MA Real Estate Taxes

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

That's the opposite of a specific answer. What would you cut? How would you make your town run more like a private company?

More services need to be regionalized.

[Brave Stranger]

Pension costs are where the real savings in government are. I agree Mass is not likely to do 401ks, but in the future they may not have a choice.

[brent s]

Damn, coming from NY property taxes are a bargain in MA. I happily cut that check every quarter.

[Boston_Burbs]

I turned down a public job because of the pension system.

Yea it seems all nice and rosy on the outside. A defined benefit from retirement to death.. but as a young person, you are basically locking yourself in to be a public employee for the rest of your life.

What is scary is that MA is one of a few states that opts out of social security for their public employees. You pay 11% of your pay into the system. So if some where down the road you want to change careers, or maybe start your own business, you leave with essentially nothing. Your time in, unless it is 15+ years gives you measly benefit. You have no SS benefits, and unless you did it on your own, no 401k.

I have found because of this, the public sector has people not working to live, but working to retire. My moms a teacher and all her and her friends talk about is their retirement date. Its a sad way to live.

Perhaps this is the skeptic in me talking, but I would much rather have MY money in MY 401k and be able to leave when ever I want without a second thought about my pension. To me its annoying enough I need to give 6% of my money to be babysat by the government, no way I am giving another 5. Plus, this is not even mentioning the concern of a politician in a political crisis waving magic wand and changing the system.

IMO, the federal government has it right with their 3 tiered retirement. SS + a small pension (1% paid by the employee) + a 401k with a match. It gives you much more freedom as an employee, to leave without a second thought.

[City Guy997S]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

That's what I hear, but what exactly are those inefficiencies? How can they be cut? Is it over staffing? Sweetheart contracts with vendors and contractors? Duplicate services?

My buddy used to work on a union paving crew. Lots of down time, the paving crew could not add any fluids to the machinery, there was a lube guy that did that. So if a machine needed oil, they would stop working (to save the machine from damage) and wait for the lube guy to come and add a few quarts of oil.

They also couldn't work on snow days so they collected unemployment then went out and did snow plowing on the side for cash!

He moved to Florida and quickly realized that paving is hard work in the sun, non union conditions and they work 24/7 so there was no days off like snow days!

[City Guy997S]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

That would cost a lot in the short run but could prove beneficial in the long run. I don't see public employees accepting such an arrangement, though, and I don't see this state proposing, much less passing, something unpopular with public employees.



That's the opposite of a specific answer. What would you cut? How would you make your town run more like a private company?

Well much like the NHL lockout, you offer the alternative and then replace them if they don't want to participate. The hardest short term would be law enforcement/fire rescue. In all reality the pension programs are bad math.....you can't collect out of any program for more years than you worked and for more money than you made most of your career! Many local govts are taking loans now to pay their pension liabilities....yeah that is really bad math (future debt to cover current liabilities! )

[bUU]

Originally Posted by City Guy997S

He moved to Florida and quickly realized that paving is hard work in the sun, non union conditions and they work 24/7 so there was no days off like snow days!

That reminds me of my spouses youngest brother, a Florida native who was a construction worker. He died at the age of 29 of heat stroke, back before OSHA regulations were as stringent as they are now, no doubt.

[konfetka]

It's healthcare.

17% of GDP is spend on healthcare vs. 9% in the rest of the world.

Likewise, in Beverly, for example, it was 17% in 2011. It was also growing at 10% annually.
There was no deductibles and co-pays used to be only $15.

Beverly and 20 other towns changed their insurance plan and after negotiating with unions, Beverly saved $1.5 million per year, by increasing their deductibles and co-pays.

But now it went down to 16% from 17% of the budget, which still looks too high.
So depending on the town up to 20% of your tax bill goes to health insurance for city employees.

Now how would you expect them to vote to increase their own health insurance?

It wasn't even possible until the new healthcare law in 2011 in Massachusetts, which allowed negotiating health insurance.