NJPP3 – US Trust New Jersey?

There was a lot of discussion last week on United States Trust Co. v. New Jersey 431 U.S. 1 (1977) and not only in New Jersey:


Last week the Illinois State Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional a 2013 law that eliminated automatic pay increases and reduced future benefits and in a PBS story the link to New Jersey was made:
.

.
The Illinois decision cited US Trust:

Moreover, the United States Supreme Court has held that particular scrutiny of legislative action is warranted when, as here, a state seeks to impair a contract to which it is itself a party and its interest in avoiding the contract or changing its terms is financial. Committing to a contract does implicate the state’s sovereign power, but:

“[w]hatever the propriety of a State’s binding itself to a future course of conduct in other contexts, the power to enter into effective financial contracts cannot be questioned. Any financial obligation could be regarded in theory as a relinquishment of the State’s spending power, since money spent to repay debts is not available for other purposes. Similarly, the taxing power may have to be exercised if debts are to be repaid. Notwithstanding these effects, the Court has regularly held that the States are bound by their debt contracts.” United States Trust Co. of New York v. New Jersey, 431 U.S. 1, 24 (1977).

In addition, because the state’s self-interest is at stake whenever it seeks to modify its own financial obligations, the United States Supreme Court has made clear that it is not appropriate to give the state’s legislature the same deference it would otherwise be afforded with regard to whether the impairment is reasonable and necessary to serve an important public purpose. “A governmental entity can always find a use for extra money,” the Court observed, “especially when taxes do not have to be raised. If a State could reduce its financial obligations whenever it wanted to spend the money for what it regarded as an important public purpose, the Contract Clause would provide no protection at all.”

What seemed clear in Illinois was being muddied in New Jersey:
.

.

PS: We were supposed to be having oral arguments at this hour on the fate of the New Jersey pension payment for the 7/1/15-6/30/16 year but that was postponed until the NJ Supreme Court comes out with something on the 7/1/14-6/30/15 payment they are mulling over.

.

.

PS2: For those of you eagerly awaiting Chris Christie’s economic plan for the country today  is your day.

72 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 10:40 am

    Eureka, we finally have TL on video tape. Ignoring the facts and ignoring the questions.

    Reply

  2. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 11:05 am

    So the big unanswered question is when does everyone stop the doomsday posturering because we need to get down to the business of good faith negotiations for a reasonable and necessary compromise solution. Not left nor right but middle, unfortunately it seems this State and Country are too idelogically divided to resolve this as well as other issues.

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 11:28 am

      Unions have tried for years….. This administration rules by fear, intimidation and lies. What a shame!!

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 11:53 am

        Unions compromise?

        Really ? Do you call offering givebacks of 5%-10% of their current ADVANTAGE over what their Private Sector counterparts typically get a “compromise” ?

        Reply

        • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 12:37 pm

          Yes compromise!!
          35% of the healthcare premium and an increase in pension contributions…increase in retirement age and decrease in pension. To name a few compromises off the top of my head….Mrs. Jealousy!!! Lol. Your new name.

          So typical!! Equal … Fair!! You obviously were born with a silver spoon and have no idea how it is to actually work.

          You and I both know your soooooo angry because you know full well there will be very very small givebacks by the PWs, but your taxes will rise. It’s inevitable. And police and fire will be exempt from all reforms…. As they should.

          Later…….

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 12:51 pm

            And like I said ….. ALL of that is giving back 5-10% of the current PUBLIC Sector Total Compensation (in pay, pensions, and benefits) “advantage”.

            That’s not compromise … is minor BS.

            e.g., BIG DEAL giving a few more % of pay “contribution”, when to erase the Public Sector pension “advantage” you would have to increase your contributions by 20% of pay (and MORE for safety workers).

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 9:16 pm

      I believe Christie will greatly reduce funding to colleges and universities because they all have surpluses to make the pension payments now and in the future. The funding reductions will include the community colleges. The same might apply to all entities that receive state funding but have reported surpluses. He certainly won’t cut public education.

