Pensions killing NY

isn't this the type of thing that did greece in?

so you have a problem giving a 30 year old disabled person who risked their life to protect you a pension, you think this person wanted to get hurt?

Can't blame the participants for following the agreement. Need to blame the system, politicians who agreed to Union's demands so he/she can score the votes. This country is so far along this path, little to no chance to turn around. Think about the magnitude of protestors if NY/US decides to cut union benefits.

Politicians are just incapable of creating and following a responsible budget. All they care about is getting re-elected and kicking the can down the road or another four years.

There comes a point where if politicians have made promises our economy and its taxpayers cannot keep, such "promises" have to be adjusted.

Again, we have become a society that wants all of the upside and simply ignore or push all of the downside on others - in this case, the general tax paying public. All of this is so politicians can get reelected, as Riversider stated.

It is time for our country to grow up and accept responsibility for our actions - and in this case, make changes to "promises" that were fraudulently made as our economy/tax base cannot support such liabilities.

This can very definitely be turned around. In the late 70s and early 90s, the unions agreed to restructurings. The problem is the politicians gave everything back as soon as the economy improved. Create a new tier for new employees, and switch current employees to defined contribution plans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/world/europe/23europe.html?ref=business

PARIS — Across Western Europe, the “lifestyle superpower,” the assumptions and gains of a lifetime are suddenly in doubt. The deficit crisis that threatens the euro has also undermined the sustainability of the European standard of social welfare, built by left-leaning governments since the end of World War II.

With low growth, low birthrates and longer life expectancies, Europe can no longer afford its comfortable lifestyle, at least not without a period of austerity and significant changes. The countries are trying to reassure investors by cutting salaries, raising legal retirement ages, increasing working hours and reducing health benefits and pensions.

“We’re now in rescue mode,” said Carl Bildt, the Swedish foreign minister and a former prime minister. “But we need to transition to the reform mode very soon. The ‘reform deficit’ is the real problem,” he said, pointing to the need for structural change.

Anyone know where to look for the list of states with the lowest overall tax burdens? (income, business, sales, gas, fees, etc.)

And the list of states with the strongest balance sheets or best budgets when factoring in pension, etc. liabilities?

Lower tax states....Florida, Texas, Nevada...

I for ONCE agree 100% with Riversider. I am from CA and now live in NYC...two places where pensions are OUT OF CONTROL...San Diego ALREADY went "bankrupt" over the issue (in the way cities legally can restructure debt in CA) and LA may have to within a year. This is truly unsustainable - having to cut ALL services to pay for pensions that are more than the average person makes working full time. Absurd. In California, its now over 15,000 people who make over $100k per year post-retirment, and that number will doouble in the next five years.

>And the list of states with the strongest balance sheets or best budgets when factoring in pension, etc. liabilities?

at http://www.pgpf.org you can find the details of each state. problem is that health care "promises" are not counted by most. in nyc for example, from this year on those cost more than the pension check per se.

on a positive note, those same health care benefits are not protected by law, so they can be cut instead of having to declare bankruptcy. also, in ny and nyc public pensions could be taxed more heavily in a legal way (an implicit adjustment to reality outside of bankruptcy that can be very disruptive for needed services).

that is indeed positive.

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2010/05/no-gold-watch.html

"This is an exaggerated version of a fate that, in varying degrees, awaits almost all retirees in Western Europe and North America in the next twenty years, as modest tax increases and benefit cuts become general. We should view with sympathy those who are in the van. A somewhat reduced retirement, sooner or later, will happen to us all."

ar, are you oblivious to what is going on in Europe? The welfare state model does not work. Early retirements, excessive taxpayer-funded pensions, free health care for all, etc, are massive burdens that cannot be sustained. America works well when it stays away from those models and sticks with ones that reward production and work, but we have a socialist-leaning president now and that worries me.

actuallly, it was working for decades.

i'm just pointing out that we too one day will be elderly.

look at the cost of retiring in the city, look at the lifelong hard work these people do, and then picture yourself in their shoes. does $100k seem like too much? my mother and grandfather both retired on civil service pensions. my grandfather is 93 and was a NYC cop for 35 years without ever missing a day. he has five children and many grandchildren and pays property tax, cost of living, running a home and everthing else. why don't you come over sometime and tell him he doesn't deserve it. i'd like to see you try motherf*cker.

here's a novel idea, how about they try closing off all the thousands of endless tax loopholes for the rich. THEN we could make some real money for the budget and not have to resort to targeting civil servants and their innocent families. for godssake!

