Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
How quickly we forget George Bush's near-catastrophic attempt to privatize social security by converting it into 401Ks. Which would have conveniently made loads of cash for Wall St traders right as Enron was about to tank mutual funds across the country.
How about demanding more from the private sector instead of lowering the bar for the public one?
Otherwise, you should say adios to your sick days, holidays, vacation days, maternity leave, workers comp, and every other worker improvement the private sector enjoys thanks to organized labor and collective bargaining.
You act like these things are a given, but they aren't.
How would you feel if you found out right before (or after) retirement that your employer hadn't been making a 401K match that was part of the agreement for you taking your job in the first place?
It isn't the fault of unions that Republican and Democratic politicians haven't been properly funding pension contributions for decades. The union members have been paying their share, it's we, the taxpayers, that are collectively in default. Point the finger at you, me, and every other Illinois voter who has allowed political corruption to endure for decades.
As for the "benefit to society" of paying what we owe - is that a joke?
Do you want to deal with thousands upon thousands of impoverished senior citizens in Illinois who suddenly wouldn't be able to pay their bills? Retired people do also shop and support the economy, you know. I guess you'd prefer they be kicked out of their homes so the banks can grow their slumlord-to-society role.
I can't believe how short-sighted people are these days... it's like the staunch refusal to look at an actual cost-benefit analysis of providing health care to everyone, even though our hospitals right now are already providing it by default, as by law they can't turn people away from the ER.
So to get back to Illinois - you can fix the pension "problem" by simply getting priorities straight. The State made an agreement. It should live up to that agreement before giving Sears monster tax breaks and all the other gravy we throw at so-called "private sector" companies.
It's completely legitimate to negotiate future pension agreements so we don't find ourselves in a similar pickle down the road, but this idea that we can retroactively welsh on existing ones is nonsense and unethical, if not illegal and likely a death sentence for our bond rating.
I never said we should cut the pensions that past and current workers agreed to. It does need to stop going forward though. We can't continue to have taxpayers pay for worker's retirements, it's freaking crazy.
Expecting more from the private sector isn't going to happen in a global economy, they'll just pick up and go elsewhere. Even within the US itself, if Sears feels it is being over-taxed then they'll pick up and move to Texas or some other state with lower taxes.
What does that actually mean? Your pension is presumably based on time of service. A guy who works 20 years isn't getting the same pension as one who worked 40.
Now, we don't need double-dippers for sure. There are loads of abuses that can be cut.
But don't cut off your nose to spite your face.
I believe pensions are also based off the worker's age and average salary so they can get out of whack pretty easily.
The root of all the problems the state faces have nothing to do with pensions or the benefits offered to workers - it has everything to do with the mis-management of pensions by the state. Back in the early 90's Dawn Clark Netsch ran for governor making pension underfunding a core part of her campaign. She was mocked for it, and voters chose to go with politicians who said everyone could have everything they wanted without raising taxes. Instead of raising taxes they just stopped investing in the pension funds at the level they needed to. When it became blatantly apparent that pension underfunding was a ticking time bomb they paid hundreds of millions of dollars to investment firms to make riskier investments to shore up the funds. For a few years the state invested NO money in the pension funds. When the real estate bubble burst and the market crashed in 2008, the bill came due.
Plenty of states and private companies run pension funds in a conservative manner and are not facing any issues today. The blame falls on Springfield (the workers all paid their part into the pension funds, nearly 10% of their salaries every year).
I think it is kind of ironic that this is posted in the Chicago thread. Chicago municipal workers are not affected by the state pension at all. Chicago runs it's own pensions that are paid for by property taxes paid by Chicago residents. Only suburban and downstate municipalities are covered by the state pension. If you live in Chicago you are paying for pensions all over the state through your state taxes, and will be on the hook to clean up this mess, even though Chicago workers don't get coverage through state pensions. I wish Madigan's plan to make suburban and downstate communities cover their pensions (like Chicago does) had gone through.
Attrill may be mostly correct from a technical standpoint that the City of Chicago's accounting practices attempt to show a direct link between revenues paid into City property tax coffers and funds flowing into the City pension plans.
He is INCORRECT that suburban / downstate areas have no such links. In fact any property owner (who outside of Cook Co is paying their half years installment TODAY, June 1st...) will CLEARLY see multiple entries on their property tax for supporting the VARIOUS pension funds mandated by the State for local cops, firefighters, employees of municipaliites, forest preserves etc. The solvency of most of those are NOT a problem.
What is a problem are the pension funds for employees of the state AND the various 'transfered liabilities" that come FROM RETIREES. The employees of the state CERTAINLY include the good guys that move wrecked cars off the road and keep prisons orderly BUT THOSE FUNDS disproportionately have HIGH WAGE SHORT TENURE "employees" that are largely POLITICAL APPOINTEES of CROOKS like Blago and the Old Fat Pill Pusher From Kankakee and all the other scum that has risen to the top of Illinois' political cess pool. For MOST of these jokers they jumped up from some do nothing job as a "legislative assistant" where the accrued most of the "years of service" and then showed up for a few meeting once they got appointed "Asst Head Director of Do Nothingness" for a term or two at some grossly elevated salary and now expect the higher spoils.
The other HUGE category of abusers are the folks that made DEEP six figures as administrators in schools districts BUT ONLY for a short time. Even if they kicked in $20K a year for 8 years or something there is NO WAY that any kind of "investing" would guarntee them a LIFETIME stream of income at 70% of their $200K salary. The rest of the dough is coming from ALL State tax sources.
Finally the sad reality is that we who live in the less poverty stricken areas get just about NO 'state aid' to run our schools while City of Chicago get a TREMENDOUS wad of cash right out the State kitty to keep its failed schools running, ostensibly as a way "shore up" the disadvantaged. The carte blanche that happens with transfer payments that into CPS without any oversight from those who pony up the money are quite different than the sort of microscope that local school boards face from concerned tax payers / residents.
Madigan and Co have quite little charade worked out to funnel dough to the various interests that pump right back to the political war chests that ensures his continued power...
As a union guy myself, I hate when all Unions get lumped together as some scourge of the tax dollars.
The antics of the public sector unions makes me sick. They get away with murder, for things I would have been fired for long ago with no severance or notice.
As far as pensions, they should put the pensions in the hands of the unions like all the trades. The govt pays into the pension funds X amount per employee per work share.
It's then up to the union to figure out how to make it work.
Union bosses want to raid the pension fund? That's fine. They'll also then have to deal with the angry mob of pitchfork carrying members outside ready to burn the hall down.
Attrill may be mostly correct from a technical standpoint that the City of Chicago's accounting practices attempt to show a direct link between revenues paid into City property tax coffers and funds flowing into the City pension plans.
He is INCORRECT that suburban / downstate areas have no such links. In fact any property owner (who outside of Cook Co is paying their half years installment TODAY, June 1st...) will CLEARLY see multiple entries on their property tax for supporting the VARIOUS pension funds mandated by the State for local cops, firefighters, employees of municipaliites, forest preserves etc. The solvency of most of those are NOT a problem.
I never said that suburban and downstate municipalities don't pay anything into their pension funds, They do. They also receive money from the state for their pensions, Chicago pensions are not part of that system.
I said that Chicagoans pay into all of those funds via state taxes and no one outside of Chicago pays into Chicago pension funds. My point that Chicagoans are on the hook for the rest of the state and on their own for Chicago pensions is accurate. It isn't just a matter of how it is accounted for.
You're correct that wealthy suburbs get less state aid than Chicago, but that's because the aid is mainly based on poverty levels. Suburbs with high poverty levels (i.e many south of Chicago) and many rural downstate districts receive more aid than Chicago on a per student basis, as well as state aid as a percentage of their budgets. Much of this money is also a straight pass through of federal dollars administered by the state.
I never said that suburban and downstate municipalities don't pay anything into their pension funds, They do. They also receive money from the state for their pensions, Chicago pensions are not part of that system.
I said that Chicagoans pay into all of those funds via state taxes and no one outside of Chicago pays into Chicago pension funds. My point that Chicagoans are on the hook for the rest of the state and on their own for Chicago pensions is accurate. It isn't just a matter of how it is accounted for.
You're correct that wealthy suburbs get less state aid than Chicago, but that's because the aid is mainly based on poverty levels. Suburbs with high poverty levels (i.e many south of Chicago) and many rural downstate districts receive more aid than Chicago on a per student basis, as well as state aid as a percentage of their budgets. Much of this money is also a straight pass through of federal dollars administered by the state.
I agree 100 percent, and also would note that the state isn't even coming close to living up to its constitutionally-mandated requirement to pay for the majority of public schooling. Here it is:
How else can one interpret "primary responsibility for financing the system of public education" which in the above section is defined as free public education through the secondary level?
As a union guy myself, I hate when all Unions get lumped together as some scourge of the tax dollars.
The antics of the public sector unions makes me sick. They get away with murder, for things I would have been fired for long ago with no severance or notice.
As far as pensions, they should put the pensions in the hands of the unions like all the trades. The govt pays into the pension funds X amount per employee per work share.
It's then up to the union to figure out how to make it work.
Union bosses want to raid the pension fund? That's fine. They'll also then have to deal with the angry mob of pitchfork carrying members outside ready to burn the hall down.
But that is exactly what the government was supposed to be doing and didn't. Putting money into pension funds. How is it a municipal employee's fault the government has been violating the terms of their contract?
Hey, if there are corrupt union officials, by all means let's purge them from the industry. It isn't exactly a secret that organized crime infiltrated many unions and just leeched money out.
But the principle that labor should be able to negotiate is a fundamental constitutional right to assemble peaceably. It is not right, nor sustainable, to have corporations claiming rights as people when actual people are having those rights denied.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
