“It’s embarrassing, and I’m tired of hearing this I want what I was promised”

Hopefully there will be video soon of the entire town hall meeting in Sparta today at which Governor Christie made that and other comments on the Pension and Benefits system in New Jersey, some of which were reported by politickernj a couple of hours ago:

“In February, they [NJEA] actually signed a framework with us. And then, just a few weeks ago, they announced they were walking away,” Christie said. “They don’t want to negotiate, they want to get everything that they’re getting and give nothing back.”

 “Your question to them has to be, how much do you think you’re going to tax out of my pocket to pay your public sector union friends?,” Christie asked the crowd, which responded with applause.

“It’s embarrassing, and I’m tired of hearing this I want what I was promised,” he said later. “Everybody has got to be in this together.”
.
Perhaps these quotes are taken out of context but it would be a lot easier for someone to sacrifice were they told the truth (which I will get to if the video of these statements surfaces).
.
“We can’t afford it” does not cut it for pensioners when uttered by someone who sees no issues with spending for, among other things:
.

99 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 2:48 pm

    John,

    It’s not ONLY that we (meaning NJ’s taxpayers) simply cannot afford the “promises” that have been made, but more ….. as I responded to a comment (time-stamped May 14, 2015 at 12:44 pm) to your NJPP4 blog post (and pasted below):
    —————————————————————————————–
    (2) Your position completely ignores the UNDENIABLE “fact” the Public Sector pensions & benefits are always MULTIPLES more generous than those granted Private Sector counterparts, when factoring in BOTH the MUCH greater pension “formulas” AND the MUCH more generous “provisions” …… easily demonstrated to be 3 to 4 TIMES greater in value at retirement. These FAR greater pensions & benefits are unnecessary to attract and retain a qualified workforce, are unfair to taxpayers burdened today with the responsibility to pay for 80-90% of total plan costs, and are very clearly unaffordable. The upshot is EVEN IF WE HAD THE MONEY to fund these grossly excessive promises (the direct result of your Unions’ BUYING the favorable votes of our elected officials) we should NOT do so. Not only should “promises” so clearly the result of underhanded deal-making NOT be honored, but NJ has FAR FAR more important needs than unnecessarily OVERCOMPENSATING it’s employees, not the least of which include:

    * infrastructure repairs and Capital improvements (Transportation Trust fund)
    * assistance for the poor-elderly and infirm
    * affordable housing
    * education support, especially for the less financially fortunate

    Reply

    • The “promises” were made to them by liars and thieves who probably shared in the ill-gotten gains at taxpayer expense.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 3:17 pm

        HMA, a while back a commentator addressed this rather appropriately ….

        “An initiative to control the union’s ignorance and greed is needed. Since the people actually pay, let the people decide. No more negotiating because snakes negotiating with snakes produces THIS big mess!”

        Reply

      • And we all know that there is no honor among thieves.

        Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 2:57 pm

      TL doesnt even attend the town hall meetings she is consumed with happy hour. its no joke folks and if you read her comments, its the alcohol speaking most of the time

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 3:14 pm

        And you wonder why I call you an imbecile ………

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 3:19 pm

          TL stop missing your OCD support group meetings.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 3:21 pm

            Undoubtedly, one of NJ’s “Best and Brightest” we pay so much for …….

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 3:50 pm

          TL you have paid virtually nothing towards pensions for 20 years, even if the pensions are reduces you will pay substantially now you fool.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 5:10 pm

            I have no problem or objection to paying (taxpayer) contributions towards Public Sector pensions EQUAL TO (as a % of pay) what PRIVATE Sector taxpayers TYPICALLY get from their employers toward their retirement.

            Past actual taxpayer payments (with investment earnings) if compared to that bogie would be higher or lower. I have no problem funding any shortfall in THAT comparison, should one exist ….. but I have a HUGE problem funding your current “promises”, typically 3x-4x greater in value than what Private Sectors get.
            ——————-

            EQUAL but not better ….. and GREED is the only reason you object to that.

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 7:36 pm

            Maybe TL will move from NJ like I did so PW’s have one less person to pay for their unsustainable pensions.
            PW’s should never get more than what max social security pays

  2. Posted by Equal Time on May 14, 2015 at 3:59 pm

    Pensions are a form of deferred compensation – that’s deferred, not canceled!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 5:26 pm

      Question….

      Suppose you were a Private Sector resident of town “ABC”, and suppose a self-interested elected official (surely in the Union’s pocket … as are most today) agreed to increase all of your town employee’s “WAGES” by 300% for one year, and sneaked in that deal with little announcement or ability for the residents to object.

      Would you fight like the devil to overturn that “abuse” of power ? Would you pay it? Hell no, and you’d likely want to tar and feather that Elected Official.

      Well, elected officials promising 3+ times greater pensions & benefits than necessary, reasonable, fair to the taxpayers (responsible for 80-90% of the total cost), or affordable, is no different …. other than that he cost of THAT type of abuse is less apparent, and that the elected officials who agree to it will likely have moved on when the bill comes due.

      NEITHER is “deferred compensation”, they are BOTH “theft”.

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 5:35 pm

        Now it’s theft?? Man o’ Man….you are a manic one aren’t you??? Calling an honest wage and pension that was earned– a theft– is beyond crazy. I’m glad you say such things because it only diminishes your credibility. Theft?? Lol… Still scratching my head on that one!!
        Guess you’re one of the ones that took the test to be a public employee and failed, so now you have a grudge!!! I’ve seen you post on forums as far away as California spewing your corporate greed venom!!! Why would one post on soooo many forums if you didn’t have a seriously “creepy” axe to grind???
        Have fun and good luck with that!!

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 5:44 pm

          No, I’m simply very knowledgeable and can’t easily be fooled or swayed by spacious arguments ….. especially by those driven by self-interest.

          And “theft” seems like a very appropriate way to describe such high-level abuse.

          ——————————————

          “honest” ??? “earned” ??? ….. hardly.

          ——————————————-
          Scratching you head won’t help you.

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 8:59 am

            Could have fooled me….. Your entire post history is 85% copy and paste…..

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 7:38 pm

      So lower the deferred to max SS or less.

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 7:42 pm

      Aren’t you the one that thinks fire fighters are special? Please…….
      No more special than anyone else.

      Reply

  3. Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 5:06 pm

    TL is a form of arrested development.

    Reply

  4. Posted by Jitters on May 14, 2015 at 6:07 pm

    24-42% raises for his staff. Those facing criminal inquiries are ushered to other state jobs I.E. NJ Transit. The largest staff any governor has ever had. The most legal fees incurred by any governor. Shared sacrifice begins at home. Any credibility is gone. Next.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 6:56 pm

      If true, abuses f0r sure, but IN ANY WAY does it reduce the immediate need to materially reduce (by 50+%) the always GROSSLY EXCESSIVE pensions & benefits of ALL of NJ’s CURRENT workers (State & LOCAL) ….. NO !

      Reply

  5. Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 6:16 pm

    There has and always will be competing interest for the almighty tax dollar. No one can ever satisfy everybody, the differences too many to mention. It’s unfortunate we can’t discuss the issues reasonably and rationally to reach a compromise solution. Maybe if the individuals posting (myself included) on this forum commented from the opposite perspective, then they would have a glimpse into the counter view.

    Ah forget I was just dreaming, I’ll go back to bed now.

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 6:20 pm

      I am. I’m a private sector business owner advocating for the public employees.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 7:01 pm

        Yes, and you have ALSO stated (in prior comments) that you have several family members working in the Public Sector.

        And from the voracity of your comments, I suspect that while perhaps now working in the Private sector (IF being truthful) you WERE a PUBLIC Sector worker in the past, and are now (or will in the future be) receiving a Public Sector pension.

        Reply

      • I think you are full of it. Hard to understand how a “private sector business owner” would be so emotionally supportive of the travesty known as public sector pensions – not to mention post retirement, pre 65 medical benefits.

        Social Security is designed to supply about 40% of pre-retirement compensation AT AGE 66. So it is fair for Public Sector drones to get 65% or 70% at age 50 or 55? Don’t think so.

        Bad news coming, stay tuned.

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 7:40 pm

        Aren’t you the one that thinks fire fighters are special? Please…….
        No more special than anyone else.

        Reply

        • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 8:02 pm

          Yes. I am the One!!
          While you all loathe the public workers, I do not. I’ve seen first hand the work these people do. While I do not know how they do it, even while being vilified by the same people they are SWORN to protect, by oath…. They do the job. It’s stupidity, jealousy or both that have people say idiotic things like call them thieves!! Say that to one of them to their face while they are risking their lives for you, a complete stranger even knowing they have a family at home… Wives… Children… All who will be at a funeral because they died for you!! Some creep, who admonishes their job security.
          Make their jobs as safe as yours and we can talk about equal and fair. Until then, pay these people their earned pensions and get over it!!

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:14 pm

            You seem to be quite “off-the-wall” ….

            How does wanting to pay our safety workers a fair wage (even BETTER than a fair wage … as we do now in many NJ towns) and pensions & benefits consistent with what someone making that SAME wage in the Private Sector, translate into …… “you all loathe the public worker ” ?

            There is simply no justification for the current GROSSLY EXCESSIVE pensions & benefits (easily 3x-4x greater in value at retirement than what comparable Private Sector workers typically get in retirement pensions from their employers) to be added to the current BETTER-than-fair wages we now provide.

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 6:57 pm

      Quoting … “It’s unfortunate we can’t discuss the issues reasonably and rationally to reach a compromise solution. ”

      We CAN …. it’s called EQUAL, but not better.

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 8:04 pm

        Not equal… Because they ARE BETTER….

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:22 pm

          MY “EQUAL” refers to COMPENSATION, not the workers.

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:00 am

            My point exactly

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:01 am

            Make their jobs as safe as yours….. Than we can talk equal….. Until then…they are special because ther are not the same.
            It’s simple logic really…..

        • Some years ago Chicago advertised 300 firefighter positions. The job was so dangerous and fraught with peril (7 days a week 24 hours a day) that only 10,000 people applied for the job. So much for “better”.

          Yes, I think that most public sector pension plans, and especially those of firefighters and police, are tantamount to grand larceny perpetrated on the private sector taxpayer by greedy unions and their enablers.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:40 pm

            Well stated.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 14, 2015 at 10:31 pm

            From Bloomberg: 04/28/2011

            “McDonald’s and its franchisees hired 62,000 people in the U.S. after receiving more than one million applications,the Oak Brook, Illinois-based company said today in an e-mailed statement. Previously, it said it planned to hire 50,000.”

            One million applications?
            Grossly overpaid, those greedy burger servers, obviously.

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:04 am

            Whats your point????
            How many job applications to Fortune 500 companies recieve every year???
            Digging your own hole of lies and jealousy in front of our eyes…..

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 8:33 pm

          You are so delusional that it is frightening

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:42 pm

            In you are looking for someone “delusional”, I suggest you review YOUR comments posted on Mr. Bury’s last half-dozen blog-articles.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:43 pm

            My above comment was directed to BH and the “Anon” that seems to be his alter-ego.

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 8:38 pm

          BH,

          You are delusional

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 8:45 pm

            Ok, I’m delusional!! Makes sense. You disagree with truth and fact. So call me names…. Easy way out

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2015 at 9:33 pm

            TL,

            I didn’t mean to direct my delusional comment at you. It is BH that clearly does not understand economics.
            His adoration of FF’s is creepy.

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:03 am

            And your adoration with the pensions is creepy……
            Now what???

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:06 am

          BH, The following the the U.S. Gov’t BLS list of the 10 most deadly jobs:

          The 10 Deadliest Jobs:

          1. Logging workers
          2. Fishers and related fishing workers
          3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
          4. Roofers
          5. Structural iron and steel workers
          6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
          7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
          8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
          9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
          10. Construction laborers

          All of these occupations (with the exception of commercial airline pilots who likely are not the source of pilot fatalities) make less than Public Sector safety workers … which are NOT on the list.

          And few if any ANY have DB pensions and employer-paid retiree heathcare benefits.

          Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:07 am

          BH, The following the the U.S. Gov’t BLS list of the 10 most deadly jobs:

          The 10 Deadliest Jobs:

          1. Logging workers
          2. Fishers and related fishing workers
          3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
          4. Roofers
          5. Structural iron and steel workers
          6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
          7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
          8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
          9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
          10. Construction laborers

          All of these occupations (with the exception of commercial airline pilots who likely are not the source of pilot fatalities) make less than Public Sector safety workers … which are NOT on the list.

          And few if any ANY have DB pensions and employer-paid retiree heathcare benefits.

          Reply

          Reply

      • TL, you have to keep in mind that for decades these publics have lived in a bubble with no accountability and no limits on salary and benefits including pensions not to mention that they never paid in a dime until recently. Living in a bubble creates a state of panic and stress when the bubble bursts. Try not to be too harsh, they are simply in a state of denial of what is to come. Possibly PTSD related to the “new normal” and foreboding of what is most assuredly to come with reforms. Most of us call it reality. They call it fantasy land.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 9:27 pm

          I agree, but time is of the essence in reforming these excessive and unaffordable pension/benefits. The Union DELAYING tactic is at least partially to get as much moved from the FUTURE Service column to the PAST service column which has a greater probability of no reductions (or smaller reductions).

          With the CURRENT pension structure in NJ digging the hole deeper EVERY DAY, time (in reforming these pensions) is of the essence.

          Reply

          • Posted by MJ on May 15, 2015 at 4:58 pm

            BH. Have you stopped for one moment to consider the reasons why the state did not and can not contribute to the pensions or health benefits? Don’t you think the politicians and unions would pay their minions if they could? They all know that this a ponzi scheme gone awry. I understand your anger and disappointment but why are you taking your frustrations out on the taxpayers? Do your research. Reputable sources such as Forbes, Wall Street journal, etc have been stating the unsustainable nature of DBs for many years. This is just a pin prick of what is too come. Way too much was promised to way too many for way too long

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 5:02 pm

            Yes ….. “Way too much was promised to way too many for way too long”.

        • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:06 am

          Never paid in a dime until now?? By God what are you speaking of?? Total lies and falsehoods…..
          Please get your facts straight.
          Police and fire have always paid 8.5% until ch.78 which increased it to 10%……….

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:19 am

            BH,

            Yes they have contributed 8.5% (now 10%) toward a pension that when PROPERLY calculated using the standards and methodology REQUIRED by the Treasury Dep’t of Private Sector Plans, has a level annual cost (as a % of pay to fully fund it over their working careers) of 40% to 50% of pay (assuming the COLAs are reinstated).

            So while not now contributing very much, it’s the Taxpayers who you want to hold responsible to contribute all but the workers “share” … or 30 to 40% of pay annually.

            Now tell me, how is that fair (or even remotely “reasonable”) to taxpayers, when THEY typically get (from their employers) a 3% to 4% of pay contribution into a 401K Plan and the employer’s 6.2% of pay contribution into SS on their behalf, totaling to about 10% of pay ?
            ————————————————————-

            Nothing you say holds up under close examination.

          • Posted by MJ on May 15, 2015 at 11:31 am

            Was mainly talking about the cadilac health benefits. Publics never paid it until recent years. If I am incorrect please say so. I recall all of the publics I know being extremely indignant that they would be asked to pay into health benefits and pay a little more into pensions

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:07 pm

            So, if the state never took decades off as a pension payment holiday while the funds were well over 100% funded…. This would still be an issue today??
            No it would not!!!
            State and corporate GREED is what caused this problem and now you want the workers to suffer because we all took their pension money as pet projects, corporate tax breaks and property tax decreases!!
            And then call them liars crooks and thieves??? I think you’ve got it backwards!!!! We are the liars crooks and thieves who STOLE their money from their funds and now WE demand THEY pay it back now that it’s short????
            That’s the most backwards way of thinking I’ve ever heard!!! It’s you lazy, greedy, jealous private sector scrubs that owe!!!! So take out your checkbook…….

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:02 pm

            BH, you are circling back to square one because nothing seems to sink-in…..

            AS I stated earlier, ANY Plans (no matter how generous) will “work” IF the ARC (which is a function of the generosity underlying that Plan) is always paid. But the problem is that overly generous Plans …. as ALL Public Sector Plans are …. have huge ARC requirements. And there is zero justification for Taxpayers to fund such grossly excessive Plans.

  6. Posted by fouls123 on May 14, 2015 at 6:43 pm

    Tl is probably a paid lobbyist for Christie and the Republicans anyway. Ignore her as most have learned to do.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 7:05 pm

      Nice try…………… Knowledgeable commentary is a problem for those with no reasonable arguments to counter such commentary ………

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 14, 2015 at 8:04 pm

        Corporate greed is ruining this country!!!!

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 14, 2015 at 8:20 pm

          “Corporate greed” is indeed a problem ……….. but does THAT problem lessen the HUGE problem of grossly excessive, unnecessary, unfair, and unaffordable Public Sector pensions and benefits, and the need for very material reform ?

          Of course not …….. no matter how many times you try to sway the readers into believing the one problem cancels out the other..

          Reply

          • Posted by MJ on May 14, 2015 at 9:02 pm

            If these public takers are so secure in thinking that they will receive all “promised ” to them why are they do concerned with TL’s comments and rationales for reform? They sound indignant and have no other tools available other than to attack opposing views and name calling. It’s over no way out. Maybe not today but soon. So enjoy your checks while they are still coming!

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:08 am

            Indignant??? When they are called liars, thieves and crooks… I’d support them making even more!!

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:21 am

            Yes you support …….. YOUR FAMILY (and likes yourself) …. making even more.

  7. Posted by Anonymous on May 15, 2015 at 12:41 am

    @njsupremecrt shall speak & leave one side stomping their feet & crying like a baby over #fundnjpension, we shall see soon enough!

    Reply

  8. You do realize that if the money has to be put into the pensions per the court ruling that there will be massive lay offs, cuts to services, etc. as the budget can’t accommodate such a huge payment which is why it wasn’t put in in the first place. It doesn’t matter either way, reforms will be made because of the math and economics not because of what the publics feel they are entitled to.

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:09 am

      No, you will see tax increases across the board. Pay back is a bi*%h!!

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:24 am

        As will be a loss of retiree healthcare benefits, and reductions to pension promises (even if obscenely excessive to begin with).

        Reply

      • Posted by MJ on May 15, 2015 at 11:58 am

        BH. You do realize that your taxes will also go up and then people all around will spend less money taking away from state revenues making your situation more dire?? Home prices will continue to decline, businesses will close, cuts to services will be made. Etc etc. get a hold of yourself. You will get used to the new normal. Your arrogance dissuades me from seeing much of your points.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 12:08 pm

          BH, you really need to take a few classes in economics and finance.

          For example if YOUR pensions were reduced, sure retirees would spend less (as might active workers seeing a lower rate of pension accrual) but there is an equal (and opposite offset). Your reduced pensions would translate into lower taxes (or a lower rate of increase in taxes from what they would have been in the absence of the pension reductions) leaving NJ’s taxpayers with an increase in spendable income equal (in total) to the reduced public Sector pensions.

          Reply

        • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:12 pm

          You are trying to scare up an Armageddon from pension funds being underfunded!!!
          This will all be fixed by-

          -Tax increases across the board
          -A shift from CC’s managing firms making millions on pension fund fees now instead given to the unions to manage.
          – decrease in healthcare plans and increase in employee contributions to shore up pensions
          – increase in pension contribution from employee…

          Oh and safety pensions all exempt from any reforms!!!

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:08 pm

            Oh …. can you imagine, “Unions” ….”managing” …. such a HUGE pot of money.

            When in history have THEY not stolen more than anyone else (perhaps with the exception of Bernie Madoff) ?

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:10 pm

            Quoting …. “Oh and safety pensions all exempt from any reforms!!!”

            Nice touch …. EXTREME self-interest and greed ???

          • Too funny! Me thinks you are one of those fire fighters that you so idolize 🙂 Understandable but clearly you are not in the best interests of anyone but yourself

  9. Posted by Anonymous on May 15, 2015 at 9:03 am

    It’s out of our hands, up to the Supreme Court and the voters of NJ this November (80 assembly seats) and next (40 senate seats).

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 9:08 am

      With 3% voter turn out….. Good luck with that.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 15, 2015 at 9:19 am

        We’ll see who takes this issue to heart at the polls, we can’t complain about politicians then do nothing about it.

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 15, 2015 at 9:24 am

        I’m predicting higher than normal voter turnout, in fact the highest in recent memory. Especially after the SC ruling, upcoming budget, and subsequent veto(s).

        Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:30 am

        When similar initiatives were put to a vote in 2 CA cities over the past few years, the voters overwhelmingly (over 70%) voted to reduce pension & benefits.

        Considering the high Union membership (and family member) turnout, it’s highly likely that 90+% of all non Public Sector worker families voted FOR the reductions.

        The insatiably Public Sector Union/worker/retiree GREED is so obvious.

        Reply

        • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:24 pm

          Won’t happen in Blue Jersey!!!

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 16, 2015 at 10:48 am

            Are you kidding? Calif. is even MORE “Democratic” (and “Blue”) than NJ ….. but they’re smart out there (lots of STEM degrees), and recognize a “Snake” quicker than we have in NJ.

  10. Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:38 am

    Just out ….

    Under San Bernardino’s bankruptcy Plan, while pensions are not being reduced, San Bernardino intends to virtually eliminate retiree health insurance costs, and outsource its fire, emergency response and trash services.

    Outsourcing is one of the few and BEST options in response to Public Sector Union/worker greed. All but Police service should be outsourced, Police retiree healthcare should be eliminated and Police wages should be frozen for as many years as necessary to offset the cost their grossly excessive pensions.

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:15 pm

      Who you gonna “outsource” fire service to in a place like NJ? Lol!!
      Some of these departments do an average of 6,000 to 10,000 runs per year.

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:23 pm

        And most NJ municipalities already outsource their fire service…. It’s called mutual aid. You will never outsource the busy towns. That’s why they are career in the first place. Volunteers, while on the decline, offer a valid service, but only because the municipality cannot justify a career dept due to limited calls.
        But take a city like Newark…..they must average well over 10,000 calls per year…. Who you going to outsource those calls to?????
        I love when you think that your position is so amazingly sound and than facts get in the way. There are no municipalities going bankrupt anytime soon…. And since a state cannot either… You’ll be waiting a bit longer.
        But I do know a big area where much outsourcing can and should be done… THE PRIVATE SECTOR!!!! There’s too much waste in corporate America.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:15 pm

          There are Private Sector companies that provide Fire Protection services for FAR FAR less than paid Public Sector Firemen ….. primarily because (like all OTHER “Private” sector workers) they are NOT granted grossly excessive pensions & benefits.

          Reply

    • That’s the answer: outsourcing, the bane of featherbedded union drones. I would imagine if fire “protection” were outsourced the taxpayer would pay about half what they do now and save major $ on the elimination of these ridiculous, retire at age 48 pension plans. Its just that the leadership of most municipalities do not the have the cojones needed to do what is necessary. Or worse yet they are in bed with the unions since they are also beneficiaries of the insanity.

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 2:26 pm

        Outsource your probably unneeded unjustified over salaried Cush private sector desk job too!!! Wonder how many fringe benefits you lost through the years to make you so jaded and jealous!!!

        Reply

        • BH, you and the other public “servants” (sarc on) have a legitimate beef because the state of NJ has not made pension contributions for many years.

          Stick with that argument and stop trying to defend the ridiculous, insane, not in any way economically realistic, pension schemes concocted by your incredibly greedy unions aided and abetted by corrupt legislators over the past 40 years.

          Those same legislators not only BS’d the taxpayers, they simultaneously were lying to you and your co-conspirators. But economics and arithmetic cannot be argued with. Tough days are coming for all public sector parasites who have been laughing at the private sector taxpayer all of these years. You can wishfully think that the only solution to your dilemma is massive tax hikes. But you must appreciate that any legislators who go down that track will be recalled or not re-elected so I would not bet your mortgage on that happening.

          Reply

          • Posted by BH on May 15, 2015 at 3:06 pm

            You forget that these public workers also pay taxes and are voters. Many here seem to feel it’s perfectly ok to take away ones healthcare, drop their salary from let’s say $50,000 to $25,000 over night, take away their pensions…. (Knowing that this is the only thing many of them have since the pension was deducted from EVERY paycheck like it or not)
            Just because you think they deserve it and are parasites because of some sinister plot or straight jealousy…. They will only push this state deeper and deeper.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:19 pm

            Well Stated !

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:17 pm

          Outsourcing a “Private” Sector job ?

          To whom, a “Public” Sector worker ?

          Reply

  11. Posted by happlegate on May 15, 2015 at 3:19 pm

    BH – unfortunately, the private sector has been faring that badly or worse for many years now. When an enterprise is not financially viable nothing is off the table: layoffs, salary cuts, benefit plan eliminations, on and on. The public sector is not immune to the same laws of supply and demand. We are all in a sinking economy together. All of our standards of living are going to continue to decline. The fact that a union has a “contract” that calls for certain benefits to be paid does not change economic reality.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:41 pm

      Quoting happlegate …”The fact that a union has a “contract” that calls for certain benefits to be paid does not change economic reality.”

      You left an important item out of that quote. It should have said ……

      “The fact that a union has a “contract” that calls for certain benefits to be paid, and in COLLUSION with self-interested Elected Officials beholden to the Unions, has put in place major legal barriers to pension/benefit reform commonplace in the Private Sector, does not change economic reality.”

      Reply

  12. Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 3:36 pm

    BH, Here is an article right up your alley … a perfect example of “corporate greed”:

    http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2015/05/14/chipotles-ceos-are-under-fire-high-compensation/?SiteID=aolcompromotion_may_16&icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl10|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-1023961549

    But who is paying for that greed ? Is it the shareholders … or the Taxpayers, as it would be when PUBLIC Sector compensation (whether in pay, pensions, or benefits) is excessive ?

    Reply

  13. Posted by Anonymous on May 15, 2015 at 8:18 pm

    Please don’t respond to TL. His arguments are always specious as I have demonstrated previously. He indicates public workers pensions are “multiples more generous” than the private sector. A 60 year old public sector worker making a 100K with 30 years is eligible for a 55K pension. He tries to posture that an equivalent private sector worker makes only 20K – 25K. Patent nonsense. As indicated by his numerous nonsensical ludicrous posts, he is just shilling and is irrelevant. Let it be !!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 9:33 pm

      When you make foolish comments you get to proven the fool ………….
      —————————————————————————————-
      Lets look at your … “60 year old public sector worker making a $100K with 30 years is eligible for a 55K pension.”

      My “multiples more generous” statements have usually really been more specific, such as “3x-4x greater in value at retirement” assuming COLAs are reinstated (as I have included with such statements).

      I could provide a very long demonstration (which I have done in the past, but it bores most readers), so to make it short:

      (1) the Formula factor (per year of service in the NJ Plan above) is 1/55 = 1.818%. While few Private Sector traditional-style (“Final Average Salary”) DB Plans are still granting accruals for current workers, an average factor over that 30 year period in typical Private Sector Plans would be about 1.25% per year of service. Current DC Plans (or Cash Balance DB Plans) now common in the Private Sector would a generate FAR LESS equivalent.

      This gives a Public Sector “advantage” of 1.818/1.25 = 1.45 (or 45% greater JUST from THIS element).

      (2) While the Public Sector workers can retire with a full/unreduced pension at age 60, the Private Sector worker’s pension would TYPICALLY be subject to an early retirement reduction-adjustment of about 5% PER YEAR of retirement before the Plan’s “Normal Retirement age” (typically age 65). Note that Social Security uses a retirement adjustment factor of just about 6% in such calculations. Hence $1 in pension accruals is reduced to $1 x (1-(65-60)(0.05) = $0.75

      This gives a Public Sector “advantage” of 1.00/0.75 = 1.33 (or 33% greater JUST from THIS element).

      (3) While COLA increases are now suspended for NJ’s Plans, that suspension is being challenged in Court and many observers believe the suspension will be overturned. The inclusion of a COLA-increase provision (beginning at age 60) and as implemented in NJ, increases the “value” of that COLA-increased pension over an otherwise identical pension w/o the COLA-increase provision by just about 25%. You can ask John if you don’t believe me.

      This gives a Public Sector “advantage” of 1.25/1.00 = 1.25 (or 25% greater JUST from THIS element).

      ————————————————–

      The noted 3 “advantages” are multiplicative (not additive) when all apply to the same Plan. Hence the overall Public Sector “advantage” is 1.45 x 1.33 x 1.25 = 2.41 ………..or 2.41 times ……. or 141% “greater” ….. than the pension typically granted (the very FEW) Private Sector workers that still have Final Salary Average DB Plans.

      If we averaged the above “advantage” of these Misc. worker pensions with the larger “advantage” associated with the MUCH richer pensions routinely granted Police and paid Firemen, the average Public Sector “advantage” would be closer to 3 times.

