OT: Estimated state budget deficit reaches $25.4 billion

[Anonymous]

[quote=EconProf]True conservatives want to limit government power, expand personal freedom, and allow businesses and individuals to create and prosper or fail according to their own merits.[/quote]

More useless rhetoric.

Have you ever heard anyone, left or right, say that they want to increase government power, reduce personal freedom, or eliminate merit as a component of success?

Motherhood and Apple Pie.

But when it comes to actual policy, conservatives do plenty to increase government power (massive military, prison system, …), reduce personal freedom (Patriot Act, War on Drugs, ….), and eliminate merit as a component of success (farm subsidies, “too big to fail”, …)

But the pot won’t stop screaming that the kettle is black.

[quote]I haven’t seen anything in your response or that of others to counter the points I made about California’s likely economic and political future.[/quote]

All you’ve said so far is that we are doomed because liberals are running the state. And then you pointed out that liberals have been running the state for 40 years.

California’s had a helluva run in the past 40 years, so your points are already countered by the glaring reality of history. No further responses are necessary.

(And BTW, economic comparisons between California and North Dakota are ridiculous. More evidence that you don’t have any credibility.)

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.

[Anonymous]

[quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.

[Arraya]

It’s all a ponzi-webbed, interconnected unsustainable system.

[Arraya]

It’s all a ponzi-webbed, interconnected unsustainable system.

[Arraya]

It’s all a ponzi-webbed, interconnected unsustainable system.

[Arraya]

It’s all a ponzi-webbed, interconnected unsustainable system.

[Arraya]

It’s all a ponzi-webbed, interconnected unsustainable system.

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.[/quote]

I’m not sure what was “aggressive” or “sneaky” about those propositions. What it pointed out was there was an ~$800 million deficit in lifetime pension benefits *at this point in time.*

Ultimately, that number could be much greater — if everyone lives well beyond what the actuaries have calculated, and if investment losses/lower returns are worse than what they’ve projected…OR, they could end up with a surplus if workers die earlier and/or investment returns outperform thier projected estimated returns.

Let me say this first (and I’ve said it many times before): the current pension benefits are too generous. They made some very irresponsible decisions over a decade ago, and we are now dealing with the consequences. However, those foolish decisions were based on a bubble mentality that has been with us now for over a decade. Those pensions were superfunded (over-funded) when those decisions were made, but it was entirely due to the stock/internet bubble.

One VERY important point: the pension funds have sustained very large losses because they were invested in precisely the types of investments that caused our financial crisis. They, and many other typically-conservative investment funds/entities, were forced into these riskier investments because the Fed held rates so low for so long that everyone had to move out on the risk curve in order to maintain their projected returns. I place that blame squarely on the Fed and the govt regulators who allowed the financial deregulation that enabled the **MASSIVE LEVERAGE** and those “innovative” products to come to market in the first place. We have been lacking good, solid regulation for too long. We need people like Elizabeth Warren, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, etc. to lead this country — all of whom strike me as people who *actually care* about the United States and our citizens, and who have some understanding of economics and trade. (Note how they come from all across the political spectrum…it’s not a party issue.)

I believe the pension crisis will be fixed because the govt employers are already beginning to shift the pension contribution requirements from the employers to the employees. After that is done, I believe the formulas will be changed so that the projected investment returns will be lowered, and contribution requirements will rise. This will be borne by the employees, not the taxpayers. It could be an effective 20-30% cut in pay. Additionally, many employers have already moved toward a two-tiered system where the new employees are being put on the pre-pension-boost formula (2% vs. 3%). They cannot change the ones who are already vested, but the obligations going forward will be lower.

When we incentivize speculation/investment over labor, we get bubbles because “gambling” becomes more profitable than working. We have allowed the financial industry (the REIC, actually) to run this country into the ground. We need to turn away from the worshipping of the financial “gods” and corporate executives, dealmakers, etc., and get back to the business of creating and building things. We need to turn away from “free trade” with third-world countries when that “free trade” means all our jobs are being off-shored.

There are many problems with our economy, and many possible solutions; but scapegoating public union workers totally ignores the root causes of our problems and prevents us from being able to establish workable, common-sense, solutions that acutally address the REAL causes of our economic distress. We need to move away from this nonsensical partisan bickering and focus on what will make this country strong and successful again. The problem is at the TOP, not the bottom.

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.[/quote]

I’m not sure what was “aggressive” or “sneaky” about those propositions. What it pointed out was there was an ~$800 million deficit in lifetime pension benefits *at this point in time.*

Ultimately, that number could be much greater — if everyone lives well beyond what the actuaries have calculated, and if investment losses/lower returns are worse than what they’ve projected…OR, they could end up with a surplus if workers die earlier and/or investment returns outperform thier projected estimated returns.

Let me say this first (and I’ve said it many times before): the current pension benefits are too generous. They made some very irresponsible decisions over a decade ago, and we are now dealing with the consequences. However, those foolish decisions were based on a bubble mentality that has been with us now for over a decade. Those pensions were superfunded (over-funded) when those decisions were made, but it was entirely due to the stock/internet bubble.

One VERY important point: the pension funds have sustained very large losses because they were invested in precisely the types of investments that caused our financial crisis. They, and many other typically-conservative investment funds/entities, were forced into these riskier investments because the Fed held rates so low for so long that everyone had to move out on the risk curve in order to maintain their projected returns. I place that blame squarely on the Fed and the govt regulators who allowed the financial deregulation that enabled the **MASSIVE LEVERAGE** and those “innovative” products to come to market in the first place. We have been lacking good, solid regulation for too long. We need people like Elizabeth Warren, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, etc. to lead this country — all of whom strike me as people who *actually care* about the United States and our citizens, and who have some understanding of economics and trade. (Note how they come from all across the political spectrum…it’s not a party issue.)

I believe the pension crisis will be fixed because the govt employers are already beginning to shift the pension contribution requirements from the employers to the employees. After that is done, I believe the formulas will be changed so that the projected investment returns will be lowered, and contribution requirements will rise. This will be borne by the employees, not the taxpayers. It could be an effective 20-30% cut in pay. Additionally, many employers have already moved toward a two-tiered system where the new employees are being put on the pre-pension-boost formula (2% vs. 3%). They cannot change the ones who are already vested, but the obligations going forward will be lower.

When we incentivize speculation/investment over labor, we get bubbles because “gambling” becomes more profitable than working. We have allowed the financial industry (the REIC, actually) to run this country into the ground. We need to turn away from the worshipping of the financial “gods” and corporate executives, dealmakers, etc., and get back to the business of creating and building things. We need to turn away from “free trade” with third-world countries when that “free trade” means all our jobs are being off-shored.

There are many problems with our economy, and many possible solutions; but scapegoating public union workers totally ignores the root causes of our problems and prevents us from being able to establish workable, common-sense, solutions that acutally address the REAL causes of our economic distress. We need to move away from this nonsensical partisan bickering and focus on what will make this country strong and successful again. The problem is at the TOP, not the bottom.

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.[/quote]

I’m not sure what was “aggressive” or “sneaky” about those propositions. What it pointed out was there was an ~$800 million deficit in lifetime pension benefits *at this point in time.*

Ultimately, that number could be much greater — if everyone lives well beyond what the actuaries have calculated, and if investment losses/lower returns are worse than what they’ve projected…OR, they could end up with a surplus if workers die earlier and/or investment returns outperform thier projected estimated returns.

Let me say this first (and I’ve said it many times before): the current pension benefits are too generous. They made some very irresponsible decisions over a decade ago, and we are now dealing with the consequences. However, those foolish decisions were based on a bubble mentality that has been with us now for over a decade. Those pensions were superfunded (over-funded) when those decisions were made, but it was entirely due to the stock/internet bubble.

One VERY important point: the pension funds have sustained very large losses because they were invested in precisely the types of investments that caused our financial crisis. They, and many other typically-conservative investment funds/entities, were forced into these riskier investments because the Fed held rates so low for so long that everyone had to move out on the risk curve in order to maintain their projected returns. I place that blame squarely on the Fed and the govt regulators who allowed the financial deregulation that enabled the **MASSIVE LEVERAGE** and those “innovative” products to come to market in the first place. We have been lacking good, solid regulation for too long. We need people like Elizabeth Warren, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, etc. to lead this country — all of whom strike me as people who *actually care* about the United States and our citizens, and who have some understanding of economics and trade. (Note how they come from all across the political spectrum…it’s not a party issue.)

