Bashing New Jersey Public Employees

In a youtube clip that got a lot of views since it was included in an story Governor Christie almost broke down when explaining how the NJEA publicized that he hates his children:

If you want hatred see what Christie, through his Attorney General’s office, said about public employees (retirees especially) in the State’s Reply Brief in Support of the Cross Petition for Certification filed today in the Berg / NJEA consolidated cases.  Among the vitriol spilled:

Moreover, the remand, as the Appellate Division designed it, would pit active employees who seek the long-term sustainability of the system against retirees who seek to drain the fund for their short-term needs. Such fratricide is not in the public interest.

Presumably the option of the state making its required contributions is off the table as Christie’s people call out current public employees for hating old people and current public retirees for being so selfish as to want to keep their promised pensions.


27 responses to this post.

  1. II believe you don’t so why do you try to take bread from the public employee’s children s mouth.
    Their retirees payed their share while working, the State dismissed their responsibility
    to pay their share for many years, The retirees for the most part make less then $30,000 a year. You can’t buy a lot of bread these days, with what most of these people make.


    • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 2:17 am

      Don’t you love it when those who oppose Public Sector pension reform say the Public Sector workers paid “their share”, with no description of what that share actually is?.

      I’ll give you an accurate description …….

      Public Sector worker contributions (INCLUDING all the investment returns thereon) can be expected to pay ONLY 10%-20% of the total cost of a pension that is always AT LEAST 2x greater in value at retirement than those TYPICALLY granted comparable Private Sector workers retiring at the SAME age, with the SAME service, and with the SAME pay.

      And that “AT LEAST 2x” above, is MOST OFTEN 3x-4x, and for safety workers USUALLY 4x-6x greater.


      Oh, and the DRAMA ….. “try to take bread from the public employee’s children s mouth.” How about the mouths of the children of the PRIVATE Sector Taxpayers who are responsible for 80-90% of the total cost of these grossly excessive pensions ?


      Oh, and the distortions …….. “The retirees for the most part make less then $30,000 a year. ”

      Sure they do, when you average in:
      (a) those who retired LONG AGO on lower salaries and lower pension formulas,
      (b) part time workers,
      (c) short career workers, and
      (d) 50% survivors of deceased workers

      But you knew all that (didn’t you) as well as that the average starting pension of a FULL-TIME, 30+ year CAREER worker is likely on the underside of $70K.


      Where do the material omissions, the distortions of fact, and the perhaps knowing lies end ?


      • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 8:58 am

        I was wondering when you were going to be out of rehab again. Had not seen you in a day or so. Glad you have insurance to cover it. By the way, you are the Queen of Denial as well as the Queen of Distortions. Maybe we should call you Double D instead of TL. ha!


        • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 1:17 pm

          As usual, you cannot refute anything I said …….

          It must be tough knowing that your gravy train (of grossly excessive pensions and benefits) is going to be cut short.


        • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 2:22 pm

          Oh I’ve been around and commenting back and forth (on Mr. Bury’s recent blog-post titled “Call the Propagandists’ Bluff”) with another “Anonymous” (who I believe may be the same “Joel” as the commentator above). Looks like he gave up debating with me on that one as he couldn’t counter clear examples with verbal diarrhea.


      • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 8:59 am

        TL has no problem hiring Chris Christie as a nanny for her children. She totally trusts him to give them the best of care.


  2. Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 1:43 am

    When it comes to Christie, the bigger question may be how do we feel about lawyers who become politicians. Christie is a great lawyer, I think we all know what that means, sadly enough he has to put on an act at the very least and even lie blatantly. Ask Brett Schundler about the Federal Education Funding. Christie also seems to have bullying tendencies, would anyone here want to be in his childrens shoes? Not me


  3. Posted by MJ on October 15, 2014 at 6:46 am

    Based on this small blip it would seem to me that Christie is saying what needs to be said. Overly generous promises were made with no realistic way to pay for those promises. The state now has retirees, some who will be paid out for many more years than they worked, draining the fund. Same retirees also sucking the life out of the budget with retiree healthcare. Christie is correct in stating that there will not be much left for new or current workers unless substantial reforms are initiated. Whether one likes Chrisite or not, at least he is putting it out there as to what needs to be said.


    • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 9:02 am

      Christie is not saying anything that has not been said before in the last 15 years. Only difference is that Christie in order to get elected lied to police and fire fighters and told them he wont do anything to jeopardize their pensions. I think he meant to say that he wont do anything period.


      • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 1:31 pm

        So who is the fool, believing that a politician won’t say ANYTHING necessary to get him/her elected………………… ESPECIALLY when you KNOW that your pensions & benefits are (a) grossly excessive, (b) only 50% funded under proper accounting, and (c) clearly unsustainable?


        • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 3:21 pm

          You are because no matter what happens you will continue to pay and pay dearly


          • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 3:24 pm

            I’ll be paying a LOT less in incremental taxes (if any) than the reduction in your pensions & benefits.

    • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 1:23 pm

      Of course Christie is correct, but understandably, the Public Sector worker/retirees (who will suffer the pain of materiel penson/benefit reductions) fight accepting that reality.

      The FIRST step in recovery is always “denial”, and they seem hopelessly stuck at that step. Move-on Public Sector workers/retirees …. it will help you get past this.


      • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 3:23 pm

        Denial is the fact that you somehow thing you will be spared your heavy tax burden if public employees pensions are cut. Sadly you will pay through the nose regardless I think deep down you realize that.


  4. Posted by MJ on October 15, 2014 at 8:16 pm

    The first step is anger which is clearly being exhibited on this site by the publics. Denial is funny bc they all believe that they will get theirs but others won’t. At least, that is what they tell themselves. Then comes the bargaining and at long last acceptance that their gravy train will in some way come to a screeching halt. I won’t be paying anything as I sold my house for full asking price to a public! Ha Ha how ironic. They can deal with the 15,000 a year in real estate taxes. I hope they are not downsized and stuck with their outrageous mortgage. Reform now so that publics don’t lose all that they paid into for the ponzi scheme!!


    • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 8:35 pm

      While ALL of what you said is true, your LAST sentence is telling ….

      You see the younger, shorter-service “actives” are:

      (a) incredibly believing that somehow, someway their extraordinarily generous pension & retiree healthcare promises (20+ years in the future) will be there for them when THEY retire, and

      (b) they are so afraid to stand up to their Union and the older, longer-service actives (as well as those already retired), that they either don’t see or refuse to address how THOSE groups are ripping THEM off ….. by now receiving (or soon to receive) pension payments FAR in excess of Plan assets available to pay for them ……. effectively diverting the contributions of the younger “actives” to THEM. Pretty foolish, huh ?


      • Posted by Anonymous on October 15, 2014 at 9:06 pm

        The unfortunate part is that public service has become a subservient class. The public wants higher standards, more accountability, greater education–they just don’t want to pay for it. It will take a couple of years for this recession to work it’s way out, but who on earth would want to be a public sector accountant? You’d have to be crazy to have any faith in the system, or trust that the public and legislators will keep their word.


        • Posted by Tough Love on October 15, 2014 at 9:13 pm

          Subservient class?

          Really, when one looks at the cash pay, the pensions, and the benefits …… WELL in excess of what would be paid for comparable work in the Private Sector …… most people would consider current Public Sector workers the new ROYALTY.


        • right… with twice the pay of private sector most of which have NO PENSIONS at all.

          I left the sate 8 years ago, it is doomed thanks to liberal arrogance and an ignorant population.

          Cesspool by any other name.


  5. NJ public employees are indeed part of the problem and the liberals who helped create the biased structure that is against the citizens such as you J Bury are as well.

    NJ is a liberal hole, period.

    Best to get…

    U stay, you pay.


  6. Posted by S and P 500 on October 16, 2014 at 6:01 am

    Someone always has to say “retirees paid their share, it’s the state that didn’t make its payments into the pension fund.” Well then I guess these loyal savers deserve a little trophy made in China or a mention in Money magazine. That should make them feel better if they are upset that the union reps on the pension board told the state they could take a pension payment vacation or that the fund managers couldn’t produce Bernie Madoff returns.


  7. Posted by Javagold on October 16, 2014 at 11:43 am

    Hey whats that sound ???

    Its the beginning sound of an avalanche in the stock market ……you aint seen nothing yet


  8. Posted by Anonymous on October 16, 2014 at 12:08 pm

    A bipartisan pension reform board came out in the past and said the reforms currently mandated by Chapter 78 WILL serve to make the systems sustainable but three “prongs” must be maintained:

    1) Employee contributions raised to suggested levels as well as a reconfiguring of service years and calculations (prong being met)

    2) Healthcare contributions put into effect and contributed as specified and into retirement as mandated (prong currently being met)

    3) State making its defined yearly payment as specified in the law into pension system (HA – don’t make me laugh)


    • Posted by Tough Love on October 16, 2014 at 2:41 pm

      Ha HA , don’t make ME laugh.

      The system may become sustainable when PUBLIC Sector pensions & benefits are reduced to a level NO GREATER than those typically granted comparable PRIVATE Sector workers (by their employers) when retiring at the SAME age, with the SAME pay, and the SAME years of service.

      And doing THAT will require reducing the pensions of all CURRENT workers by 50%-75%.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: