U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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 08-31-2017, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Chicago,IL and Estero,FL
110 posts, read 137,918 times
Reputation: 141

Advertisements

2 ex government employees trying to justify why we should be happy to help pay for their retirement. Oh please!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-31-2017, 05:21 PM
 
4,084 posts, read 7,781,562 times
Reputation: 5684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delahanty View Post
As a retired public employee, a sore point for me is when someone mistakenly thinks that they're "paying for" something which government retirees aren't paying for or haven't paid for.
Taxpayers are subsidizing public employee pensions by something like for 4 to 1. For every $1 a public employee contributes, taxpayers pay $4. An employee at a company is lucky to get 1 to 1 match from the employer. Enjoy your pension. Enjoy other people's sweat and labor.

Editorial, Aug. 13, 2017: California taxpayers pay high cost for public employee pensions

Paying for public retirees has never cost L.A. taxpayers more. And that’s after pension reform - Los Angeles Times

California is land to the $100k minimum wage state worker: 220,000 highly-compensated state employees cost the public $35 billion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2017, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Washington State
18,462 posts, read 9,561,235 times
Reputation: 15753
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigCreek View Post
It's very bad in Kentucky. Our carpetbagger governor Matt Bevin promised he'd set it all straight - instead, he hired consultants who have proposed that the cost of living raises given to retirees from 1996 through 2012 be rescinded, with said retirees' current pensions being reduced up to 25% to cover the deficit.

We're talking COL raises given up to 21 years ago - and long spent. Now the state should get them back?? The same state government who botched retirement plan investments and failed to pay in its legally required share for its employees? How is it that those who made these wretched decisions get off the hook - while those who were long promised a decent and reliable retirement must now be docked of long-past COL raises to make up the deficit caused by others' carelessness and callousness?

Right, public employees (including local communities' police, firefighters, public librarians, social workers, etc., plus other employees who worked directly for the state of Kentucky) who worked at their jobs for a quarter of a century or more for less than private market wages and who did not job-hop, who were promised good retirement benefits in compensation, and who paid in their own legal share, would be rewarded by having their pensions drastically cut to make up for the lax behavior and poor investments of current and previous governors and state government representatives, all of whom are covered with a different retirement program which is fiscally solvent.

If anyone can find any justice or common sense in this, please enlighten me.

Not gonna fly. Retirees and their families, friends, and advocates are outraged at this, as well as at Gov. Matt Bevin's comments on teachers who occasionally take sick leave (public school teachers in Kentucky are also covered by state retirement, but in a slightly different form, and so they are not included in the COL take-back proposal).

Bevin and his cronies (financially dubious cronies, I should add) are clueless when it comes to the public good, and it burns me that my tax dollars are being spent on useless and punitive consultants who came up with such a brainless suggestion. If this proposal goes through, heads are going to roll in Frankfort when the next election comes around.
It's definitely going to be a problem to be dealt with because you were promised the pension and perhaps made your decision to continue working there based on that promise. However, the Kentucky pension is only funded at 31% so you will need future taxpayers to pay for your pension....Kentucky, Illini, Connecticut are all underfunded and are not exactly states on a super fast growth path so as taxes are raised to pay for these pensions, it could drive more and more people out of those states meaning fewer and fewer payers which the long term effect could be so burdensome that the state goes broke...n which case, your pension might not be worth that much.

The problem is that politicians sold the lie for votes of public employees and voters bought the lie....it's going to be a huge problem in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2017, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
35,450 posts, read 10,488,468 times
Reputation: 33527
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
Taxpayers are subsidizing public employee pensions by something like for 4 to 1. For every $1 a public employee contributes, taxpayers pay $4. An employee at a company is lucky to get 1 to 1 match from the employer. Enjoy your pension. Enjoy other people's sweat and labor.

Editorial, Aug. 13, 2017: California taxpayers pay high cost for public employee pensions

Paying for public retirees has never cost L.A. taxpayers more. And thatís after pension reform - Los Angeles Times

California is land to the $100k minimum wage state worker: 220,000 highly-compensated state employees cost the public $35 billion.

Again, public employees and retirees pay taxes, too. And we also paid taxes annually on our pension contributions.

If you want to sqwawk about public pensions, squawk about decades of savings not being realized because unions have continued to thwart establishment of new pension tiers, and sqwawk about government employers contributing to their states' unfunded liabilities by "deferring" payments to their state pension funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2017, 09:37 PM
 
26,589 posts, read 52,267,707 times
Reputation: 20410
My close friend has been assistant city manager and city manager for two Bay Area cities... the largest financial issue is public safety pensions...

The actuaries projected out to 2037 where the retirement benefits will consume the entire city budget...

Don't know how it works elsewhere but the unions agreed to terminate the old pension system which has police and fire getting what the position currently pays and in some cases with longevity pensioners are getting double of more than the most ever earned...

The replacement promised lifetime medical and full contribution paid for by the city with 3% per year and retirement eligible at 50... so 30 years would be 90%...

Only stating the obvious as to sustainability...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2017, 06:39 AM
 
Location: USA
6,223 posts, read 5,356,171 times
Reputation: 10636
I suppose they will need to do what the private sector has done for awhile and move to a 401k style plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2017, 07:13 AM
 
708 posts, read 501,901 times
Reputation: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
No guilt trip here just pointing out that you didn't pay for your pension to the degree that you originally claimed. Govt pensioners seem to overestimate their contributions to their pensions.

You can have your pension, just don't complain when it gets cut from budget cuts. Living off the govt teat you are subject to the whims of the govt and fed up taxpayers.
You have to remember most state employees and teachers get paid less then the normal pay rate in a state for their education status. Pension is a big incentive to work in the public section vs. private. Now I will say their are many jobs that should not be paying a pension in the state. Some should be similar to a 401K based retirement. Every state has hard jobs to fill competing with the private sector, those need a pension based retirement. It needs to looked into for sure to shore up these dismal percentages is some states.

Last edited by Willistonite; 09-01-2017 at 08:17 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2017, 07:20 AM
 
Location: USA
17,644 posts, read 8,845,467 times
Reputation: 13173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willistonite View Post
You have to remember most state employees and teachers get paid less then the normal pay rate in a state for their education status. Pension is a big incentive to work in the public section vs. private is the pension. Now I will say their are many jobs that should not be paying a pension in the state. Some should be similar to a 401K based retirement. Every state has hard jobs to fill competing with the private sector, those need a pension based retirement. It needs to looked into for sure to shore up these dismal percentages is some states.
I've worked in both public sector (early in my career), and private sector (bulk of my career), and that has changed. Many public sector jobs are now competitive with private sector in salary, and benefits, and actually over market rates when you factor in benefits, and pensions.


The people I used to work with in government all retired in their 50's with most of their salaries in pensions, and full benefits. They live VERY nice lifestyles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2017, 07:45 AM
 
35,324 posts, read 25,158,624 times
Reputation: 32409
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSHL10 View Post
Are you paying for the full amount of your pension? I haven't heard of any govt employee who has to date. Everyone I know pays a portion of it with the rest funded via tax payers most of whom do not get a govt pension.

And in turn they get state employees for WAY below market rates. That's the trade off. I left public service twice because I just couldn't afford to do it. Pay scales were just way to low, gained 40%+ each time I left. The health care as well was worse than what I received in the private sector.


Quote:
Originally Posted by s1alker View Post
I suppose they will need to do what the private sector has done for awhile and move to a 401k style plan.

This mentality is the problem. This is not the solution. The rest of labor should be fighting to move back to pensions, not worsen the system of other's to align with their crappy system. There is plenty of money out there, plenty of wealth, these changes over the past 30-40 have just benefitted the ultra wealthy. The working classes need to stop tearing town each other and work to build each other up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-01-2017, 08:16 AM
 
708 posts, read 501,901 times
Reputation: 1165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
I've worked in both public sector (early in my career), and private sector (bulk of my career), and that has changed. Many public sector jobs are now competitive with private sector in salary, and benefits, and actually over market rates when you factor in benefits, and pensions.


The people I used to work with in government all retired in their 50's with most of their salaries in pensions, and full benefits. They live VERY nice lifestyles.
You are right it is changing, but there are many positions that need to pay competitive packages. Also my
point, like it or not, states are going to have to go different retirement programs depending on positons and education level. You can see what is happening in highly unionized states like Illinois, completely underfunded pension programs. I am not an anti-union person but the one size fits all mentality will not work in the public sector going forward.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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