- This topic has 460 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by
Ricechex.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 3, 2009 at 8:55 AM #410266June 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM #409592
blahblahblah
ParticipantI guess I don’t really have a problem with good salaries and pensions for police and firefighters, but retiring at 53? Come on! For those of us in the private sector who have our retirement in the markets, there is no way we’re ever going to be able to retire at at even 65 and lots of us are going to work until we drop. I would like to see fire and police chiefs make it until at least 60 before they can retire.
June 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM #409830ParticipantI guess I don’t really have a problem with good salaries and pensions for police and firefighters, but retiring at 53? Come on! For those of us in the private sector who have our retirement in the markets, there is no way we’re ever going to be able to retire at at even 65 and lots of us are going to work until we drop. I would like to see fire and police chiefs make it until at least 60 before they can retire.
June 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM #410077ParticipantI guess I don’t really have a problem with good salaries and pensions for police and firefighters, but retiring at 53? Come on! For those of us in the private sector who have our retirement in the markets, there is no way we’re ever going to be able to retire at at even 65 and lots of us are going to work until we drop. I would like to see fire and police chiefs make it until at least 60 before they can retire.
June 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM #410138ParticipantI guess I don’t really have a problem with good salaries and pensions for police and firefighters, but retiring at 53? Come on! For those of us in the private sector who have our retirement in the markets, there is no way we’re ever going to be able to retire at at even 65 and lots of us are going to work until we drop. I would like to see fire and police chiefs make it until at least 60 before they can retire.
June 3, 2009 at 9:12 AM #410290ParticipantI guess I don’t really have a problem with good salaries and pensions for police and firefighters, but retiring at 53? Come on! For those of us in the private sector who have our retirement in the markets, there is no way we’re ever going to be able to retire at at even 65 and lots of us are going to work until we drop. I would like to see fire and police chiefs make it until at least 60 before they can retire.
June 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM #409622SDEngineer
Participant[quote=LarryTheRenter]It is ridiculous…thats why we are in this finacial mess…why should they have a guarenteed return, independent from market risks???? A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..
So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]
How much do you think a similar position in the private sector would pay?
A CEO of a 1000 employee company (about the size of the San Diego firefighting force) probably would make at LEAST about 100K more per year than she did in terms of salary (and more likely, significantly more – and for what, in my opinion, is a lot less responsibility).
Basically, we, the public, are shorting them on their pay during active service, and making it up in terms of retirement benefits.
June 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM #409860Participant[quote=LarryTheRenter]It is ridiculous…thats why we are in this finacial mess…why should they have a guarenteed return, independent from market risks???? A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..
So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]
How much do you think a similar position in the private sector would pay?
A CEO of a 1000 employee company (about the size of the San Diego firefighting force) probably would make at LEAST about 100K more per year than she did in terms of salary (and more likely, significantly more – and for what, in my opinion, is a lot less responsibility).
Basically, we, the public, are shorting them on their pay during active service, and making it up in terms of retirement benefits.
June 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM #410107Participant[quote=LarryTheRenter]It is ridiculous…thats why we are in this finacial mess…why should they have a guarenteed return, independent from market risks???? A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..
So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]
How much do you think a similar position in the private sector would pay?
A CEO of a 1000 employee company (about the size of the San Diego firefighting force) probably would make at LEAST about 100K more per year than she did in terms of salary (and more likely, significantly more – and for what, in my opinion, is a lot less responsibility).
Basically, we, the public, are shorting them on their pay during active service, and making it up in terms of retirement benefits.
June 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM #410168Participant[quote=LarryTheRenter]It is ridiculous…thats why we are in this finacial mess…why should they have a guarenteed return, independent from market risks???? A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..
So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]
How much do you think a similar position in the private sector would pay?
A CEO of a 1000 employee company (about the size of the San Diego firefighting force) probably would make at LEAST about 100K more per year than she did in terms of salary (and more likely, significantly more – and for what, in my opinion, is a lot less responsibility).
Basically, we, the public, are shorting them on their pay during active service, and making it up in terms of retirement benefits.
June 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM #410320Participant[quote=LarryTheRenter]It is ridiculous…thats why we are in this finacial mess…why should they have a guarenteed return, independent from market risks???? A sole proprieter would have to have a 2 million dollar retirement fund which yields 6% per year which would get you the $10,000 per month..
So obviuosly the fireman/woman didnt kick in this much him/herself…it is the taxpayers that are getting bled.[/quote]
How much do you think a similar position in the private sector would pay?
A CEO of a 1000 employee company (about the size of the San Diego firefighting force) probably would make at LEAST about 100K more per year than she did in terms of salary (and more likely, significantly more – and for what, in my opinion, is a lot less responsibility).
Basically, we, the public, are shorting them on their pay during active service, and making it up in terms of retirement benefits.
June 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM #409627Casca
ParticipantThe public trough welfare queens never get enough.
June 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM #409865ParticipantThe public trough welfare queens never get enough.
June 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM #410112ParticipantThe public trough welfare queens never get enough.
June 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM #410173ParticipantThe public trough welfare queens never get enough.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.