      And not even considered yet is that the 60 year old Private Sector retiree would VERY RARELY be getting ANY employer-sponsored subsidy towards retiree healthcare costs, while the 30-year Public Sector NJ retiree would be getting free (if Police or a teacher) or heavily-subsidized retiree healthcare …. likely with a Taxpayer cost for Family Coverage in excess of $250K.
      ———————————————————————
      So YES, I believe I’ve “demonstrated” that the pensions (and certainly the pension & benefits) of Public Sector workers are “Multiples More Generous” than those of their Private Sector counterparts.
      ———————————————————————-

      So sure, ignore me and what I have to offer ……………. so the likes of BH, this “Anonymous”, and the myriad of other like him, can continue to try to distract, distort, mislead, omit material facts, and lie ….. on all of which I will call them (and others like them) out on.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 15, 2015 at 11:17 pm

        Since BH seems to be so oblivious to (or more likely, quite aware of but simply paying dumb) the GROSSLY EXCESSIVE level of pensions promised Safety workers (Police and Paid Firemen) in NJ, I though it worthwhile to revise my above long work-up demonstrating what the 2.41 times Public Sector Misc-workers pension “advantage” would be for Police with their much richer pension formula.

        Assume the same $100K final salary, but retirement at age 55 with a $65,000 pension after 25 years (per the NJ Police Plan formula). Also, we will continue to assume the Private Sector worker gets a DB pension with a formula factor of 1.25% of pay per year of service, and also retires at age 55 after 25 years of service …. an Apples-to-Apples comparison.

        Using the same numbering scheme for each Public Sector “advantage” as in my above comment:

        (1) The Formula factor (per year of service in the NJ Plan above) is based on a 65% of final pay Police pension after 25 years, or 0.65/25 = 2.60

        Using the SAME 1.25 Private Sector Plan formula-factor gives a Public Sector Police-worker “advantage” of 2.60/1.25 = 2.08 (or 108% greater JUST from THIS element).

        (2) In this work-up, we are assuming retirement at age 55 (vs 60 in my earlier example for the “misc” category worker). Note that the Policeman can collect a full/unreduced pension at age 55, and again using a 5% reduction for EACH YEAR the age retirement is below 65 for the Private Sector worker, we have $1 in Private Sector pension accruals is reduced to $1 x (1-(65-55)(0.05) = $0.50

        This gives a Public Sector “advantage” of 1.00/0.50 = 2.00 (or 100% greater JUST from THIS element).

        (3) In my earlier example (for the “misc” worker) I assumed a 25% increase in the value of the COLA-adjusted pension (vs an otherwise identical pension w/o COLA). The “value” of including the COLA provision INCREASES as the age at retirement gets younger, so for retirement at age 55, a 30% assumption is more appropriate.

        This gives a Public Sector “advantage” of 1.30/1.00 = 1.30 (or 30% greater JUST from THIS element).

        ————————————————–

        As in my earlier example, the noted 3 “advantages” are multiplicative (not additive) when all apply to the same Plan. Hence the overall Public Sector Police pension Plan “advantage” is 2.08 x 2.00 x 1.30 = 5.41 ………..or 5.41 times ……. or 441% “greater” ….. than the pension typically granted (the very FEW) Private Sector workers that still have Final Average Salary DB Plans… and who retire at the SAME age, with the SAME pay, and the SAME years of service.

        And in THIS case, with the Police Officer retiring at age 55 (vs 60), the Taxpayers will be providing FREE (likely “Family”) retiree healthcare coverage for an ADDITIONAL 5 years (ABOVE that noted in my earlier example) at a cost of over $25K per year.

        ———————
        Grossly Excessive ?

        YOU decide.

        Reply

      • Posted by MJ on May 16, 2015 at 7:14 am

        TL. I don’t think BH and his cohorts are deliberately trying to distort and mislead they simply can’t comprehend the math, economics or long term reality. All they know and chant is that “they were promised ” and get past those buzz words. I can understand their panic in realizing that the gravy train is coming to an end. They haven’t come to acceptance and their only solution is to raise taxes as if the tax weary citizens don’t pay enough already all so that they can retire at 55. The problem is not going away any time soon

        Reply

  14. I think that TL has many times clearly demonstrated the math for the public sector workers. Some may not make that much in retirement but most make more in retirement than when they were working not counting the life time health benefits and sick day pay outs If one has sick time left over after a 30 year career then clearly the sick time was overly generous.

    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: