Christie Flops

John Kerry was portrayed as a flip-flopper in 2014:
.

.
But looking at Chris Christie’s latest presidential ad which has nothing to do with what he said would be a centerpiece of his campaign:
.

.
got me to thinking about his stance reversals but, in his case, it was all flops:

.

Speaking of flopping, even Tom Tancredo’s PAC doesn’t see a need to bother anymore.

80 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 1:07 pm

    It’s as expected, this guy loves Florida and flip flops are all they wear down there – #snowstorm

    Reply

  2. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 1:55 pm

    Come on now he’s done more for NJ than any other sitting Governor running for POTUS?

    Reply

  3. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 4:43 pm

    TL supports Christie and his lies

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on August 25, 2015 at 5:55 pm

      I “support” Christie only in his HONESTLY in demanding material reductions in the grossly excessive NJ Public Sector pension & benefit promises …. rather than unjustly and unfairly (to taxpayers) trying to “fund” them.

      Actually, I’d like to see Scott Walker as POTUS …. he’d really do a number on the Public Sector unions.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on August 26, 2015 at 10:09 pm

        Tender Loving once again shilling for the chimerical Chris Christie. Sweetly cooing the consistent grossly excessive 3x-4x refrain and celebrating good ole CC “only in his HONESTLY”. Who can gainsay Tender Loving and his admiration for the HONESTLY governor who can pass a law, run for three years on its HONESTLY, and then contest its DISHONESTLY unconstitutionality. Tender Loving must celebrate the integrity of such an admirable figure who represents TLs paragon of rectitude. HONESTLY, TL, HONESTLY.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on August 26, 2015 at 10:56 pm

          Ah yes, the man of poetry, assuredly “active” or retired from the NJ Public Sector, and doing his part to support a continuation of the insatiable greed (even for FUTURE service not yet worked) and avarice for NJ Taxpayers .

          Yes, you should be proud. And please stand your ground … don’t relent, don’t accept EQUAL TO what Private Sector Taxpayers get …. CONTINUE to demand MORE, MUCH MORE, all the way to massive cuts in Public Sector pensions and loss of all retiree healthcare benefits.

          Reply

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 26, 2015 at 11:22 pm

            I apologize Tender Loving for forgetting the “insatiable greed” and “avarice” part of your chorus and I forgive your mischaracterization of who I am. But you misunderstand me. I am sympathetic to your cause. Who would not celebrate a governor who has not lived up to any of his fiscal responsibilities and STILL, has captained the New Jersey ship of State to NINE rating downgrades during his tenure. Who could not celebrate such administrative and financial acumen. No Tender Loving, you mistake me. I celebrate the intellectual insight you have to recognize the administrative HONESTLY of such a leader. How could such a leader not be admired who has Tender Loving as such a critical but loyal camp follower. I recognize your right to shill, I raise you a SHILLING and I admire your efforts. I am only troubled by your apparent efforts to needlessly distance yourself from who you really are. Embrace your HONESTLY TL. And indeed carry on !!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 12:09 am

            Quoting … “I apologize Tender Loving for forgetting the “insatiable greed” and “avarice” part ”

            You’re forgiven ………. I know that you’re in denial and really believe the misunderstood Public Sector workers are underpaid, under-pensioned and under-benefited….. and DESERVE pensions and benefits ROUTINELY 3x-4x greater than similarly situated Private Sector Taxpayers.
            ——————

            By the way, I read an interesting comment today from Ed Ring, the executive director of the California Policy Center:

            “These realities are insulting. The mentality of anti-reformers is insulting. Their sense of entitlement is insulting. Their complete lack of empathy for private sector taxpayers is insulting. Their selective understanding of economics and finance is insulting. Their blithe, continual use of distortions, deceit, lies and misrepresentations is insulting. We don’t want to be like them, and we’re not.”

            But unfortunately he DID leave something out …….. “their greed in insatiable”.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 27, 2015 at 3:02 am

            That’s not an interesting comment, TL. It’s sad.

            I almost feel sorry for the guy.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 7:29 am

            Let’s put our energies into enacting reforms as outlined in the special Commission report.

            The Governor is not facilitating the process and in fact is, either intentionally or unintentionally, blocking any eventual solution.

            Please step aside Governor, it’s in everybody’s best interest, except maybe yours.

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 10:29 am

            Responding to S Moderation Douglas,

            Since you added your standard-fare comments (supporting the status quo) to that discussion, I’m sure that YOU were one of those Mr. Ring had in mind when he made that very thoughtful and appropriate comment.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 27, 2015 at 12:39 pm

            Actually, I would like to change the status quo, appropriately.

            Mr. Ring, and others, constantly misstate the facts. When he does, I will call him on it.

            First, the main premise of the article was clearly wrong. It is actually quite typical of Ed Ring to assume the worst, and he got caught.

            Second, in the text, he repeats claims that he knows are untrue. I have to assume that is to prejudice readers against public workers.

            Ed Ring: “Here we go again – a recommendation for another 50% pension benefit increase. Will it be retroactive this time? That went well last time.”

            He knows, or should know, it can’t be retroactive, due to pension reform passed in 2012. He knows, or should know, there was never a 50% pension benefit increase.

            Ed Ring: “And, here we go again – somehow getting a CalSTRS pension instead of Social Security is a monstrous sacrifice!”

            His characterization of Mr. Ehnes statement is………..insulting. The head of a teachers pension system reiterates that the “average” teacher is not eligible for Social Security. No “sacrifice” was stated or implied.

            In my humble (and of course, moderate) opinion, that was pure demonization on the part of Mr. Ring. And……………insulting.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 1:48 pm

            S Moderation Douglas an eloquent reply, highlights the inaccurate and misleading extreme views on this issue both liberal and conservative!

            Appreciate your thoughts on the post relating to certified financial planner, etc. as it relates to the demonizing posts on public workers and their P&B – thank you!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 2:24 pm

            With the exception of a few (like myself) who advocate for REAL pension reform in NJ, the comments on this blog are becoming 75+% one Public Sector worker simply supporting ANOTHER Public Sector worker’s misguided comments protesting any real attempt to halt the Pension Plans’ march toward insolvency.

            Earth to those with such a mindset …. it will NOT work out the way you want.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 3:20 pm

            BULLCRAP, let me get my MJ, PSDrone, Javagold, LarryLittlefield, and many other violins out – those who demonize publics and support your position on P&B – come on now who’s kidding who?

          • Posted by Greg Lamon on August 27, 2015 at 7:28 pm

            Tough – on the insatiable greed issue – I am still waiting for an independent, unbiased study that proves that public sector employees are any more or less greedy than the population at large

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 8:13 pm

            Greg,

            What is demonstrable, and what I have already demonstrated in comments on this Blog is that the pensions of NJ’s Public Sector workers are ROUTINELY (at all income levels) 3 to 5 times greater in vale at retirement than those of Private Sector workers retiring at the SAME age, with the SAME years of service, and the SAME pay.

            It is THAT relationship combined with their refusal to materially REDUCE the pension accrual rate even for FUTURE Service not yet earned that justifies my statement. I don’t need a “study” of greed to state that Pubic Sector workers/retirees are INSATIABLY GREEDY. That 3 to 5 times relationship and the Public Sector workers’ refusal to move the needle FAR closer to EQUAL TO what Private Sector Taxpayers typically get, speaks for itself.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 9:30 pm

            Greg I to wait for a middle of the roard analysis on this and frankly all of our State and Country issues. It’s the extreme conservative and liberal positions that got us and keep us here.

            Until such time (never), can you just trust the all knowing and good TL, bleeding hard working NJ’s 401k’s so they have to work even longer.

            Wonder why the financial services sector wants to kill off the last of the DBP dinosaurs, no doubt all for their greater good!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 9:55 pm

            Anon, I don’t, (and never have) made ANYTHING from other people’s 401K investments …. or from the Plan’s sponsor ….. or from anyone else connected to such Plans.

            All I hear is more and more nonsensical reasons to justify NON-Action in reforming these grossly excessive Public Sector pensions.

            It’s YOUR retirement at stake.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 10:01 pm

            Hey you don’t have to sell me on it just the CFP!

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 10:04 pm

            http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/08/a_reform_plan_to_solve_teachers_pension_problem_on.html#incart_river_mobile

            GOP proposal for TPAF, which I’m assuming would be rolled out to PERS and yes sorry BH P&FRS as well as SPRS and JRS.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 10:05 pm

            As I remember someone once posted on this blog, John knows who we are from our IP addresses – enough said.

          • Posted by BH on August 27, 2015 at 10:23 pm

            http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/08/a_reform_plan_to_solve_teachers_pension_problem_on.html#incart_river_mobile
            GOP proposal for TPAF, which I’m assuming would be rolled out to PERS and yes sorry BH P&FRS as well as SPRS and JRS.

            Yeah….. Good luck with that!!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 11:15 pm

            Yeah BH ….. how dare anybody address the MOST egregious (and hence costly) of NJ’s Public Sector pensions ….. those of Safety workers (BOTH State AND Local).

  4. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 6:55 pm

    Scott Walker the same guy who has no respect for the lives of women. He offers them a death sentence.

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 7:40 pm

      Well at least the GOP is consistent as the Donald’s seems to delight in degraing members of the opposite sex!

      Reply

  5. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 7:47 pm

    TL PLS HLP with the stock market! Oops I forgot your part of the problem. Financial Services Sector rigged game, win win situation don’t matter how the market’s doing!!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on August 25, 2015 at 9:13 pm

      What, never heard of options ? Then get an education.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 9:28 pm

        Or more ve to another state, works for public & private – no double standards right?

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 9:39 pm

        Oh you mean research financial advisors so I make an educated choice on selecting another money monger (sorry can’t spell meant manager, I’ll work on that education) with a similar stinky deal!!

        Reply

  6. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 10:29 pm

    https://www.cfp.net/for-cfp-professionals/professional-standards-enforcement/standards-of-professional-conduct/code-of-ethics-professional-responsibility

    Interesting reading on a certified financial planner responsibility and duty to their client!

    Unanswered question is could a conflict of interest assertion be made if a public worker has employed an advisor with such adverse views and opinions of them and the P&B they receive? How could said advisor have their best interest at hand? How could said advisor advise them on risk tolerance appropriately?

    For example I’m the public worker client and I fill out my questionnaire stating I can assume a high level of risk on my investable assets because I have a “guaranteed” pension!

    Wow, I’m just saying!!

    Reply

  7. Posted by Anonymous on August 25, 2015 at 10:57 pm

    Ok don’t get too fired up because you won’t let a firefighter put it out unless their from a municipality that privatized this service, not sure they exsist in NJ! I know a terrible run on sentence, sorry.

    Reply

  8. Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 27, 2015 at 7:05 pm

    Holy holes in doughnuts, TL!

    You’re as bad as my little sister, crying to Mama. “Mommy, Mommy, he hit me back!!!!”

    Quoting TL: “FYI, He didn’t link to this article.”…….”S Moderation Douglas took that as an opportunity to bash just about everything you said HERE, w/o linking to it.”

    Here’s the link:

    http://unionwatch.org/calstrs-ceo-jack-ehnes-recommends-50-increase-to-calstrs-pension-benefits/#comment-9252

    Would you like to edit all my posts in the future? In case I say something you disagree with, or g.d forbid, leave out something you think should be there?

    Mr. Ring knows I have a history of disagreeing with his opinions.

    As example:

    Douglas47 says:

    August 27, 2014 at 8:22 AM

    “The average total compensation for California’s state and local government workers (taking into account all employer paid benefits including retirement benefits and annual paid vacations/holidays) is now more than twice the median compensation for private sector workers.”

    I promised to be nice. I will just say this one statement undermines all your credibility.

    ……………………………………..
    Since Mr. Ring appreciates the referrals:

    http://unionwatch.org/the-looming-bipartisan-backlash-against-unionized-government/

    …………………………………….
    If you agree that the average total compensation for California’s state and local government workers is now more than twice the median compensation for private sector workers, add that to your usual screed. Credibility be damned.

    Moderation* says: The “blithe, continual use of distortions, deceit, lies and misrepresentations” in Ed Rings various articles …………..is insulting.

    *In case there is confusion, “Douglas47” and “S Moderation Douglas” are one and the same. New and improved as it were.

    Reply

    • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 27, 2015 at 7:10 pm

      Shall I copy this post now, or send the link to Ed Ring?

      You can take care of that if you like. Brownie points will accrue.

      I think he likes you more than me, anyway.

      c’est la vie

      Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 8:25 pm

      Thank you for providing that link.

      As Mr. Ring stated on THAT Blog article … ” if S Moderation Douglas wants to call attention to this post, he is to be thanked. Because it just means that more people will come here, read it, and make up their own minds. ”

      I agree with Mr. Ring …. that’s EXACTLY what readers should do.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 8:40 pm

        Follow-up…

        I ALSO suggest that readers DO THEIR OWN ANALYSIS (as Mr. Ring recommends). Then they can be BS-ed by the likes of S Moderation Douglas.

        In the article linked below from Unionwatch (in Blue in the 1-st sentence of the 3-rd paragraph), the author (who is Mr. Ring) linked an USER-FRIENDLY Excel spreadsheet where the user can (by varying inputs) see the cost of various pensions under differing assumptions.

        The TRUE cost the the incredibly generous PW pensions will indeed be enlightening ….. and frightening.

        It is a VERY useful tool for those who want he learn the truth … and are unsure whom to believe.

        http://unionwatch.org/a-pension-analysis-tool-for-everyone/

        Reply

        • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 27, 2015 at 10:12 pm

          Veddy interezting.

          In Mr. Rings spreadsheets, the first “analysis” shows a “pension % of salary” = 60%

          In the real world, the pre 1999 safety “2%@50” formula incrementally increased to 2.7% at age 55

          https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/forms-publications/state-safety-benefits.pdf&ved=0CCQQFjABahUKEwjFzvTBwsrHAhUMN4gKHVFcBVA&usg=AFQjCNGWppSFcwRJBjeDgqvqIej4tYMSiQ&sig2=56bnoXyIZNu1HXhEaL7r6A

          (Page 30/31), yielding 81% of salary at age 55 with 30 years service.

          Not rocket surgery. 81% NOT 60%. What some persons might call GIGO.

          The new formula, mandated by PEPRA, is actually less generous than the pre SB400 rates.
          The formula for those hired after Jan 2013 is 2%@50 and graduates up to 2.7%@57.
          30 years @ age 55 would result in a “pension % of salary” of 75%. (pages 44/45)

          I don’t visit Unionwatch often, usually when it is linked from other sites or articles. I’m happy to refer others to it, as Ed says, they can make up their own mind. As for me, it is bad propaganda and bad math.

          Do you agree with Mr. Ring that:
          “The average total compensation for California’s state and local government workers (taking into account all employer paid benefits including retirement benefits and annual paid vacations/holidays) is now more than twice the median compensation for private sector workers.”?

          Twice?

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 11:34 pm

            Might be. According the Figure 13 of the AEI Compensation Study*, California’s Public Sector Workers have a “Total Compension” (pay + pensions + benefits) ADVANTAGE of 32% of pay.

            But the AEI Study excludes All LOCAL workers and all “Safety” workers (BOTH State and Local).

            That 32% excludes the tens of thousands of CA “Safety workers” (a HUGE category in crazy CA). With the completely outrageous compensation of CA’s Safety workers (anyone read about the compensation of their “lifeguards lately ???) Who knows, perhaps it would bring the AVERAGE Total Compensation to “twice” if they were included.

            And even if not, ANYTHING greater than ZERO % more than comparable Private Sector taxpayers is NOT necessary, just, or fair to taxpayers.

