Lies, Incorporated with a NJ Pension Example

The book came out last month looking to expose biased and paid-for research that pollutes public debate on:

  1. Tobacco
  2. Climate Change
  3. Health Care
  4. Debt
  5. Immigration Reform
  6. Guns and Lies
  7. Voter I.D. Laws
  8. Abortion
  9. Gay Marriage

Around the same time this podcast interview with Union Boss Hetty Rosenstein offered a concrete examples of the process as applied to the New Jersey Retirement System.

First excerpts from the introductory chapters of Lies, Incorporated and then Rosenstein’s lies:

[Richard Berman] is the purest representation of a growing force in American politics that creates and disseminates lies designed to disrupt the public policy process for monetary and ideological gain. (page xi)

Our democracy has been hacked, manipulated by political practitioners who recognize that as there is no truth, there can be no progress. (page 4)

What we see today is a highly organized industry built around the creation and dissemination of falsehoods supported by a media environment that aids and abets its work. Facts are conjured in purportedly academic studies that have only the thinnest veneer of legitimacy. (page 7)

Most of these [think tanks] do not consist of scholars developing solutions unmoored to ideology or funding. Instead, many are simply part of an ideological arsenal, used to manipulate public policy in favor of their corporate funders. (page 16)

Hetty Rosenstein picking up on an NJPP lie:

And that participants pay for 75% plus of the cost of their pensions:

If that were true then why do the taxpayers have to put in more than the other 25%, or about $500 million, to get up to 100%?

Full Rosenstein podcast comments on pensions:

9 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by commr51 on May 13, 2016 at 10:22 am

    Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner. In this case, DEM politicians and PW’s are the wolves, taxpayers dumb enough to remain in NJ are the sheep.


  2. Posted by Anonymous on May 13, 2016 at 11:47 am

    Hetty, thank you for the truth. Let’s hope and pray the vote goes through this fall.
    So we are set free! Otherwise, New Jersey will be under some heavy judgement.


    • Posted by dentss dunnigan on May 13, 2016 at 12:18 pm

      Yes workers have underfunded their own pensions for years ….look at your cash balance (total contributions) and do the math with current interest rates for the last decade and see what you will be getting


  3. Posted by MJ on May 13, 2016 at 6:11 pm

    This woman is the epitomy of moronic. If all publics paid in what she says for their pensions there wouldn’t be a collapse coming down the road. They underfunded their own pensions, voted in the morans that keep screwing them and then want to cry fowl and have their neighbors, friends, relatives, private businesses, etc pay for their own stupidity. I guess Hetty sets the bar too high


  4. Posted by Javagold on May 13, 2016 at 9:15 pm

    Hetty. Suck a bag of dicks.


  5. Posted by PatB on May 14, 2016 at 11:06 am

    The 75% may not a lie, but is disingenuous. She is probably referring to the Alicia Munnell 2014 editorial where she states “Once new hires replace current employees, the annual pension cost for general employees will be about 9% of payroll, with the employee contributing 7.5%. The cost for teachers will be about 10% with an employee contribution of 7.5%. For police and fire, the cost will be about 20% with an employee contribution of 10%. These provisions mean that, based on the system’s assumed investment return, most employees will pay for the bulk of their pension benefits.”

    Disingenuous because it applies to future employees, not current ones.


  6. Posted by Anonymous on May 14, 2016 at 11:43 am

    The existing laws support unforgettable rights of current retirees and current employees with many years of service credits, therefore the new rules apply to new hires and those at the age/ service requirement cutoff.


  7. Posted by george on May 14, 2016 at 1:03 pm

    ” biased and paid-for research that pollutes public debate on:”

    paid-for: 100% of research is paid for in a ‘no free lunch’ sort of way.

    Biased: You know someone is propagandizing when they say they are not biased, but the other side is.

    pollutes public debate: Actually a debate means there are people arguing both sides. Why pollute the debate by accusing the other side of polluting the debate.

    Not on the list is nuclear energy

    Why it’s time to dispel the myths about nuclear power

    By contrast, France has for decades produced 75% of its energy through nuclear, and enjoys the cleanest air and among the lowest carbon emissions of any industrialised nature.

    This article says nuclear energy is safe because the French can operate nuclear reactors without, so far, screwing up.

    I point out nuclear power because it is subject to the same sorts of debate as the other items on the list. In France they have a comparatively cheap, comparatively uncorrupt educational system that produces technical people who can handle nuclear reactors. The nuclear industry is mostly owned by the government so the government cannot blame anyone else for problems. Of course they are just one accident away from proving this wrong. One thing I have noticed about articles that cite French nuclear safety is they never suggest hiring the French to do all the work, and collect all the profits. They usually suggest our bureaucrats, engineers, entrepreneurs, corporations will just do what the French do.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: