Blue State San Diego & San Jose Calif. Vote Pension Reform Like Pro-Obama Wisconsin!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mascale, Jun 6, 2012.

  1. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,033
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    Unions and Collective Bargaining Rights are not threatened in California, like they were in Wisconsin. Bloated state and local payrolls have come under 2012 attack all over Pro-Obama, Blue State California: Just like in Pro-Obama Wisconsin!

    San Diego, San Jose voters embrace pension cuts - CBS News

    Effectively, the Democrats are on the winning side as is usual, and Obama in fact stayed awy from Wisconsin--clearly so as not to be against his own supporters!

    Uncaring analysts, with no doctorates, failed to note the actual issue involved in the Recall vote in Wisconsin! To paraphrase, "The Public Pensions, Benefits, Working Conditions, Perks, Public Vehicle Costs, Overtime Payments, and On and On: Are Too Damn High!" Likely the Mayor of New York City can understand that(?)!

    San Jose and San Diego, CA, understand that. California State Civil Service understands that. The Governor of California has long since understood. As "Moonbeam," Govenor Brown years ago was on board with the equal-amount COLA and pay raises for State Civil Service, in a previous term. At the Time, President Gerald Ford was offering $50.00 income tax rebates, and State of Alabama was providing McGovern Plan, $1000.00 bonuses to the teachers.

    Matthew 25:14-30 fits the Romney Brand! Wisconsin didn't vote for that, even though it voted Republican. The rich getting richer, Wisconsin getting poorer--The Romney Brand--is different from Matthew 20:1-16, From which follows, the Obama-Biden, Make Work Pay, Refundable Tax Credit. The equal amount was paid regardless if the person had worked all the year or not! Clearly, The Republicans--of the Romney Brand--took that away. It was in the Christian Stimulus, which all Republicans forever opposed, even before it started! Christian Methods are not supported, at RNC! They actually took them away, once they were in place!

    The Republicans were opposed, even from the start: To Matthew 20:1-16. Governor Brown, in contrast, was an avant garde supporter of the "Good" householder's method--Matthew 20:1-16--even in a previous term(?)! The Romney Brand is of Bain Capital type of investment experience--not even Catholic type of investment experience like into "Jobs Not Jails!" Govenor Brown has promised to not draw the current pension, to which there is an entitlement: Just like under a CBA!

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
    (White Eyes Known to Shoot funny anyway, at apples above, "Between-The-Eyes!" "Who Was Mascale, Anyway?! That was clearly, "The Lo-o-o-one, White Man! Tune In, and See If He's Dead, Yet!")
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2012
  2. Disturbed9
    Offline

    Disturbed9 BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    123
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Madison,FL
    Ratings:
    +21
    Unions are for slacker-pussies.
    Occupational socialism.
     
  3. mascale
    Offline

    mascale VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,033
    Thanks Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +453
    At parkercountyblog.com, dated May 31, 2012, anyone can find as follows, below. Like in Wisconsin, the recent election is less about CBA rights than it is about who pays for what. Taxpayers in Wisconsin were not only at risk for their own retirement, but the law had been arranged so that they were also at risk for the public employee, retirement fund--of those hoards.

    So the pro-Obama voters in Wisconsin are supportive of what is now a Blue State issue, which the Republicans have yet to engage. The Walker Reform aside, the California Civil Service, has started to engage the problem: With Democratic Governor in office, without taking away any rights. In Wisconsin, the Republicans focused on unions as the problem, not the funding laws.
    _____________________________________________

    . . . .The published normal cost of public pensions must be adjusted upward to reflect the guaranteed nature of pension benefits. Using Wisconsin as an example, what is needed is not the normal cost with the 7.2 percent discount rate used by the WRS, but the normal cost using the lower, risk-free rate. When this adjustment is made, the normal cost of the WRS increases from 11.6 percent of wages to 29.5 percent of wages.[4]

    Before the 2011 Budget Repair Bill signed by Governor Scott Walker (R), most state employees in the WRS contributed only about 0.2 percent of their wages toward the pension plan,[5] meaning that the taxpayer cost of the WRS was 29.5–0.2 = 29.3 percent of the public employees’ wages.[6] Now that the reform bill has passed, most government employees must contribute 5.8 percent of their wages, resulting in a new taxpayer cost of 23.7 percent of wages.

    It has been frequently reported that the new 5.8 percent employee contribution is “half” of pension costs, but 5.8 percent is half of the improper normal cost estimate that is unadjusted for a risk-free discount rate. In reality, most government employees in Wisconsin now pay about one-fifth of the cost of their retirements, not one-half.

    What the Government Puts Into Its Pension Fund Is Not the Same as Actual Costs

    Left-leaning think tanks have attempted to base the cost of public pensions on whatever amounts states and local governments contribute to their pension funds each year. This is fundamentally incorrect. For example, one paper purporting to show that Wisconsin government workers are “undercompensated” recently estimated employer costs for public pensions in the state to be 11.3 percent of base wages, much lower than the actual value.[7]

    The 11.3 percent figure is merely what public employers decided to contribute, not what they needed to contribute to pay for accrued benefits. Because pension benefits are guaranteed by state law (and often by state constitutions), underfunding pension plans today does not reduce benefits or save money in the long term. It simply delays paying for steadily accruing benefits, forcing future taxpayers to deal with the growing problem.

    Generous Pensions Help Drive Excessive Public-Sector Compensation

    The annual cost to large private firms of 401(k)-style retirement plans is about 3 percent of payroll—far less than the 23.7 percent that Wisconsin taxpayers are liable for under the state’s public DB plan.[8]

    In Wisconsin, California, Ohio, and other states where public-sector compensation has been controversial, generous pensions and other benefits easily outweigh the relatively modest salaries received by government workers compared to their private-sector counterparts.[9] Ensuring that public workers are paid at fair market rates requires further reform of the way pensions are financed.

    Real Costs Matter for Taxpayers Across the Country

    Properly estimating the cost of public-sector pensions may seem like something only number-crunching bureaucrats need to worry about. On the contrary, pension cost analysis informs highly charged political debates that are occurring not just in Wisconsin but all around the country. Public-pension costs are considerably greater than most governments estimate, and a proper understanding of the real cost is the first step toward reform.

    "Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
    (Clearly, teaching is not possible at any grade level, without the doctoral degree, unless it is believed that some kids are better than other kids, and that all the other kids are not worth the extra effort! See, for example, state and local government pension reform, directed at the teachers!)
     

Share This Page