Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 2, 2014 at 7:53 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778380October 2, 2014 at 7:34 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778381
CA renter
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]So, do you think we should continue to spiral down until we are all living in mud huts and eating a bowl of rice per day (while our corporate masters get wealthier and more powerful), or do you think we should protect our industries and our way of life by enacting trade laws and tariffs that offset the differences between our environmental and labor standards and the standards of others?[/quote]
A strawman and a false choice in one sentence! Nice use of logical fallacies!
What I think is that any attempt to guarantee investment returns decades into the future is folly. I think we should base policy on the realities that history has taught us, not the fantasies that some would like to believe.[/quote]
Not at all a false choice or a straw man argument (you like to make these claims a lot, pretty much anytime you don’t have an answer to someone else’s challenge). Do you seriously not understand the trajectory that we’re on? Do you honestly not know where our corporate masters are driving the global economy? Do some research for a change!
And if we were to all lose Social Security and DB pensions (and Medicare, since we’re throwing everything out there that is backed by taxpayers), how do you think that would play out? Do you not understand that we would still have to pay for these people when they run out of money (and they would run out of money), or risk serious social and civil strife?
In the past, a large and strong family unit was the social safety net. With industrialization and globalization, that can’t happen. What do you propose *that would actually work*?
ParticipantLet’s say the man was throwing up at the hospital the first time he went (pretty likely), or that someone might have come into contact with is blood, saliva, feces, or urine while he was there. It seems pretty likely that this might have happened.
Then this person (or people) go home to their loved ones, go to work, go to restaurants and other establishments, etc., and the disease is spread. Some of those people, or the people with whom they’ve had contact, might also have traveled to other cities or states, spreading it there.
It seems pretty contagious, based on what I’ve read. Even healthcare professionals who are taking extreme precautions are getting sick. Just the fact that someone made it here with the disease, even though they are trying to be vigilant about passengers who are traveling from the disease-riddled countries, is extremely frightening.
October 2, 2014 at 8:37 AM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778365ParticipantThat would be globalization. Because in a world where some people are willing to work for pennies on the dollar (and where environmental protections are low to non-existent) vs. American labor, the U.S. will continue to lose jobs.
So, do you think we should continue to spiral down until we are all living in mud huts and eating a bowl of rice per day (while our corporate masters get wealthier and more powerful), or do you think we should protect our industries and our way of life by enacting trade laws and tariffs that offset the differences between our environmental and labor standards and the standards of others?
ParticipantWhy not buy SLV?
October 2, 2014 at 2:02 AM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778359Participant[quote=harvey][quote]Yes, I’ve been following the pension issue for many, many years (far, far, far longer than you have)[/quote]
I’ve been following the pension issue since the steel industry began collapsing in the 1970s. But go ahead and tell me more about myself since you seem to know so much.[/quote]
I know by the claims you’ve made about public sector pensions that you know nothing about them. There is no way you’ve been following them for any amount of time, and what you do know about them, you’ve only learned from propaganda pieces put out by the Privatization Movement. We’re not talking about steel mills here, we’re talking about pensions in the public sector.
[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]FYI, a person who makes $120K/year ]about the average for a public safety worker with many years of experience,[/quote]
You specifically defended the $180K compensation of a retired Vallejo police officer.
The $180K figure is retirement income, which means the total income pre-retirement would need to be far more.
(Have you taken the time to understand the value of an $180K lifetime fixed annuity for a 50 year old? It turns out to be quite a nest egg!)
[quote]For the example in the story, which is probably an outlier, they are in the top 8% in both areas. See map with income percentiles. And they most certainly are “the workers.”[/quote]
The data in your link is for household income, not individual.
And do you think someone retired with that level of income is going to live in a city with inadequate public services and and crumbling infrastructure … a place like Vallejo?
You see, the people of Vallejo – the ones that don’t have the option to move to the golf course community in a low cost of living area – did “take a hit” … a big one!
