More public pension loony tunes – now Providence RI is in trouble

[blake]

New California Taxes Pay for Pensions, Not Schools

Remember, it’s all for the children! 😐

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]Taxpayers are now having to pay for the contributions that WERE NOT MADE by “taxpayers” during the good times.[/quote]

Once again this is absolutely false, and the text you cite (boldface or not) does not say anything about state or municipal agencies (“employers”) failing to make the required contributions.

CalPERS has never accepted an IOU from the state or a city. Your claim is a complete fabrication.

Every state agency and city has paid their contributions in full. In fact, even while in bankruptcy, Vallejo continued to pay CalPERS the full contributions, and gutted city services in order to meet the payments:

It kept making all of its contributions to Calpers throughout its three-year bankruptcy.

“We never shortchanged Calpers,” said Robert V. Stout, Vallejo’s finance director at the time.

And did public employees make concessions? Nope, they sued in order to keep it at all:

But Calpers drew a line in the sand, warning Mr. Stout and his lawyers that in California, public pensions can be increased but never decreased, not just for retirees, but also for workers at midcareer.

More examples of public employees fighting concessions:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/san-jose-police-union-sues-city-over-pension-ballot-measure/

(Links are posted for the benefit of everyone except CA Renter, since we know she simply ignores facts from credible sources. Just like she did with ones I posted up thread that she still has not acknowledged.)

There have been some minor concessions forced upon public employees (out of necessity), but nothing that comes even close covering the shortfall.

The money covering the shortfall has been coming from:

– Deficit spending (hence the state’s poor credit rating)

– The state’s general fund, as cited in a link in my post above

– Cuts in programs, particularly schools. In my own school district, teachers were just laid off and elementary class sizes have increased to 30 students.

– (pending) Tax increases (see Jerry Brown’s ballot initiative referenced in blake’s post above)

Pubic employees and public-employee unions are not offering any compromises whatsoever. They are simply suing the state and city governments at every opportunity in order to demand more taxpayer money, forcing cuts in services and ultimately tax increases.

CalPERS, their lawyers, and their union cohorts are nothing more than financial bullies who literally rob schoolchildren.

Sorry CAR, your “one word” answer is completely wrong. If it were correct, there wouldn’t be a shortfall, would there?

[Anonymous]

[quote=SD Realtor]Why shouldn’t they get the exact same benefit?[/quote]

“yes, everyone should get to retire at 50 with a full salary pension.”

Of course we’ve seen how well that actually works.

[briansd1]

[quote=CA renter] How about public-private partnerships and give-aways to private developers and contractors (where the majority of fraud and abuse occurs)? What about all the idiotic bonds that taxpayers passed, even in the face of a major recession? What about all the interest payments we’re making because govt entities took on too much debt for various projects during the “good times”? [/quote]

What about this and what about that? Is that your way of deflecting? Those wrongs don’t make the pension rip-off right.

But we do know that pension costs are becoming ever larger portions of budgets.

Citizens, adults and children, are suffering because services are being cut.

CA renter, I know you want to get the money from the bankers. I’d be happy to support you in that, if you have a plan… but don’t rob local citizens to pay retirees.

In San Diego, payments to the city’s retirement fund soared from $43 million in 1999 to $231.2 million this year, equal to 20 percent of the city’s general fund budget, which pays for day-to-day operations. San Jose’s payments jumped from $73 million in 2001 to $245 million this year, equal to 27 percent of its general fund budget.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/2595482ba71845c6867b7d13fdd575a1/CA–Public-Pensions/

CA renter, i know that you’ll seize on the parts of the article that support your side… but let’s be pragmatic here. The money to make the pensions whole should come from somewhere. IMO, the money should not come from continued cuts to services. So please tell me where the money should come from?

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=harvey][quote=SD Realtor]Why shouldn’t they get the exact same benefit?[/quote]

“yes, everyone should get to retire at 50 with a full salary pension.”

Of course we’ve seen how well that actually works.[/quote]

Yes… It’s call Greece!

