« First « Previous Comments 26 - 65 of 72 Next » Last » Search these comments
They just raised taxes by 32% and almost all went to pensions-now want to raise more.
The main goal is this proposal is to change how revenue is collected. Reduce property tax, increase state tax. Make the state income tax graduated.
But the state pension systems are blown up by the short changing of contributions on the state side.
I guess it could be argued, if the money is paid up front (higher salaries for cops and teachers), and then have them use 401ks, it would prevent the govt from underfunding the compensation expenditures.
Did a quick bit of Google research.
Illinois has $2.3 billion in debt, and a population of 12.8 million people. That's close to $16,000 per person.
At the federal level, the US debt is $19.9 trillion and about 325 million people. That's around $60,000 per person.
So everyone in Illinois, from babies to seniors, has $76,0000 of debt taken out on their behalf by Fed and State government.
Illinois has $2.3 billion in debt, and a population of 12.8 million people. That's close to $16,000 per person.
They should fund the current year out of the current tax income, and if they want to fund a large project, they should save up for it first.
HowdyThere saysIllinois has $2.3 billion in debt, and a population of 12.8 million people. That's close to $16,000 per person.
Fuck! And we don't even have any aircraft carriers, jets and the like! $16k per person vs. $60k per person. Think about that. Just one state.
That way governments would tend to run surpluses most of the time. Some of the retained earnings would get used up during downturns or used for large projects.
HowdyThere saysThat way governments would tend to run surpluses most of the time. Some of the retained earnings would get used up during downturns or used for large projects.
The logic is sound in my opinion. Problem is getting government to run a surplus. Government and surplus in the same sentence is like a Nazi and a Jew having a beer in 1939. Not happening.
Basically existing employees and retirees keep everything they have already "earned" in their pension to date
There is no digging out of this abyss unless existing employees already in the system accept some reform too.
HowdyThere saysIllinois has $2.3 billion in debt, and a population of 12.8 million people. That's close to $16,000 per person.
Fuck! And we don't even have any aircraft carriers, jets and the like! $16k per person vs. $60k per person. Think about that. Just one state.
Those "reforms" from Moonbeam are hardly making a dent into California's pension liabilities.
That's unfair, becasue the pension funds are in place of social security,
The tricky part is how to budget when one doesn't* know for sure how much tax is going to be collected. Governments are notoriously bad for being overly optimistic. Given that economies tend to grow over time, I thought the best method wold be to limit budgets to actual receipts from, say, 3 years previous. That way governments would tend to run surpluses most of the time. Some of the retained earnings would get used up during downturns or used for large projects.
Thoughts?
No they're not. Never have been. Pensions generally pay out more then SS by a long shot.
Pension benefits are MASSIVELY unrealistic in most places
Sure. The solution is just don't pay your pension obligations when the taxes revenues are less than you anticipated. Problem solved right ?
Some of the retained earnings would get used up during downturns or used for large projects.
PEople are talking about lowering govt workers pensions from what's promised, but it's what they have instead of social security.
LEt's reduce your social security you receive in retirement, as a solution to the fed meeting those obligations. Sound good to you ?
First, just an observation. Even with the attractiveness of a defined benefit pension, there's plenty of room for improvement in the quality of the pool of people applying to go into education and law enforcement. After all, a pension is just something with monetary value. It's part of compensation. But it doesn't work if the government doesn't pay into it as they should. I guess it could be argued, if the money is paid up front (higher salaries for cops and teachers), and then have them use 401ks, it would prevent the govt from underfunding the compensation expenditures. I guess they still might be able to postpone their part of payments in to the 401ks. Would they then pay in to social security too, instead of the pensions ? Wouldn't they have to ?
Booger saysThey are blown up by the luxurious pension benefits.
It's not like you read or understood my comment.
PEople are talking about lowering govt workers pensions from what's promised, but it's what they have instead of social security.
LEt's reduce your social security you receive in retirement,
PEople are talking about lowering govt workers pensions from what's promised, but it's what they have instead of social security.
LEt's reduce your social security you receive in retirement, as a solution to the fed meeting those unfunded obligations. Sound good to you ?
LEt's reduce your social security you receive in retirement, as a solution to the fed meeting those unfunded obligations. Sound good to you ?
Can that be done with social security when retired, will they pay out a lump sum? Does a heir get the full amount paid into SS if the person dies?
80% of the US workers who rely on their 401K's and Social Security for retirement.
And yes, the total is 9% of their pay.
But the district then must contribute at least another 10% and the state probably contributes something as well. So the total amount that's supposed to be put aside for the employer is something along the lines of 20 to 25%
Interesting explanation of how they go where they are. Teachers are going to have to up their contributions a lot, and the state and the district too. Maybe you're right that it wont be enough.
Let's then account for the fact that CPS teachers are only putting in 2% of their income into the pension
But it gets exacerbated by under funding, for example when Illinois took a holiday from contributing it's obligations to the pension funds, I'm quite sure under republican governance.
It's 9% of the teachers Salary. Plus I have to assume some other contribution by the district and an additional contribution from the State. There things together make up what is supposed to be put into the fund per year.
You could have committed decades of your life to a government job if you thought it was such a sweet deal.
« First « Previous Comments 26 - 65 of 72 Next » Last » Search these comments
Democratic governor candidate J.B. Pritzker said Tuesday he would seek to temporarily raise Illinois’ flat income tax rate and boost credits and deductions while lawmakers consider changing the state constitution to allow for a graduated income tax.