Wonder if this will push more folks out of the county? (Atlantic: 2014, teacher salaries)

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

The city employees who would get the increase in pay, are city residents, and in turn city taxpayers.

Not to mention they spend money in the city, which further stimulates the local economy.

One could argue that the taxpayers also spend money in the city. But this isn't actually 100% true, because a certain percentage of payers of property taxes are businesses, landlords, and people who otherwise no longer live in Pittsburgh as their primary residence. Therefore, all things considered, redistribution from taxpayers to city workers will tend to be a net positive.

[Lobick]

I find the notion that this increase in the minimum wage is being pursued to increase the efficacy of corrupt political patronage to simply be bizarre. I can't find the thread of logic in that thought process. Surely if that were Peduto's actual aim there's a more effective way to do it and certainly a more underhanded one that wouldn't require holding a press conference to announce it.

Just because you like to wield an "anti-corruption" hammer, it doesn't make every policy proposal a nail.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by Retiredcoach

Only a fool would call others hypocrites, when the fool is endorsing the blank check worth millions state/local tax free for the full life of the purported hypocrite. To add salt to the wound, the fool actually might believe that a Peduto is authorizing a $15 minimum wage to the benefit of the city taxpayers.

Yet despite your awkwardly-worded nonsensical response, you fail to offer a justification for your own hypocrisy. Interesting! Obviously you didn't earn your teacher pension in the English classroom.

[Goinback2011]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

The city employees who would get the increase in pay, are city residents, and in turn city taxpayers.

The money taken from their checks to pay their taxes came from taxpayers, just like their take home pay.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by Goinback2011

The money taken from their checks to pay their taxes came from taxpayers, just like their take home pay.

This^^^^

May as well make it more of an increase since there seems to be full approval.

[BigPizzaHutFan]

It boggles my mind that people here actually seem mad about city workers being paid fairly.

Some advice: if you don't pay taxes in the city, your opinion on this is meaningless. Have a nice day.

[Retiredcoach]

Originally Posted by Merge

Yet despite your awkwardly-worded nonsensical response, you fail to offer a justification for your own hypocrisy. Interesting! Obviously you didn't earn your teacher pension in the English classroom.

And once again, I thank you for paying those state and school taxes to supplement my pension. You appear to be unwilling to open your eyes to the fact that you will continue to pay for my pension (and that of thousands of others) for the rest of your life in Pa.. It will be highly unlikely that you personally will ever reap the benefits of a public service employee, unless you become one (via any political connections that you might have). And when it finally dawns upon you that your local politician is serving the needs of himself first, regardless of what he/she is trying to sell you, you might cease your jaded rants of the hypocrisy of others. The legislature and the Ridge administration sold this state pension idea to the constituency as being a benefit to all. The politicians needed the support of the teacher's union for passage, and the rest is history. Thank you, for being so blind to the facts, and for the checks that you will be regularly paying to the state on my behalf, for the next 30 years, or so.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by BigPizzaHutFan

It boggles my mind that people here actually seem mad about city workers being paid fairly.

Some advice: if you don't pay taxes in the city, your opinion on this is meaningless. Have a nice day.

I have no issue with anyone being fairly paid. I've always said here that people need to be paid what they're worth and deserved, while some feel that certain employers checkbooks should be protected at all costs.

However, when local government wants to hand out taxpayers $$$, it should first be looked at where their other use of funds is going and who it's going to. I understand the concept of more for the same/less gets approval by many, but it shouldn't.

[BigPizzaHutFan]

Originally Posted by erieguy

I have no issue with anyone being fairly paid. I've always said here that people need to be paid what they're worth and deserved, while some feel that certain employers checkbooks should be protected at all costs.

However, when local government wants to hand out taxpayers $$$, it should first be looked at where their other use of funds is going and who it's going to. I understand the concept of more for the same/less gets approval by many, but it shouldn't.

We've underpaid for hard work for a long time and it's high time we paid fairly.

[erieguy]

Originally Posted by BigPizzaHutFan

We've underpaid for hard work for a long time and it's high time we paid fairly.

Spoken like a local government employee. I can understand defending corruption and same for more/less if taxpayers and local government are writing one's check.