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.
Well, there are private sector pensioners who have been screwed - sometimes life isn’t fair...
So let's make it unfair for everyone instead of fighting to make it fairer for everyone? Bring everyone down to the lowest level instead of pulling others upward?
Well, there are private sector pensioners who have been screwed - sometimes life isn’t fair... NJ should make good on its obligations, but concessions might be needed from the other side fair or not. Union concessions were how Rhode Island was able to get back on track without completely screwing the retirees. For the record, my parents and in-laws benefit are benefiting from state pensions (not NJ pensions, though).
If public sector pensioners are to be screwed as you say like private sector employees have been shouldn't the public sector employees have the rights as a creditor like private sector workers had?
So discretionary spending would have to clear a creditor committee and assets could be sold off to pay creditors. If you did that pensions would be fully funded
I might leave in part because of Phil Murphy. This state is already in serious trouble and Murphy's election tells me it's not going to get any better anytime soon.
I'm a registered Republican with libertarian views, but I'm more about issues and ideology than party lines. I agree with you as well. I think we need to cut spending to meet our priorities and change the pension and health benefits systems for future retirees. Governor Christie put together a commission that came up with good recommendations to reform the pension and health benefits systems for future retirees, no one in the legislature ever considered these reforms. As a state, I think our priorities have to be 1) affordability 2) meeting our pension and health benefits obligations and 3) investing in our infrastructure without higher taxes.
We need reform to meet our obligations, so the answer to your question is no.
So your anger really has nothing to do with Murphy ,you just want to blame someone.
So let's make it unfair for everyone instead of fighting to make it fairer for everyone? Bring everyone down to the lowest level instead of pulling others upward?
Merry Christmas everyone.
Unfortunately many things in the US are becoming a race to the bottom - the move away from defined benefit plans and towards self-service 401K’s is no doubt a raw deal for most workers (for those that are even lucky enough to get a 401k with match). How is someone with minimal financial acumen supposed to manage their investments? In the current state there are clear winners and losers in the retirement funding game. Granted the one plus to 401K’s is job portability since vesting periods are much shorter and much less substantial than defined benefit plans.
Ideally public and private sector employees would all have well-funded defined benefit plans, but at least for the private sector the trend keeps moving sharply in the opposite direction and many private sector retirees have had the rug pulled out from under them. Pathmark was bought by a German conglomerate years ago so their overfunded pension could be raided. Since A&P / Pathmark has declared bankruptcy, the pensions are now paid out by the PBGC which serves as a backstop, but for many retirees payments were not as high as they were anticipating.
What are private sector employees to do (aside from switching over to the public sector)? Revolt until the good old days of defined benefit plans come back? Unlikely as that train has left the station unless there is a major shortage of workers and labor gains the upper hand.
I once read an interesting article that noted Social Security and Medicare are successful because everyone benefits, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. Therefore it is in everyone’s best interest to keep those programs solvent. On the other hand, benefits that only some receive are more susceptible to attack and cuts since those who don’t benefit are saying why the heck should I have to pay for the other guy. In the case of NJ pensions, it is indeed a bad thing that the funds were raided many years ago and the can has been kicked down the road for too long. Now the bill is coming due and per an article I saw from a few years ago, every household would have to pay ~12k to make the fund solvent (that number didn’t include health benefits owed). Ouch, and the majority of households can’t afford that which results in resentment and Christie did a great job at fanning those flames (at least directed towards teachers). Also, I get that in some cases pensioners did not pay into Social Security so that increases the urgency to clean up the mess that was created. Divided we fall.
Last edited by Cubicle Dweller; 12-22-2017 at 01:04 PM..
What are private sector employees to do (aside from switching over to the public sector)? Revolt until the good old days of defined benefit plans come back? Unlikely as that train has left the station unless there is a major shortage of workers and labor gains the upper hand.
I suppose we'll just have to find out. Again.
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.
