patrick.net

No really? What a twist.

Why do they hate free enterprise political patronage?

Pension fall down go boom!

Liberals have never had the one single Ass Beating in their life, by an authority figure that loves them and is trying to teach them right from wrong. So they are EVIL and don't understand right from wrong. From the most educated Liberal to the dirt poorest they are suffering from deep emotional and psychological issues. They hate America and the world

They are big Fuck ups they have Daddy Issues and they were raised by Doctor Spoc books read by even bigger Idiots than they are.

Waiting for Marcus to show up in 5, 4, 3, 2,.... to tell us he's worth every dollar of that pension.

Why can't we as citizens vote on a proposition that restricts government pensions? Am I missing something here?

MrMagic says

Waiting for Marcus to show up in 5, 4, 3, 2,.... to tell us he's worth every dollar of that pension.

Here's what Marcus might say:
1. Government workers work very hard 12 hour days.
2. They risk their lives with dangerous work. eg. accounting.
3. They only get one week a year vacation. eg teachers.
4. They retire at 75 because they care so much for the citizens they serve.
5. They get things done.

The 'big fight' is when the pension involvent states go to Congress for a bail out. Oh yeah, kiddies! Stock up the popcorn to watch THAT show?

Naw, your bouncing boobs icon would be more interesting than that. When the States go for a bail out, Congress will run the printing presses and stroke the check. Done.

HeadSet says

The 'big fight' is when the pension involvent states go to Congress for a bail out. Oh yeah, kiddies! Stock up the popcorn to watch THAT show?

Will we be able to afford popcorn when that happens?

It's insane here, CA pension system is out of this world. They've way overpromised. You work 27 years, you don't have to work for another 35 with full salary and benefits. They turned government employees into masters, and taxpayers into worker bee slaves. Taxes are insane out here. And every year they go up too with various "Propositions" that always increase sales or income or property taxes.

There is a promise of another major tax increase in 2020 when teachers union is supposed to ask for pension increases, which would require $600/household of additional taxes annually to fix a problem for a few years.

Strategist says

MrMagic says

Waiting for Marcus to show up in 5, 4, 3, 2,.... to tell us he's worth every dollar of that pension.

What I will say about government pensions is the same thing I've always said.

Pensions are a form of compensation. Nothing more or less. If you want to look at how teachers, or cops, firemen, or judges, or public defenders, or clerks in govt offices are paid on an annual basis, then by all means go ahead and include the annual cost of the pension in your analysis of their pay. If you think it's too high, and that paying people in government jobs substantially less is going to be good for the job market or for the economy (not to mention the public good), then hey,...have at it.

Funny that when I advocate for taxes being higher on increments of income over 250K (not the first 250K), I get accused of being envious of the rich.

All jobs should have pensions as part of the pay, to help protect people from themselves, and to force them to save for their retirement.

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary. If I work in to my seventies, then it will be ever so slightly more than half of my ending salary ( I won't be doing that - I'll probably work full time until 68 or so, a little over 20 total years - with a pension less than half of my ending pay). So you need not envy me.

marcus says

Strategist says

MrMagic says

Waiting for Marcus to show up in 5, 4, 3, 2,.... to tell us he's worth every dollar of that pension.

What I will say about government pensions is the same thing I've always said.

Pensions are a form of compensation. Nothing more or less. If you want to look at how teachers, or cops, or judges, or public defenders, or clerks in govt offices are paid on an annual basis, then by all means go ahead and include the annual cost of the pension in your analysis of their pay. If you think it's too high, and that paying people in government jobs substantially less is going to be good for the job market or for the economy (not to mention the public good), then hey,...have at it.

Funny that when I advocate for taxes being higher on increments of income over 250K (not the first 250...

Tell that to the throngs of pitchfork wielding tax donkeys when/if the time comes.

Envy? Yes, probably at least a bit but what would you really expect when the tax donkey has no say in how much is taken from them?

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary. If I work in to my seventies, then it will be ever so slightly more than half of my ending salary ( I won't be doing that - I'll probably work full time until 68 or so, a little over 20 total years - with a pension less than half of my ending pay). So you need not envy me.

I don't think teacher's pensions is the biggest problem. Police and firefighter pensions are usually much more lucrative. After spending 20 yrs in a donut shop and going outside only to give a minorityperson a good beating, they can retire on nearly full salary + spike it in last few yrs in many states. That seems very wrong. Note that even the Republican governor of WI did not touch police + fire pensions.

Die! Oldfucks! Die!

TrumpingTits says

Because the CA SCOTUS will strike it down as unconstitutional, that's why.

The California Supreme Court is ruling on a bunch of pension cases this month.

There is real hope that they might finally gut the stupid "California Rule" which basically enshrines pensions in our Constitution and the reason why we haven't reformed pensions years ago.

Right now, when a City goes bankrupt (often due to pensions) - the City can raise taxes, reduce services (more pot holes, less teachers, closing libraries etc.) and shaft the bond holders. But the government worker's compensation and pensions are totally protected while everyone else living in the City suffers with shittier but more expensive government services.

How is that fair?

Marcus might argue that government workers engaged in a contract and that can't be broken. But what about the hundreds of millions of tax payers who are seeing their taxes go up while government services are going down? Where is our contract to not be raped by shitty government?

socal2 says

How is that fair?

It's not fair. But then underfunding the pension funds in the first place is also not fair. IT happens often for any of a number of reasons - including sometimes evil advocates of "starve the beast." But often it's just incompetence at high levels of government. "well kick the can (problem) down the road ? So we can spend money on this other thing we want. Nobody will notice until later. Can we win votes by being prudent (not spending this money now) and honoring our obligations ?"

Is breaking promises, and ruining the lives of people that spent their lives working in service jobs really the solution ?

marcus says

It's not fair. But then underfunding the pension funds in the first place is also not fair.

I don't think underfunding is is the main problem in California. The main problem started with Gray Davis retroactively offering the super generous Police and Firefighter pension system to the rest of the State and Local employees and CALPERS telling the politicians that they could do this without increasing contributions. I'm in the infrastructure business and my clients at Public Works lament that so much of the general fund is diverted to prop up Calpers and other pension funds. That is why California has some of the shittiest infrastructure despite high taxes and revenue.

marcus says

Is breaking promises, and ruining the lives of people that spent their lives working in service jobs really the solution ?

I don't think anyone is advocating taking away pensions and "ruining lives".

At worst, you might lose 10-20% - and you will still have a much more generous LIFETIME retirement than the majority in the Private Sector.

If we don't figure out a way to get a handle on these pensions with some much needed reforms, expect to see more Cities go bankrupt and folks lose the majority of their pension like the people at "LA Works" and Loyalton.

socal2 says

If we don't figure out a way to get a handle on these pensions with some much needed reforms, expect to see more Cities go bankrupt and folks lose the majority of their pension like the people at "LA Works" and Loyalton.

Actually a lot of pension reform progress was made under Brown. Not that more isn't needed.

marcus says

Actually a lot of pension reform progress was made under Brown. Not that more isn't needed.

I do give Brown some props for finally waking up on this issue. He looks halfway sane compared to the unions and Commies that have super majorities in Sacramento.

Too bad it took Brown his final 2 years of political life to work up the bravery to take on this issue.

socal2 says

Too bad it took Brown his final 2 years of political life to work up the bravery to take on this issue.

The doubling of pension contributions has been ongoing since he took it on in what ? 2012 ? Along with many other reforms.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2012/08/28/news17694/

You might only be aware of the recent coming to a head of a couple issues in the California supreme court. You don't see the progress much, from the other reforms becasue both calpers, and calstrs have lowered their assumptions about returns. But contributions to the funds have gone way up, and many of the the tricks for spiking or using accumulated vacation days have ended. Retirement age was raised. What's being ruled on now (I think) is firemen's right to essentially buy years of service. Something that was taken away from teachers many years ago.

It's probably a long shot to hope that Gavin Newsome will follow through in making the funds more healthy.

marcus says

All jobs should have pensions as part of the pay, to help protect people from themselves, and to force them to save for their retirement.

Why the fuck does the government need to protect you from yourself? Oh, that's right. it's the Democrats way of control.

Why the fuck can't you save for yourself, why does the government have to do it for you.

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary.

Just think if YOU started saving for retirement for yourself back in your 30's (like us responsible people did). Then you wouldn't need the government to bail your ass out.

How is it fair the taxpayers have to pay for your retirement when YOU screwed up and didn't plan for it?

MrMagic says

marcus says

All jobs should have pensions as part of the pay, to help protect people from themselves, and to force them to save for their retirement.

Why the fuck does the government need to protect you from yourself? Oh, that's right. it's the Democrats way of control.

Why the fuck can't you save for yourself, why does the government have to do it for you.

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary.

Just think if YOU started saving for retirement for yourself back in your 30's (like us responsible people did). Then you wouldn't need the government to bail your ass out.

How is it fair the taxpayers have to pay for your retirement when YOU screwed up and didn't plan for it?

Sadly, fair has nothing to do with it. It's power baby!!! Power to get what you want when the opportunity presents itself. And that happens to be when the union contract is up and the tax donkeys are hard at work, raising kids and wanting to be left alone.

Wake up tax donkeys.

marcus says

What I will say about government pensions is the same thing I've always said.

Pensions are a form of compensation. Nothing more or less. If you want to look at how teachers, or cops, firemen, or judges, or public defenders, or clerks in govt offices are paid on an annual basis, then by all means go ahead and include the annual cost of the pension in your analysis of their pay. If you think it's too high, and that paying people in government jobs substantially less is going to be good for the job market or for the economy (not to mention the public good), then hey,...have at it.

Yup, you always say that, but not what you need to say.......Why should government pensions be higher than what SS would provide?

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary. If I work in to my seventies, then it will be ever so slightly more than half of my ending salary ( I won't be doing that - I'll probably work full time until 68 or so, a little over 20 total years - with a pension less than half of my ending pay). So you need not envy me.

I'm going to give your a raise Marcus. Approx. 10.25% of your pay goes to CalSTRs so you never see it while working. So final pension (20 years of service) pay is:
48/89.75 = 53..5% take home pay (salary - retirement contribution).
And this also means a wannabe teacher can fritter their twenties away, start teaching at 30 and still retire with "max" take home salary after ~37 years of service (89.75/2.4). FICA is for suckers.

MrMagic says

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary.

Just think if YOU started saving for retirement for yourself back in your 30's (like us responsible people did). Then you wouldn't need the government to bail your ass out.

How is it fair the taxpayers have to pay for your retirement when YOU screwed up and didn't plan for it?

Actually, clever Marcus planned it pretty well. He will collect SS because he worked till his late 40's, and half his salary from pension as a teacher.
Marcus knows his 2+2.

EBGuy says

marcus says

By the way, fun fact: I was middle aged when I started teaching and my pension won't be more than half of my salary. If I work in to my seventies, then it will be ever so slightly more than half of my ending salary ( I won't be doing that - I'll probably work full time until 68 or so, a little over 20 total years - with a pension less than half of my ending pay). So you need not envy me.

I'm going to give your a raise Marcus. Approx. 10.25% of your pay goes to CalSTRs so you never see it while working. So final pension (20 years of service) pay is:
48/89.75 = 53..5% take home pay (salary - retirement contribution).
And this also means a wannabe teacher can fritter their twenties away, start teaching at 30 and still retire with "max" take home salary after ~37 years of service (89.75/2.4). FICA is for suckers.

I've been a sucker all my life.

marcus says

Is breaking promises, and ruining the lives of people that spent their lives working in service jobs really the solution ?

Yes, it is the solution.

Strategist says

He will collect SS

You would think, but no. THey ended that in about 1983. See SS WEP.

Strategist says

Yes, it is the solution.

I can see your true colors coming through.

marcus says

Strategist says

Yes, it is the solution.

I can see your true colors coming through.

My colors are very fair. Government workers who don't do much to begin with, have no right to retire 10 years earlier with full pay for the rest of their lives, while the citizens they should be serving have to keep working to pay for government pensions.
It's disgraceful.

marcus says

and ruining the lives of people that spent their lives working in service jobs really the solution ?

There isn’t much life left so not much to ruin! Anyway it’s hard to say your life has been “ruined“ because you’re making $80,000 a year instead of $120,000 a year for doing absolutely nothing.

I think California is a great place to open up the first boomer concentration-retirement camps. Start prototyping now before the rush. Get some voice-of-the-customer feedback then iterate the design.

just_dregalicious says

I think California is a great place to open up the first boomer concentration-retirement camps. Start prototyping now before the rush. Get some voice-of-the-customer feedback then iterate the design.

they already got those.

marcus says

I was middle aged when I started teaching

during the fallout from the dot.com collapse, I read an article in the SF Chronicle about teachers who started in middle age, and how their social security got messed up.

I did not know this, but California teachers are opted out of social security. It means, they don't pay into it, nor do their employers. They do the pension instead. The teachers who started late, would receive a low social security based on contributions before going into teaching. But, because they started late, nor would they accrue a large pension benefit.

I know one guy who was in the military for 20 years. He is elderly, but has been collecting a pension for 40 years now, and has taken advantage of every program, loan, subsidy, transportation, base privileges, degree program etc. on the basis of his service, and will probably live for another ten years.

The coupla cops in Cali that I have known all have gamed the system when they turned 50. It is a formula they all cynically follow in lock step. Once one of them has blazed the trail, they all fall in and consider it entitlement even if it is massively corrupted and based on bullshit.

One things about cops, though, I don't think I have encountered one who was not suffering from some degree of PTSD.

marcus says

You might only be aware of the recent coming to a head of a couple issues in the California supreme court. You don't see the progress much, from the other reforms becasue both calpers, and calstrs have lowered their assumptions about returns. But contributions to the funds have gone way up, and many of the the tricks for spiking or using accumulated vacation days have ended.

Getting rid of the pension spiking gimmicks like "air-time" was the lowest hanging fruit. I think the unions overplayed their hand fighting for that benefit as it has come back to bite them and opened up the whole "California Rule" issue putting the rest of the pension benefits in question.

Contributions have gone up now that CALPERS/CSLSTRS has reduced the discount rate to something more reasonable (it's still too high IMO) and the majority of the increased contributions are coming from the tax payers as Cities are diverting more and more of their General Fund money to keep up with their minimum pension contributions.

Again, we need EVERYONE chipping in so Cities don't go bankrupt during the next recession. If tax payers have to accept higher taxes and reduced government services to fund these pensions, it is not unreasonable or unfair to expect the government workers to do their part too..........and there is more to do.

B.A.C.A.H. says

The teachers who started late, would receive a low social security based on contributions before going into teaching.

No, it's much worse than that. They take the amount you would get based on what you've paid in, and they discount that by several hundred dollars a month.

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/wep.html

Ceffer says

I don't think I have encountered one who was not suffering from some degree of PTSD.

I did not know that writing traffic tickets, sitting on your ass in office, sleeping in police cruiser for hours at a time, and frequenting Dunkin Donuts would give anyone PTSD.

Quigley says

for doing absolutely nothing.

Right. I've done a lot of different kinds of work. The work I do now is by far the hardest. And the longest hours too.

Strategist says

Government workers who don't do much to begin with, have no right to retire 10 years earlier with full pay for the rest of their lives, while the citizens they should be serving have to keep working to pay for government pensions.
It's disgraceful.

Again it's compensation. It's simply the deal they got going in. It's only the so called saftey workers that can retire early, although I guess some teachers can retire at 62 if they started at 22.,

If you think being a cop or a fireman for 30 to 35 years is such a sweet deal, you should have done it yourself, instead of being envious of those that did.

It's disgraceful

What's disgraceful is how many petty, pathetic and self centered assholes there are in America, that gave us Trump.

d6rB says

Ceffer says

I don't think I have encountered one who was not suffering from some degree of PTSD.

I did not know that writing traffic tickets, sitting on your ass in office, sleeping in police cruiser for hours at a time, and frequenting Dunkin Donuts would give anyone PTSD.

They get PTSD the moment they figure out how much it pays.