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.
The other fact is that in Illinois there is an excellent demonstration of the difficulty of trying to screw over younger workers will arbitrarily allowing existing insiders to stay fat and happy, namely the unfilled positions are largely those that would be subject to the "Tier II" rules. This too is understandable as economics tells us that workers are extremely unlikely to accept conditions that are against self interest; trying to get insiders fat on the backs of younger hires is a classic example of such a situation.
If they want to offer younger worker inferior retirement benefits then they have to compensate by offering a higher salary. I'd have no problem taking a position that had inferior retirement benefits if the pay was also higher to compensate. I'd just fund an IRA. I evaluate an offer like most people based on total compensation.
I think the only thing the state can do is figure out an affordable buyout to the pensioners and switch over to a 401k system. The state is not capable of handling a pension system. I'm not sure the Dems are competent enough to run a fast food restaurant.
That would be an economically rational and consistent decision --EXACTLY what Unions would block!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
If they want to offer younger worker inferior retirement benefits then they have to compensate by offering a higher salary. I'd have no problem taking a position that had inferior retirement benefits if the pay was also higher to compensate. I'd just fund an IRA. I evaluate an offer like most people based on total compensation.
I think the only thing the state can do is figure out an affordable buyout to the pensioners and switch over to a 401k system. The state is not capable of handling a pension system. I'm not sure the Dems are competent enough to run a fast food restaurant.
The Golden Tenants of unions who promote "seniority alone equals higher wages" like the Teamsters and other thugish organizations end up protecting the stupid lazy worker over the worker that actually does a better job. I have no problems with the sorts of trade unions like IBEW and others that actually invest in training workers to have higher skills and they do have folks that quickly EARN the right to be better paid for their skills while others wash out of the apprenticeship.
It very well might make sense to entice workers with a fresh mindset into State jobs with a bit of a premium to offset the lower Tier II premium but the fat cat Union leaders would fight tooth and nail over such a proposal; they would demand that any raises FIRST get doled out to their do-nothing pals...
I hate to be critical of guys that probably have never taken Econ 101 but when it is so obvious they do know the anything about why state governments are very different than the Federal government the only way to understand the problems of Illinois is to start with the basics.
The first big difference is that no individual state has the ability to set monetary policy -- the simple fact is since only the Federal Government has a Central Bank. States are unable to control things like creating currency or managing interest rates. So while it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for the Federal Government to truly "run out of money" individual states VERY MUCH can be unable to meet their obligations for loans and current accounts.
The second big difference is that the economics of the "safety net" programs like Medicare and Social Security are completely dependent on the ability of the FEDERAL government to secure long term financing. That is why other countries that have been in the headlines like Greece need a "bailout" from the EU and other Central Banks. IF the US government were to ever spend too much on "safety net" programs compared to the US GDP the same sort of deals might be needed. Currently there are plenty of buyers for regular old US Government debt and that sort of bailout is not needed. Changes to "safety net" programs are NOT done exclusively by the Executive Branch but have to be initiated by the US House and reconciled with what will pass the US Senate before being signed or vetoed by the President. If folks object to these changes being at odds with the US Constitution the SCOTUS would be involved too. In contrast individual states really never attempt any such "safety net" -- they do handle the administration of things like Medicaid because the Federal Government control of local hospitals and such is at odds with nature how the nation has evolved, it is also true that states do handle administration of unemployment compensation but they also set the rates for employers to pay taxes to cover such things.
The other fact is that in Illinois there is an excellent demonstration of the difficulty of trying to screw over younger workers will arbitrarily allowing existing insiders to stay fat and happy, namely the unfilled positions are largely those that would be subject to the "Tier II" rules. This too is understandable as economics tells us that workers are extremely unlikely to accept conditions that are against self interest; trying to get insiders fat on the backs of younger hires is a classic example of such a situation.
The Golden Tenants of unions who promote "seniority alone equals higher wages" like the Teamsters and other thugish organizations end up protecting the stupid lazy worker over the worker that actually does a better job. I have no problems with the sorts of trade unions like IBEW and others that actually invest in training workers to have higher skills and they do have folks that quickly EARN the right to be better paid for their skills while others wash out of the apprenticeship.
It very well might make sense to entice workers with a fresh mindset into State jobs with a bit of a premium to offset the lower Tier II premium but the fat cat Union leaders would fight tooth and nail over such a proposal; they would demand that any raises FIRST get doled out to their do-nothing pals...
Chit, I'm glad to hear you support the IBEW, been an active "outside" member since 1984! But, I will tell you, the teamsters I worked (and some of the management) with at UPS were no fat cats, they worked the dog s#+% out of you. Lol. As much as I hated working there, it opened doors for me to get into the IBEW Apprenticeship.
If they want to offer younger worker inferior retirement benefits then they have to compensate by offering a higher salary. I'd have no problem taking a position that had inferior retirement benefits if the pay was also higher to compensate. I'd just fund an IRA. I evaluate an offer like most people based on total compensation.
I think the only thing the state can do is figure out an affordable buyout to the pensioners and switch over to a 401k system. The state is not capable of handling a pension system. I'm not sure the Dems are competent enough to run a fast food restaurant.
Inferior, the only republicans that didn't vote for it said it didn't go far enough. DRUMPF and Ryan are going after your entitlements too (SS and Medicare), but don't worry, your 3% match on your 401k will tide you over.
Inferior, the only republicans that didn't vote for it said it didn't go far enough. DRUMPF and Ryan are going after your entitlements too (SS and Medicare), but don't worry, your 3% match on your 401k will tide you over.
If I keep saving at the rate I am I can retire within 15-20 years with or without social security and it won't be in Illinois. I'll move to a red state. All I have to do is keep shielding my money from Dummycraps who want to steal people's money for themselves and their union cronies' lavish retirements.
As I said, I'd get a small one bedroom apartment or a room-mate and two to shield myself from property taxes, keep buying stuff online and in DuPage Co to shield myself from sales taxes, and max out my traditional 401k to shield myself from income. And I will keep voting straight republican because the Dems are nothing but racketeers running "govt" for their benefit and that of their union cronies.
It reminds me of WWII where there would be pictures of Tojo everywhere telling people to do good things like recycle metal to stick it to him. I should have pictures of Mike Madigan hanging up telling people to buy online and vote Republican to stick it to the Democrats.
If I keep saving at the rate I am I can retire within 15-20 years with or without social security and it won't be in Illinois. I'll move to a red state. All I have to do is keep shielding my money from Dummycraps who want to steal people's money for themselves and their union cronies' lavish retirements.
As I said, I'd get a small one bedroom apartment or a room-mate and two to shield myself from property taxes, keep buying stuff online and in DuPage Co to shield myself from sales taxes, and max out my traditional 401k to shield myself from income. And I will keep voting straight republican because the Dems are nothing but racketeers running "govt" for their benefit and that of their union cronies.
It reminds me of WWII where there would be pictures of Tojo everywhere telling people to do good things like recycle metal to stick it to him. I should have pictures of Mike Madigan hanging up telling people to buy online and vote Republican to stick it to the Democrats.
Haha, sounds like a nice life, lol. I hope your more diversified than your 401k, because DRUMF and Ryan ain't gonna let the poor people off the hook, there gonna make you pay.
Keep thinking (and acting) like a poor person and you will stay poor (and bitter). While contributing to a 401k (hopefully with a match) is a start, you should be throwing money in multiple directions (investments). Keep renting, l love my tenants. Your so preoccupied by taxes that you won't see an opportunity. Keep feeling sorry for yourself. I'm constantly looking for a deal, whether it be another rental (I'm small potatoes with 7 rentals), or trying to find the next google stock (hopeing it's mobile eye, AMD, boot barn or dexcom). Although, I did buy Amazon in the 600's and google in the 500's. Along the way, I had some losers in real estate. I and 6others invested in 87 acres. We annexed it into a village and cut it up into 54 estate sized lots. We were fortunate as we were able to pay the bank off before the housing collapse. Neumann and lakewood homes amoung others weren't so fortunate. I walked away with my shirt and one prime lot. I ended up selling it for a loss (20k after paying property taxes for years and years) of my total investment. In 2002, my wife and I (my money, her time) started a small business, 15 years later it's still running. We don't make a killing on it, but she isn't working 80 hours a week (or 40 or 20, lol)either. We can travel and with cell phones it makes it a whole lot easier to stay in contact (still stressful at times). And with that business we have had to deal with hostile (in our opinion) local officials. We ended up leaving on area because of something we thought was excessive. The building we left sat empty for over 4 years, the city lost utility taxes and the landlord lost rent. The over zealous employee eventually moved on, but we were already gone.
Really mind blowing when someone that seems to have really benefited from their own initiative and risk taking constantly sides with the turds that abuse taxpayers to prop up their insider pals...
Whatever mind control chemicals the Union Newsletter mixes in with their ink must be very powerful stuff to get somebody who had such extensive individual investment experience to think that keeping pension fat for lazy government employees is anything other than a recipe for doom.
The success that Rauner has had sounds much more similar to that of folks who've risked their own money to ensure a comfortable lifestyle than the pattern that Madigan has repeated over and over -- he literally profits by reducing the taxes of high rise landlords who then transfer that burden onto the backs of regular homeowners. That cycle is KILLING property values right now in many south suburbs and the pattern is spreading to other areas...
The success that Rauner has had sounds much more similar to that of folks who've risked their own money to ensure a comfortable lifestyle than the pattern that Madigan has repeated over and over -- he literally profits by reducing the taxes of high rise landlords who then transfer that burden onto the backs of regular homeowners. That cycle is KILLING property values right now in many south suburbs and the pattern is spreading to other areas...
It is also severely depressing the economy in Illinois and destroying home ownership for the people. It is mind boggling why anyone would vote for the Democrats other than govt union workers. They are just inflicting such damage and misery on the people they claim to want to serve. Very sad. They are going to turn Illinois into the next Venezuela where the only people thriving are the leftist politicians and their cronies.
The Democrats have become the party of leftist dysfunction and corruption and self-serving government.
Last edited by MSchemist80; 04-25-2017 at 08:52 AM..
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.
That would be an economically rational and consistent decision --EXACTLY what Unions would block!
