I find that hard to believe TM. You might want to check your Premise here. Most States either contribute a portion to Employee Retirement Funds. Maybe you could focus on a legitimate source. Just a thought.
The New York Times editorial board has decided, reluctantly, it is time to rein in the compensation that government union employees get:
That huge increase is largely because of Albanys outsized generosity to the states powerful employees unions in the early years of the last decade, made worse when the recession pushed down pension fund earnings, forcing the state to make up the difference.
Although taxpayers are on the hook for the recessions costs, most state employees pay only 3 percent of their salaries to their pensions, half the level of most state employees elsewhere. Their health insurance payments are about half those in the private sector.
In all, the salaries and benefits of state employees add up to $18.5 billion, or a fifth of New Yorks operating budget. Unless those costs are reined in, New York will find itself unable to provide even essential services.
So to review government unions conspired to elect union friendly Democrats to the state legislature who in turn then granted, via outsized generosity [with other peoples money], incredibly expensive benefits that cost those union members next to nothing.
Uh, yeah, I think thats what has been said about Wisconsin as well. But in its very next paragraph, the NYT says, presumably so as not to seem too anti-union or anti-worker, that pointing this out isnt either of those things, but that darn GOP is both:
To point out these alarming facts is not to be anti- union, or anti-worker. In recent weeks, Republican politicians in the Midwest have distorted what should be a serious discussion about state employees benefits, cynically using it as a pretext to crush unions.
The NYT provides one of the perverse joys I look forward too each day trying to figure out how the editorial board will torture both the language and logic to come up with the positions it assumes. This is another example. What is happening in Wisconsin almost precisely the same scenario is anti-worker and anti-union because good old Governor Walker is one of them a Republican.
But Governor Cuomo? Why the model of what it means to be a union friendly Democratic governor:
Gov. Andrew Cuomo has pursued a reasonable course, making it clear that he expects public unions to make sacrifices, starting with a salary freeze. He wants to require greater employee contributions to pensions and health benefits, with a goal of saving $450 million.
Negotiations begin this month, but so far union leaders have publicly resisted Mr. Cuomos proposals. If they dont budge, Mr. Cuomo says he will have to lay off up to 9,800 workers.
New York Times: New York is not like Wisconsin « The Greenroom
