule taxes, so it's wrong to say they are paying for the benefits of public sector employees in that sense.

They're paying sales and gas taxes. They're paying property and utility taxes (either directly or through rent). They're paying garbage collection fees. They're paying for stamps. They're paying for licenses. And so on.

Poor people pay a lot of money that ends up in govt workers pockets. And they can't pick a different provider.

[CWuestefeld]

The people with jobs without benefits are paying minuscule taxes, so it's wrong to say they are paying for the benefits of public sector employees

I pay truly enormous taxes. While I enjoy a modicum of 401(k) benefit, it's several orders of magnitude less than the pension benefits of those being paid through my taxes.

those people are "paying" for someone else's benefits. But no one seems to complain about that.

Of course they do. Have you witnessed the number of people going to shop in WalMart to get low prices on overseas-made goods, rather than pay top dollar? What do you think is telling us?