[CA renter]

“Standard And Poor’s Gives San Diego County Its Highest Rating
San Diego County has earned the highest possible rating from all three of the top credit agencies—Fitch, Moody’s, and Standard and Poor’s.”

http://patch.com/california/encinitas/s/fmbxd/standard-and-poors-gives-san-diego-county-its-highest-rating?utm_source=article-mostrecent&utm_medium=rss&utm_term=politics%20&%20government&utm_campaign=recirc&utm_content=aol

[CA renter]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=phaster]

[snip irrelevant commentary and conjecture]

-snip-[/quote]

uhh, phaster, nice try but if you think this bleached whale “people-of-Walmart” couple you depicted here watching an implosion from their (polluted backyard?) in rural Nevada are representative of SD City and County retired workers, you need to see your eye doctor, pronto.

For the most part, we are fitter and trimmer than the Gen Y college-student set who comes back “home” for the holidays to work out at the gym we work out in all year-round!

And the only reason we can exist (or co-exist with a side gig) on our paltry city/county pensions is because our living expenses are relatively low in comparison to the “worker bee” currently raising a family. The COL is lowest for those older (WWII gen) members who retired prior to 2002 and thus purchased their current residences well below $100K.

Contrary to popular belief, SD city/county retirees don’t live lavish lifestyles on “golden pensions,” people …. NO, not even former sworn staff with more generous “Class C” retirements. We live in neighborhoods and houses most of you worker bees wouldn’t even bother getting off the freeway to look at in PAID FOR houses (or nearly so).[/quote]

Very true, BG. You can tell who gets all their news from the UT and Fox when they start talking about the “lavish” pensions. LOL!

And, Phaster, the CDO problem, along with any related derivatives, isn’t a result of what public employees are doing. That’s a problem that is created by the financial industry. Focus your righteous indignation in the right direction. “The Big Short” should have opened your eyes regarding the real perpetrators behind our economic collapse and the booms and busts that have caused most of the problems in the DB world.

If you’re really ticked off about taxpayers having to subsidize the lifestyles of others, then you should direct your anger squarely at Prop 13, as well — and that tax expenditure was never earned while pensions are deferred compensation for work already performed. Prop 13 is a HUGE tax subsidy, often to very wealthy people, which dwarfs California’s “pension crisis.” If we want to fix our fiscal house, we need to get rid of Prop 13 first (except for a single primary residence); then, we can see where we stand WRT other expenditures.

[CA renter]

[quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
Newbie Pigg phaster is in the habit of posting multiple (mostly dated) links in effort to incite public “outrage” over contracts made long ago with current and former CA local government employees.

[/quote]

For most paying attention that are not marxists, I think there is plenty of outrage.

At this point I’ve thrown in the hat – when my job dries up, I’m leaving California. The last thing I want to do is work until my death so some gd govt worker can retire in luxury meanwhile I’m living in poverty. Screw that….

public employee unions and california state govt are higly skilled in robbing/preying upon tax paying private sector workers in california.[/quote]

And your employer, a government contractor, paramount? You think they’re not ripping off taxpayers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBGFZX6G2Q

https://www.usaspending.gov/transparency/Pages/SpendingMap.aspx

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey][quote=temeculaguy]The trend is towards the elimination of the traditional pension, hopefully that makes you sleep better.[/quote]

That is the trend, and I’m optimistic that common sense will ultimately prevail.

Defined benefit pensions are a financial experiment that failed, but the effects still linger.

The OP was asking how much damage is left to be done.

The question is still relevant.[/quote]

Fifty years from now, do you honestly think they’ll be talking about the success of defined contribution pension plans? Which one do you think will be viewed more favorably, DB or DC pensions, once the DC debacle comes home to roost?

You’re dreaming if you think that DC pensions are superior in any way to DB pensions. I agree that some of the formulas are too generous (and have felt that way since the pension increase passed in CA), but DB pensions have been around a lot longer than DC pensions (since the Roman Empire, if not earlier), and they’ve done exceptionally well, all things considered.

The ONLY way DC pensions (private savings) have ever worked in all of known human history, was when family members were expected — even mandated, in some cases — to care for each other until death. I’m not opposed to that personally, but how do you think that’s going to go over with the general public in the U.S.?

If Americans are forced to take on the care of their sick and/or elderly relatives, I’d bet anything that they would be willing to pay a small tax on their income, over their lifetimes, that would give them relief from this obligation. Welcome to DB pension plans.

Your thoughts? How do you see DC pensions actually working, over the long term, in real life?

Something for you, and other critics of DB plans, to think about:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/edwardsiedle/2010/10/07/401ks-americas-biggest-investment-fraud-was-foreseen-and-preventable/

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
Newbie Pigg phaster is in the habit of posting multiple (mostly dated) links in effort to incite public “outrage” over contracts made long ago with current and former CA local government employees.

[/quote]

For most paying attention that are not marxists, I think there is plenty of outrage.

At this point I’ve thrown in the hat – when my job dries up, I’m leaving California. The last thing I want to do is work until my death so some gd govt worker can retire in luxury meanwhile I’m living in poverty. Screw that….

public employee unions and california state govt are higly skilled in robbing/preying upon tax paying private sector workers in california.[/quote]

Voting with your feet is the best way. I already did although I’m still paying CA taxes on CA related income, and property taxes. I hate property taxes that I see no personal benefit from.

I don’t mind paying taxes. But taxes should be for services to citizens and the poor. Not golden pensions.[/quote]

If you own property, then you benefit from the services provided via property taxes. What would the value of your property be without a local school district? How much would it be worth without roads, sidewalks, streetlights, local parks, sanitation services, police and fire protection, etc.?

This is what’s so messed up about many people who oppose taxes. They have no idea how these tax payments end up benefiting them. Very often, they receive an even greater benefit than what they pay because public infrastructure, as a whole, is often worth far more than the sum of its parts.

We desperately need better financial, economic, and political education in our schools. There are far too many people walking around who think that they know what they’re talking about when they really have no clue.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]All interactions in prison and life are potential threats.

Catcalling is not a crime. Groping is a crime and could result in prison time. We can’t conflate noncriminal words with a sex crime.[/quote]

Sexually aggressive words and actions can indeed be grouped together. We’re not talking about the law here; we’re talking about how one group’s behavior (the group of stronger, larger [in size and/or number], more powerful people) negatively affects another weaker, less powerful group — groups who often have a long history of being abused and oppressed by the more powerful group.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]This seems a little like minority students calling for safe spaces on campus to limit speech that makes them uncomfortable.

Not sure that discomfort can be vanquished in our lifetime.[/quote]

Again, it’s far easier to take this position when you’re the one in power. Not so easy when you’re the one who’s been subjected to violent/aggressive/hateful speech and actions, especially when you’re in a more vulnerable and less powerful position.

[CA renter]

[quote=outtamojo][quote=FlyerInHi]Yes, learn to be strong.

The most ridiculous thing is when you hear women desperate to get married and be taken care of. Learn to be strong and take care of yourself.

My niece once pushed another girl whose mom complained to the principal. Kids dare each other. Kids should learn to deal with a little shove.[/quote]

Hard to take care of yourself when an 8 pound baby splits you in two and you’ve got blood and afterbirth hangin’ all over you – hence the biological drive to look for someone to take care of you.[/quote]

Agreed. This and the fact that women are generally smaller and weaker, and much more likely be tortured, raped, and killed than a man if things go wrong. Of course, men are often killed in larger numbers during wars and battles, but they are less likely to be tortured and raped in the process.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=outtamojo]
Hard to take care of yourself when an 8 pound baby splits you in two and you’ve got blood and afterbirth hangin’ all over you – hence the biological drive to look for someone to take care of you.[/quote]

I can go with this…. but there’s a price to everything in life. If someone takes care of you, then you need to give something in exchange. If the boss pays you, then you have to submit to the boss and do as told.

The baby belongs to both parents, so the baby itself cannot be part of the bargain.[/quote]

The baby belongs to the mother by default. The father wouldn’t even know that a pregnancy resulted from his sex act unless the woman told him. He would have no rights to the child without the legal system (created by men, and based largely on religious doctrine that establishes a man’s position over his wife) that gives him rights to the child, and a legal/social structure — marriage — that reinforces this arrangement and gives women a reason to share the child with the father. She gives him the ability to pass on his genes, giving his family line the potential for “eternal life,” and he returns the favor by taking care of the wife for life.

Of course, it’s a business deal, and both spouses have other ways to give and take, but that’s the basic premise.

[CA renter]

Scaredy, when one of your clients is about to head off to prison, do you advise him to smile and nod when the other inmates catcall and whistle at him? Do you tell him that it’s “just a compliment,” and he should be happy about it?

Because that’s what it feels like to be a woman walking by yourself and having a group of sexually aggressive men catcall, grope, and make vulgar gestures at you.

Trust me, it’s not taken as a compliment; it’s a threat.

[CA renter]

[quote=livinincali]Bernanke will be hailed as a hero until the next bubble pops. Then he’ll be the biggest idiot in the world because he’ll have failed to raise rates so they can respond to the next crisis. Greenspan was a pretty big hero until 2008 came along.[/quote]

Bingo!

[CA renter]

For one thing, many of us have been saying that some of the benefit formulas need to be reworked, putting them back to levels seen before pension benefits were boosted back in the late 90s.

Some of us have also advocated for pension funds (of all stripes) to get back into more conservative types of investments — govt bonds and very high quality debt, etc. — and to realign their return forecasts as a result. But this would only work if the Federal Reserve were mandated to stay out of interest rate manupulations except for very rare emergencies. Even then, their moves would have to be closely scrutinized and the pension funds (or a federal agency that oversees govt pension funds) should have some representation in the decision making process at the Fed.

If we want to change the way all financial entities calculate risks, the entire FIRE sector would implode. I’m all for holding people accountable, but we can’t cherry-pick the ones we want to target.

Along the same lines, ALL government guarantees and expenditures need to be much more closely monitored. That includes govt contracts; corporate subsidies (including tax expenditures); guarantees to investors, farmers, etc.; public-private partnerships, etc. — all of which need to be much more closely controlled and scrutinized.

As I’ve noted regarding the author of the LA Times piece, she is harshly critical of public pensions, but doesn’t bat an eye when cheering on our bloated defense spending (with a single unnecessary project costing as much as 1/3 of the unfunded pension debt in her worst-case scenario), or public-private partnerships and govt subsidies of private companies, like Space X, etc.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Social policy is the domain of Congress. They can pass laws to deal with wages and social inequality. Bernanke himself said that Congress should act along with the Fed.[/quote]

True, but they intersect. Pumping money into the economy when there is nowhere for it to go (people will not start or expand their businesses when their customers are going into survival mode) will create bubbles.

The government can offset this to some extent, but if the political will is not there, it won’t happen. They should have been clamping down on speculation, putting more money into energy and healthcare R&D, rebuilding our infrastructure, etc. They did some of that, but not nearly enough, IMHO.

[CA renter]

Agree, that’s been a big problem.

Not sure I missed anything about it, though.

[CA renter]

LOL! You just keep burying yourself, Pri. You don’t even have the slightest knowledge about this issue, and when someone calls you out on your BS, you resort to more of your trolling.

Good luck!

[Author]

Posts