Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter V who wrote (203310)	5/21/2009 12:31:16 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

RE:"Comparing the f'd up private sector retirement options to a typical pension plan is not really fair." Where it doesn't compare is that the private sector can't fund their pension plans with taxes.

To: Peter V who wrote (203310)	5/21/2009 2:29:24 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 306849

>>So just because the California teachers have the "old school" pension plan means that they are greedy a$$holes? 30 years is a lot of service before your retirement at 52, and being a teacher is not the easiest job.>> they are greed bags b/c they lie, cheat and bribe to continue to milk the tax payer for more while not delivering a substantially better product. 20% of the private employees are unemployed or under employed and the teachers cry before they've even laid off one teacher. the legislature raised taxes on the 20% unemployed or underemployed people to pay for their 90% pensions when they retire at 52 and the LA unified teachers are threatening TO GO ON STRIKE TO GET EVEN MORE! >>Comparing the f'd up private sector retirement options to a typical pension plan is not really fair.<< yes, b/c private sector labor pays for most of both. the private sector is hurting right now and all the teachers' union is worried about is raising taxes on unemployed people to get more cash for itself! >>I guess you figure if your company won't do it for you, then nobody should have it?<< i figure if my company doesn't do it for me, i shouldn't have to do it for others - especially at an unsustainable clip that is bankrupting this state. 90% is too much. it used to be 60% until the internet bubble cash came in and the unions saw cash for the raiding... and they bribed davis and raided the public trough. enough is enough. we are bankrupt and the private sector is not the slave of the public sector. well, it is - but we are sick of it! >>Maybe the Unions got too good of a deal, maybe the plan is a little richer than it should be. But condemning it wholesale like you have seems wrong too.<< i'm condemning the excess. i have no problem if the state matches 401k contribution up to 5% +/- of salary. they deserve some form of retirement plan similar to what the people who fund their plan get - not multiples better. the key is reasonable - and it is nowhere near reasonable. that's why spending in the state has doubled in 10 years while legal residents have stayed about flat - AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE ENOUGH! btw, revenues have dramatically exceeded inflation... it is a spending problem, not a revenue problem. well, due to 20% private sector employment and fat government expenditures, it is probably now a problem in both areas.

To: Peter V who wrote (203310)	5/21/2009 10:34:42 AM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 306849

30 years is a lot of service before your retirement at 52, and being a teacher is not the easiest job. What an incredibly bizarre thing to assert on this "enlightened" thread. Just because you work someplace for 30 years doesn't mean you are entitled to be paid for not working for the next 30 years. This country is long past affording such extravagance. People need to be responsible for saving for their own retirement. Depending on others is a thing of the past.

To: Peter V who wrote (203310)	5/21/2009 11:06:11 AM
From: Culler	Respond to of 306849

In the real old old days there were no pensions. Modern pension plans are glorified pyramid schemes.

To: Peter V who wrote (203310)	5/21/2009 12:35:40 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

I seem to have stirred up a divisive hornet's nest. I get 12 recs on this post, and okrious gets 11 recs for calling it a bizarre position. I think there are two public service gigs that deserve some kind of incentive, which come in the form of better pensions and benefits than other jobs. THe first is the military, where you put your life at risk for very little pay. The second is being a teacher. We always say we want the best and the brightest. Traditionally, teaching jobs pay far less than private sector jobs. So how do you lure bright, talented people to the profession if they have no financial incentive? Given the amount of teachers needed, they can't all do it just for the love of the profession and summers off. Well educated, talented people in California make a lot more than $63K per year, so don't tell me that they are paid more than enough, at least by past standards. (now that unemployment exceeds 11 percent in the state, maybe their pay will start to seem like more than enough). Do I think that the teachers' union is too powerful? Yes, especially when the district can't fire underperforming teachers. That's inexcusable, and it's a problem with most powerful unions. Do I think 90 percent of salary is too much? Yes, going back to 60 percent would be better. Is 30 years too short for full retirement? Probably, given how long people are living now. Is the pension a strain on the budget? Absolutely. California's congress is incapable of restraining their spending, which certainly compounds the problem. I'm assuming there are other public sector jobs that also have pension plans, which also strain the budget. I'm not in favor of pension plans for all government employees, just those whose positions are hard to fill with the right kind of people. Maybe it's because I have two school-age kids attending public school. I have one of the best teachers in the district, who has been at this for 38 years. So maybe I'm a bit biased. .