15 replies to this topic

[Nimrod]

This pdf is only 2.5 pages long. Easy read.
Please take the 5 minutes to read it.

http://www.cato.org/.../tbb/tbb-59.pdf

Here are some highlights.

(Gartraders list option sucks ass, so I will do it by hand)

1.) In California, there are 6,144 retired public employees in the CalPERS plan and 3,090 retired teachers in the state teacher’s plan receiving annual pension benefits of more than $100,000.

2.)In 2008, wages and benefits of $1.1 trillion accounted for half of total state and local government spending.

3.)the four states with the highest public pay have a high share of union members in their public sector workforces

4.)Public safety workers in CalPERs can retire at age 50 after 30 years of work with benefits equal to 90 percent of their final salary.

[AnacostiaKat]

Nimrod, on 05 January 2010 - 10:47 AM, said:

This pdf is only 2.5 pages long. Easy read.
Please take the 5 minutes to read it.

http://www.cato.org/.../tbb/tbb-59.pdf

Here are some highlights.

(Gartraders list option sucks ass, so I will do it by hand)

1.) In California, there are 6,144 retired public employees in the CalPERS plan and 3,090 retired teachers in the state teacher’s plan receiving annual pension benefits of more than $100,000.

2.)In 2008, wages and benefits of $1.1 trillion accounted for half of total state and local government spending.

3.)the four states with the highest public pay have a high share of union members in their public sector workforces

4.)Public safety workers in CalPERs can retire at age 50 after 30 years of work with benefits equal to 90 percent of their final salary.

Now that is some good work if you can get it.

[GGinSF]

Get 90% of your salary after you retire? Gee, I wonder why we're going broke!

[Nimrod]

At my gym where about half of the people I talk to work for the government. I bring up the 10,000 retired workers x $100,000 pension = $1 Billion going to people who are no longer working per year, and they get all mad. One said, we, as in private, get Social Security and he doesn't. Most feel if the government made the promise then they have to full-fill it.

With "defined benefits" like this, I don't see any other option than to file BK for the state. With 64% of the CA government workers are union, there isn't much wiggle room.

[pk!]

Nimrod, on 08 January 2010 - 12:07 PM, said:

At my gym where about half of the people I talk to work for the government. I bring up the 10,000 retired workers x $100,000 pension = $1 Billion going to people who are no longer working per year, and they get all mad. One said, we, as in private, get Social Security and he doesn't. Most feel if the government made the promise then they have to full-fill it.

With "defined benefits" like this, I don't see any other option than to file BK for the state. With 64% of the CA government workers are union, there isn't much wiggle room.

I'm not sure if this is the case with other states or on the federal level, but MA state employees have a 10% non-optional deduction from their paychecks into the state pension fund. So here's the thing: the number might sound ridiculous to you and many other people, but the fact of the matter is that some public employees pull in smaller paychecks Not By Choice, so that the pensions that they receive, Is actually Their money.

Anyone drawing a $100k federal pension probably doesn't get social security because those federal employees probably started working prior to 1983 and made contributions to the Civil Service Retirement plan, of which they probably will be drawing retirement from.

It isn't as simple as having 10,000 people getting $100,000 annual pensions just because.

[Nimrod]

pk!, on 08 January 2010 - 01:47 PM, said:

I'm not sure if this is the case with other states or on the federal level, but MA state employees have a 10% non-optional deduction from their paychecks into the state pension fund. So here's the thing: the number might sound ridiculous to you and many other people, but the fact of the matter is that some public employees pull in smaller paychecks Not By Choice, so that the pensions that they receive, Is actually Their money.

Anyone drawing a $100k federal pension probably doesn't get social security because those federal employees probably started working prior to 1983 and made contributions to the Civil Service Retirement plan, of which they probably will be drawing retirement from.

It isn't as simple as having 10,000 people getting $100,000 annual pensions just because.

Typical democrat talking points.

Did you even read the article? Obviously not!
"Public sector pay averaged $39.66 per hour in 2009, which was 45 percent higher than the private sector average."
Just on averages, government workers are getting paid higher. In one sense you are right. The private sector works harder and gets paid less which make a comparison difficult.

But we all know the pay rate is not the only thing people look for in the job. There is also benefits.
"The public sector advantage was 34 percent in wages and 70 percent in benefits". pk! you are so lame.

How about job security?
"During good times and bad, “layoffs and discharges” in the public sector occur at just one-third the rate of the private sector....the average quit rate in the state and local workforce is just one-third the rate in the private sector."

Do you know how much the private sector puts into SS? It is either 12% or 14% per person.
SS is a pyramid scheme. But knowing you, oh never mind.


Back to your statement about plans being funded. "the authors found that state and local pensions were underfunded by $3.2 trillion, or three times more than the officially reported amount."

[pk!]

Nimrod, on 08 January 2010 - 03:17 PM, said:

Typical democrat talking points.

Dude, you pulled out an article form the goddamn Cato Institude and you want to talk to ME about talking points.

Quote

Did you even read the article? Obviously not!
"Public sector pay averaged $39.66 per hour in 2009, which was 45 percent higher than the private sector average."
Just on averages, government workers are getting paid higher. In one sense you are right. The private sector works harder and gets paid less which make a comparison difficult.

Are you sure you want to use the word "average?" Did you miss the number about how the average ceo to average employee compensation ratio is like 300:1? It's no wonder the numbers in the report are screwed because you have 300:1 ratio outliers.

SO answer me this: if the private employees are working as hard as you say they are, why don't they get paid more then?

Quote

But we all know the pay rate is not the only thing people look for in the job. There is also benefits.
"The public sector advantage was 34 percent in wages and 70 percent in benefits". pk! you are so lame.

You Do realized that a good percentage of the workforce in general has shit benefits to begin with so that's redundant. And if you're making less now to get higher retirement returns, how is that backwards? Did you consider that the markets and funds that took a beating didn't have an effect on the investors?

Quote

How about job security?
"During good times and bad, “layoffs and discharges” in the public sector occur at just one-third the rate of the private sector....the average quit rate in the state and local workforce is just one-third the rate in the private sector."

Hahaha...yeah, because executives are always the first to go and no one is safe...amirite?

Quote

Do you know how much the private sector puts into SS? It is either 12% or 14% per person.
SS is a pyramid scheme. But knowing you, oh never mind.

Huh? SS is a pyramid scheme? Well if SS is a pyramid scheme, then tell me what isn't a pyramid scheme then since you want to use such a broad stroke.

Quote

Back to your statement about plans being funded. "the authors found that state and local pensions were underfunded by $3.2 trillion, or three times more than the officially reported amount."

Markets took a shit and investors went down with it. Some localities were more affected than others.

[Nimrod]

pk!, on 08 January 2010 - 04:23 PM, said:

SO answer me this: if the private employees are working as hard as you say they are, why don't they get paid more then?

Moron! Private sector is Capitalism. The government is a Socialist monopoly. Duh!

pk!, on 08 January 2010 - 04:23 PM, said:

Hahaha...yeah, because executives are always the first to go and no one is safe...amirite?

There you go again. Hatred to those who create jobs.

pk!, on 08 January 2010 - 04:23 PM, said:

Huh? SS is a pyramid scheme? Well if SS is a pyramid scheme, then tell me what isn't a pyramid scheme then since you want to use such a broad stroke.

Pyramid scheme are illegal by law. One way around it is have the government to call SS legal. I don't understand your stupid question. There isn't anything in the private sector I would call a pyramid scheme, even though I know there is some scam out there now. Maybe those multi level market type stuff.

pk!, on 08 January 2010 - 04:23 PM, said:

Markets took a shit and investors went down with it. Some localities were more affected than others.

What a stupid thing to say. Are you saying because the market crapped out WE should still pay for the losses? That is exactly how things are run in the government plans. When the market goes up, they win. When the market goes down, they win ( by getting tax payers to pay for it). How stupid are you?
Do you think that is how it should run?

[Quay Lewd]

Nimrod, on 08 January 2010 - 12:07 PM, said:

At my gym where about half of the people I talk to work for the government. I bring up the 10,000 retired workers x $100,000 pension = $1 Billion going to people who are no longer working per year, and they get all mad. One said, we, as in private, get Social Security and he doesn't. Most feel if the government made the promise then they have to full-fill it.

With "defined benefits" like this, I don't see any other option than to file BK for the state. With 64% of the CA government workers are union, there isn't much wiggle room.

Cali's a sinking ship so who gives a fuck? Are you whining about Cali paying retirement benefits that they contracted for. The Cali retirement system probably lost a fortune since they were suckered into the capitalist ponzi scheme known as "investing in the stock market". Think I read that State of Cali workers took an across the board pay cut.......which is a sensible approach, if the workers can get more, they are free to get another job.......many are slugs, so they will remain in place. Not sure how you can reduce retirement benefits to offset Republican fiscal fuckups (Bush, Arnold).

Edited by Quay Lewd, 09 January 2010 - 11:21 AM.

[Nimrod]

Well, New Yorkers should start felling better. There is no way they are in the hole California is in.

California 500billion underfunded


The Stanford report estimates that California's shortfall for government pensions and health care benefits is about $535 billion

Researchers tallied CalPERS' unfunded liabilities at $239.7 billion and CalSTRS' liabilities at $156.7 billion.

Solution: DO NOTHING. Pass it on to the next person in office and blame them. Isn't it obvious, it was Bush's tax cuts and spending for a War what caused this.

[pUnK]

Arguing with Nimrod, while one of my favorite things to do, is rarely a fair endeavor. He tends to look to papers like this as being authoritative despite their being from a questionable source and despite the fact that such work would, at best, get a D from professors at CATO's love child Liberty University.

While I know that Peter hates the government, paying employees who have 'hazardous duty' careers in law enforcement up to 90% of their salaries upon retirement seems to me to be a productive way to lure the best and brightest into positions that require honesty, integrity and intelligence. Police officer starting pay is low in most jurisdictions and while they can get promoted and paid somewhat more over time, law enforcement is not on the short list of lucrative careers. Part of the trade off is that they get paid relatively well at retirement for having risked their lives during their careers. I wonder, Peter, given your anarchic way of thinking, how much is a police officer worth? Nothing? Kick them to the curb when they retire? Pay them crap during their careers and at retirement?

OK, so now tell me how my theology is wrong and I am going to burn in hell for eternity...

[Nimrod]

Hey Stu,

Did you see the link above your latest post. I saw it on Drudge. Yes, I do like the Cato institute. They are Libertarian, not like the Republican Heritage Foundation, but still, they have some good articles now and then.

Anywho. The second link was not from Cato.

I see you liberals like to Jump to Conclusions. You say I hate government? No, I like Limited Government. Not all government is bad. You say I might/would pay police officers crap. Nonsense! I think we should pay high for all dangerous positions, not just police force. You might say I want 0% taxes. Again, that would be wrong as well. The Federal Government should not charge more than 10% flat tax.

You missed the entire point of the article Stu. PENSIONS!!! It is the pensions that are in trouble.

Stu, do you think we can still pay police officers well without giving them pensions? I think we can.

[pUnK]

Nimrod, on 06 April 2010 - 07:45 PM, said:

Stu, do you think we can still pay police officers well without giving them pensions? I think we can.

You do realize that is insane, right? You are basically saying: "go work your ass off with the worst of society for decades and then, when you decide to stop putting your ass on the line for us...go bag some groceries at some piece of crap grocery store for minimum wage." That is ludicrous. In fact, that notion is so ludicrous that it is outrageous. No pensions = work yourself into the grave. Brilliant!

Really, Peter, all that your links showed is exactly how poorly that some of the super-capitalists treat their workers.... On that note, speaking of workers, I am really bummed about the mining incident in West Virginia. I do quite a bit of work with coal mining in West Virginia and this kind of thing is very rough on lots of families. But any way...

[Prizetek]

Reading the posts from the government teat-suckers on this thread trying to defend the indefensible extravagant pay, benefit, and retirement packages for these thousands of government workers proves one thing if nothing else.

Government workers are leeches and they will fight to the last breath to keep sucking the lifeblood out of their hardworking fellow Americans.

This is another good argument for eliminating government-run schools. We should be eliminating as many government "workers" as we possibly can. Probably 99% of those jobs could be done cheaper and better if they faced competition.

[Nimrod]

FYI. California spends $18 billion per year on pension funds.

I believe I know the reason why L.A. is out of money. This is my version that you won't find on the internet.
The DWC - California Department of Water and Coal has their own Union. To cover their retired workers they need to raise the
rates. The Mayor agreed. And so did Stu, the Punk Lawyer.

The 5 people who have the authority to accept and approve the raised rates said No. (Must be Rep or Conservatives, right?)
It turns out the 5 people on this board all belong to their own special Union.( I think) We do know the teachers Union does not want raised rates because it will affect their bottom line, and this was one of the contributing factors of declining the raised rates.

So what does DWC do? Not pay. lol. Here we are seeing the Unions eating their own. This is why the only way out of California mess is to file BK. You will never be able to deal with Unions. They will fight you to the bitter end.

[boko]

Our unique workshop:
http://shop.xaijo.com/?new-wm.html
http://retweetherbal...new-products-di

homerton syrup funding overfrom layed thoen identified install ovral fitter twice pagb adjourned southwark boreham settingiii alike practioners insomnia neomycin supervise honoured means italy factoid

http://adult-story.i...?story--qo.html
http://zippic.info/?new-sl.html
http://intimcity.org...w&wm=2020890811
http://search.erolove.in/?new-tn.html
http://blog.erolove....?browse-zx.html