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]It is absolutely hilarious.

On the one hand you will argue that it is a shame that people would have to move out of san diego to find affordable housing. That they should not have to.

Yet your argument for pensions is that people who do not work in the public sector should not get them. That the solution is for us chumps in the private sector to quit and get a public sector job.

You love to argue how in favor of the workers, that the working class should receive all corporate profits but you are plenty satisfied with the differences in how the private and public working class employees are treated.

In your utopia shouldn’t all working class employees receive the exact same treatment?

Why shouldn’t they get the exact same benefit?[/quote]

Where in the world did you get the idea that I think private sector workers shouldn’t get decent pay and benefits?!?!?!

To the contrary, I understand that the age-old division is NOT between public and private workers, but between labor and capital — always was, and always will be. The people who have destroyed the private sector jobs are the very ones who have concocted this artifical division between “private” and “public” sector workers. They are the ones beind the attacks on unions. They are trying to divide and conquer the workers all around the globe so that they can move forward with their agenda to control all natural resources and cash flows.

Personally, I think that if executives and shareholders want to be exempt from personal liability via incorporation/limited liability, etc., then their “rights” to profits should be limited as well. Those profits were created by the workers, and they are the ones who should be getting the bulk of the benefit from the value THEY create.

If capitalists want “unlimited” personal profits, then they need to take “unlimited” PERSONAL risks. Period.

Unfortunately, the sheeple in the private sector bought the lies that “unions are bad, and globalization is good,” and they are reaping the consequences. Where were they — where were YOU — when the unions were fighting the changes in tax and trade policies that allowed our corporations and the capitalists behind them to hollow out our economy and created the greatest wealth disparity in our history?

[Coronita]

I think this is probably a wakeup call for folks who are generation X or youngers for what’s to come…

Baby boomers retiring in massive amounts
+
generous entitlement programs that are underfunded
+
no one willing to compromise and give up for the greater good

= you and your kids being ultimately screwed…royally….

All you generation X’s and beyond. Might as well start spending some of your money and enjoying life….Because, if you don’t you’re definitely not going to enjoy watching yourself pay up the noses in taxes to fund all these unsustainable entitlement programs at the federal,state, and local levels…watching retirees enjoy their golden years, some of which only worked for 5-6 years to get get a lifetime pension…while you struggle putting ends meet together….with absolutely no sympathy from those folks in the entitlement programs…

You see, there’s a huge problem folks….See, when private corporations go bellie up, and have pension obligations, those things get renegotiated as was the case in the airline industry…so that the company can survive.

When federal/state/local government can no longer afford to pay it’s bill, it’s not so simple as filing for BK and renegotiating the pension obligations…Even if a local gov files for BK, it doesn’t free them from their pension obligations… That’s a big problem…

On top of that our government, continuously rewards bad, irresponsible behavior by encouraging more spending, from the very same folks that shouldn’t/can’t be spending. By extending them loan mod/save your home programs,etc,etc,etc,etc…

WAKE UP PEOPLE. You get a cookie for being stupidly stupid fruggle…saving….to allow everyone else enjoy spending and enjoying their lifestyle at your expense….. you’re saving and paying a hell of a lot more taxes to support THEIR life AT YOUR EXPENSE…. You routinely enjoy being gang butt-fvcked, because for some reason, you’re holding on to the notion of being “financially responsible”, as some morale/right thing to do… Guess what? NO ONE GIVES A SHIT BUT YOU (and maybe the minority of piggingtons on this board)…

Savers 0 : Spenders 1

I’ve stopped penny pinching about 2 years ago, when this hit me…That’s why, when I like something now, and I can afford it, and it’s reasonably priced (not totally overboard), I just get it… Because if I don’t, uncle sam will tax me for holding on to my money and fork it over to defense spending and entitlement programs that I don’t benefit from. Government can’t exactly tax you anymore up the ying yang when you don’t have excess money to tax…Spend now voluntarily…or let someone else spend for you later…

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

I’ve stopped penny pinching about 2 years ago, when this hit me…That’s why, when I like something now, and I can afford it, and it’s reasonably priced (not totally overboard), I just get it… Because if I don’t, uncle sam will tax me for holding on to my money and fork it over to defense spending and entitlement programs that I don’t benefit from. Government can’t exactly tax you anymore up the ying yang when you don’t have excess money to tax…Spend now voluntarily…or let someone else spend for you later…[/quote]

Spending/consuming more doesn’t lower your taxes.

[sdrealtor]

sorry but no one concocted an artificial division between “private” and “public” sector workers for me. I have worked in the public sector and seen it personally. I have seen the pension benefits and compensation the public sector worker receive. I have seen school funding get cut and community services get cut personally. We arent idiots around here nor are we sheeple. We see it ourselves. We dont listen to the media about that just like we didnt buy into the housing bubble. Its a real problem but as a direct beneficiary of it you cant see past it. Nothing more….nothing less.

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1][quote=flu]

I’ve stopped penny pinching about 2 years ago, when this hit me…That’s why, when I like something now, and I can afford it, and it’s reasonably priced (not totally overboard), I just get it… Because if I don’t, uncle sam will tax me for holding on to my money and fork it over to defense spending and entitlement programs that I don’t benefit from. Government can’t exactly tax you anymore up the ying yang when you don’t have excess money to tax…Spend now voluntarily…or let someone else spend for you later…[/quote]

Spending/consuming more doesn’t lower your taxes.[/quote]

No, I’m just not leaving any more money than needed on the table for it to be taxed in the future.

For instance… Folks that think that things like 401k income deferrals I think will be in for a rude awakening when taxes are due when a Generation Xer retires. I’m pretty sure the taxes paid then will be more than paid now, both in terms of percentages and actual amount paid.
Nor do I think Roth 401k/IRAs are going to be non-taxed in the the future too…

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]sorry but no one concocted an artificial division between “private” and “public” sector workers for me. I have worked in the public sector and seen it personally. I have seen the pension benefits and compensation the public sector worker receive. I have seen school funding get cut and community services get cut personally. We arent idiots around here nor are we sheeple. We see it ourselves. We dont listen to the media about that just like we didnt buy into the housing bubble. Its a real problem but as a direct beneficiary of it you cant see past it. Nothing more….nothing less.[/quote]

Bullshit. I’ve advocated for workers’ rights long before I went to work in the public sector. On multiple occasions, I’ve advocated for things that worked very much against my best interests if I felt it was the right thing to do. You have no idea what motivates me, and it’s clear from your multiple posts that you don’t understand what public sector workers do (hanging out after work and drinking alcohol on the patio?!?!?).

Based on your posts, you worked for a short time in administration where it is indeed bloated — and most “boots-on-the-ground” workers will tell you that. You’ve never done the hard work that the front-line workers do. Yes, I’ve seen the nonsense in administration with its multiple layers of overpaid bureaucrats, but for some reason, those aren’t the people who are being vilified in most MSM articles and on the blogs.

Programs get cut when revenue drops or costs increase unexpectedly, they don’t get cut because of the workers.

Yes, the idiots who are whining about not having these benefits are, more often than not, the ones who championed the off-shoring of jobs, the elimination of unions, and “globalization.” They foolishly believed that they were somehow members of “the rich” who were going to benefit from the decimation of the middle and working classes. Yes, they are idiots and they are sheeple. Yes, their opinions are affected by the MSM and the “national groupthink” that is controlled by a handful of people/entities who are responsible for the destruction of our economy.

BTW, how many billions/trillions of dollars have been spent to artificially inflate housing prices and keep the housing market liquid — something that YOU benefit from personally? You are in no position to complain about wasted taxpayer money.

[sdrealtor]

Really “boots on the ground” workers bitch and moan about mangement in the public sector? Thats the oldest chorus in the world and plays out everywhere. That is until those “boots on the ground” workers eventually end up in management or with some title like Leuitenant Fire Captain Class 4. They get promoted 10 times in 10 years with very little real changes in their actual day to day work. Has there ever been a fireman hired who just stayed at their current pay grade? They dont stay “boots on the ground” workers they have a solid keep your head down and do your job so eventually you get that managment job title guarantee. And thats where the big pay day arrives.

