Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: This pension thing is going to get nasty

  1. #1

    This pension thing is going to get nasty

    http://www.mercurynews.com/elections...enging-pension

    It's interesting the conflict of interest that arises when litigating matters involving government pensions.

    San Jose hired outside lawyers for Measure B because it affects the city's in-house attorneys, whose union opposed it. Reed, a lawyer himself, said he is confident the outside attorneys, who oversaw the measure's language, produced a "good document around which to mount our legal defense."
    Another huge issue is the conflict of interest with government judges, whose decisions will effect their own pensions. Reed is trying to transfer the issue to federal court, for obvious reasons I think. Are state judges going to set precedence against their own pensions? Are even US Supreme Court justices immune from this issue? Are they going to rule in a way that could jeopardize their own pensions?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    San Diego just passed a ballot measure which will change pensions for future employees (not sure if current pensions would be frozen and any future earnings converted) will not be pensions but 401k type accounts for city employees. I am not a government emloyee but do worry about my company pension still being there when I retire- which could be as soon as about ten years if I take the earliest option. As a future recipient, I like the pension idea with a fixed return but from the employer side a 401k type plan puts the risk on the individual and off of them to cover any shortfalls in the pension fund.

  4. #3
    As a future recipient, I like the pension idea with a fixed return but from the employer side a 401k type plan puts the risk on the individual and off of them to cover any shortfalls in the pension fund.
    That's why most of the private sector has moved to 401k. It's absurd that a firm should be expected to provide annuities to former employees indefinitely into retirement. You might as well just call it an employee owned firm instead of a for profit firm.

    And that's really the core issue of public sector pensions in my view. Government unions think the government, and its power to force revenue streams with guns, belongs to them. It's got to change.

    Personally I don't want to be rich. I want to be secure. There's a big difference between wealth and security. Often poor people are very secure while rich people are very insecure. As a matter of government policy we should be looking towards securitizing retirees with different things than money streams. For instance outright, mortgage free, home ownership and no property taxes. That social security check looks pretty good if you don't pay rent, don't pay for medical care, and don't pay property taxes.
    Last edited by furface; 06-08-2012 at 08:42 AM.

  5. #4
    i am a firm beliver that legacy costs is going to break this country , as a note i live in scottsdale az , about 5 years ago the city went from private contract fire fighting company to city fire fighters , now the city will have to pay retirement to both police and firemen after 20 yrs of service, then they double dip.

    after 12 yrs in the military , when i joined the pay was $85/mo , 3 hots and a cot , so to get people the retirement was 20yrs service .

    bottom line i think all city/county/state police and firemen should work at least 28 yrs before retirement , the retirement should be about 1/3 of pay when they retired , not 50% like now .

    as far as the military goes , their pay is not great but on avg it is much better than before , the military retirement now after 20 yrs service should be changed to 25yrs , but the gi's should get two for one time for has duty pay , that's to say if a gi puts 1 year in afgh he gets 2 yrs credit toward his 25 yrs to retire .

    retirement in this country is way out of hand.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by furface View Post
    Personally I don't want to be rich. I want to be secure. There's a big difference between wealth and security. Often poor people are very secure while rich people are very insecure. As a matter of government policy we should be looking towards securitizing retirees with different things than money streams. For instance outright, mortgage free, home ownership and no property taxes. That social security check looks pretty good if you don't pay rent, don't pay for medical care, and don't pay property taxes.
    That is what I am shooting for. As of right now, Social Security combined with my pension will be less than I am making now (no- I don't expect to get more for not working). My mortgage will be paid off by the end of this year (lowering expenses so costs of living will be lower though I will probably have to be paying all of my health insurance instead of part of it now) and otherwise debt free. I will still have homeowners fees (condo) and property taxes.

  7. #6
    I would prefer people have private retirement accounts. This is the free market approach. It would force competition at the recipient level and give the individual control over their money and their future. I understand this is very scarey to some people but freedom really is a good thing once you get accustomed to it.
    Insanity should be defined as trusting the government to solve a problem they caused in the first place. Please do not go insane!

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by TonySutton View Post
    I would prefer people have private retirement accounts. This is the free market approach. It would force competition at the recipient level and give the individual control over their money and their future. I understand this is very scarey to some people but freedom really is a good thing once you get accustomed to it.
    i would like to see the elected people in DC have private retirement accounts , but they just like to talk about cutting things that normal avg americans get , they never cut their expences or reduce their stafts or bennies, as a matter of fact i would not even give any elected offical in DC any retirement , then they would serve america and then leave , i would then have respect for them.

    they are all like hogs at the trough , has any of them ever cut their staft or expences ?

    easy answer , NO
    Last edited by ILUVRP; 06-08-2012 at 03:19 PM. Reason: sp

  9. #8
    wisconsin + governor's red pencil = current events = headlines galore



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by ILUVRP View Post
    as far as the military goes , their pay is not great but on avg it is much better than before , the military retirement now after 20 yrs service should be changed to 25yrs , but the gi's should get two for one time for has duty pay , that's to say if a gi puts 1 year in afgh he gets 2 yrs credit toward his 25 yrs to retire .
    Military pay is fine. We do just fine with the pay we get. If you dont believe me just go to any base and look at the cars some of the younger guys are driving. I get upset when folks in my office get pissed because they dont get paid enough. You should have heard the uproar when our pay increase was the smallest it has been in a decade. We should be damn happy we got a little increase and not a decrease.

  12. #10
    The lower level members of all the various Ponzi schemes will soon scratch and claw each other's eyes out... It's not going to be pretty.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by bkreigh View Post
    Military pay is fine. We do just fine with the pay we get. If you dont believe me just go to any base and look at the cars some of the younger guys are driving. I get upset when folks in my office get pissed because they dont get paid enough. You should have heard the uproar when our pay increase was the smallest it has been in a decade. We should be damn happy we got a little increase and not a decrease.
    i agree , military pay is much much better than when i was in ( still loved it ) ,i had a part time job as a building cleaner at $1.25/hr , after 6 months i was the supervisor making $1.35 ( i was cleaning up ) , i had a 2nd lt working under me , every night 5-10pm.


    no complaints, i just get sick hearing our elected people in DC telling americans " we have to cut spending " , they have never cut their spending.

  14. #12
    The private sector lost their pensions, it only makes sense that the same will happen to those in the "public" sector. No need to give out extravagant benefits when there is a surplus of workers.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  15. #13
    LibForestPaul
    Member

    No need to lose pensions. Its all pixie dust anyways. 100 ruble pension in russia still comes every month. Buys a loaf of bread.

  16. #14
    I wonder if that bread is any good ?



Similar Threads

  1. TSA gloves are NASTY!
    By RCA in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-23-2010, 11:08 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-14-2010, 03:21 PM
  3. nasty WSJ
    By amisspelledword in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-18-2010, 09:00 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-14-2009, 01:04 PM
  5. Nasty, Nasty Review of RP Rally--Freedom=Self-indulgence???
    By wgadget in forum Bad Media Reporting on Ron Paul
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 09-29-2007, 11:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •