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.
Firstly, I just want to say that I am part of the growing number of voters in NJ who have been very unhappy with Jon Corzine. There is no shortage of dislike for him on this site. However, I'm interested in knowing if he has done anything positive for NJ.
I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but then again I don't follow NJ current events and government close enough to just say he hasn't done anything positive. Can you name anything? I want to hear about them if they’re out there. Please, no one line sarcastic smarta** responses. I'm really curious to get the entire picture of this governor.
Last edited by izannimda; 07-01-2009 at 09:58 PM..
I am not a Corzine fan, and will not be voting for him. Just recently he capped tuition increases at State colleges to 3% a year, which i think is a good thing
One thing that he's done is sign a bill to raise the retirement age for new public employees. It's a baby step, but it is a step in the right direction (e.g. as opposed to Whitmans decision that the pension plan was overfunded). I think he deserves some credit for this. This is the type of thing that is seldom changed in the right direction.
Whoever is the next governor, needs to get the state pension system under control. It's not enough to complain about taxes, it's not even enough to talk a good game about cutting spending -- you need to cut spending on the things that cost serious $ (health, education, and pensions). Of these, the one item that is an out-of-control wrecking ball that is growing, is the pension system. I think it's difficult to cut spending on health, and I don't think they want to cut education spending (not at the state level anyway -- local is another matter)
Christie claims that he will shut down defined benefit plans, which is the right approach to fixing the broken pension system. Whether or not he'll actually get this through is another matter. It seems to be a long way down the todo list on his website, but it really is a major issue as far as the budget is concerned.
I understand the pension fund is $58B underfunded, yet he chose to go another year without funding it. Where will all the $$ for pensions owed come from?
I understand the pension fund is $58B underfunded, yet he chose to go another year without funding it.
Could you elaborate ? How did you choose "to go another year without funding it" ? My understanding was that he gave towns some breathing room (he let them defer payments). If he hadn't done this, everyone here would be squealing about their property taxes going up.
Quote:
Where will all the $$ for pensions owed come from?
The employees in the system need to contribute more. The contributions for state employees have increased to 5.5% (from 5.0%) and the retirement age has increased in two steps, from 55 to 60 and 60 to 62.
This is not completely satisfactory, but it is a good start, and it is a move in the right direction.
I understand the pension fund is $58B underfunded, yet he chose to go another year without funding it. Where will all the $$ for pensions owed come from?
From the suburbanites. After all, they're all filthy rich and don't pay their fair share.
One thing that he's done is sign a bill to raise the retirement age for new public employees. It's a baby step, but it is a step in the right direction (e.g. as opposed to Whitmans decision that the pension plan was overfunded). I think he deserves some credit for this. This is the type of thing that is seldom changed in the right direction.
Whoever is the next governor, needs to get the state pension system under control. It's not enough to complain about taxes, it's not even enough to talk a good game about cutting spending -- you need to cut spending on the things that cost serious $ (health, education, and pensions). Of these, the one item that is an out-of-control wrecking ball that is growing, is the pension system. I think it's difficult to cut spending on health, and I don't think they want to cut education spending (not at the state level anyway -- local is another matter)
Christie claims that he will shut down defined benefit plans, which is the right approach to fixing the broken pension system. Whether or not he'll actually get this through is another matter. It seems to be a long way down the todo list on his website, but it really is a major issue as far as the budget is concerned.
I wasn't going to post in this thread, but this fired me up a little bit. OK, Christie says he's going to shut down defined benefit plans. Two things come to my mind:
1. Will Chris Christie give up his pension?
2. How does a person who's primary job for the last several years paid under $150,000 ( Federal Employee Details ) live in a house assessed at well over $2,000,000 ( New Jersey property owners - 2007
), with a tax bill of over $35,000 per year? Even if his wife made the same salary (or double his salary), how would this be possible? Could it have been working all those years in the private sector before working in the public sector?
Here's my point: Chris Christie is able to talk all this smack about shutting down defined benefit programs because he most likely doesn't need a pension, so it won't really affect him. (But again, would he be willing to give up his pension?) This is just another case of another super wealthy politician wanting to take away from those hard-working public employees who need and deserve pensions. 98% of public employees do not have the options that Chris Christie had to work in the private sector making crazy money or to get major sources of income from sources outside of their primary public sector jobs.
Now, even though I'm a loopy lefty (flame away, I know this board leans to the right), I'm no Corzine fan. I think he's done a very poor job as governor, and that he's come to represent all of the atrocities of government he campaigned so furiously against many years ago when he was getting his political career started. (He did help to get rid of the death penalty though. That, IMHO, was the one good thing he accomplished.)
But I would certainly still take him over Christie. (Not that I plan on voting for him, it will most likely be a third-party candidate for me!)
Last edited by zhelder; 07-05-2009 at 06:07 PM..
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.
State Pension Fund Underfunded by $58B