BTW my income has been remarkably stable over the last decade and I have benefited very little from taxpayer bailouts. I’d be right where I am with or without them.

[CA renter]

[quote=sdrealtor]Really “boots on the ground” workers bitch and moan about mangement in the public sector? Thats the oldest chorus in the world and plays out everywhere. That is until those “boots on the ground” workers eventually end up in management or with some title like Leuitenant Fire Captain Class 4. They get promoted 10 times in 10 years with very little real changes in their actual day to day work. Has there ever been a fireman hired who just stayed at their current pay grade? They dont stay “boots on the ground” workers they have a solid keep your head down and do your job so eventually you get that managment job title guarantee. And thats where the big pay day arrives.

BTW my income has been remarkably stable over the last decade and I have benefited very little from taxpayer bailouts. I’d be right where I am with or without them.[/quote]

Once again, you’ve proved with this post how little you know about the public sector.

You’ve benefitted tremendously from taxpayer-funded bailouts. Not only because your commissions are based on artificially inflated prices, but because of the liquidity.

Without the Fed/govt money, the housing market would be frozen — and at much lower prices — with very few sales being made at any price. Remember the second half of 2007? Things were only getting started then. If not for the “cash-for-trash” deals, the Fed give-aways, ZIRP, the GSEs, FHA, and various tax credits on both a state and federal level…your income over the past 5 years would have plummeted.

If not for the artificially low interest rates, tax exemptions, MID, etc. before the “crash,” your income would have been much lower in the five+ years prior to that, as well.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter]
yet the financial sector parasites are scapegoating them for all the damage inflicted by the financial industry (both booms and busts).[/quote]

Why invest with Wall Street if they are such parasites?

The pension funds could have bought more conservatives investments. The problem with that is that pension contributions would have been much higher for the same level of guaranteed benefits.[/quote]

Wanted to address this, too, as it’s a valid point.

Originally, the public pension funds were not allowed to invest in “speculative” securities. They were primarily invested in high-grade bonds.

Unfortunately, Wall Street and their enablers got their hooks into the pension funds (can’t let that much money circumvent them, can they?), and the pension funds were allowed to get into riskier and riskier positions over time.

Whereas the funds used to manage most of their investments in-house, they’ve been moving more and more toward using private, for-profit outside managers, advisers, hedge funds, etc. Needless to say, I despise this and think that it forces too much risk onto public employees and tax payers. We need to get Wall Street/private, for-profit entities OUT of public finance. There have been too many conflicts of interests and a few corruption cases, and it’s tied (as always) to the revolving door between public **and private** enterprise. Very rarely do you have this level of corruption in an agency that is not tainted with **private-sector** money/blackmail.

It’s also interesting to consider that if the pension funds were only allowed to invest as they used to, I doubt we’d have the “pension crisis” we do today.

One more clarification I wanted to make WRT CalPERS: it is not a private entity. It is a state agency, but various govt agencies contract with them for their healthcare and pension programs…but not all govt agencies contract with them as many manage their own funds. Just wanted to make that clear.

I would LOVE to roll-back time and undo the damage caused by the Fed’s inflationary policies and pro-speculation stance (like the Greenspan/Bernanke put) which have the undesirable effect of forcing public agencies to invest in more speculative vehicles…and promise unsustainable benefits. I would gladly welcome the return of more modest investment gains and more modest benefits if we could eliminate the inflationary policies of the Fed/govt and speculative activities pursued by those in the financial markets.

[CA renter]

Note to Pri:

I’m not ignoring your post, and appreciate the fact that you finally brought something factual (with links and citations) to the debate. In order to reply, I will need to do some research, and haven’t had the uninterrupted time to do it just yet. Please feel free to bump this and remind me that I need to respond to your post.

[Author]

Posts