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 pension was and is part of the compensation package when you are hired. Some employers offer bonuses, matching 401k's and other perks. Some offer a more generous salary. The employer has the right to change the compensation through negotiation. The pension is a contributory plan in which the employee makes a payment once vested the terms can not be changed. The fact that employees contribute to the pension is one major difference with private sector pensions as currently constructed and as they operated in the past.
I feel sorry for young teachers, I'll tell ya that. By the time the current retired teachers drain the system and die, there will really be nothing left for them.
The young teachers should be pushing their union to end their forced contributions to the defined benefit system and move to 401Ks that they can control.
Nothing left for them is a little much. Regardless of what happens with pensions whatever you put in you will get back if not more with interest. Besides that most you would like nothing more then teachers and the rest of the bunch to pay or suffer. Of course all the while you go about happily being raped by big business and never questioning them a bit. How much to insure companies make? I know I know they are private I wonder who pays those bills???
Nothing left for them is a little much. Regardless of what happens with pensions whatever you put in you will get back if not more with interest. Besides that most you would like nothing more then teachers and the rest of the bunch to pay or suffer. Of course all the while you go about happily being raped by big business and never questioning them a bit. How much to insure companies make? I know I know they are private I wonder who pays those bills???
The rest of his post is asking if some people deserve to have a pension. The age of his relative makes absolutely no difference to that question.
Do people deserve to have a pension?
People deserve to receive the benefits that were part of their contractual agreement. Perhaps you took a different Contract Law class than I did, but I don't recall any part of Contract Law stating that a contract could be legally violated because one party later decided that it did not like the terms that they had earlier agreed to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom1944
The pension was and is part of the compensation package when you are hired. Some employers offer bonuses, matching 401k's and other perks. Some offer a more generous salary. The employer has the right to change the compensation through negotiation. The pension is a contributory plan in which the employee makes a payment once vested the terms can not be changed. The fact that employees contribute to the pension is one major difference with private sector pensions as currently constructed and as they operated in the past.
And, of course, this leads to the inevitable question:
If teaching is/was such a lucrative "gravy train", why did the current critics of teacher pensions not jump on that gravy train when they had the chance?
The most likely reasons for failure to jump onto that supposedly lucrative gravy train are:
>The salary was lower--perhaps significantly lower--than what those critics were earning in the private sector.
>The critic is not a college graduate.
There may be other reasons for failure to jump onto that gravy train, but these are the ones that come to mind. Can anyone give us the other reasons why thousands more people did not desire to become teachers, but now serve as critics of that profession?
I don't think anyone that is already retired should have any of their lifetime benefits or pension taken away or reduced.
However, no one deserves lifetime anything on the taxpayer's dime. No one deserves free anything (i.e. health benefits) on the taxpayer's dime. We need reform. Actually, we needed reform a long time ago. Teachers are no longer paid a salary that is far lower than everyone else, justifying the free benefits and benefits for life deal.
And the notion that if teachers were paid per student...if they were paid even just $3 an hour per student, they'd really be making $150,000 a year or something...is the most foolish b.s. I have ever heard. Teachers are managers of sorts. Managers manage groups. That is the job description of a manager. You don't get paid per head. If a teacher should get paid per each of the 30 students in his/her class, then the principal should get paid per each of the 500 students in his/her school? It's a cutesy idea, but let's get real.
The other defense of teacher benefits that makes me roll my eyes is the "Teaching is noble" or the "Teachers are heroes" defense. I don't want to hear a sanctimonious explanation that sounds like a Mariah Carey or Whitney Houston song about heroes having the strength to carry on and teaching the children or our future to lead the way.
Nothing left for them is a little much. Regardless of what happens with pensions whatever you put in you will get back if not more with interest. Besides that most you would like nothing more then teachers and the rest of the bunch to pay or suffer. Of course all the while you go about happily being raped by big business and never questioning them a bit. How much to insure companies make? I know I know they are private I wonder who pays those bills???
No one wants teachers to suffer or be punished. We are asking why teachers are entitled to things like free benefits for life? Asking teachers to contribute towards their health insurance premiums is asking them to suffer?
Also, this has nothing to do with insurance companies or evil "big business" raping people. This is the typical kind of histrionic response in these discussions or debates about teacher compensation/benefits that makes teachers lose credibility. All of a sudden, you start railing against "big business" and Wall Street and bad mortgages. Insurance companies are evil...so teachers deserve free benefits for life? Subprime mortgages are evil...so teachers deserve free benefits for life? Teachers did not cause the meltdown on Wall Street...so teachers deserve free benefits for life? What kind of thinking is this? You are throwing up a smoke screen because you don't have any real answers or justifications for teacher benefits.
And, of course, this leads to the inevitable question:
If teaching is/was such a lucrative "gravy train", why did the current critics of teacher pensions not jump on that gravy train when they had the chance?
The most likely reasons for failure to jump onto that supposedly lucrative gravy train are:
>The salary was lower--perhaps significantly lower--than what those critics were earning in the private sector.
>The critic is not a college graduate.
There may be other reasons for failure to jump onto that gravy train, but these are the ones that come to mind. Can anyone give us the other reasons why thousands more people did not desire to become teachers, but now serve as critics of that profession?
Another typical teacher response...the "If it's so easy and so lucrative, why don't you do it?" response.
Not all people want to be teachers...so teachers deserve free benefits for life?
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.