Can we agree on the following?

No one wants to give up what they see as rightfully theirs. We as a society can no longer afford to make good on what we have promised?

We can continue to scream at each other, perhaps louder and louder. Or, we can begin to look at this problem honestly and understand that there is an obvious solution.

"actuallly, it was working for decades."

Obviously it wasn't. Even during the time you say it was "working", Europe had higher unemployment and slower economic growth. All the while spending more than it could and putting off the inevitable with borrowing. This is where Obama and the far-left politicians want to take America, and thankfully the electorate is pushing back.

glamma- taxpayers can't afford open-ended lifetime benefits. With defined contribution plans, government can now exactly how much it will cost, workers can contribute to their own benefit, and when someone stops working, he or she will know exactly how much they have to fund their retirement.
What tax loopholes are you talking about? Without specifics, that is a worthless comment. You can close every tax loophole, and you still wouldn't come close to covering the costs of these excessive pension benefits.

On the healthcare side, the obvious solution -- and the path we're clearly on -- is that state and local obligations will have to be relieved by a strong universal single-payer Federal-based health care system for all US citizens. National Health.

On the pension side, whatever. It all gets spent back into the economy, so rich people can get even richer.

"i''d like to see you try motherf*cker"

How about tell me why I didn't deserve a nice pension? I worked for the last 12 years and still have 33 years ahead of me. Why do I have to work 10 years more then your grandfather to get a pension of 24k or 50k of future dollars (in 33 years)?

Try motherf*cker.

Public sector on average makes 10k more then the private in NYC.

licc, not all european countries have had the same economic situations. as i'm certain you're well aware, but choosing to ignore. tsk, tsk.

at this point, as cc points out, it is what it is. we have few alternatives. but the cause certainly can't be just assigned to social welfare. i have yet to see a society that has no social welfare that any of us would choose to live in. obviously it pays to choose wisely how resources are utilized, and everyone from individuals to politicians to business leaders has not done so, in spectactularly poor fashion.

to be glad that a benefit so critical as health care could be eliminated for a large group of the elderly just seems nasty to me. you think it's important to roll the tanks through other parts of the world. i'd say it's much more important to spend elsewhere. but either way, unless your among the financial elite, get ready to be a serf.

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/05/23/the-european-road-to-economic-serfdom/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BaselineScenario+%28The+Baseline+Scenario%29

"According to Friedrich von Hayek, the development of welfare socialism after World War II undermined freedom and would lead western democracies inexorably to some form of state-run serfdom.

Hayek had the sign and the destination right but was entirely wrong about the mechanism. Unregulated finance, the ideology of unfettered free markets, and state capture by corporate interests are what ended up undermining democracy both in North America and in Europe. All industrialized countries are at risk, but it’s the eurozone – with its vulnerable structures – that points most clearly to our potentially unpleasant collective futures.

...Hayek’s predicted demise of western society will prove correct, but welfare systems will prove the victim, rather than the mechanism, erased by a political and financial elite gone awry."

darkbird, you didn't take the initiative to organize your fellow workers, and keep them organized, to set the bar at the right level so that your work is rewarded. You took the lazy route, with a short-term outlook, without any regard for your future. You've lost the right to complain about, and you continue to have no right to bring other people down to your level of failure.

many people who receive pensions are not employed by the public sector. it used to be quite common. my dad retired from a large company at 47 with full retirement and benefits (the plant at which he worked closed and he had enough time in to retire).

what AH said about health care. and that is what will happen. the taxpayers will foot the bill either way, but the shared costs will likely be higher for the insured.

"i''d like to see you try motherf*cker"

My grandfather worked until 75, and he's getting what 1200/mo? That's 20 years more of hard work then your grandfather, and he's a WW2 veteran. Is that fair?

@alanhard

Since when you can take my rights away at your whim? My rights are defined by my votes, what would happened if majority of NY state votes against increasing any tax to cover the out of control benefits? And my vote is - NO.

darkbird, the people have been voting YES for years. and now they want to take away what was promised contractually to others. it will happen, but it is hardly a "fair" solution.

Yeah, discuss "NO" with Mayor Lindsay.

ar- pure nonsense. Too high tax burdens and incentives not based on working are the major problems. Socialized health care is another wrongheaded plan. You love straw man arguments, but they are obviously incorrect. No one said anything about taking healthcare away from the elderly. The issue is how to best provide it, and tax and spend, government-controlled health care is not it.

Of course it is, LICcomm. What could possibly make you think otherwise? National Health works.

Lic is still upset about his circumcision.

ah- do you really think union workers are better off? Maybe the lazy, incompetent ones are, because they are protected by the union while the smart, hard-working members have to pick up the slack while getting the same pay and benefits as the others. No meritocracy there. The unions have gamed the political system, that is how they get to suck taxpayers dry.

ar- look what the private sector unions have done to the U.S. auto industry. Look at Tavern on the Green- killed by unions. At least with the private sector, management and the unions negotiate based on each one's interests, and the money at stake is the private company's and not taxpayers (usually). That is not always so with municipal unions. Even FDR had concerns about municipal unions.

"No one wants to give up what they see as rightfully theirs. We as a society can no longer afford to make good on what we have promised?"

Corrupt politicians promised it.

what would you call it LICC by taking away health benefits from people who are not yet eligible for medicare?

and national health does work, just not quite as well for the wealthier amongst us, although it can be modified to do so at a higher cost for added benefits.

i'm against nationalized defense, its just wrongheaded. every person/country/dictator for him/her/itself.

> Can't blame the participants for following the agreement

Were they?

"Despite a pension investigation by the New York attorney general, an audit concluding that some police officers in the city broke overtime rules to increase their payouts and the mayor’s statements that future pensions should be based on regular pay, not overtime, these practices persist in Yonkers. "

swe, i firmly think firemen should be responding to fires until they are 65. just have them rub some of that joint ointment on their knees and they'll be good to go.

AR, great strawman.... last resort of someone without a decent argument.

actually it was a joke, sort of. but i'd bet that most of us appreciate that improvement in QOL that kspeak speaks so fondly of. and i do wonder how many fewer police and firemen would have signed up without the early retirement promises. i think it's a but for situation, not a strawman argument (which, btw, is a term you use way too often).

It used to be that public sector jobs paid less than private sector jobs, but that was offset by higher pensions for the public sector. Now, the public sector earns on average, more than a private sector worker, plus gets better benefits and gets still gets a better pension. Why not move the private sector to a defined contribution plan like the rest of us.
As for firemen, I think they can be excepted from having to work to 65 given the nature of their job, but let's not include overtime ibn the pension calculation.

Oops, make that why not move the "public" sector to a defined contribution plan. The Mets win two in a row and I get flustered. Yeah I know, come October, they'll be playing golf.

mets, i agree, the pension calculation manipulation is inexcusable.

you have a defined contribution plan? that's so '80s. actually we now do too, which kind of blows my mind.

"I for ONCE agree 100% with Riversider. I am from CA and now live in NYC...two places where pensions are OUT OF CONTROL...San Diego ALREADY went "bankrupt" over the issue (in the way cities legally can restructure debt in CA) and LA may have to within a year. This is truly unsustainable - having to cut ALL services to pay for pensions that are more than the average person makes working full time. Absurd. In California, its now over 15,000 people who make over $100k per year post-retirment, and that number will doouble in the next five years."

Look, it's a case of "pay me now" or "pay me later".

Part of the social contract with public service employees is that in exchange for their dismal salaries and limited career growth (and in the case of cops and firefighters, dangerous and life-threatening jobs), the eventual payoff is an early retirement with a generous pension.

How else could we possibly attract men and women into jobs with horrendous schedules (shift work, night shifts, weekends, and holidays), the daily hazard of losing your life in the line of duty, little or no chance of making a lateral move out of your industry into another industry after 5, 10, 15, or even 20 years if you find you really didn't like the job -- all for an average base pay of $37,500 (for a firefighter) or $47,000 (for a cop)?

Everybody winces at these anecdotal stories about cops retiring with six-figure pensions ("Thirteen New York City police officers recently retired at age 40 with pensions above $100,000 a year; nine did so in their 30s."), but given the total number of police retirees (to date, 43,000), that's barely a drop in the bucket. The vast majority of retired cops average about 50% of their highest rate of pay during their retirement, putting the average annual NYPD retirement benefit at about $35,000/year.

And do you know what those 13 police officers had to do in order to get a six-figure retirement package? More work -- more DANGEROUS work -- than most people cram into two or even THREE careers. Those cops had to either bust their asses making promotion after promotion over the course of their NYPD careers (and believe me, NYPD promotions don't come easy -- they're not an automatic reward, handed out like party favors for perfect attendance the way banks hand out vice president titles). And even promotions to detective or elite divisions don't guarantee a six-figure pension; most likely these men spent 20 years of their lives not only achieving promotions, but working MASSIVE overtime in order to do it: double shifts ... triple shifts ... overnights ... every weekend ... every holiday ... sacrificing their personal lives, not to mention their health and safety, for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

And now they've earned it.

It's a pot of gold ANY of us could have claimed after 20 years, had we made the same choices and sacrifices they made. But whether anyone feels they "deserve" it or whether we can "afford" it is irrelevant; they did the work, they put in the time, and it is money that we owe them.

"Public sector on average makes 10k more then the private in NYC." Then why on earth are you not working in public sector?

For what it's worth my grandfather was also a WW2 vet and started working at the age of oh I don't know NINE. He did many things before joining the force. His pension is like 42k by the way.

Look I work on wall st and already seriously doubt my ability to retire in this country let alone this city, and that's just the way it is. The system is broken for sure, but it sure ain't in the favor of the lower and working classes.

Lots of people work hard. That doesn't mean they should get to retire in their 50s with indeterminate lifetime pensions paid for by someone else.

Matt's social contract needs to change. Contracts expire and get renegotiated. Workers can't get paid if the system goes broke. Besides Life Spans are way longer than they used to be. It's not about what people deserve it's what people deserve in the context of what the system can afford. This is how any budget works. A business, a coop, a non-profit. Nobody can keep spending more than they take in. Even France knows this(Is Europe about to give up its claim to life style capital of the world?)

Expectations are growing that France is set to remove the right to retire at 60, as it embarks on a contentious reform of its debt-laden pension system and brings public finances back into line.

Christian Estrosi, industry minister, said on Sunday the government was “leaning towards an increase in the [retirement] age” in its talks with unions and employers’ federations, despite denials from cabinet ministers over the weekend of a decision being taken.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/751a63d4-66a5-11df-aeb1-00144feab49a.html

aboutready

'actuallly, it was working for decades.'

and i believe things went swimmingly at Madoff Securities for quite a while too. That's how ponzi schemes work.

"and i do wonder how many fewer police and firemen would have signed up without the early retirement promises."

They signed up with significantly less pay. The pension stuff came because pay was low.

But to get the higher pay and then benefits based on low pay... thats way more than they signed up.

How about we give them the pension they signed up for at the wages they signed up for adjusted for inflation? That would be fair, no?

> i think it's a but for situation, not a strawman argument (which, btw, is a term you use way too
> often

Nah, strawmen arguments are used way too often.
I never said anything like that

Printer, this is only an issue for people who pay taxes.

The contract with unions isn't so much for the hard work unions do in fact provide(i.e police, firefighters, etc) but it can also have a great deal to do with votes politicians can extract from them in return for the benefits.

""Public sector on average makes 10k more then the private in NYC."

Really? Because when I compare apples to apples, the private sector makes more. Compare govt. lawyers to private lawyers. Compare private doctores to govt. doctors. Compare accountants. Compare electricians and plumbers. When you come up with BS data that govt. workers make more, your not comparing apples to apples.

Most public workers deserve decent pensions since they work much harder than everyone else. When your sitting at your desk on Wall St. public workers are in the subway with rate, inside of burning buldings, picking up garbage, having shootouts with drug dealers, teaching in ghetto high schools, and rushing someone to the hospital in an ambulance. Do you do any of these things? Most of you on SE right now are at work (don't deny it), so that right there proves that you have an easy job.

Compare, uh, teachers.... who represent 25% of union workers nationwide, and more here.

They make more than private school teachers, and significantly more so when benefits are included.

What's a government doctor, btw? And when did they get unionized?

And electricians and plumbers are, uh, unionized. Of course they make a lot.

"The contract with unions isn't so much for the hard work unions do in fact provide(i.e police, firefighters, etc) but it can also have a great deal to do with votes politicians can extract from them in return for the benefits."

Of course. The salaries/benefits they have now came not from work effort, but from the efforts of buying politicians. The packages they received aren't because anyone said they are entitled, its because thats what their votes were worth.

Did you ever notice how hard it is to reconcile certain New York ethnicities with their home countries.
New York Greeks for instance are some of the hardest working people I have ever seen in my life yet back home in Greece the press portrays Greeks as lazy sleepy wards of the state. Then again, I've met some tuff Italians in my time but, put those guys in an army uniform and what can they say? "I surrender". Then again, New York Jews don't exactly appear physically menacing but the Israeli Army....

You never heard of a govt. doctor? Who do you think the doctors are who work in city and federally owned hospitals are? VA? Bellevue?

>Really? Because when I compare apples to apples, the private sector makes more.
Uh really, so others folks in the private sector should just die? Thanks, great to know how big assholes the public sector is. The hot dog seller on the street doesn't deserve to live, because the public employee that watches porn on the government computer deserves his pay.

>Most public workers deserve decent pensions since they work much harder than everyone else.
I work nights and weekends, do I get double play? No? But public employees get extra pension for working for private companies.

They're scamming us out of our money.

"They make more than private school teachers, and significantly more so when benefits are included."

Really? Because this private school teacher made $40k in 1999 right out of college. That's more than public school teachers made back then:

http://www.nypost.com/pagesixmag/issues/20080803/Confessions+Private+School+Teacher

Most public workers get time and a half, not double pay.

Did you ever notice how hard it is to reconcile certain New York ethnicities with their home countries

Makes sense, It's not hard to believe that those that emigrate are more motivated and harder working than the larger population of their native country. Emigrating is not something one takes lightly. The press is also mischaracterizing the Native Greeks; People are people and respond to the incentives they are given within their respective societies.

"Lots of people work hard. That doesn't mean they should get to retire in their 50s with indeterminate lifetime pensions paid for by someone else."

Actually, it DOES, if part of the agreement in taking on life-threatening jobs with health-threatening shifts with relatively low salaries meant a DEFERRED compensation vis-a-vis a more generous pension.

You can't be changing the rules mid-game. It's patently unfair and immoral to those people who sacrificed decades of their lives who are now entitled to their full compensation.

@The_President When the article says LESS then 40k then it says

"After taxes, Anisha had only $1,500 left to spend per month"

Really do some math and bother with your lies.

Private business changes the rules all the time. Gov't increases has increased the retirement age, Miners don't get the benefits of a cop and many civil servants don't risk their lives. Nothing that's been argued suggests the contract is unchangable and teachers and other unions have introduced tiering into contracts where newer workers entering the union have differnet benefits than older workers.

It's really a straight forward concept. The city and state get a budget and have to live within the budget. No politician would spend their onwn money the way they spend the publics.

all the rich people who feel they are being robbed by the poor people are hopelessly disillusioned and i wish them good luck attaining a better grasp on reality.

The poor are not robbing the rich. the politians are.

NYCMatt, if you don't think rules of the game in life are changed all the time, well wake up. its usually then followed by a tough tittie on you with a rasberry. you know, for the common good. whats going on here and what we will see is a reduction of services, less trains, less park availablity, less libraries and even less teachers, cops and then fireman and then last but not least garbarge pickup. get used to mail without saturday delivery too (who cares). this all will be done in order to "protect" those golden egg pensions. they will have to be cut too at some point. this is just the beginning of the ball of twine yet to be unravled. but all these "cuts" will be on the backs of nyc taxpayers andresidents to protect some of the more outlandish pensions and the abuses built into the system and overtly "approved" by our esteemed "leaders". ugh.

"Private business changes the rules all the time."

That doesn't make it right.

*****

"Miners don't get the benefits of a cop"

If a miner (or anyone else) wants the benefits of a cop, he's more than welcome to become a cop and take on the risks and sacrifices that the job demands.

Interesting....

"but all these "cuts" will be on the backs of nyc taxpayers andresidents to protect some of the more outlandish pensions and the abuses built into the system"

Honestly, I don't see a $35K/year pension for a cop who's been risking his life his entire career to be "outlandish" in the least.

And what "abuses" are you talking about?

rf, i know i'm a wimp, and it's not the biggest of the issues, but the reduced garbage pick up is really going to get to me in the summer. i vividly recall the stench of the '80s. ugh.

NYCMatt, admit it. your motivation here is the love of the uniform.

>all the rich people who feel they are being robbed by the poor people are hopelessly disillusioned and i wish them good luck attaining a better grasp on reality.

Poor people, working for government? Sorry, you're delusional. More then 40% of households in this country make less then 40k, and they don't work for government.

ha, but you have the south of france that time of year anyway. :)

Matt, plz. you aren't serious. look, my sister actually is a cop - my dad retired from the nypd as a civil engineer. but its common knowledge how they goose their pensions the last few years and how their hierarchy allows it. first dibbs on the ot to those retiring in the next two years...

rf, i wonder if there will be cuts there as well. i'd assume so, but the hills of nice have less garbage potential it seems to me (although the city itself could get rank) so i'll take solace in the thought of my upcoming mediterranean breezes.

head to provence - they turn "garbage" into gastronomical orgasms.

"NYCMatt, admit it. your motivation here is the love of the uniform."

in my musings re garbage i somehow overlooked the above gem.

Actually many of the city/state union workers that have relatively generous retirement benefits don't risk their lives in any special way. The fact is not every civil servant is a cop or a fireman.

rf, spent a week in bonnieux last summer. a delightful town.

yes, but every public worker isn't offerred early retirement either. your post specifically highlighted police officers.

>yes, but every public worker isn't offerred early retirement either. your post specifically highlighted police officers.

Fine, actually I am more pissed with feds.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20091211/1afedpay11_st.art.htm?loc=interstitialskip

The growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker's pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector

darkbird, at least your anger has direction. but i worked for the DOJ. i had to leave because the pay was not competitive. i'm fairly certain it still isn't in my former area. a lot of gov't jobs pay far less than private. others, such as admin assistants, may pay more than some private, but you'd be amazed at what a legal secretary makes these days. the private sector figure includes minimum wage jobs, like mcdonalds. or being a bookkeeper for a nail salon. if you compare like positions private almost always beats public.

don't worry, they're about to get their ranks thinned significantly. like city and state workers.

Oh I dont worry about myself. My pay is certainly is in top 5% or so in US.

But it isn't fair to the 45% that have less then 40k, while they don't pay federal taxes (which i dont mind while they work), they still pay state taxes.

Yes, private includes fast food industry which has the lowest pay out of all. But are you telling me they aren't human and shouldn't be accounted anywhere?

How many crooks are there in the NY force or state officials... I wonder where is the ex-NYPD commissioner is, or NY senate majority leader?

Why should I pay for crooks?

nice. true, my experience was more personally related towards them but think almost identical for the FDNY and others. anyway, think this can be a pretty passionate debate for obvious reasons but its an issue that is going to be quite painful all the way around.

darkbird, you're absolutely right -- fast-food industry workers should unionize, as should big-box store employees. If they do a good job of it, that would help re-establish the higher wages of the private sector vs. public.

darkbird, get off your high horse. of course i never said that food workers aren't human. i was just pointing out that if you compare like jobs to like jobs private pays much better than public. hence one of the reasons for additional benefits.

food service employment, in an ideal world, would not be a primary source of income for anyone needing to support themselves solely or support a family. i'm just saying your number includes them, and i doubt anyone would argue that a mcdonalds worker should make more than a government doctor. somebody in GAO, maybe.

yes, rf, this will be supremely painful. just like the construction of unneeded homes goosed our economy for years, with the money from the debt obtained flowing into our economy, so has the swelling of monies paid to governmental employees. it will not be resolved without a great deal of pain for all, including those who are happy to see the wages and benefits of others decline. there will be ripple effects.

ar, just to be clear not happy to see wages and benefits of others decline. just seems like the ultimate logical outcome if you follow the bouncing ball. no doubt, politicos and others will try and continue to perpetuate the ruse but smoke and mirrors only get you so far - until recently, at least for the next four years of public office. eventually, the balance sheet has to add up or these ripple effects will be more like a tidal wave. i am not a doomsdayer by any means but those nyc re bears have a pretty formidable roar at the moment.

The easy and smart solution is just to raise taxes. We in the US still pay less overall in taxes than the residents of nearly every other developed nation, so no problem.

How about reducing the senate by half. Would we really notice the difference. Then add on to that, their staffs. Be honest, how many of you would miss Schumer, Lautenberg and Dodd (or whoever will replace him).