I believe the pension crisis will be fixed because the govt employers are already beginning to shift the pension contribution requirements from the employers to the employees. After that is done, I believe the formulas will be changed so that the projected investment returns will be lowered, and contribution requirements will rise. This will be borne by the employees, not the taxpayers. It could be an effective 20-30% cut in pay. Additionally, many employers have already moved toward a two-tiered system where the new employees are being put on the pre-pension-boost formula (2% vs. 3%). They cannot change the ones who are already vested, but the obligations going forward will be lower.

When we incentivize speculation/investment over labor, we get bubbles because “gambling” becomes more profitable than working. We have allowed the financial industry (the REIC, actually) to run this country into the ground. We need to turn away from the worshipping of the financial “gods” and corporate executives, dealmakers, etc., and get back to the business of creating and building things. We need to turn away from “free trade” with third-world countries when that “free trade” means all our jobs are being off-shored.

There are many problems with our economy, and many possible solutions; but scapegoating public union workers totally ignores the root causes of our problems and prevents us from being able to establish workable, common-sense, solutions that acutally address the REAL causes of our economic distress. We need to move away from this nonsensical partisan bickering and focus on what will make this country strong and successful again. The problem is at the TOP, not the bottom.

[CA renter]

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]You DO realize that the “financial crisis” (including the “pension crisis”) was caused by the financial industrty, and not public unions, right?[/quote]

Although they have some elements in common, the two “crises” are not the same.

The bulk of the pension crisis for government employees was caused by aggressive and sneaky union tactics.

One small example:

http://www.pe.com/localnews/stories/PE_News_Local_D_pension03.299e5be.html

This has nothing to do with the financial crisis. It has everything to do with public unions throwing big money behind legislation that will bankrupt the county.[/quote]

I’m not sure what was “aggressive” or “sneaky” about those propositions. What it pointed out was there was an ~$800 million deficit in lifetime pension benefits *at this point in time.*

Ultimately, that number could be much greater — if everyone lives well beyond what the actuaries have calculated, and if investment losses/lower returns are worse than what they’ve projected…OR, they could end up with a surplus if workers die earlier and/or investment returns outperform thier projected estimated returns.

Let me say this first (and I’ve said it many times before): the current pension benefits are too generous. They made some very irresponsible decisions over a decade ago, and we are now dealing with the consequences. However, those foolish decisions were based on a bubble mentality that has been with us now for over a decade. Those pensions were superfunded (over-funded) when those decisions were made, but it was entirely due to the stock/internet bubble.

One VERY important point: the pension funds have sustained very large losses because they were invested in precisely the types of investments that caused our financial crisis. They, and many other typically-conservative investment funds/entities, were forced into these riskier investments because the Fed held rates so low for so long that everyone had to move out on the risk curve in order to maintain their projected returns. I place that blame squarely on the Fed and the govt regulators who allowed the financial deregulation that enabled the **MASSIVE LEVERAGE** and those “innovative” products to come to market in the first place. We have been lacking good, solid regulation for too long. We need people like Elizabeth Warren, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, etc. to lead this country — all of whom strike me as people who *actually care* about the United States and our citizens, and who have some understanding of economics and trade. (Note how they come from all across the political spectrum…it’s not a party issue.)

I believe the pension crisis will be fixed because the govt employers are already beginning to shift the pension contribution requirements from the employers to the employees. After that is done, I believe the formulas will be changed so that the projected investment returns will be lowered, and contribution requirements will rise. This will be borne by the employees, not the taxpayers. It could be an effective 20-30% cut in pay. Additionally, many employers have already moved toward a two-tiered system where the new employees are being put on the pre-pension-boost formula (2% vs. 3%). They cannot change the ones who are already vested, but the obligations going forward will be lower.

When we incentivize speculation/investment over labor, we get bubbles because “gambling” becomes more profitable than working. We have allowed the financial industry (the REIC, actually) to run this country into the ground. We need to turn away from the worshipping of the financial “gods” and corporate executives, dealmakers, etc., and get back to the business of creating and building things. We need to turn away from “free trade” with third-world countries when that “free trade” means all our jobs are being off-shored.

There are many problems with our economy, and many possible solutions; but scapegoating public union workers totally ignores the root causes of our problems and prevents us from being able to establish workable, common-sense, solutions that acutally address the REAL causes of our economic distress. We need to move away from this nonsensical partisan bickering and focus on what will make this country strong and successful again. The problem is at the TOP, not the bottom.

[Author]

Posts