U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-29-2016, 09:38 AM
 
8,373 posts, read 4,578,036 times
Reputation: 8915

Advertisements

yes, because you cant seperate taxes as what they are for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-30-2016, 08:43 PM
 
3,165 posts, read 1,275,306 times
Reputation: 6326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
The main reason is that the private employers have way more applicants than jobs, so they are in the catbird seat. Typically, there is intense competition for decent Federal or State jobs, BECAUSE of the benefits. The number of public employees has to continue to grow as the population grows. No choice for the most part. Yet the percentage of the pool of qualified, drug free people drops every year, as more and more of the bulk of the population is less educated and has entitement atitudes. Being a Federal or State employee has no allure today. Many years ago it was a job choice, just like all the other jobs that were available. The disparity between public and private is indeed due to corporate greed mandates from the 0.1% major stockholders, who are also high government officials making choices that do not benefit the average person that just wants a good job with fair pay and benfits in their own country. They are making choices that benefit the 0.1%.
What? Government employment has huge allure today. I have a coworker who interviewed for a federal position that had 2500 applicants and it wasn't a particularly prestigious or alluring opening as far as openings go. People are willing to take gigantic pay cuts for federal jobs due to the job security. The same can't necessarily for the security of state/local government employment, but for most of those the benefits like health insurance are extremely cheap and there is still a really good pension plan. That said, in many of the state/local positions, there have been no raises at all (not even COLA increases) for years or only 1-2 very small raises in the past 5-7 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 05:08 PM
 
Location: Monterey County California
254 posts, read 229,401 times
Reputation: 264
Im sure those public employees hate how they have to pay for my stock options and they don't get them as well. It all works out. If you want a public employee pension get a job working for the public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 05:14 PM
NCN
 
Location: NC/SC Border Patrol
21,136 posts, read 21,264,276 times
Reputation: 23169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
Should tax paying citizens who do not have a pension plan going for them be required to fund the pensions of others?

Few private sector employees have a pension plan in this day and age. However, most public sector employees (municipal, state and Federal) have pension plans that are funded in whole or in part from taxes imposed on all people in their respective tax base.

In my mind, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to require people who don't have a pension to fund the pensions of people in the public sector. If it were up to me, I would provide for a tax credit for people without a pension plan or, better yet, pass a law that required all public sector employees to fund their own pensions.

What makes sense to you?
I saw little that makes any sense in your post. Are you one of those people who think government workers should work for free?

They do pay their own pensions, or I did. I asked if it was optional and was told no. I thought I could do better on my own. Sometimes after you pay into these pension plans, they are still taken away and reduced.

Employment benefits from one sector to the other have nothing to do with each other. You are not personally paying the pension. It was part of their employment that was supported by taxes such as SS. We paid into that too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Central IL
13,700 posts, read 7,350,471 times
Reputation: 31736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
Should tax paying citizens who do not have a pension plan going for them be required to fund the pensions of others?

Few private sector employees have a pension plan in this day and age. However, most public sector employees (municipal, state and Federal) have pension plans that are funded in whole or in part from taxes imposed on all people in their respective tax base.

In my mind, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to require people who don't have a pension to fund the pensions of people in the public sector. If it were up to me, I would provide for a tax credit for people without a pension plan or, better yet, pass a law that required all public sector employees to fund their own pensions.

What makes sense to you?
Hmmmm....do people who don't have kids pay taxes that support the education of other people's kids?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 05:48 PM
 
3,741 posts, read 2,126,853 times
Reputation: 3413
What an odd OP.

It's part of the compensation package, like salary or anything else.

(I don't have a pension, and would love to cut back on pension abuses btw.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 06:46 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,261 posts, read 13,411,332 times
Reputation: 14156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
Should tax paying citizens who do not have a pension plan going for them be required to fund the pensions of others?
This is a ballot initiative issue, whereby you need to amend your State constitution, city articles of incorporation and county charters so that pension plans are voted on by the People instead of the politicians.

That will at least give you and the People some control over private pension plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2016, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Hiding from Antifa?
5,839 posts, read 3,821,892 times
Reputation: 5022
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
This is quite simple. Government employees should be paid equal to that of private employees and should be given the option to participate in a 401k.

No more pensions for public employees.

EDIT: I bet most public employees would not want to this to happen, because they know they have a sweet deal.
There would still be a significant number of people who would opt for the public sector jobs. Especially the ones that prefer to "work" where they can't get fired.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2016, 10:11 AM
 
772 posts, read 404,532 times
Reputation: 757
Why should their retirement plans be put in 401ks run by Wall Street? Did the financial crisis not teach anybody anything? Did Americans get a vote when 401ks were bailed out by the government along with the banks in 2008?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2016, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Liminal Space
1,018 posts, read 1,174,469 times
Reputation: 1294
The entire premise of the thread is invalid. Take, for instance the California pension system (CalPERS). The pensions are paid for entirely out of employee and employer contributions. In fact, every other public pension plan I've heard of was similar. I've actually never heard of a public pension plan that funds pensions directly from tax dollars. I'm not sure the situation the OP is asking about exists.
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

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top