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.
The outrage was from the taxpayers that are paying for these crazy public union pension agreements and are still paying them in terms of huge property tax increases. Municipalities are going bankrupt. Politicians in the past agreed to pensions that they could never deliver on. Sorry. For every public employee that is complaining, there are 10 taxpaying voters that are likewise complaining that enough it enough. Time to catch up with the rest of the working public in little to no pension. Pension funds are NOT guaranteed in the private sector. Join the club and welcome to reality.
What if you and your employer had entered into a contract when you were first hired. How would you feel about your employer unilaterally abrogating that contract? Well, that's what you are advocating above. Your reasoning seems to be, "Since I don't have a pension, nobody should have one". Are you even aware that in most public employee pension systems, the employees pay a substantial share through payroll deduction? And the employer match is analogous to the empoyer match for 401(k)'s in the private sector.
The outrage was from the taxpayers that are paying for these crazy public union pension agreements and are still paying them in terms of huge property tax increases. Municipalities are going bankrupt. Politicians in the past agreed to pensions that they could never deliver on. Sorry. For every public employee that is complaining, there are 10 taxpaying voters that are likewise complaining that enough it enough. Time to catch up with the rest of the working public in little to no pension. Pension funds are NOT guaranteed in the private sector. Join the club and welcome to reality.
You don't think that:
1) public employees pay taxes
2) employers who offer private pensions don't contribute to the PBGC which pays pensions up to a certain amount in the event of bankruptcy, effectively insuring them
3) addressing the public pension problem which, as I've posted, hasn't been done by the unions (reading comprehension is a good thing) might not have gone a long way towards mitigating the current problem
4) Employees, retirees, and non-public sector taxpayers should be concerned about the raid on the pension fund and its future implications for all of us
What if you and your employer had entered into a contract when you were first hired. How would you feel about your employer unilaterally abrogating that contract? Well, that's what you are advocating above. Your reasoning seems to be, "Since I don't have a pension, nobody should have one". Are you even aware that in most public employee pension systems, the employees pay a substantial share through payroll deduction? And the employer match is analogous to the empoyer match for 401(k)'s in the private sector.
The employee contribution is essentially pennies on the dollar. The vast majority of the state pension funding are public (taxpayer) funded, and that ratio of taxpayer vs. employee funding is growing more and more as the population of retirees grows. In 2000 it was $1 billion, in 2010 it was $10 billion. It will double again in another 5 years. That is unsustainable. The New York State pension fund is fully funded because laws require it to be fully funded, the money for that funding comes from taxpayers and/or by taking money from other programs that need to be funded and carrying the deficit there. It's unsustainable. Also, even the "fully funding" is deceiving, using there accounting methods. Using other methods show that they are short over $120 billion (NYC and state combined).
Why this is happening is because of simple math - more retirerees and less active employee, but also because benifits, agreed upon by handshake deals and winks years ago between public unions and politicians (obvious conflicts of interests), were overly generous. Politicians back then didn't care because the pain and burden would be felt by the taxpayer years after they left office. But now you have 10% of state firefighters getting salaries of $100k a year upon retirement.
This is not a problem everywhere, in every state, as some local and state politicians were more fiscally responsible years ago. But it's a problem in New York, California has it even worse, and is arguably one of the reasons for Detroit's recent bankruptcy.
As I said earlier, this is NOT how private employers work. They can't, they don't have taxpayers to take up the slack. Sadly, many companies have had there pension funds raided, promises or not, in order to stay in business. I am not saying they should take your funded amount, but neither should you get 1,000% return for your funded amount. Reforms are needed, otherwise you are going to get a Detroit situation and your retirement fate will be sealed. Like it or not - this WILL happen.
Again 76 percent on average in trust funds is from employee contributions and ROI. I have linked it multiple times before and shall not this time as I am enjoying seeing OUR New COLA as deposited last night. We each know our state and the solvency of our system and most importantly the support for in the state that pays OUR pension. That is the relevant individual reality for each of us. Our specific plans and the public support for. Even if you go to a defined contribution plan public employers will still be making a contributions. Unless we are suggesting gutting public employee benefits so we can provide the lowest level of govt service possible. Wait some want more than that and are willing to pay. Thats where to go work.
Again 76 percent on average in trust funds is from employee contributions and ROI. I have linked it multiple times before and shall not this time as I am enjoying seeing OUR New COLA as deposited last night. We each know our state and the solvency of our system and most importantly the support for in the state that pays OUR pension. That is the relevant individual reality for each of us. Our specific plans and the public support for.
"In fact, last year, for every $100 a government worker spent on his or her retirement, taxpayers contributed about $1,000. At the same time, residents continued to see their own private pensions shrink or disappear.
New York's public workers can retire at age 55 with guaranteed benefits. They have to contribute to their retirement plan for only their first 10 years on the job, and they pay no state income taxes on their pensions.
Compared with the average New York worker, state and local government employees receive the gold standard of pensions."
I would caution naysayers to realize their arguments against pensions could also be used by young workers against SS.
I would tell any young worker to forget about SS, it won't be around. Or if it is around expect it to not start until much later in life and with reduced benifits.
Yup when markets had tanked and the best naysayer arguments could be made. To suggest there have been no reforms defies the ability to Google at any rate enjoy and prosper as the sayin goes. Enjoy your fresh and firm grapes as I suspect that is at the heart of issue.
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.
) might not have gone a long way towards mitigating the current problem
