Christie Curses Out NJ Media

The New York Times even covered it primarily because the speech was surreptitiously recorded:

.

Among the targets in a particularly mean-spirited (and typically unfunny) way:

3:30 – Dick Codey

3:50 – Jim McQueeny

4:20 – Paul Mulshine and Tom Moran – the angry drunks

7:10 – wishing for more car crashes for journalists

10:30 – Michael Aron’s stupid question

Contrast that to the public face Christie puts out there in a particularly smarmy (and typically unfunny) way:
.

78 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 11:29 am

    No surprises, typical Christie!

    Reply

  2. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 11:54 am

    Vulgar and incompetent, if POTUS we’d be in WWIII. Just wait until Korea, China, or Russia ruffels his feathers, missiles please.

    Reply

  3. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 12:37 pm

    Hopefully you TL type commentors aren’t benefiting from government contracts or public sector patrons. IF you are look in the mirror and repeat after me; insatiable greedy hypocrite!

    Reply

  4. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 1:42 pm

    BTW, that includes receipents of Federal pensions including our beloved Armed Forces. It’s all taxpayer funded, either Federal, State, or Local governments.

    Reply

    • Posted by MJ on May 22, 2015 at 3:07 pm

      That’s the problem; when you take into account all federal, state, county, municipal employees sucking out of the life blood out of the coffers and combine it with the disability cheats, welfare queens, illegals, chronically unemployed, etc one has to wonder who is paying the bills in NJ. Not a revenue problem but a spending problem. Did I cover most everyone?

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 4:04 pm

        Almost just forgot all the lucrative private sector government contracts, excessive Corporate welfare, farming and other ridiculous subsidies – other than that you’re good. So let’s clean the whole house and put EVERYBODY on a level playing field, add in a flat tax with NO deductions.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 4:35 pm

          Does that include STATE &LOCAL retirees no longer NOT having to pay STATE & LOCAL income taxes on their pensions …. a freebie that no one ELSE gets ?

          ANOTHER of the very MANY ways that Private Sector taxpayers are “suckered” by the insatiably GREEDY Public Sector Unions/workers/retirees.

          Reply

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 6:00 pm

            Totally untrue so you’re the one that doesn’t have a clue, now I know your nothing but hot air!

            Excluding accidental disability (yes special treatment and I believe in most instances MIGHT be tax exempt) retiree’s pensions are taxed under the following general rules; 1. Prior to 414h (only applicable @ Federal level) tax deferred pension contributions , you were fully taxed AFTER recovering the “taxable” portion of your pension contributions OR based on IRS tables a calculated lifetime monthly “exclusion” tax exempting a very small portion. Subsequent to 414h, tax deferring pension contributions, all retiree’s pension benefits were/are fully taxable (at Fdderal level) but the the pre 414h rule remains for NJ tax purposes because pension contribution are not treated as tax deferred.

            I know probably too wordy for your simplistic comprehension, my apologizes in advance.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 6:16 pm

            I know such income is taxed in NJ, but it’s NOT in many other places …. but yes, as this blog primarily addresses NJ’s pension problems, I should have mentioned that.

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 6:28 pm

            Then I’ll clarify your clarification, I don’t know of ANY state that exempts JUST public sector pensions. There ate States that have either no income tax OR exempt ALL income from pensions. Just to be fair and equal, the facts.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 9:33 pm

            Anon,

            Article …. 12 States Without Pension or Social Security Taxes

            Souirce: http://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/slideshows/12-states-without-pension-or-social-security-taxes/2

          • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 10:20 am

            Talk about lack of mental capacity. You initial misstated the facts. The clarification you provided states social security and pensions are tax exempt. It doesn’t distinguish the source of the pension. Furthermore some of those states have no income tax.

            BTW, I don’t like your style of writing either but that’s not the purpose of this PR any blog.

          • Yup that too! Except that the corporations that provide so many private sector jobs would not hesitate to move to a more tax friendly state…..

  5. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 6:31 pm

    OK so the whole truth just to be fair and equal. Some States have no income tax and other States exempt ALL income derived from pensions ( public and private).

    Reply

  6. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 6:59 pm

    Ah the taxpayer prophet spreading false public sector pension phrophecies to innocent followers!

    Reply

  7. Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 7:28 pm

    For those who would like to understand all the PHONEY ways that Public Sector Unions/workers/retirees try to FALSELY justify their grossly excessive pensions:

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/02/nine-fallacies-used-to-defend-public-sector-pensions

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 7:40 pm

      Bait & switch. same old broken record of a song filled with half truths and lies. Right wing conservative propaganda! http://www.heritage.org/about

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 7:46 pm

      Then tell those same tea toddlers to cut military spending and institute the same P&B changes for members of our Armed Forces funded by Federal taxpayer dollars! Oh no, Rebiblican president will have us at war within 18 months of being sworn on, that’s their MO.

      Reply

      • Sorry but I would hardly compare our armed forces who have been deployed round the world protecting our rights placing themselves in harms way, not to mention the sacrifices of their famiies…with the takers that are most of our public servants. Sorry no comparison to me. Cut the takers, leave the benefits for those who actually earned them.

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 9:09 pm

          BS, no different than P&F – occupation by choice based on P&B – equal and fair, NO right wing conservative’s prmoters of war exceptions!

          Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 9:16 pm

          Honestly kudos to them but to exclude them from the conversation sounds like what TL calls excuses to BH – maintain what little credibility you have fair and equal no exceptions!

          Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 9:22 pm

          Just another right wing conservative perspective, self fulfilling prophecy to more war and defense spending.

          Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 9:39 pm

          MJ, I agree COMPLETELY.

          Reply

  8. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 7:35 pm

    TL may go to prison if she ever gets found out by the IRS

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 9:40 pm

      And you wonder why I call you an imbecile.

      Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 9:45 pm

      Anon,

      Considering the endless gibberish you keep coming out with, rather than “imbecile” a much better description of you is how George Will described Donald Trump ……………….. a “Bloviating Ignoramus”.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 10:16 pm

        Ah yes the true you, that can’t handle the truth.

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 10:19 pm

        Oh you mean honest and truthful information, not the lies you attempt to perpetuate – tea toddling right wing conservative GREEDY supporters of the 1%’s agenda. Who the heck is ANNON your CO?

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 4:24 am

        I am happy for you Bubble Girl, you finally took my advice and resumed attending your OCD support group meetings. I do still wonder if you are actually Chris Christie with you name calling and propensity to bully. I also think that you dont realize that there are many anonymous posters, yet you refer to them as if they are one person.

        Reply

  9. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 10:25 pm

    Your version of fair and equal, the distorted and twisted problem of what’s wrong with the right wing conservatives vision for NJ and America. Feed the 1% with wars and on the backs of the 99%, no more it stops because the majority of NJ and America won’t fall prey to your vial threats based on lies.

    Reply

  10. Posted by Tough Love on May 22, 2015 at 10:29 pm

    John,

    You certainly have attracted a “nutcase”……………

    Reply

  11. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 11:06 pm

    TL exposed, no not a women but Ted Cruz – scary.

    Reply

  12. Posted by Anonymous on May 22, 2015 at 11:26 pm

    Truth hurts and love stinks, get over it.

    Reply

  13. Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 9:12 am

    A Republican in need is a Democrat indeed!

    Reply

  14. Posted by Tough Love on May 23, 2015 at 9:31 am

    Hey Anon,

    8 MORE crazy comments since I alerted John that he had a “nutcase” commenting …….

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 10:21 am

      Yup you’re going to spew your crap unchallenged anymore!

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 11:04 am

      TL you are under the delusion that there is only one anonymous. You also are under the delusion that your opinions are important and necessary.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 23, 2015 at 1:21 pm

        I’m sure ALL of these “nutcase” comments are coming from one IP address (which John can see with each comment) …. YOURS.

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 3:36 pm

          TL lies more than every ex governor combined. It is not the same person. There are many anonymous posters and you reply to them as if they are the same person. You have even stoop so low as to now say that according to John, most of the anonymous comments are coming from the same person whom he is monitoring. You really arent wrapped too tightly.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 23, 2015 at 5:12 pm

            Quoting Anon, ……..”You have even stoop so low as to now say that according to John, most of the anonymous comments are coming from the same person …. ”

            Really? Did say ANYTHING that was prefaced …….”according to John” ?

            Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or are you just so smoking-angry at hearing the truth about your grossly excess but severely in-the-toilet pension Plan that you can’t think straight ?

            What I said was …. “I’m sure ALL of these “nutcase” comments are coming from one IP address (which John can see with each comment) …. YOURS.”

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 3:49 pm

          TL and devout followers; individuals presenting a right wing conservative perspective based on half-truths and lies.

          TL continual posts repetitive misinformation citing sources with extreme ideology. Yet sumarial dismisses other posts with conflicting opinions and sources.

          Specifically, purposely misstated the tax status of public pensions in the following post; https://burypensions.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/christie-curses-out-nj-media/#comments When called to task tried to double talk their way out of it. Standard operating procedure for most of their commentary.

          Fair and equal for all is the mantra. Fair enough, but not when I suggest Federal workers and members of our beloved Armed Forces be part of the bigger conversation. The response, they’re different. But why, because they risk their lives like first responders at home. Their DBP are paid with Federal tax dollars as opposed to State or Local. Everyone knew what the job risks when they accepted employment. But they also knew what their salary, pension, and benefits were supposed to be.

          To blame and demonize public workers for the current situation is unfair and untrue. Do politicians make “deals” with unions that don’t always have the taxpayers best interest? I think everyone knows the answer to that is yes. But politicians are always making “deals” it’s what they do. Just ask the various segment market corporations; defense spending (lucrative contracts), farming (subsidies) and the list goes on and on.

          Your bully tactics and demeaning attitude only motivate me more to push back your parties ridiculous vision for NJ and America. Yes I’m sure John knows all of our IP address, so you and your business name can be exposed as well.

          The purpose of continually posting this comment is to allow the counterpoint perspective to be heard. I will no longer personally engage your comments tit for tat.

          Reply

  15. Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 3:39 pm

    I also love the way TL speaks for John on a regular basis. Notice he rarely if ever responds to her.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 23, 2015 at 5:26 pm

      I speak for myself, as a Private Sector Taxpayer being financially “mugged” by the insatiably greedy Public Sector Unions/workers and enabled by NJ’s Elected Officials who favorable votes that granted these grossly excessive pensions & benefits were BOUGHT with Public Sector Unions campaign contributions and election support.

      And hopefully hastening the education of other Private Sector Taxpayers … who will rise up and demand an end to this financial “mugging”.

      Reply

  16. Posted by Anonymous on May 23, 2015 at 7:08 pm

    This Blog has really deteriorated. Maybe it time to end it soon. Its become nothing more than an AOL Chatroom

    Reply

    • Posted by BH on May 24, 2015 at 7:53 am

      I think that’s mostly because a few posters here call other people greedy, lying thieves on a continual basis unchecked. Then spew lies about those same people. As a private worker and business owner, I can’t believe the harsh criticism about public workers. Granted there are a few at the trough that get more and milk the system, the majority are not. Same in any sector. But the level of contempt I read here is shameful. Posters like TL bring a one sided view that’s filled with inaccuracies but think they are the subject matter expert…. It astounds me. I’m thinking about leaving myself. The stories are great, but the people here are batsh@t crazy.

      Reply

      • Posted by BH on May 24, 2015 at 7:56 am

        I can’t recall the last time I’ve witnessed such a fanatical lust to bring down one group of people who are undeserving of all that hate since this public workers pension situation began.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 24, 2015 at 1:50 pm

          Yes, “bring them down” …. to a level in total compensation (wages, pensions and benefits) …. EQUAL TO (but no greater than) that of their Private Sector counterparts.

          Arguing as you so STRONGLY do AGAINST this …. is nothing but GREED. You can “spin it” all you want, but it will remain the SAME …. GREED.

          Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on May 24, 2015 at 1:46 pm

        Quoting….”As a private worker and business owner…………”

        Yes, and who has STATED that they have family members working in the Public Sector, and who, from the voracity of his comments may very well be a Public Sector retiree now collecting a Public Sector pension …. perhaps even in their early 50s.

        And ALL Public Sector pensions are excessive, from those with the lowest wages to those with the highest, all MULTIPLES greater in value than those of there private Sector counterparts. It’s NOT just a few, it’s EVERYONE

        That’s the ROOT CAUSE of the financial mess we are in, and the inability to fund these “promises” is a CONSEQUENCES of that grossly excessive generosity.

        Did you read this ……

        http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/02/nine-fallacies-used-to-defend-public-sector-pensions

        Are you right or is he ?

        Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on May 24, 2015 at 2:17 pm

          TL you believe that John agrees with you, but he does not. But its okay in your Bubble, everything will be okay in your bubble.

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 24, 2015 at 6:51 pm

            John seems to be more pissed at Christie than I …… with I, just pigeonholing him as the stereo-typical “politician”, and ignoring the bravado and bluster.

            But clearly, while John does not like to get into the subject of how much is fair compensation, he clearly knows (likely more so than I) that when factoring in BOTH the MUCH richer formulas AND the MUCH more generous provisions (such as VERY young full/unreduced retirement ages, COLAs – now suspended in NJ, liberal definitions of pensionable compensation, etc. ……….”Public Sector pensions are MULTIPLES greater in value at retirement (TYPICALLY 3 times greater for misc worker and teachers, and 5 times for safety workers) than those typically granted Private Sector workers retiring at the SAME age with the SAME wages, and the SAME years of service.”

            MY words in quotations are indisputable ….. and I believe John would agree.

  17. Posted by PatB on May 24, 2015 at 12:09 pm

    Tom Moran said it best this morning, the incident was blown out of proportion. But it shows CCs poor judgement, cause it’s negative ad fodder. http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/05/christies_curse-fest_and_how_the_media_blew_it_mor.html#incart_most-comments

    As for this blog, we would all be better off ending the troll fest it has become.

    Reply

  18. Posted by Anonymous on May 24, 2015 at 11:00 pm

    TL you really are very much like Chris Christie you continue to put words into John’s mouth. And sadly you are dead wrong about what he believes, yet you are very sure of your fantasy world.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 24, 2015 at 11:19 pm

      As exhibited many times before, you apparently have a reading comprehension problem….. and see only what you DESIRE to see.

      And as far as what “John” believes, would HE be in a better position to state that…. than YOU ?

      Reply

  19. Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 2:27 am

    ” And ALL Public Sector pensions are excessive, from those with the lowest wages to those with the highest, all MULTIPLES greater in value than those of there private Sector counterparts. It’s NOT just a few, it’s EVERYONE.”

    Absolutely demonstrably incorrect.

    As for Governor Christie, it’s not a sign of weakness or hypocrisy to insult someone collegially without resorting to scatology or base language. He’s not just rude and crude, he’s dumb.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on May 25, 2015 at 5:02 am

      Wrong (as usual)….

      I “demonstrated” the Multiples-greater Public Sector pension in 2 long comments toward the end of the comment-list on Mr. Bury’s 5/14 Blog-post titled ….. “It’s embarrassing, and I’m tired of hearing this I want what I was promised” …. and which can be found here:

      https://burypensions.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/its-embarsaing-and-im-tired-of-hearing-this-i-want-what-i-was-promised/#comments

      Reply

      • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 10:31 am

        You “demonstrated” that public sector …pensions…are larger than the private sector.

        pensions

        One of the most conservative think tanks in the country “demonstrated” that, nationwide, sixty percent of state workers are either “roughly equal” in TOTAL COMPENSATION, or significantly underpaid.

        total compensation

        Your obsession is showing. Your logic is faulty. Your “Fireman Fallacy” ( SAME pay, SAME length of service, SAME retirement age) is a farce.

        Still.

        GIGO

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on May 25, 2015 at 11:11 am

          S Moderation Douglas,

          You’ve outdone yourself in what I’ve called-you-out-on before …. with your misstatements, distortions, omissions of material facts, and outright lies.

          Via my 2 long comments referenced just above, I “demonstrated” that NJ’s NON-safety Public Sector workers are granted pensions TYPICALLY 2.41 TIMES those of similarly situated (in wages, years of service, and age at retirement) Private Sector workers (or 141% “GREATER”), and for Police Officers 5.41 TIMES those of similarly situated (in wages, years of service, and age at retirement) Private Sector workers (441% “GREATER”).

          And the SAME Study* that YOU are pick-and-choosing irrelevant facts (compensation relationships for those mainly with PHD’s and professional degrees) to “mislead” the readers, shows in Figure 1 that (on average) Private Sector “wages” are just 1.04 TIMES (or 4% GREATER) than those of Public Sector workers.

          So, do you really believe (with the TRUE cost of NJ’s pension Plans costing a level annual 25-50% of pay to fully fund them over the workers’ careers) that because Public Sector “WAGES” are (on average) 4% LESS, that they are entitled to pensions 141% GREATER (for Non-safety workers) and 441% GREATER for Police?

          I don’t.
          —————————————————————————

          * Study source:

          https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/-biggs-overpaid-or-underpaid-a-statebystate-ranking-of-public-employee-compensation_112536583046.pdf

          Reply

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 12:22 pm

            (compensation relationships for those mainly with PHD’s and professional degrees) ?????

            Moi ?? “pick-and-choosing”

            Those are just the ones who are “significantly” undercompensated. And together they comprise about ten percent of the state workforce. Hardly irrelevant.

            “significantly” meaning private sector earn fifty to sixty percent more than public. Again, hardly irrelevant.
            ______________________________
            “And the SAME Study*” ????

            LOL….ROFL….LMAO

            That’s why it’s my favorite study.

            As predicted when I first cited this study, like Brietbart or Fox News, you continually reference the one or two charts in the appendix (lazy reporter bait) and ignore the rest of the study.

            “Average” 4% lower wages and “typically” 141% higher pensions are virtually meaningless. As a wise guy once informed me, the “average” New Jersey worker, public -or- private, has one testicle and one ovary.

            The averages are greatly skewed by those 30% to 40% of state workers at the lower education and skill levels, and a good deal of the public center advantage is in healthcare and retiree healthcare. Factoring in healthcare, janitors, clerks, laborer, etc. make as much as 50% more total compensation than their private sector peers.

            And yet.

            Many of these workers earn so little in cash wages that they qualify for several forms of public assistance. I have personally known several over the years who received food stamps, section 8 housing assistance, child care subsidies, EIC, etc. Everything BUT Medicaid.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 25, 2015 at 2:33 pm

            Quoting S Moderation Douglas …….”Those are just the ones who are “significantly” undercompensated. And together they comprise about ten percent of the state workforce.”

            Well, those PHDs and Professions constitute only 3% of all Privater Sector workers (from Table #1 of the same Study) … hardly a meatly base form which to draw conclusions.

            Oh … earlier I forgot to mention …. that STUDY excludes all SAFETY workers, and with their MUCH higher average WAGES, and EXTRAORDINARILY RICH pensions & benefits, had they been included, the (small to begin with) 4% NJ Private Sector “wage” “advantage” might have disappeared altogether …. and made the NJ PUBLIC Sector “Total Compensation” advantage of 23% (per Study Figure 6) even greater.

            And per Study Figure 13, the above 23% NJ PUBLIC Sector “Total Compensation” advantage above increases to 34% when the VALUE of the much greater PUBLIC Sector “job security” is factored in.

            ——————————————————————————————

            Taxpayers …… think about that. Even ignoring the MUCH greater Public Sector job Security (worth an ADDITIONAL 34%-23% = 11% of pay), and even using only the 23% NJ Public Sector “Total Compensation” advantage from Study Figure 6 (which assuredly would be higher if the higher paid/pensioned/benefitted safety workers were included), how much bigger and better would YOUR retirement be if EVERY year YOU had an ADDITIONAL 23% of pay to save and invest over your entire career.

            Even for those with very modest salaries, that would likely accumulate to well over $1 Million dollars. That’s the INCREMENTAL value now buried within the grossly excessive pension “promises” now made to NJ’s Public Sector workers by our Elected Officials who have betrayed us (Private Sector Taxpayers).

            That is RIGHT NOW how we (the Taxpayers) are being financially “mugged” by the insatiably greedy Public Sector workers, and enabled by our Elected officials who grant these grossly excessive pensions in exchange for Public Sector Union campaign contributions and election support. DEMAND an end to this theft….. of YOUR wealth.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 4:22 pm

            “how much bigger and better would YOUR retirement be if EVERY year YOU had an ADDITIONAL 23% of pay to save and invest over your entire career.”

            That’s not the way it works. That’s not the way any of this works. That’s why we read the entire study instead of the sucker bait graphs at the end. You have (according to *this* study) 23% higher *total compensation* (not 23% of “pay”, big difference), much of which is in “fixed costs” (insurance). For the lowest paid workers, insurance can be a huge percentage of compensation. Which means they get overpriced insurance instead of Medicaid. Probably as much of a benefit for the insurance companies as it is for the employee.

            _______________________________
            “4% NJ Private Sector “wage” “advantage” might have disappeared altogether”

            That there is rich. I checked several spreadsheet programs and can’t seem to find your “might have” function. This is only one “study”. Other studies, which do include safety workers, show the average compensation of public workers equal to or less than private. And all these studies rely on data from before the current pension and benefit reforms in many states.

            “23%” was a highly suspect number to begin with. Even more so now since workers are paying more into pensions and insurance, and receiving lower benefits. The relationship is constantly changing.

            Don’t make vast conclusions with half vast “data”.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 25, 2015 at 6:02 pm

            Quoting S. Moderation Douglas …”“That’s not the way it works. That’s not the way any of this works.”

            Oh really ?

            Why is THAT, because YOU as a Public Sector retiree sucking at the Taxpayers’ teat doesn’t want to acknowledge the ENORMITY of the RIPOFF being perpetrated upon Private Sector Taxpayers ?

            That’s EXACTLY how the math shakes out. When You (PUBLIC Sector workers) receive in “Totoal Compensation” 23% MORE than your NJ Private Sector counterparts (which is EXACTLY what that Study says) it is EXACTLY the equivalent of getting 23% of you wages (EXTRA) EVERY year to save and invest … easily worth $1+ million over a full career.
            ——————————————————

            And you follow-up pints are more nonsense as the 23% is the “NET” Public Sector Total Compensation “advantage” AFTER all the things that you are bringing up to mislead the readers. ALL of those things STILL leave the PUBLIC Sector workers with a 23% Total Compensation “advantage”.

            ————————————

            Oh, and now (per you) …. the “23% is suspect to begin with”. Why, because you can’t reconcile that “problem” vis your goal to stop, to delay, and to divert attention from the VERY clear need for pension reform in NJ ?

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 10:02 pm

            “Oh, and now (per you) …. the “23% is suspect to begin with”. Why, ……..yadda, yadda, yadda…….?”

            Lol…. “Moderation” is not just a name, it’s a way of life.

            The Economic Policy Institute in a 2011 study said that California public workers earned about 7% less than private. This includes state and local workers AND safety workers.

            And:

            “When total compensation—both the cost of employer‐provided benefits and direct pay—is taken into account, state and local public sector workers in California are similarly compensated to workers in the private sector.”

            “Similar”, not 23% higher.

            Let us assume EPI is somewhat biased, whether intentional or not, perhaps they understated public benefits.

            …….Moderation…..

            ________________________________
            A similar study by EPI in New Jersey in 2010 had similar results: “nearly equal” total compensation.

            Let us assume again they understate public benefits.

            …..Moderation….

            _________________________________
            A 2010 National Institute on Retirement Security study says: “On average, total compensation is 6.8 percent lower for state employees and 7.4 percent lower for local employees than for comparable private sector employees.”

            7ish% less, not 23% more.

            Let us assume they understate public benefits, too.

            …….Moderation…..

            _________________________________
            A 2010 paper by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College says:

            “……..state and local workers in the aggregate have a wage penalty of 9.5 percent.”

            “Our re-estimation of the much-used
            wage equation plus adjustments for proper valuation
            of pensions and retiree health insurance indicates
            that the two roughly balance out. The estimated
            difference nationwide is about 4 percent in favor of
            private sector workers.

            4% less total compensation, on average, not 23% more……but, let us “assume”, again, that they underestimate public benefits.

            ……Moderation….

            (All these studies, by the way, are in general agreement with the Biggs study, that average state and local wages are lower across the board than private sector wages. Public safety worker compensation is included in calculating these averages.)
            _______________________________________

            Why is 23% public advantage suspect? The same reason “nearly equal compensation” is suspect. The same reason “4% in favor of private sector workers” is suspect. The same reason “total compensation is 6.8 percent lower for state employees” is suspect. There are biases …on both sides… There are honest differences of opinion. There is error in data gathering and interpretation. And there is a constant change over time.

            …….Moderation……

            Even ……if….. the “average” California public worker had a 23% advantage in the relevant study period (2008-20012), he is *now* paying about double into his pension, while simultaneously receiving a lower formula in return. Same concept in New Jersey with Chapter 78. Even if “23% more was ever true, it is no longer.

            There is no reason to believe 23% is any more valid than any or all the other studies. The biggest difference, of course, is how future costs are discounted and how retiree healthcare is calculated.

            Or how other “benefits” are calculated.

            For instance, Biggs calculates the “value” of employer paid Social Security as about 2.4%, not the 6.2% actually contributed. One may understandably either agree or disagree with their logic, they say their goal is “to be as rigorous as possible in analyzing all forms of
            worker compensation, both large and small.” But there seems to be numerous opportunities for “fudge factor”. I will take every one of the studies with a substantial grain of salt.

            One complaint of Biggs study is that he alternately uses either “employer cost” or “employee value” depending on how it affects the outcome, as in the SS calculation. I’m sure similar claims could be made against the other studies. Another grain of salt, please.

            Moderation in all things.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 25, 2015 at 10:08 pm

            Sorry, apparently I got off topic here. What I meant to say is, Christie’s potty mouth is irrelevant at this point anyway. He is history.

          • Posted by Tough Love on May 26, 2015 at 12:32 am

            S Moderation Douglas,

            Your version of …. “rage against the Machine” ???

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on May 26, 2015 at 1:01 am

            Moderation.

            No lie.

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: