Leftist Nightmare: Gov Brown to drain govt pensions to fight global warming and immigration law.

[MTAtech]

CA is in the shape it is due to massive government programs.
While he isn't a socialist CA is going to have to do something.

This is why 3rd party mediators should be here to protect the interest of the tax payers.
All these massive give always to unions from nut job liberals are ruining states.

There is. NO reason that the state should continue to pay you once you retire.
If you have a 401k great.

The reason is that was the deal when they hired you. Public employees traded lower pay, compared to the private sector for the same job, with better benefits and pensions.

 

[GDViking]

Nope, you must realize that my social security (SS) is peanuts when compared to a government employee's retirement benefit. My social security after working 40+ years is $1,800/month while my (younger) sister-in-law gets $3,600/month after for working 20 years as a public school teacher (and not paying into SS). Another difference, well worth noting, is that fleeing a high taxing state is far easier than fleeing the US (remember that my SS is not subject to federal income tax).

No offense but it seems your sister in law chose a better career path...

 

[ludin]

I know that I am coming late to this party but Gov. Brown is not a socialist. He is also responsible for taking the debt laden California into surplus.

Regarding CA's pensions, right-wingers want to use this as an excuse to believe that pensions are bad. They aren't. But if you are going to offer them, you need to fund them. Over the decades, politicians found it easy to offer pensions then refuse to fund the cost, sending that cost into the future. That irresponsibility doesn't undercut the value of providing pensions for employees.\
Thanks for your usual well-thought out viewpoint.

No he isn't a socialist CA just every year passes more and more big government programs.

The reason for the surplus is temporary for now. The economy is up and there is another tech boom going on right now.
also he has raised CA taxes all over the place making it one of the most expensive places to live and some of the highest taxes in the nation.

he also doesn't have a surpluls once you factor in the deficit to their pension fund.

Pensions aren't bad if they are done correctly and within reason. The problem here is that more and more and more is given.
payback to the unions with taxpayer money. there is no due diligence or fiscal oversite on behalf of the taxpayers.

they are simply on the hook for all these big giveaways.

 

[GDViking]

Across the country, states and local governments have about $1.7 trillion less than what they need to cover retirement benefits -- the result of investment losses, the failure by governments to make adequate contributions and perks granted in boom times.

Yes you should read.
They have a 1.7 trillion dollar deficit. That money has to be paid somehow.

Please read and understand what 1.7 trillion less than what they need means.

Not here in Wisconsin theirs is 100% funded, even though our governor has tried to raid it.

 

[GDViking]

No he isn't a socialist CA just every year passes more and more big government programs.

The reason for the surplus is temporary for now. The economy is up and there is another tech boom going on right now.
also he has raised CA taxes all over the place making it one of the most expensive places to live and some of the highest taxes in the nation.

he also doesn't have a surpluls once you factor in the deficit to their pension fund.

Pensions aren't bad if they are done correctly and within reason. The problem here is that more and more and more is given.
payback to the unions with taxpayer money. there is no due diligence or fiscal oversite on behalf of the taxpayers.

they are simply on the hook for all these big giveaways.

Sounds a LOT like what republicans just did on a national level, pay back their donors...

Difference is there donors are not public servants they only have themselves in mind.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No offense but it seems your sister in law chose a better career path...

Indeed, but that depends on the generosity of politicians spending other people's (tax) money usually in exchange for campaign cash (legal bribes?) from public employee unions. Nice gig if you can get it but a drain on those that take private career paths. My father got a similar deal and was able to fully retire at age 53 (22 years military and 9 years civil service combined) on a CSRS pension and, largely thanks to COLA increases, Social Security and VA benefits, makes more now at age 95 than he ever did while working.

 

[GDViking]

Ronald Reagan is still one of the top modern presidents.

Sorry I have no recollection of those events...

