[quote=poorgradstudent]Econ 101 pretty much tells us that long term, in order to keep talent, if critical government jobs cut benefit plans, they’d have to raise salaries, basically making it a wash in terms of taxpayer benefit. I personally know several people who work for the State for wages lower than they could take elsewhere specifically because of the benefits.
[/quote]
The irony is that the character qualities that many people exhibit in taking a government job–sacrificing a larger salary now for a reward paid out later in benefits–is usually admirable. Kind of like those who are frugal and save their money instead of being the consummate consumer. But suddenly, they are all being villainized for being reasonable and responsible!
I agree that some of the benefits being paid out are out of hand, but for the majority I don’t think the benefits are out of hand.
This discussion wouldn’t be happening if the fund and pension managers hadn’t bought the lie. If they’d kept the pension funds invested in safe, moderate return facilities. Now comes the MBSes and the funds lose tons of money and now there is nothing left to pay out to retirees. It’s not their fault–most of them don’t even have control over what the pension invests in–but now they are the villains?