The retirees can live wherever they want. And $180K is in the top 2% of the nation.
(If you don’t like the 2% figure please don’t bother to dig up links so that you can split hairs – everybody knows that $180K is a very good income.)
As for EconProf’s question: What you personally do for a living doesn’t alter the merits of your arguments which have consistently been self-contradictory and nonsensical.
But he did call you out, and you showed your true character with your answer. The claim that your support of public sector pensions has nothing to do with your “self interest” is blatantly dishonest.[/quote]
I didn’t “defend” anyone’s compensation. We’re discussing the reasons for Vallejo’s financial problems and how these problems affect their pension obligations. And I’ve never claimed that $180K isn’t a good income, whether one is retired or not.
BTW, $180K is still not in the top 2% for men, even for individual income, but it is in the top 4%, and that’s for the U.S. 😉 And where a person lives dramatically changes the percentile ranking; this guy is still living in the Bay Area (Napa), and has moved to an even more expensive area, so he’s nowhere near the top 2%, or even the top 5% for the area.
The residents of Vallejo are losing what was gained during the Fed’s bubbles. Services and infrastructure were greatly enhanced as a result of the bubbles; now, they are losing some of those things. These financial losses are in addition to the losses (and additional expenditures) sustained as a result of the base closure. These residents were the ones who were begging the city council for a larger and better-paid police force, among other things. I would also point out that while the city is claiming that they can’t afford to pay their employees as promised, they’ve managed to militarize their police force, as have many other “broke” police departments across the country. While much of that money comes from the federal govt, it would have been better if the same money could have been used to actually improve these departments instead of gearing them up for a war against “domestic terrorists” (a.k.a.: people who don’t agree with the current corporatist regime).
Please show me an example of my “self-contradictory and nonsensical” posts. The only ones who’ve made self-contradictory and nonsensical posts about this topic are you, econprof, and paramount. While others might have opinions that differ from mine, at least they appear to be trying to better understand the issues. You just spout pure nonsense.
And econprof, the former public sector worker of 18 years who, if he was full-time faculty, is probably getting one of those awful pensions (and, quite possibly, retiree healthcare) didn’t call out anything. Let’s revist my post and show, once again, how poor your reading comprehension skills are, shall we?
[quote=CA renter]
I’ve never let my own self-interest get in the way of what I thought was right, which is why I advocate for eliminating Prop 13 protection for non-owner-occupied properties, even though we have benefited from it in the past and stand to benefit greatly in the future. It’s why I’ve advocated for changes to the pension systems that would go very much against my own interests. There are many things that I advocate for and against that go against my own self-interest. How about you?
[/quote]
I have ALWAYS been 100% in favor of DB pensions for ALL workers (and single-payer healthcare, among other things), even when I was working in the private sector. I have been arguing *for years* about the insane, and growing, wealth/income gap between capital and labor. I have participated in the (original, when it was opposed to bank bailouts) Tea Party movement and the Occupy Wall Street movement, even though it doesn’t affect me, personally. This has nothing to do with my own self-interest; I have always been an advocate for doing the right thing, period.
October 1, 2014 at 9:23 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778352Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]And I’ve already stated many times what I do/have done. I was a public school teacher many years ago, but spent most of my time in the private sector…management in the tech industry, to be specific.[/quote]
For years on this forum you have claimed extraordinary, detailed knowledge of public sector labor economics, such as pension investment strategies and compensation rules. You have claimed to have been intimate with union and contract negotiations.
And now you are saying you have had little affiliation with the public sector and spent most of your career in private industry?
It doesn’t jibe.
[quote]I advocate for the people who make the world go ’round — the workers.[/quote]
Then why are you arguing so hard for the guy making an income in the top 2% who isn’t working at all?
And what would you know about “the workers?” You just said you were in management.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve been following the pension issue for many, many years (far, far, far longer than you have), and I have also worked with negotiating committees and have done research for public employee unions. Yes, I’ve also spent most of my working years in the private sector.
I’ve never let my own self-interest get in the way of what I thought was right, which is why I advocate for eliminating Prop 13 protection for non-owner-occupied properties, even though we have benefited from it in the past and stand to benefit greatly in the future. It’s why I’ve advocated for changes to the pension systems that would go very much against my own interests. There are many things that I advocate for and against that go against my own self-interest. How about you?
See, I actually do research and make sure that I know what I’m talking about before spouting off, unlike you.
FYI, a person who makes $120K/year [about the average for a public safety worker with many years of experience, often in a management position (captain, etc.), including benefit costs and some overtime] in San Diego is in the top 21%, not the top 2%. Also in the top 21% in Vallejo. For the example in the story, which is probably an outlier, they are in the top 8% in both areas. See map with income percentiles. And they most certainly are “the workers.”
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html?_r=0
Participant[quote=zk][quote=The-Shoveler]Yep most likely I am paranoid,
After he was sent home from the emergency room the first time
DALLAS (Reuters) – Two days after he was sent home from a Dallas hospital, the man who is the first person to be diagnosed with Ebola in the United States was seen vomiting on the ground outside an apartment complex as he was bundled into an ambulance.
“His whole family was screaming. He got outside and he was throwing up all over the place,” resident Mesud Osmanovic, 21, said on Wednesday, describing the chaotic scene before the man was admitted to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday where he is in serious condition.[/quote]
If anything in that article makes you fear a widespread outbreak (or believe that “that’s what they want you to believe”), then you are paranoid.
Not kidding at all.[/quote]
You have to admit, zk, that this doesn’t look good. How many people have come into contact with this person’s blood, saliva, feces, urine, semen, etc.? From there, nobody knows how it could play out. Did they get a hazmat team, experienced in handling this type of situation, to clean up the vomit? What about when he used the bathroom in the airport or this apartment, or in any restaurants, stores, etc. that he might have visited when he first got to the U.S.? Did a lot of friends/relatives come by to visit while he was sick?
Just too little info to know how this will play out, one way or another.
October 1, 2014 at 9:04 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778351Participant[quote=EconProf]Thank you for telling us what you have done in the past. What about your spouse?[/quote]
Also in the public sector after working for years in the private sector.
If you were a full-time, faculty professor, are you also receiving a pension and, possibly, retiree healthcare? How about your spouse?
October 1, 2014 at 3:33 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778342Participant[quote=EconProf]To answer your question–I taught economics for 18 years at SDSU and have since kept up with the research and published nationally.
CAR, please tell us Piggs what you and your spouse do for a living.[/quote]Then why are you so inclined to just spout propaganda without ever using data and research to back up your claims? Why do you disappear whenever somebody calls you out on your false claims? It’s frightening that you were an economics professor. I’ve never seen a professor so inclined to argue the way you do without any regard for the facts (and harvey/pri and paramount are right behind you).
And I’ve already stated many times what I do/have done. I was a public school teacher many years ago, but spent most of my time in the private sector…management in the tech industry, to be specific.
October 1, 2014 at 3:27 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778341Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Wrong. Public employees are the only ones to take a hit, so far.[/quote]
Unbelievable that anyone could make this claim, which is absolutely false.
You contradict it in the very next post!
[quote]EVERYBODY has to take a hit[/quote]
And this one perfectly illustrates your grasp of the situation:
[quote]He’s not living on $180,000/year. That’s the TOTAL cost of his retirement benefits, including the family’s healthcare which probably accounts for at least $24,000 of that. Not saying he’s living in poverty, but let’s be honest about numbers. Let’s also not forget that he’s probably paying a much higher percentage of income tax than the vast majority of “taxpayers” who are complaining about public sector employees and their pensions.[/quote]
So, being “honest about numbers:”
– It’s not all cash – part of it is $2000/month in healthcare benefits.
– And the poor guy makes so much money, it puts him in a high tax bracket.
When a city has to cut services while the taxpayers still pay the same, your only concern is for the “employees” that have to “take a hit.” When the people who are paying for services get substantially less police protection, fewer ambulances and paramedics, more crowded schools and crumbling infrastructure, you direct your outrage toward the notion that public employees might actually have to fund their own retirements.
The selfishness and complete disregard for the public you supposedly serve says a lot about your character.[/quote]
There you go with your reading comprehension problems again, troll. The first statement is about what IS happening. The second statement is about what should be happening. The problems were not caused by public employees, so they should not be the only ones to take the hit. ALL STAKEHOLDERS need to take the hit. Get it?
Your disregard for the people who do the actual work is disgusting. You advocate for investors (like landlords and other non-resident property owners who benefit from Prop 13, and high-frequency traders, to name a couple); I advocate for the people who make the world go ’round — the workers.
October 1, 2014 at 3:23 PM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778340Participant[quote=livinincali][quote=CA renter]
And your claim that public safety workers “game the system” to enhance retirement benefits? While some do (mostly state employees), most cannot. Overtime is NOT calculated in pension benefit formulas for many (most?) municipal employees. New employees are specifically prohibited from using OT to “spike” pensions (and I think it should apply across the board).
[/quote]I worked on a project for RISK management about 12 years ago, which is the San Diego’s self funded disability insurance office. What firefighter and cops did at retirement was pretty bad. That was more a case of disability fraud, where if you retire under disability 50% of you pension income is tax free. But there were crazy things in the payroll system. People claiming to work more than 24 hours in a day. People claiming light duty (aka a disability claim) and regular duty in the same day. People like to game the system unfortunately, and defined benefit contribution plans like the ones that are currently designed encourage that unethical but possibly legal behavior.[/quote]
I agree with you on the disability stuff. While most are legitimate claims, I think that some people do stretch things in order to qualify for this. IMO, the 50% tax-free income should not be allowed, especially if the person gets retiree healthcare…so their healthcare costs are covered, witch would be the only legitimate reason for this tax-free status if they had to pay for their own healthcare costs in retirement.
The other issues might have been a problem with the record-keeping system. I know for a fact that the system can sometimes double-count shifts when the employee enters a different code for a shift; it’s not intentional in the cases that I’m aware of. It should be audited on an ongoing basis (and it usually is) to make sure this doesn’t happen.
ParticipantIt always starts with one case…
[Just kidding, kinda-sorta.]
October 1, 2014 at 3:01 AM in reply to: How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy? #778325Participant[quote=EconProf]This thread has had a lot of back and forth about little details about public employee pensions. But there are several well-established realities that all sides ought to agree on which point to a grossly unfair system that will only get worse.
It is well known that public sector employees have total compensation that far exceeds similar positions in the private sector. Remember that total compensation includes ALL fringe benefits: medical, retirement, vacation days off, etc., plus the smaller likelihood for getting fired for poor performance. And fire and police personnel are good at gaming the system to enhance their benefits with pseudo disability claims, racking up overtime in their final year, etc. Those same public safety workers have convinced the public that their jobs are dangerous, even though the mortality rates for a host of other occupations are far greater. Construction workers, fishermen, farmers, taxi-drivers, convenience store clerks face far more danger and higher on-the-job deaths. And on top of it all, the latter workers retire in their 60’s in order to pay taxes to support the public safety workers retiring in their 50’s.
Let’s remember these obvious realities and not get so bogged down in little details. Government pension expenses in cities, counties, and states are exploding and squeezing out other needed government goods and services.[/quote]Econprof, are you really an economics professor? After all of the false statements you’ve made in various threads — teachers don’t like unions, privatization saves money, etc., etc. — I have to question this. You simply spout right-wing propaganda, and when asked for any kind of data to back up your points, you disappear. It’s happened on numerous occasions.
As for your claim that public sector employees have total compensation that far exceeds similar positions in the private sector, we’ve already covered that, too.
[quote=CA renter][quote=ocrenter][quote=CA renter][quote=ocrenter][quote=sdrealtor]But if you perform below average you should fall behind. Its the private sectors way of showing you where the door is without getting sued.[/quote]
ultimately that’s the downfall of the public sector. the pay increases are all set in stone, regardless of performance.[/quote]
I’m pretty familiar with a number of public employers and their compensation numbers. Of the ones I’m familiar with, almost all have had their compensation frozen or seen net decreases in total compensation since about 2008. No net raises in the vast majority of cases. Their compensation has gone down in real terms, and in many cases, in nominal terms.[/quote]
But that’s looking at a short term deviation from the norm secondary to budgetary crisis at all levels of government. Overall, the government employees are significantly overpaid.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf%5B/quote%5D
Where does it say that?
From your link, on page 4:
“Comparing private and public sector data
Compensation cost levels in state and local government should not be directly compared with levels in
private industry. Differences between these sectors stem from factors such as variation in work
activities and occupational structures. Manufacturing and sales, for example, make up a large part of
private industry work activities but are rare in state and local government. Professional and
administrative support occupations (including teachers) account for two-thirds of the state and local
government workforce, compared with one-half of private industry.”
——————Here are some articles and studies regarding compensation in the public vs. private sectors:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/02/working-in-america-public-vs-private-sector/
And this more “mixed” analysis from the Reason Foundation — hardly a “liberal” or “pro-union” organization:
http://reason.org/news/show/public-sector-private-sector-salary
And from Mother Jones (to get all sides in here), another “mixed” bag:
Chart of the Day: Federal Government Pay vs. Private Sector Pay
——————
One comment I have to make about the higher pay for the jobs with fewer degree requirements — many of which are public safety jobs — there are no similar jobs in the private sector with which to compare them.
Not only that, but they mention the much lower turnover rate in many public sectors jobs; this is very important to public employers. The (necessarily) bureaucratic hiring process and extensive initial, and ongoing, training required for these employees is VERY expensive. They cannot afford to have high turnover rates. IMHO, even if they were to go to defined contribution plans (as many suggest), I don’t think they’d end up saving very much (anything?) in the long run. One of the main reasons people are attracted to these jobs is the benefits packages. Take that away, and the turnover rates — and related costs — would be much, much higher.[/quote]
http://piggington.com/2012_edition_what039s_your_raise_this_year
Here’s another study regarding public vs private sector compensation:
————
And your claim that public safety workers “game the system” to enhance retirement benefits? While some do (mostly state employees), most cannot. Overtime is NOT calculated in pension benefit formulas for many (most?) municipal employees. New employees are specifically prohibited from using OT to “spike” pensions (and I think it should apply across the board).
“Also specifically excludes certain types of pay from being
reported as pensionable compensation, including, bonuses, overtime, pay for additional
services outside normal working hours, cash payouts for unused leave (vacation, annual,
sick leave, CTO, etc.,), and severance pay, among others.”http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/employer/program-services/summary-pension-act.pdf
—–
And those public safety workers are not just being paid because of the dangerous nature of their jobs (and they are dangerous; cops are in the top 10, firefighters in the top 15), they are also being paid for the skill set and responsibilities (HUGE liabilities…witness the Ferguson issue…where a split-second decision can easily change the rest of your life) inherent with those jobs.
Most dangerous jobs:
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/11/12/the-15-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america/
Participant[quote=njtosd]Speaking of people having the guts to stand up for their rights – I just came across this article about the owner of Garden State Bagels in Encinitas. He had the guts to tell a motorcycle cop that he couldn’t issue tickets while parked on private property. I love the remark about “raising money for the city of Encinitas.” They have good bagels, too.
Wow. If not for the fact that nobody in the comments section (or anywhere else) is refuting what the cop said, I’d think this story was made up. There is no question that there are some seriously messed-up cops out there, and this is a good example of one.
I’ve heard good things about their bagels, too. 🙂
-
AuthorPosts