 

[GDViking]

Indeed, but that depends on the generosity of politicians spending other people's (tax) money usually in exchange for campaign cash (legal bribes?) from public employee unions. Nice gig if you can get it but a drain on those that take private career paths. My father got a similar deal and was able to fully retire at age 53 (22 years military and 9 years civil service combined) on a CSRS pension and, largely thanks to COLA increases, Social Security and VA benefits, makes more now at age 95 than he ever did while working.

It's not "other peoples money" it not only was money paid to make a functional society he paid in with taxes,service and puting his life at risk for his nation.

When you drive on a freeway do you feel guilty for driving on roads paid with "other peoples money"?

 

[ludin]

The reason is that was the deal when they hired you. Public employees traded lower pay, compared to the private sector for the same job, with better benefits and pensions.

there is 0 oversite on how big those pensions get and the constant increases when it comes time to contracts.
there is 0 taxpayer say in going why are we paying more money into the pension fund or promising more benefits.

there is a conflict of interest between public unions and governments who are their donors.

 

[ludin]

Sorry I have no recollection of those events...

You should get your memory checked then.

 

[ludin]

Not here in Wisconsin theirs is 100% funded, even though our governor has tried to raid it.

YOu didn't read my post very well you should go back and do that.

 

[ludin]

Indeed, but that depends on the generosity of politicians spending other people's (tax) money usually in exchange for campaign cash (legal bribes?) from public employee unions. Nice gig if you can get it but a drain on those that take private career paths. My father got a similar deal and was able to fully retire at age 53 (22 years military and 9 years civil service combined) on a CSRS pension and, largely thanks to COLA increases, Social Security and VA benefits, makes more now at age 95 than he ever did while working.

that is why there should be a 3rd party mediator that represents the tax payer.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's not "other peoples money" it not only was money paid to make a functional society he paid in with taxes,service and puting his life at risk for his nation.

When you drive on a freeway do you feel guilty for driving on roads paid with "other peoples money"?

That freeway does not send a check to somebody. I fully understand the "public service" concept but that is no reason to pay them more for life. The argument used to be that public service paid less in salary (for a similar position) than the private sector and that justified the higher back end (retirement) perks (that is still largely true for the miliatry and some very high level government positions). That has not been true for most rank and file public sector jobs for quite a while.

Overall Public-Private Sector Compensation Gap Has Widened, CBO Finds - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com

 

[ttwtt78640]

that is why there should be a 3rd party mediator that represents the tax payer.

They are called voters and if they paid attention then this nonsense would stop.

 

[GDViking]

That freeway does not send a check to somebody. I fully understand the "public service" concept but that is no reason to pay them more for life. The argument used to be that public service paid less in salary (for a similar position) than the private sector and that justified the higher back end (retirement) perks (that is still largely true for the miliatry and some very high level government positions). That has not been true for most rank and file public sector jobs for quite a while.

Overall Public-Private Sector Compensation Gap Has Widened, CBO Finds - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com

I disagree I was on the Wisconsin conservation congress for.a number of years and worked for the dnr for a few years. My office was next to the wardens and probation and parole. As far as I'm concerned they are grossly underpaid.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I disagree I was on the Wisconsin conservation congress for.a number of years and worked for the dnr for a few years. My office was next to the wardens and probation and parole. As far as I'm concerned they are grossly underpaid.

Your opinion has been noted. Folks are free not to take a job that they feel does not offer them proper compensation.

 

[MTAtech]

It's not "other peoples money" it not only was money paid to make a functional society he paid in with taxes,service and puting his life at risk for his nation.

When you drive on a freeway do you feel guilty for driving on roads paid with "other peoples money"?

Moreover, public employees pay into their pension plans. In NY, they pay 5% of salary, no cap.

 

[ludin]

They are called voters and if they paid attention then this nonsense would stop.

They don't know and they don't care. That is the problem.

 

[ludin]

Moreover, public employees pay into their pension plans. In NY, they pay 5% of salary, no cap.

