U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Unread 03-13-2009, 04:37 PM
 
Location: Hills & Hollers of SW MO
17,752 posts, read 13,415,103 times
Reputation: 15086
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post
Time to get into the real world government workers. You are a part of what's killing our country. Stop being greedy fools.
According to the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Econony:

"In 2007 California had the 2nd lowest number of full-time equivalent state government employees relative to population among all states. California had 103 state employees for every 10,000 residents while Illinois had the lowest ratio at 97. The U.S. average was 143 state employees per 10,000 residents. California’s ratio of state government employees relative to population was 28% below the national average."

All state employees I'm aware of pay taxes on their earnings. Since state workers are doing their part, what are the other 9,897 out of every 10,000 of you doing to keep California afloat.

I didn't realize I was so powerful as a state worker. According to what I've read here a mere, roughly, 230,000 out of a total population in excess of 36,000,000 have single-handedly brought down the state.

By the way, according to the Controller's office, in the month of January 2009 alone, the reviled, despised and greedy state workers paid about $151 million in federal taxes and $39 million in state taxes.

If you want to channel your anger in a realistic and useful manner, stop re-electing the same, sorry, labor union owned and operated members of the Legislature year after year. They're the ones who have nearly bankrupted the state with all their pork, as has the electorate by consisting voting in more and more catagorical spending as initiative mandates.

PS. For the record, we pay a $5 to $15 copay for prescriptions and have never complained. Also, I didn't retire until age 62, not 55, so the chances I'll be able to fleece the state for the next 30 years are slim to none. But if I can't do it for at least 25 I'm going to feel cheated!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 03-14-2009, 12:17 AM
 
12,574 posts, read 21,934,016 times
Reputation: 6930
I think much of the interest in this topic is because there are few defined benefit retirement plans outside of the the public sector.

It is hard for some to comprehend the idea of defined benefit outside of the public sector...

I was discussing issues facing my city several weeks ago with the assistant City Manager and her fear was where the city was going to come up with pension short falls should the Calpers losses linger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 08:35 AM
 
332 posts, read 1,048,980 times
Reputation: 221
Defined benefit pensions = financial suicide

Ask GM

CA is next
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 08:42 AM
 
Location: USA
4,983 posts, read 4,809,067 times
Reputation: 2506
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Boy View Post
This is going on in at least half of the other states right now. What can you do?

This IS going on all over, in other states too.
Government employees get pensions, not 401Ks, which we all KNOW are better than 401Ks.
There has been too much milking of the system, and Americans have paid too much for all of this.
It is time they felt what people employed by private industry feel...the economy.
Of course they feel they are worth it. We in private industry think we are worth it too, but we don't control things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 08:43 AM
 
Location: USA
4,983 posts, read 4,809,067 times
Reputation: 2506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I think much of the interest in this topic is because there are few defined benefit retirement plans outside of the the public sector.

It is hard for some to comprehend the idea of defined benefit outside of the public sector...

I was discussing issues facing my city several weeks ago with the assistant City Manager and her fear was where the city was going to come up with pension short falls should the Calpers losses linger.

You are right. They don't want to know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 08:46 AM
 
Location: USA
4,983 posts, read 4,809,067 times
Reputation: 2506
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post
It's the SAME SONG here in CT, probably worse. The state workers were asked to pay a $3 copay on prescriptions and they FLIPPED OUT.

What? What the hell do you think those of us on private healthcare plans pay! Good Lord, we are paying over $600.00 per month just for health insurance with crappy copays and coverage! The state folks - free.

The property tax bill on an average house here is about $9,000 per year, and they are rising fast to keep up. They also tax cars, boats, motorcyles and other private property just like your house.

We have the highest gas tax in the nation, utility tax tax this tax that. Everywhere you turn they are taxing the crap out of us in CT and then, THEN they cry broke and need more money yet will not lay off ONE WORKER.

Disgusting.

That's why they get PENSIONS not 401ks, because they know they are better.
If they worked for a private business, a lot of them would not have jobs, but because it is the government, they still have jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 09:09 AM
 
Location: Hills & Hollers of SW MO
17,752 posts, read 13,415,103 times
Reputation: 15086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I think much of the interest in this topic is because there are few defined benefit retirement plans outside of the the public sector.

It is hard for some to comprehend the idea of defined benefit outside of the public sector...

I was discussing issues facing my city several weeks ago with the assistant City Manager and her fear was where the city was going to come up with pension short falls should the Calpers losses linger.
I agree. Defined benefit has become a foreign concept in much of America of late. However, state, county and local plans are a drop in the bucket when compared to the sheer volume of federal retirees. Funny. I've yet to hear anyone complain about military retirements which are non-participatory and defined. Soldier aren't as acceptable to pick on and complain about as other "mere" civil servants I guess.

For the naysayers, my wife and I consider ourselves most fortunate and are very appreciative of the security we've been provided as a result of our work. The stability of a state career permitted her to raise her two daughters for 16 years as a single, working mother with no support of any kind from her ex. In my case it made possible the raising of five children on a single income, mine, while ensuring their medical and dental needs would be taken care of. All five are grown, on their own and doing fine. Same with my wife's daughters.

For us it means a modest but secure retirement and we will be leaving the state to maximize it. We make no apologies for that either. I lost home, savings, investments and half my state retirement in divorce from my childrens' mother so my wife and I started from scratch just over a decade ago and her health forced her into an early retirement. And no, there are no disability benefits.

My point is, don't paint all of us with the same broad brush and show a little appreciation for the fact that we are self-sufficient and should never be a burden on our children or society. There are worse things, you know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 10:17 AM
 
12,574 posts, read 21,934,016 times
Reputation: 6930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
I agree. Defined benefit has become a foreign concept in much of America of late. However, state, county and local plans are a drop in the bucket when compared to the sheer volume of federal retirees. Funny. I've yet to hear anyone complain about military retirements which are non-participatory and defined. Soldier aren't as acceptable to pick on and complain about as other "mere" civil servants I guess.

For the naysayers, my wife and I consider ourselves most fortunate and are very appreciative of the security we've been provided as a result of our work. The stability of a state career permitted her to raise her two daughters for 16 years as a single, working mother with no support of any kind from her ex. In my case it made possible the raising of five children on a single income, mine, while ensuring their medical and dental needs would be taken care of. All five are grown, on their own and doing fine. Same with my wife's daughters.

For us it means a modest but secure retirement and we will be leaving the state to maximize it. We make no apologies for that either. I lost home, savings, investments and half my state retirement in divorce from my childrens' mother so my wife and I started from scratch just over a decade ago and her health forced her into an early retirement. And no, there are no disability benefits.

My point is, don't paint all of us with the same broad brush and show a little appreciation for the fact that we are self-sufficient and should never be a burden on our children or society. There are worse things, you know.
I don't begrudge Public Employees for utilizing the system as it is. I do think changes are inevitable.

The State of California made a big case about trying to have neighboring States help California collect income tax on California benefits being paid to former employees no longer living in California.

At least a dozen or more from my High School Class went into law enforcement and all but 2 retired in their early 40's with pensions. Some have started private sector jobs and one went started at another city outside the Calpers System... it is possible for 6 figure Calpers Pension, at least in law enforcement. I don't know if the same is possible for military.

Public Defined Benefit Employees will continue to be scrutinized because of the disparity between identical Private Sector jobs not offering anything close in the way of benefits.

I work in Health Care and the wages paid public sector Registered Nurses are on par with private sector... the private sector continues to loose benefits at a greater rate and this causes ill will. Many private facilities no longer offer any retirement... no company match, no profit sharing and no defined benefit pension...

None of this would be relevant if there was parity between public servant positions and private industries... these isn't and that's why the public is becoming more out spoken.

The teachers unions are trying to mass public support against budget cuts and I don't think they are having quite the success they hoped for. I don't know anyone in private industry that isn't doing more for less pay if they still have a job. Across the board 10% pay cuts are not uncommon and staff reductions are the norm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Hills & Hollers of SW MO
17,752 posts, read 13,415,103 times
Reputation: 15086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I don't begrudge Public Employees for utilizing the system as it is. I do think changes are inevitable.
Thank you. It is what it is and I expect it to change for future employees. I think it must to come in-line with today's fiscal realities. Labor unions and compliant (dare I say, "obedient") politicians have let it get way out of hand. I say that as someone whose retirement is partially a safety retirement from my eight years in law enforcement, credit for four of which the ex received and cashed out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
The State of California made a big case about trying to have neighboring States help California collect income tax on California benefits being paid to former employees no longer living in California.
California used to collect income tax on retirement income earned from California even if the rercipient lived in another state. This was called a "use tax." Thankfully, it was successfully challenged in court as being unconstitutional and in 2004 the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear it on appeal which means the final Appellate Court decision that the taxes cannot be collected stands to this day.

It was then that I finalized my decision to, one day, retire ABC -- Anywhere But California!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 03-14-2009, 07:32 PM
 
Location: Way on the outskirts of LA LA land.
3,043 posts, read 6,752,099 times
Reputation: 1806
If the benefits of working for a public agency are so great, then why aren't these folks applying for those positions? It was stated earlier that working for the state (city, county, etc.) is good when the economy is bad and bad when the economy is good. This is basically true. One of the reasons I decided to work in the public sector was the benefits and retirement. I had to apply, take a test (and pass it with a reasonably high score), interview successfully, then work 40 miles from home to get into the entry level position I started in. Anyone that may have wanted to could have done the same thing I did.

I later chose to attend schooling on my own time, just like many in the private sector. I worked my way up through a variety of positions, while enduring staffing and budget cuts several times. At this time, the maintenance crew I work on has only 8 people as opposed to 12 or so that it used to have. We are maintaining more facilities than ever before in the past. On top of that, we are doing so with very little overtime compared to what was done in the past.

It is true that our pay and job security are better than that for those who are employed in the private sector at this time. There is better money to be made in the private sector if you are successful and willing to take some risks. There are computer programmers working in the public sector. They don't make what Bill Gates makes. He took his skills and started a successful company, and made it viable by surrounding himself with competent, skilled associates. There are lots of folks that have done this over the years, from people working in the trades, to those working in white collar positions.

Have you seen what a public sector engineer makes compared to an engineer that starts his own firm? There is more potential for the engineer in the private sector to make money than for the one in the public sector. The trade-off is there is also more risk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:27 AM.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top