"Actually, it DOES, if part of the agreement in taking on life-threatening jobs with health-threatening shifts with relatively low salaries meant a DEFERRED compensation vis-a-vis a more generous pension.

You can't be changing the rules mid-game. It's patently unfair and immoral to those people who sacrificed decades of their lives who are now entitled to their full compensation."

True... of course that completely nullifies your case.

The unions DID change mid-game.

They took deferred compensation and lower current salaries.
Now they take higher current salaries AND the deferred compensation.

I'm fine with the original rules, unions aren't.

Are you?

ah, putting aside any personal bias on raising taxes - that "solution" doesnt come close to addressing the eventual shortfall.

"Honestly, I don't see a $35K/year pension for a cop who's been risking his life his entire career to be "outlandish" in the least."

Nor I. Nor anyone here.

Claiming that folks are would be a... yes, you guessed it... a STRAWMAN.

How about $350k after 20 years? That ok with you?

We are Greece and we are bankrupt. The social welfare state will die a slow and painful death. All of you big government entitlement prostitutes, will get what you deserve.

rf, i never viewed you as one of the vultures happy to see reductions for others. i too recognize the need for austerity, and i fear the results as much as i know they are necessary. i'm trying not to roar so much. i was frightening myself.

but here's some food for thought. and it may make LICC's head explode, which would be a bonus.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/05/alan-graysons-the-war-is-making-you-poor-act.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NakedCapitalism+%28naked+capitalism%29

haha! okay, will take a look later tonight. just want to avoid any grey matter that might appear on my screen due to licc's unfortunate combustion.

@ar

Took me a bit of looking, but here were are.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/S5PClAnI9kI/AAAAAAAAM9I/YZNbYqnaT5w/s1600-h/fedjobs.jpg

Looks at the cook category.

Not to mention, when unions push for too much and make things unworkable, not only with unreasonable salaries and benfits but rediculous work rules that kill productivity (see construction union) the companies they deal with DIE, as do those jobs. There is a force pushing back.
This is why, of course, unions are dying off in the private sector.

In the public sector, there is no such pushback. Corrupt politicians give greedy unions things they can't afford, and won't have to pay anyway (the guys after will) and the citizens need to be punished for it forever because??!?!?

The system was set up and gamed by the unions. Because they scammed taxpayers out of the concessions, they deserve them forever?

Do bankrobbers get to keep the money when caught?

darkbird, how many cooks are there in the federal system, and think of where they'd be working? do you think the cafeteria cook at a federal site generally makes more than one in a biglaw firm?

line chefs in the diner. truck stops. do they include the people slapping together the egg mcmuffins?

data is very interesting. but only insofar as you really understand what it represents. good on you for finding it. i just don't have a clue what it means. and i'm very good with data.

The cook datum really illustrates why fast-food workers need to unionize in a big way.

i think SAHMs should unionize. the pay is shit, the benefits for most only OK. mine are better, but everyone knows i've got my husband by the short hairs.

"Not to mention, when unions push for too much and make things unworkable, not only with unreasonable salaries and benfits but rediculous work rules that kill productivity"

Be specific. What's an "unreasonable" salary for a cop or firefighter? They're already averaging less than $50K. You want them to get paid LESS?

*****

"This is why, of course, unions are dying off in the private sector."

Actually, unions are holding steady in the private sector, and in some areas gaining new momentum, as workers realize they can no longer depend on the benevolence and integrity of employers.

*****

Corrupt politicians give greedy unions things they can't afford, and won't have to pay anyway (the guys after will)"

Examples, please?

*****

"Do bankrobbers get to keep the money when caught?"

Do you mean people who rob banks, or the people who work inside the banks who are robbing the taxpayers? In the case of the latter, yes they DO get to keep the money.

"i think SAHMs should unionize."

What will you include in your pattern of demands? More Bon-Bons?

Matt: I don't like sweets. Forget the bon-bons. How about a pension?

"What's an "unreasonable" salary for a cop or firefighter? They're already averaging less than $50K."

I said salary + benefits.... and you're conveniently leaving off overtime... not to mention rookie cops make nothing because the union pushed for that to raise backend salaries... again, to push pension numbers.

> Actually, unions are holding steady in the private sector,

No, they're not. Union membership is declining overall in the US, and the % private just went under 50% for the first time ever, meaning private is falling even more.

Want to try that again?

> Examples, please?

Uh, pensions. What did you think we were talking about?