And taxpayers foot the other 95%.

 

[OpportunityCost]

The headline for this thread is a lie. A belief which exists only in the minds of those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome - a state of mind in which people actually believe anything that comes from Trump or his masters, those who babble on the Fox network, particularly the three found on the couch at "Fox and Friends"

You see, there is a real world which for some reason, an ever-shrinking minority doesn't believe is actually real. We're in the money, California! Now let's not spend our budget surplus like drunken sailors

The OP story lede comes from Bloomberg not Fox. How you turn it into an attack on Fox I don't know. California doesn't have a surplus big enough to address its unpaid liabilities because they are gigantic in relation to their budget.

California has one of nation's worst public pension shortfalls | The Sacramento Bee

Nevertheless, pension systems have seen their “unfunded liabilities” continue to increase – giving California one of the nation’s widest gaps between earning assets and pension obligations.

California’s unfortunate status is confirmed in a new report from Pew Charitable Trusts, which found that in 2015 the state’s two big pension funds had the nation’s sixth-worst record of reducing unfunded liabilities, gathering just 79 percent of the $18.9 billion they needed to keep their pension debts from rising.

California’s status may have worsened since then. In 2015, Pew reported, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System had 74 percent of what they needed to meet pension obligations, but that ratio has since dropped to about 64 percent due to reductions in their projected investment earnings.

That's the SacBee, not the NYPost, in case you line up to shoot the messenger again.

 

[PirateMk1]

The OP story lede comes from Bloomberg not Fox. How you turn it into an attack on Fox I don't know. California doesn't have a surplus big enough to address its unpaid liabilities because they are gigantic in relation to their budget.

California has one of nation's worst public pension shortfalls | The Sacramento Bee


That's the SacBee, not the NYPost, in case you line up to shoot the messenger again.

You know why that is right? They are counting on ****ing the employees over with a court ruling saying they can cut the pensions. This is going to be fun to watch.

 

[OpportunityCost]

You know why that is right? They are counting on ****ing the employees over with a court ruling saying they can cut the pensions. This is going to be fun to watch.

Yes, that's what I read as well. My thought is they will cite the Illinois case in which the state failed to convince the Court that breaking the Illinois State Constitution was legal. But, since the Marin rule is based in a CalSC case and not part of their constitution, I think California will get more traction. It would be nice if taxpayers had someone at the table during pension negotiations, the Unions and the politicians have been serving each others' interests for decades.

 

[haymarket]

What he's talking about is the coming crash. Thus far California has a six billion dollar surplus.

Yes - I asked much the same thing in my post where I requested the actual numbers to document this claim .... and nobody stepped up to the plate.

Nobody has presented any data to show that California will not be able to meet its already incurred and promised obligations to its retirees.

 

[MTAtech]

Yes - I asked much the same thing in my post where I requested the actual numbers to document this claim .... and nobody stepped up to the plate.

Nobody has presented any data to show that California will not be able to meet its already incurred and promised obligations to its retirees.

That's a good point. California has about a $15 billion per month payroll or $180 billion a year. Nationally, it's said that states are underfunding their pensions by 3%. If California is also underfunding pensions by 3%, that's $5.4 billion a year. A $5.4 billion shortfall in a $2.5 trillion California economy. They're surely doomed! Doomed, I say!

 

[haymarket]

That's a good point. California has about a $15 billion per month payroll or $180 billion a year. Nationally, it's said that states are underfunding their pensions by 3%. If California is also underfunding pensions by 3%, that's $5.4 billion a year. A $5.4 billion shortfall in a $2.5 trillion California economy. They're surely doomed! Doomed, I say!

Thank you for those figures.

What I have always wanted to know is something rather simple but nobody can tell me. It is this:

1 - what would be the annual shortfall between what the pension fund can pay and what the pension fund is obligated to pay?
2- How much money does the California government take in during a year?