      Reply

  3. Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 11:20 am

    I often call Public Sector Unions/workers/retirees greedy, and call-out our Elected Officials as self-interested and taxpayer-betraying for granting such incredibly generous (and hence costly) pensions & benefits.

    Here’s some pretty good evidence:

    http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/all-niagara-county/csea-sues-niagara-county-over-health-insurance-20150511

    My thoughts were posted as a comment:
    ________________________________________
    Anyone looking for evidence of Public Sector worker/retiree GREED and arrogance (and the self-dealing of our Elected Officials in granting such benefits) need look no further?

    Can you imagine a PRIVATE Sector Plan EVER paying for “elective cosmetic surgery” or REIMBURSING* drug co-pays ? PRIVATE Sector Plan sponsors would NEVER spend the Corporation’s money so foolishly. Such foolishness ONLY happens when there is a 3-rd part “sucker” stuck with the bill …. such as the TAXPAYERS in government-sponsored plans.

    * the whole purpose of a “co-pay” is to have some “skin-in-the-game” so that Plan participants have an incentive to help control unnecessary usage.
    —————————————————————————–

    And can yo imagine …”prescription co-pays at $1 for generic drugs and $5 for brand-name medicines” ….. just 5 years ago.

    Sure, THAT might have been typical of Private Sector Plans … IN THE 1960s !

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 11:27 am

      Blah…Blah…a friggin Blah!!! Already.
      You’ll never get what you are asking…. Nobody agrees with you…….

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 11:34 am

        Reality and the MATH is on MY side.

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 11:47 am

          math is not on your side when you try to procreate

          Reply

        • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 12:39 pm

          You can have all the math in the world…. You will pay. Bottom line.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 12:53 pm

            We’ll see, won’t we…… taxpayers won’t put up with the $8 Billion in tax “increases” necessary to continue paying retirees once Plan assets run dry (in about 5 years).

          • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 1:13 pm

            Really? Oh what shall they do? Move away?? Revolt?? Lol

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 1:20 pm

            Silly little man.

            You precious Democratic Legislators will rapidly change side (and throw Public Sector workers/retirees “under the bus”) when they see the writing on the wall ….. raise taxes as such, and they’re out of office pronto.

          • Posted by BH on May 12, 2015 at 2:07 pm

            The writing is on the wall…..
            They will side with the workers

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 2:43 pm

            BH,

            I really glad that you comment on this blog. It makes it oh so easy to call Public Sector workers/retirees GREEDY.

            You represent the epitome of “greed”.

      • Posted by Pam on May 12, 2015 at 3:53 pm

        I agree with TL and I will never pay another dime toward NJ PW’s.

        Reply

      • Posted by Tom on May 12, 2015 at 7:25 pm

        Anonymous,

        Well, I also agree with TL, and would like to thank her for her continued postings regarding the public pensions & health care benefits mess in NJ. I think most in NJ are blissfully unaware of just how close things are to imploding.

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 7:42 pm

          not only for the public workers but also for the taxpayers who mistakenly believe the only issue is pensions. get you heads out of the sand, although it wont help you

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 8:43 pm

            Sure we have OTHER problems:

            — infrastructure in need of major repairs (Transportation trust fund)
            — education costs (especially in poor districts)
            — healthcare for the poor/elderly & infirm
            — affordable housing
            — education and healthcare costs associated with immigrants (both legal & illegal).

            But NONE is as self-inflicted and obnoxious as vastly and unjustifiably over-compensating NJ public Sector workers. It’s THAT issue, which by soaking up SOOOO much money (especially for so many years into the future) that is the reason we now do and will continue to lack the funds to address many of NJ other more justifiable needs.

      • Sorry BH, but all rational, non-public sector employees agree with her.

        Just ask yourself one question – if you or your spouse had a successful business (on the side), would you entertain for even a nano-second offering your employees the same level of pension, sick leave, medical benefits, etc. that PS employees get? Let them retire at the age of 46 at 75% of their last year’s salary including overtime? Of course you wouldn’t. But somehow all of that is logical and appropriate for PS employees. End days are coming.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 12:22 am

          HMA,

          Nicely stated. Hope you don’t mind if I occasionally use that paragraph.

          Reply

          • Posted by truthnolie on May 13, 2015 at 1:11 am

            Yes…..it would be very fitting for you to use it since most of it is a lie and totally wrong!

            I wasn’t going to clarify any further since it’s amusing to keep morons in suspense but……

            No “PS” worker gets 75% of salary….most is 70% after 30 years of service….so what Idiot Private Sector Worker #1 (HMA) is saying is that there are public safety workers being hired at age 16 who then can retire at age 46 (unless he can’t process math problems, which is very likely since he sounds like a soon-to-be failed business owner).

            Also, while pensions for public safety workers in NJ are based on their last year’s salary, overtime pay is never included only the base pay (Port Authority NY/NJ did get overtime included but they were the only ones and NOT in NJ State Pension system….not even sure they’re still getting that).

            So…..it it very conceivable you’d want to use his “nicely stated” paragraph…..it would perfectly match everything else you post in that it is wrong & entirely idiotic.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 1:27 am

            truthnolie,

            Ok, so make it 70% at age 51 in NJ for a Police officer (with no overtime included) .

            Substitute THAT in HMA’s comment … and answer his question.

          • Posted by BH on May 13, 2015 at 9:07 am

            You can use that paragraph all you want and file it under TL’s folder ” Jaded, Twisted lies to enlist more “meat with eyes” followers”!!

            Just like your Governor and his administration, lies will eventually catch up to you. He is a sinking ship. Even while I don’t agree with one policy he has ever sided with, he is still our governor and missing 75% of the time!!!

            The good citizens of NJ see through the BS with him (check the polls) and they will do the same with the workers of this state. Fund the pensions!!!!!

            Later…..

        • Posted by BH on May 13, 2015 at 9:01 am

          I am a business owner in the private sector. I know exactly how difficult it is to balance worker compensation vs my own desire to make money.
          But here again, in your post, we are able to see how jaded, twisted and often inaccurate the facts people think they know…… are wrong.

          Chapter 78 made many changes to public workers compensation.
          –There is no longer a 70%!!! Gone!! It tops out at 65% after 30 yrs!!! MAX!!
          –It is the last 3 years averaged as to what the compensation will be……
          –They pay 35% of the Healthcare Premium now and while retired!!

          I wish people would get their facts straight instead of just becoming angry and posting inaccurate info.

          And, I wish people would say Local or State worker. And differentiate between Public Safety workers, because they are not the same!!!

          I agree. If the private sector pays a cashier $15 hr vs. the Public Workers $50 hr rate is excessive. While I’m not one to point my finger and cry about it. That is a valid argument regardless of what side of the fence you are on.
          But….
          I refuse to even mention the word equal, fair or “the same” when dealing with public safety workers!! There is NO private sector counterpart to let’s say, a firefighter!! No, they are not the same as TL would have you believe. Yes, they are special and deserve every form of compensation and benefit they get. Too bad we slashed their compensation because we LUMP them all together. A stupid idea. Their local pensions are sustainable. And if properly funded they will flourish. 76.5% vs. 40% is a big difference when discussing pension funding. The state plans are in trouble. But, they are funded DIFFERENTLY than the local plans.
          No TL, not the same….. Yes special. Yes different. Follow along……

          Later…..

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 13, 2015 at 9:03 am

            The above is a response to HMA……

          • Sorry BH, but if it were up to me I would eliminate a lot of FD’s. With building code mandates, sprinkler systems, smoke and CO detectors, most FD’s are sadly over employed and under utilized. If it were not for ambulance chasing calls (the ambulance goes and the FD vehicle chases) they would hardly have anything to do. Hook and ladders often show up for hotel heart attack calls (just in case)!

            The whole public sector compensation and benefits schema is a joke. Oh, and by the way, unless some wonderful reduction has happened, I believe that NJ State Police (for just one example) get a 75% pension after 25 years and 90% after 30!! We are on a one way slope to total bankruptcy unless cooler and more rational minds hold sway.

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 7:08 pm

            FF are not special except in your mind. I live in a community with volunteer fire dept. and works just fine.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 7:46 pm

            HMA, VERY clearly I advocate for Public Sector pension reductions from the grossly excess levels granted everywhere, but formulas very widely from location to location.

            I think you are confusing the even-more-generous formulas in CA (for safety workers) with those in NJ. In NJ (up until some recent changes… which impacted only “new ” workers) NJ Police get 65% of final pay at 25 years and 70% at 30 years.

            But let’s not let charlatans like truthnolie make it seem like that lessens the need for reform. The formula above will TYPICALLY generate pensions 4x-5x greater in value at retirement (when factoring in BOTH the MUCH richer “formulas” AND the MUCH more generous “provisions” such as very young full/unreduced retirement ages and COLA increases … now suspended in NJ) than those of Private Sector workers retiring with the SAME pay, the SAME years of service, and the SAME age at retirement.

            There is ZERO justification for these truly OUTRAGEOUS pensions, as well as the usually FREE retiree healthcare offered retired Police in NJ (at an ADDITIONAL cost to taxpayers for family coverage of $250K-$400K).

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 7:59 pm

            Responding to the above comment by BH,

            (1) The formula & provision changes you described mostly apply only to NEW workers hired post-2011 law changes. That being the case, we are stuck with the even more grossly excessive older formulas for the balance of the careers of those hired before the 2011 changes….. another 20-30 years.

            (2) LOCAL worker pension Plans have a funding ration of 66% (not 76%) under the new GASB accounting standards, a level SO POOR, that it’s minimally above the 60% cut-off that if a Private Sector Plan, the granting of future service pension accruals would be barred by US Treasury Dep’t Regulation.

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 11:47 am

      TL has a decent vocabulary but she has a second grade maturity level, hence the name calling.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 9:42 pm

        Oh TL! Come on, do you believe what you have said, if so all I have to say to you, someone who goes to a psychiatrist, needs their head examined

        Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 9:19 pm

      You can’t accept the legal predicament CC created in 2011. Now it’s time to pay up. Contract law prevails.

      Reply

  4. Posted by Pam on May 12, 2015 at 3:51 pm

    I agree whole completely with TL. But i left NJ taking both my money, business, and employees in order not to have to pay one more cent toward NJ public workers. Things are much, much better in the midwest.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 4:41 pm

      Yup, The west coast has earthquakes, the heartland has tornadoes, Florida and the Gulf coast has hurricanes and NJ has Public Sector worker pension & benefits.

      I think NJ got stuck with the short end of the stick.

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 10:08 pm

      Really!!! How many illegal immigrants did you transport to your new location?

      Reply

  5. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 8:49 pm

    Bicker if you must but neither the status quo or the P&B Commission type reforms are going to happen. So we can attempt to compromise in the name of progress or ride the ship to the bottom?

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 12, 2015 at 9:05 pm

      If “reform” does not REMOVE almost ALL of the current Public Sector “advantage” (i.e., the Multiples greater Public Sector pensions & benefits for the future service of all CURRENT workers …. the asset shortfall for which Mr. Bury now estimates to be $200-$300 BILLION just for PAST service accruals, and which GROWS LARGER every day), Taxpayers would be BETTER-OFF “riding the ship to the bottom” …… because it is un-fixable w/o such reforms.

      And, when we hit bottom, appropriate reforms will indeed be FORCED upon these insatiably greedy Public Sector Unions/workers.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 9:43 pm

        Even politicians find different ways to repeat the same crap over and over. Use your imagination TL or are you a descendant of the robot from Lost in Space

        Reply

  6. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 9:58 pm

    Well then I’d like to welcome aboard the SS Titanic NJ, enjoy your journey & we’ll see who can hold their breath the longest! Ideological stubbornness, this generation’s weapon of mass destruction.

    Reply

  7. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 10:13 pm

    Mayday, mayday, all Feds on deck, State over board!

    Reply

  8. Posted by Anonymous on May 12, 2015 at 11:58 pm

    TL has all the answers and is so confident of what will occur. However Thou protests too much!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 12:13 am

      You follow my every word awfully closely for someone who professes such confidence that their pensions and benefits won’t be impacted.

      Reply

  9. Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 8:06 am

    Equality for all, sounds like socialism, government price controls on out of control executive salaries (equal not better than everyone else) for cost cutting savings at the expense of the rank and file worker – now that’s America! Any business owner’s posting comments please provide your business’s name so supporters can support you and others can boycott you!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 8:43 am

      Big difference …… and your points are a contrived distortion of the actual situation.

      (a) in the Private Sector consumers have CHOICES where to shop, and if excessive executive salaries make Corporate prices uncompetitive, consumers will shop elsewhere. In the PUBLIC Sector, where a monopoly (and no consumer choice as to service providers) exists, the need to rationally control expenses (e.g., wages, pensions, benefits) is minimal and as we have witnessed, and has gotten completely out of control.

      (b) In the Private Sector higher than “necessary” (or even justifiable) compensation is paid for by the companies SHAREHOLDERS, who like customers can go ELSEWHERE, investing ELSEWHERE if they feel they are being taken advantage of. In the Public Sector, excessive (and yes, unreasonable) compensation is paid for and FORCED upon the beleaguer Taxpayers who have no choice or option to avoid that unnecessary taxation.

      ————————————————————

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 9:03 am

        Uncompetitive, taxpayers have CHOICES and can move elsewhere, don’t try that one sided “free market” stuff. No complaining about real estate values, etc just sell and move to a State/municipality more in line with your philosophy – probably TX or WI, certainly not CA.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 9:10 am

          Good point, and yes until they put up fences at our State /City borders and force us to “pay up” before we leave, we DO have an option to avoid these unjust and unnecessary taxes … just so that Public Sector workers can CONTINUE to be overcompensated.

          But SHOULD THAT be our ONLY option ?

          Reply

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 10:00 am

            It not a question of should but a matter of what the market forces dictate.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 5:43 pm

            Anon,

            So you believe that “market forces” dictate than we OVERCOMPENSATE Public Sector workers?

            Really ?

            No, it’s clearly the result of the Public Sector Unions BUYING the favorable votes (on pay, pensions, and benefits) of our elected officials with campaign contributions and election support.

        • Posted by truthnolie on May 13, 2015 at 12:35 pm

          I’ve posted this before but the never-ending threat of residents up and leaving en masse is a pipe dream and delusional fantasy on TL’s (and other’s) part. No doubt in her inflated egotistical mind she has visions of being the hero…..the pied piper leading her fellow fed up private workers in a caravan out of state to some promised land….don’t forget toll money on the way out (and on the way back in when your Utopia turns out to be another delusional fantasy)…..LOL.

          Very few people are willing or can just pull up stakes and leave……there are family, school, friends, job/salary, etc. considerations that work against such mass exoduses……btw, TL….no one is stopping you leaving NJ..why are you still here??…..(and please don’t try the “fighting for truth, justice & the American way” jive….Superman already owns that….hahaha).

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough love on May 13, 2015 at 1:00 pm

            Taxpayers won’t need to leave. It’s likely things will muddle along (just as they have been) …but ONLY until NJ pension Plan assets run out, and it’s either major reduced pensions, or pay-as-you-go pension payments. With the latter REQUIRING about $8 Billion in additional taxes annually, it’s never going to happen.

            The Democratic legislators will switch sides and throw the Public Sector workers “under-the-bus”…. recognizing that the alternative (the $8 Billion tax increase) will get them voted out of office … PRONTO.

      • Posted by BH on May 13, 2015 at 9:18 am

        Would we even be crying about any of this if…

        #1. The pensions were always funded like they should have been, which would have made them sustainable with payouts matching or exceeding the liabilities?? Because that could have been a reality if our politicians did not ROB from the pensions for pet projects and tax relief!!!

        #2 TL and her followers would have fought for corporate reforms like healthcare increases and ceo bonuses. If the healthcare providers were not allowed to line their pockets with 20-30% yearly increases over decades forcing healthcare to become unaffordable and a huge liability on the recipient perhaps we wouldn’t even be thinking about any of this.

        We all know the true root of all this is corporate greed!!! Private Sector GREED!!!
        PRIVATE SECTOR GREED CAUSED THE ENTIRE PENSION PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.

        Private organization like Berkshire Hathaway and the Koch brother back politicians who fail to fund pensions and back pension reforms so they are forced to offer 401k plans in which they can make billions. Public Sector pensions are an untouched money machine they can rob from. Open your eyes!!!!

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 10:05 am

          All baloney, and you know it.

          Your delusional ….. as well as insatiably greedy.

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 13, 2015 at 1:45 pm

            That’s the exact response I thought you would have. When somebody poses a question, theory or fact that’s not in your agreement… You simply say… Bologney or hogwash!!! Easy way to not answer or debate!!
            You lose all credibility TL!!!!!

            Later…..

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 5:52 pm

            Ok BH, I’ll give you the longer reply…

            As to your #2… more of your “diversion” from the PUBLIC SECTOR PENSION ISSUE. Go ahead, make “Corporate Greed” YOUR mission. .It’s not mine.

            As to your #1, I’ve answered this many times before. “Funding” requirement are a mathematical function of Plan “generosity”. ANY (yes ANY) Plan even if 10 time more generous than yours will “work” if “fully funded”…. but where would the funds to do so come from ?

            The problem is that very generous Plans require VERY high “funding”.

            The discussion point needs to not be “funding” but “generosity …. which is clearly the ROOT CAUSE of NJ’s pension mess.

  10. Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 8:58 am

    Corporate tax breaks must stop first, they benefit top executives greater than the rank and file. Corporate greed is the reason for middle class wage stagnation not PWs P&B. Sherman’s march through the South continues no sign left of the middle class! I wonder if the captain will go down with their ship?

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 9:12 am

      irrelevant and simply your attempt to divert the discussion from the issue at hand ….. excessive taxation due to excessive PUBLIC Sector pensions & benefits.

      Reply

    • Posted by dentss dunigan on May 13, 2015 at 11:09 am

      Volvo will build a new auto plant in SC (RTW State)which was lured to South Carolina with 500 million tax break ,which will employ 2500 new workers …..without “corporate welfair”…Volvo would have set up shop in Texas which offered lesser breaks .If any state can’t compete it will wither ,starve and die .

      Reply

  11. Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2015 at 9:30 am

    The altruistic idea of true free market only exsists for small “mom & pop” type businesses. International and national corporations (large to medium in size) have eroded consumer choice through mergers, subsidiaries, and collusion.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 9:39 am

      Hogwash,

      e.g., what’s bigger than cellphone service providers … the Verisons, the AT&Ts, the Sprints, the T-Mobiles, etc.

      There is PLENTY of “choice” in the PRIVATE Sector economy to freely select your products and/or services ….. but almost NONE in the PUBLIC Sector, a monopoly with a lack of any real attention to controlling expenses (especially worker compensation) and always leading to unnecessarily excessive taxation.

      Reply

      • Posted by truthnolie on May 13, 2015 at 1:52 pm

        You responded above but still avoided (as usual) answering the question:

        WHY HAVEN’T YOU LEFT THEN & WHY ARE YOU STILL LIVING IN NEW JERSEY????

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 5:55 pm

          I like it here, just disgusted with the financial “mugging” perpetrated upon Taxpayers by the insatiably greedy Public Sector unions/workers and the Elected Officials who have enabled it.

          Reply

  12. This implies that Generation Greed could pass legislation tonight and 3 am tripling the pensions of existing retirees and allowing everyone over age 40 to retire immediately, including the legislators themselves. And giving all the pensioners a $200,000 moving allowance as they had for Florida.

    And those still left in the state would have absolutely no choice but to pay it, because they had agreed to an irrevocable contract whose terms could never be changed regardless of the consequences.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 13, 2015 at 6:09 pm

      Yup, it’s always been …….. “heads” the Public Sector workers WIN, and “tails”, the Taxpayers LOSE.

      But we’re gonna change that …. big-time !

      Reply

    • Posted by dentss dunnigan on May 13, 2015 at 6:10 pm

      As home values slide to zero ……take a look at Roselle if you want to see what high property taxes do to a town .average assessed value 112,000….average tax 11,800. with plenty of inventory for sale

      Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: