100% of Education's share of tax increase will go to teacher's pensions (San Bernardino: bankrupt, school district)

[Bulldogdad]

What it means is that as your trying to fill up the educational bath tub with tax water it continues to drain faster than you can fill it up. It's a run away train and the only way to stop it is to blow up a section of track and let it crash.

A buddy of mine works with the one of the largest school districts in California selling them educational materials as a vendor, millions every year. She has insight that none of us ever get to see because of her working directly with all levels of administration and teachers. Her view point is that unless Californian's are willing to purposely crash the current education system and bring it into the 21st century it will crash on it's own by 2025.

[Youthanasia]

Originally Posted by killer2021

much, much, much more difficult to do in government. Unions pay off the politicians and anyone who doesn't go with the union's agenda gets a switch boot to the rear. The unions have alot of financial power as well as influence. That goes along way.

Easier to just screw the tax payer.

Odd you say that, if you actually pay attention to California politics you will notice that Unions use membership dues money to financially support the very same politicians that are voting on paycuts, unpaid days off, pension contribution spikes to members and layoffs... this is why a majority of the state employees I have come across are voting YES on 32 because they are tired of their own money being used AGAINST THEM.

The voter guides the unions send out also endorse the very same politicians that are cutting wages and benefits, state employees may not be the smartest bunch, but they aren't THAT dumb.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Youthanasia

Odd you say that, if you actually pay attention to California politics you will notice that Unions use membership dues money to financially support the very same politicians that are voting on paycuts, unpaid days off, pension contribution spikes to members and layoffs... this is why a majority of the state employees I have come across are voting YES on 32 because they are tired of their own money being used AGAINST THEM.

The voter guides the unions send out also endorse the very same politicians that are cutting wages and benefits, state employees may not be the smartest bunch, but they aren't THAT dumb.

Dang it! Where did I miss that we were supposed to be dumb? Was that on the job description? Oh, wait a minute! We retired some years ago. The way things are going now, perhaps we were among the smart ones. Glad we dodged that bullet!

[04kL4nD]

Funny, I'm a State employee and everyone I know/work with is voting AGAINST 32, Yes on 30, and yes on A

[Leonard64]

Originally Posted by Youthanasia

Odd you say that, if you actually pay attention to California politics you will notice that Unions use membership dues money to financially support the very same politicians that are voting on paycuts, unpaid days off, pension contribution spikes to members and layoffs... this is why a majority of the state employees I have come across are voting YES on 32 because they are tired of their own money being used AGAINST THEM.

The voter guides the unions send out also endorse the very same politicians that are cutting wages and benefits, state employees may not be the smartest bunch, but they aren't THAT dumb.

As long as the Union bosses get their fat paychecks and perks and exercise power, they won't care about the members.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by 04kL4nD

Funny, I'm a State employee and everyone I know/work with is voting AGAINST 32, Yes on 30, and yes on A

shocking

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

...Though I didn't vote for Prop 30, I'd be hard pressed to support the sentiment that the money goes to teacher pensions. If the payment for pensions is identical with or without Prop 30 passing, then that means the funds must go to something else.

I see your point, but I think going forward we must start to view things usually considered as "givens" or "fixed costs" (pension contributions) instead as variable costs subject to modification.

The original contracts that created the teacher pension "given" should be considered invalid as it was not an arms-length negotiation.

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

I see your point, but I think going forward we must start to view things usually considered as "givens" or "fixed costs" (pension contributions) instead as variable costs subject to modification.

We also need to get rid of the idea that a decrease in the rate of increase is "slashing the budget" in government.

[04kL4nD]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

shocking

right? Who'd a thunk that teachers at a public university would vote this way? Madness!

[MIKEETC]

Originally Posted by Bulldogdad

What it means is that as your trying to fill up the educational bath tub with tax water it continues to drain faster than you can fill it up. It's a run away train and the only way to stop it is to blow up a section of track and let it crash.

A buddy of mine works with the one of the largest school districts in California selling them educational materials as a vendor, millions every year. She has insight that none of us ever get to see because of her working directly with all levels of administration and teachers. Her view point is that unless Californian's are willing to purposely crash the current education system and bring it into the 21st century it will crash on it's own by 2025.

I agree with this.

[a radical problem requires a radical solution]