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

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 2:05 am

            And?

            In regards to Ed’s pension analysis:

            Tough Love says:
            April 5, 2012 at 9:24 PM
            Hi Ed,

            Nice follow-up to your similar spreadsheet of a few months back. I like this one better (leaving inflation in).

            First, I validated all of your #s with my own spreadsheet. ………
            ______________________

            Did your validation find his error?

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 3:06 am

            S Moderation Douglas, There is no “error” in his spreadsheet. His spreadsheet correctly rolls out the numbers over the accumulation period (i.e., the working years) and then through the payout years (i.e., retirement) under a given set of assumption, via the yellow boxes assumptions that can be changed.

            Your complaint seems to be that one of his examples doesn’t exactly match a specific CA pension pattern.

            Fine …. so change it, and run THAT and a myriad of other variations.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 4:31 am

            Au contraire mon frere.

            He specifically states in the text that this is the California safety formula prior to SB400. And the spreadsheets, among other things, specifically show a pension increase of 50%.

            The correct analysis of the first formula would have shown that SB400 resulted in an eleven per cent increase.

            An honest mistake? How many is that now?

            “Their blithe, continual use of distortions, deceit, lies and misrepresentations is insulting. We don’t want to be like them, and we’re not.”

            Spare me.

            (See, now that’s a tirade.)

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 4:41 am

            Okay, it’s a “moderate” tirade.

            I was going to liken Ed Ring to the current governor of New Jersey, with his oafish math and irrational condemnation of public sector unions. We’ll downplay that. No need to belabor the obvious.

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 12:28 pm

            Quoting …. “He specifically states in the text that this is the California safety formula prior to SB400. And the spreadsheets, among other things, specifically show a pension increase of 50%.”

            Like I said above, that was simply the chosen “assumption inputs” in one run of Mr. Rings spreadsheet … a “spreadsheet” which in functionality has no errors.

            If you want to see a different set of pension assumptions, THAT’S what the spreadsheet is for … to test a variety of options.
            ————————————————

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 12:44 pm

            Bee ess

            You are sounding more and more like Surfpuppy.
            Defending the indefensible.

        • Posted by BH on August 27, 2015 at 10:28 pm

          We all get your “every 5th word emphasis” you can relax with the caps!!!

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 11:36 pm

            Sort of like your triple exclamation points rarely left out of ANY of your comments?

      • Posted by Anonymous on August 27, 2015 at 8:42 pm

        Absolutely so they can understand the self serving, not for the greater good, motives of those like him and you – hypocrisy!

        Reply

        • Posted by BH on August 27, 2015 at 10:27 pm

          The greater good??? Lol. This is NJ… Inside America!! What greater good do you speak of?? You want others to get less because you don’t get it nor do you feel you should pay for services. And you talk about hypocrisy!!!

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 27, 2015 at 11:39 pm

            Pay, yes …………. but pay NO MORE than necessary, just, and fair (by comparison to what reasonably comparable Private Sector taxpayers get).

            Hardly the situation today.

          • Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 3:02 am

            And a pound of flesh.

  9. Posted by S Moderation Douglas on August 28, 2015 at 5:16 am

    John,

    Do you keep a record of how long it typically takes to get completely off topic? This one looks like approximately 11 posts, at 12:09 AM.

    At least is usually stays somewhere around the subject of pensions. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say l appreciate your forum.

    And your tolerance.

    Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 9:56 am

      Off topic? This and other big issues are all intertwined with the political mindset and special interests of both parties. The only way for a fair and equal agenda is simultaneous sweeping reforms on all fronts.

      Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 1:02 pm

      Also”off topic”, but isn’t California’s Caltrans where you said you worked (retired from) ?

      Interesting article about them here:

      http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Audit-State-worker-spends-55-days-golfing-on-6470039.php

      A few of it’s highlights:

      (1) The Caltrans engineer was found to have played golf on 55 workdays in a 19 month period while his timecard listed him as working.

      (2) A 2014 report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that Caltrans is overstaffed by 3,500 engineers and that cutting the positions would save $500 million.
      ————————————————————-

      Nothing like having a tough/stressful job in the Public Sector ………….

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 1:52 pm

        TL we admire your predictability, cherry picking your data sources again!!!

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 2:48 pm

          Anon,

          So are you saying that the information reported on is incorrect ….. or are you just trying to to divert attention to the absurdity of a Public Sector employer allowing (or being unaware of) such behavior (playing golf while “on-the-clock”) or that the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that Caltrans is overstaffed by 3,500 engineers?

          Reply

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 3:40 pm

            Are you trying to put words in my mouth, I never said incorrect. There are very few, if any, unbiased data sources unfortunately bias data sources result in, at best, questionable findings. But you already knew that, go fish!!!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 4:24 pm

            Anon, I noticed the triple exclamation points again … so how’s it going “BH”.

            How come you need to keep changing posting names?

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 4:34 pm

            Nope, keep fishing!!!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 4:42 pm

            BH, Just so we don’t lose site of the “message”, to repeat:
            ———————————————————————-
            Interesting article about them here:

            http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Audit-State-worker-spends-55-days-golfing-on-6470039.php

            A few of it’s highlights:

            (1) The Caltrans engineer was found to have played golf on 55 workdays in a 19 month period while his timecard listed him as working.

            (2) A 2014 report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that Caltrans is overstaffed by 3,500 engineers and that cutting the positions would save $500 million.

            Nothing like having a tough/stressful job in the Public Sector ………….

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 5:11 pm

            You’ve added nothing and I’ve nothing to add so I guess I’m calling your fools hand. No triples !!! here.

          • Posted by BH on August 28, 2015 at 5:16 pm

            “”””””Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 4:24 pm
            Anon, I noticed the triple exclamation points again … so how’s it going “BH”.

            How come you need to keep changing posting names?”””””

            Sorry TL….. But that’s not me. The one time I posted as anon…. I immediately claimed responsibility. But I could care less who you think it is….. But to be sure. I’ll end all my posts with this…
            **No love for TL**

          • Posted by BH on August 28, 2015 at 5:19 pm

            Unfortunately the posts are a dwindling…. Could be because it’s Friday….. But I think its more that people are tired of the same old crap. It never ends.
            It’s never gonna go the way you and your 3 goons think or should I say… Wish it will.
            **No love for TL**

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 5:25 pm

            Quoting Anon (or is that BH?) ………”You’ve added nothing”

            Sure I have, what BELONGS in front of the readers …… the outrageous behavior of Public Sector employees ……. repeated golf outings while on-the-clock …… and the absurd situation of Caltrans having (per CA’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office) 3500 more Engineers than they really need.

            Why should Taxpayers pay for this ?
            ——————————————————————

            Taxpayer must find a way to renege on the outrageous pensions & benefits promised Public Sector workers.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 7:09 pm

            There’s liberals, politicos, and publics oh my!!! Just close your eyes and count your management fees and say there’s no place like WI, Walker DA MAN!!!

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 7:44 pm

            Quoting ….” !!! “

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 8:19 pm

            Quoting “The Wizard of Spin”…..

          • Posted by BH on August 28, 2015 at 9:21 pm

            Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 7:44 pm
            Quoting ….” !!! “

            Sorry… Still not me. But thanks for trying.
            **No love for TL**

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 10:06 pm

            Tender loving, if I was a poet you’d know it, or maybe !!!, quite possibly **No Love for TL** anyway Dr. Spin glad to see the market rebound but I’m sure you know we’re in for a roller coaster year – enjoy the merry go round of management fees – financial advisors what a beautiful choice.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 28, 2015 at 10:17 pm

            Alright enough already, regardless of who you are and what you thonk.

            Bottom line if the P&B Commission recommendations aren’t implemented very soon, we’re all up sh*ts creek without a paddle.

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 28, 2015 at 10:57 pm

            Anon (just above),

            Well said…… but the guy to who YOU responded is still in denial and believes in money trees, or perhaps Sweeney’s latest idea, to go begging to the feds for a “loan” (that’s funny).

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 29, 2015 at 6:29 am

            Is begging what you and others called it when the mega billionaire Wall Streeters and the Banking Industry needed theirs?????

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 29, 2015 at 7:52 am

            Ah of course not my brother it’s the private sector, greater good and all that sort of stuff??????????

          • Posted by Tough Love on August 29, 2015 at 10:07 am

            Anon, The mortgage crisis in America 5 years ago was due to incredible incompetence on the part of the rating agencies, and a HUGE failure of Gov’t regulators looking aside as a structure developed (over just a few years) where inappropriate/over-sized loans were made to borrowers who could not afford them by lenders who had little “sink in the game” (i.e., by having to keep a material portion of each loan in THEIR portfolio) and therefore, no reason to stop making such loans for the fee/commission income.

            The gov’t “bailout” was to head-off the real possibility of a collapse of the entire banking system. Very few (via bailout funds) were “MADE WHOLE” in the sense of keeping gains that were never realistic or deserved. Two minor exceptions (in the the scheme of things) were (1) Goldman Sacks who (via Gov’t payments to AIG to keep it from collapsing with wide follow-on consequences to the financial sector) was unjustifiably made-whole on some very bad investments, and (2) arguably, bonuses to certain high-level executives that should have been smaller.

            The latter item (the bonuses) were an unfortunate consequence of the compensation structure of high-level Wall-Street executives. Many routinely make 25% of their TYPICAL annual compensation in “wages” another 50% in “bonuses” based on modest goals easily met (with the expectation that this 50% will almost always be paid), and with the final 25% based on true company profitability. If no bonuses were paid, MANY would have simply quit creating far greater havoc.

            The important sentence above is …….. “Very few (via bailout funds) were “MADE WHOLE” in the sense of keeping gains that were never realistic or deserved.”

            THAT is what makes it DIFFERENT than “bailing out” the underfunded Public Sector pensions. Public Sector pensions have ALWAYS been extremely generous, with the generosity level steadily increasing over the past 20 years to a level that is patently excessive, and all while Private Sector pensions (which were NEVER as generous as Public Sector pensions to begin with) steadily declined over those 20 years. Today, Public Sector pensions are ROUTINELY 3x to 4x (4x-6x for Safety workers) greater in value at retirement than those of identically situated (in pay, age at retirement, and years of service) Private Sector workers. There is ZERO justification for this, with TAXPAYERS responsible for 80%-90% of Total Plan Costs.

            The Public Sector pension/benefit increases over all these years were never the result of arms-length “negotiations” with someone truly looking out for the Taxpayers’ interests, and notwithstanding protestations to the contrary, are clearly the result of COLLUSION between the Public Sector Unions and our Elected Officials …. the trading of Public Sector Union Campaign contributions and election support for our Elected Officials favorable votes on Public Sector pay, pensions, and benefits.

            Unlike those “bailed out” in the financial crisis who were NOT “MADE WHOLE” in the sense of keeping gains that were never realistic or deserved, Public Sector Unions/workers/retirees want to KEEP all that was NEVER … realistic or deserved.

            The Taxpayers would be crazy to allow this.

          • Posted by Anonymous on August 29, 2015 at 10:38 am

            http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/08/public_worker_pension_loan_proposal_turning_heads.html#incart_2box_politics_index.ssf

            It must come with mandatory concessions, like the P&B Commission reforms, then it could be a win win situation.

            Only problem is rolling out national reforms with the varying State and Local P&B structures.

            Typical response, blame government when things go wrong but private sector quick to take credit when things go right!!!

            Also plently of blame on the investment and banking industries for knowingly bundling these “junk” mortgages which allowed the housing bubble to grow. And the bigger the bubble the harder it bursts.

            The pension loan, which will never get through both houses or the POTUS, wouldn’t be a “hand out”. Even Judge Judy knows a loan must be repaid! If NJ or any State ever defaulted, the Feds would offset all future funding until the debt is satisfied.

            Gotta love those non refundable fees and bonusus?

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: