One of Chris Christie’s first actions as governor was to give himself breathing room on the budget by declining to make a $3.1 billion ‘required’ contribution to the New Jersey retirement system. You can do that in New Jersey and the courts are behind you all the way.
Phil Murphy’s first budget includes a $3.2 billion pension payment…..for now. The Record and NorthJersey.com interviewed Phil Murphy for half-an-hour last Thursday for a story and this is what they got out of him on pensions.
Even if Murphy gets the budget he has presented, he’ll be faced in future years with rising costs to pay into public employee pensions. The systems was underfunded for years by governors of both parties, and as a result New Jersey has the worst-funded system in the country. And despite health benefit and pension reforms by Christie and Democrats early in his tenure, the pension fund has such mounting cost that it threatens to consume an unsustainable amount of the budget.
Murphy, who once led a commission focused on pension and health benefits, has earmarked $3.2 billion for the fund in the upcoming year, a record amount consistent with a ramp-up plan set by Christie.
Murphy has acknowledged the need for further reforms, but said throughout his campaign that the state must live up to its end of the bargain. Even though Christie paid a cumulative record amount in to the pension fund, he still slashed the state’s obligation during lean budget years.
Murphy said his answer “has not changed” from the campaign, though. The state must show “over the longer arc of history” that it is meeting its financial obligations to retirees.
“I don’t mean tied to any particular contract or this particular budget. And so that’s where I’ve been and that’s where I continue to be,” Murphy said.
Reading that last sentence over a few times makes me think that someone has been doing a little too much research on legalizing marijuana for recreational use. What do you think?
Burypensions Blog 
Posted by Tough Love on April 30, 2018 at 1:02 pm
I don’t think he’ll short the $3.2 Billion total in his 1-st year as Gov. It would make him out as a failure/liar/untrustworthy right out of the gate. So he’l just do small pieces of his “other” promises and label them “accomplished”.
I believe he WILL start shorting the pension-contribution “ramp” NEXT year, and if the market/economy sours, wow would NJ (AND it’s pension Plans) be in quite the financial mess.
Posted by Anonymous on April 30, 2018 at 1:46 pm
Not after he signs S5.
366 days later…PFRS is safe from the clutches of thieves.
TL…. first to post. No job? But worried about everyone else’s pocketbook. SMH
Posted by Anonymous on April 30, 2018 at 1:48 pm
And FYI….. yes I’m posting too. But I’m a greedy public sector worker with alllllll the time in the world.
Posted by Tough Love on April 30, 2018 at 3:15 pm
Some honesty at last, quoting ………… “I’m a greedy public sector worker “.
Posted by El gaupo on April 30, 2018 at 3:29 pm
Once Pfrs splits it won’t matter if he makes the payment or not. I still hope he does.
But even when Christie, Et al, neglected to pay in, the towns were required to do so into local funds. Very little of Pfrs is funded by the state to begin with. What this will prevent is co mingling pensions at some point down the toad when the weaker plans need a boost.
Posted by Tough Love on April 30, 2018 at 4:33 pm
The “problem” with giving control of PFRS to the Unions, is that with TAXPAYER contribution (including the investment earnings thereon) responsible for 80% to 90% of total Plan costs, it’s THEY (NOT the Plan participants with their minor contribution) who should control EVERYTHING about it …………. including the ability to freeze the Plan or reduce future service accruals for all CURRENT participants.
Posted by skip3house on April 30, 2018 at 3:49 pm
Hopeless. Start over using zero debt and existing funds fairly assigned individually to 401K type accounts, with yearly % NJ match depending on that year’s budget. No retiree medical. Political promises are fools gold – afraid tough lesson for all of us, unless promisers can do magic.? So far, none have put forward a solution fair to workers/retirees/taxpayers.
Posted by PS Drone on April 30, 2018 at 10:40 pm
Better plan to put your house up for sale now and leave NJ. Soon you will not be able to as the only potential buyers will be government employees and there are not enough of them to buy up all the (soon to be) vacant homes. Everyone else with half a brain will already be gone and no one with that much brain will be moving into NJ.
Posted by El gaupo on April 30, 2018 at 11:23 pm
Housing prices say otherwise fool.
Make you money here and move away after you pack it in. Others will take your place. Home values are very high in NJ. You got nothing to worry about my man.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 12:10 am
I’m sure Detroit’s Middle Class was told the same 10-15 years ago ….. and perhaps by it’s local Police .
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 8:40 am
Detroit proper lost property values due to a industrial jobs decline and those folks who had decent middle class jobs leaving for other reasons as well…you won’t see that in northern nj unless nyc loses all its financial jobs.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 7:01 am
El gaupo I’m going to have to disagree with you on this…….In some areas such as the much North Jersey housing may be doing well. In South Jersey not too much. Houses seem to be sitting longer and longer with many price drops along the way. Probably because the economy in South Jersey is not good at all. Several smaller communities are merging police and fire departments and other services because it is eating up too much of the town budgets………Many school districts are hiring teachers part-time so they don’t have to pay pensions and health care bc it is taking too much out of their budgets
It depends on the area and the community..
Just sayin……..
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 8:42 am
I don’t disagree with you on south jersey. While I live and work in Bergen county, I went to academy in Gloucester county. Completely different then (mid 90s) and still is. Much more rural and yes. Jobs don’t pay as much down there. Public sector jobs included.
Posted by PS Drone on May 1, 2018 at 10:54 am
El Gaupo – I walk my dogs past million $…er $900K…er $800K homes that have been for sale down here in the “affluent” part of Burlington County for months now. Seems the affluent homeowners are attempting to flee the onerous non-deductible SALT and idiots like Murphy and what his brand of politics portends for the future. The only fly in the ointment is finding a greater fool (than themselves) to buy their previously highly overpriced and now just overpriced house so they can make their way south to FL or SC or somewhere where the public sector has not extorted their way to total control (think NJ, NY, CT, IL, CA, MD etc.). The tidal wave of RE on the market is coming and if you think otherwise, just wait and see.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 1:51 pm
Why have nt you moved yet? Aren’t you worried? Or do you have kids in a great school system? Cmon man stick it out till your kids are in college or out of college than look to sell. You’ll still get lots of value for your home.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 3:33 am
Oh come-on, how can THIS guy be right …… and Stephen Douglas our resident CA Public Sector retiree and denier of Public Sector pension problems big & small be wrong:
https://realinvestmentadvice.com/the-pension-crisis-is-worse-than-you-think/
Posted by Stanley on May 1, 2018 at 6:52 am
Very good link. I’m amazed at how many people think that it is the responsibility of someone else to fund and enable their late life period of relaxation. Pensions can only work if they are quite modest and only supplement what the individual has done to provide for himself in retirement.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 7:04 am
Stanley….exactly!!! and I would go a step farther to say that no one and I mean no one should be able to retire with a full pension that rivals the salaries of those still working in the private sector. Retire whenever you want but no pension until at least age 62 and if you want to keep those health benefits then pay for them…………..
The same for SS……it is meant to supplement what one has saved and prepared for in retirement not support the person the same as when working
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 8:46 am
As I said before, you are still asking “someone else” to help fund your retirement when you give them money to invest in your behalf. Only a fool would keep his retirement money under a mattress. When you give money every pay period into a 401k or even make your SS contribution, you are doing the same thing that I do when I make my pension contribution or my 457 plan contribution. You are deferring using that money now so you will presumably have more later.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 9:39 am
El gaupo you do realize that money put aside into a retirement account such as a 401K or similar is that individual’s own money…they might be having someone do the investing but that individual has a say every step of the way. NO WAY that is expecting someone else to fund their retirement, that’s called taking responsibility for one’s own retirement…that individual has the right to move that money, re-invest that money, withdraw that money (with penalties) If the market tanks then that is reflected in my retirement accounts the same as if the market does well
Not so with the public pensions…..seems to me we are forced to pay the same amounts no matter the market the economy, the returns etc
As for SS, we are all forced to be in the Ponzi scheme as is usual with government forced to have this taken from our checks and our employers public or private are forced to contribute their share to be used as a piggy bank for an over inflated government expenses
Personally I would have opted out years ago and am smart enough to invest and get a better return.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 1:12 pm
Quoting El gaupo ……..
“When you give money every pay period into a 401k or even make your SS contribution, you are doing the same thing that I do when I make my pension contribution or my 457 plan contribution. ”
What load of BS. What, no mention that your piddly pension contribution ………… yes piddly, being no more than 10%-20% of the TRUE total cost of your pension …………. gets you a pension that is 3.5 to 4 TIMES greater in value upon retirement than what comparably situated (in wages, age at retirement, and years of service) Private Sector workers typically get in retirement security from their employers?
Your ilk sure has suckered and ROBBED the Taxpayers. And we’re ALSO aware that given you retire in your 50s we’re now also on the hook for family healthcare coverage in retirement now costing over $30K annually.
You’re DEFERRING pennies and STEALING dollars.
The financial “mugging” of NJ’s Taxpayers by those who have sworn to “protect and serve” is palpable.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 7:06 am
@TL I have been reading this blog off and over for maybe over 10 Years???? No one can seem to pin down exactly what will happen or when the plans will run dry…….Let all of the illegals come to our sanctuary state of NJ as they will drain the resources more quickly…….
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 9:06 am
On the second point please NO.
If we must can we please increase our sales tax and reduce our income tax or property tax? Everyone buys shit. Not everyone pays taxes. At least then the “paid under the table crowd” would be paying something. Why should someone pay income tax on their full earnings while others get paid off the books. Sometimes allowing them to be on government assistance. While their employer doesn’t pay tax either.
Where is the outrage on this issue? A contractor pay his guys off the books while at the same time collecting cash for a job and underreporting his income to the state. Betcha the guy that plays by the rules would love to see that shit stopped. By relying more on a sales tax we would mitigate that problem. I think we should have a federal sales tax as well with a reduction in income tax. So much fraud and abuse. But let’s make the cop and teacher our enemy and poster child for what we shouldn’t do. Generally speaking, why do folks in northern nj have a higher standard of living than south jersey? Look at any school ranking and the top ones are ALL in north nj. Look at the jobs amazon is bringing to Boston. All tech jobs. Yes they may put a warehouse in a red state but the big buck jobs are all in liberal states. Look at the income rankings. With the exception of texas, they are all blue states. And I am not particularly liberal at all, Just been fucked over by the GOP more in the last 10 years. I voted republican my whole life until 2009. Now I will vote Democrat unless I like the gop candidate better.
Christie was terrible and trump is just as bad. Makes fun of disabled reporters, cheated His wife how many fuckin times, he really has no redeeming qualities.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 9:47 am
For me, if the sales tax goes beyond 7% I would make it a point to buy way less other than what was really needed and I’m close enough to DE to shop if I really need something…………after all how much stuff does anybody really need.
Posted by Stanley on May 1, 2018 at 10:55 am
“Where is the outrage on this issue? A contractor pay his guys off the books while at the same time collecting cash for a job and underreporting his income to the state.”
Sorry constable. We have to save our outrage for the gang of union cowboys raiding the state and local treasuries. You already have a respectable sales tax and a very healthy income and property tax–and that’s not all pardner. You’re squawking because you have to pay high taxes which are partly caused by that monstrous, behemoth income that you have pinched off of the taxpayers. That’s a good one! And you are worried that some guy doing yard work or doing cut-rate windshield installations might make a buck or two! The idea!
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 1:58 pm
Yeah ok fool. Your the moron who is looking out for his neighbor right? The guy who will be first in line to volunteer to police the town that voted to disband?
Tell me your not cheated out of more state income tax by guys like that than extra that you pay because you have to fund cops and teachers.
Posted by Stanley on May 1, 2018 at 5:05 pm
“Yeah ok fool” “Tell me your not cheated out of more state income tax by guys like that than extra that you pay because you have to fund cops and teachers.”
I don’t worry about who is or who isn’t paying enough tax and I would not support a higher tax on another tax payer even if it might mean a reduction in my tax. Which it wouldn’t. Most of what the government does should be privatized including the library, fire department, social services and so on. We can leave the police and courts in government hands but they will need better management. Our first order of business vanquishing the cowboy union bandits and concentrate on good police management and training. It’s not rocket science. Sorry constable; you want high taxes and you’ve got them. Better budgeting and spending will do much to improve your well being. And a better knowledge of financial markets.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 1:21 pm
El gaupo,
I find it incredibly disingenuous that you complain about tax cheats when ALL Public Sector workers (and especially Police with the richest pensions & benefits) are monumentally ripping-off NJ’s Taxpayers with guaranteed 80% to 90% taxpayer-funded pensions that are 3.5 to 4 TIMES greater than what is necessary, just, fair to taxpayers or affordable.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 2:04 pm
No you don’t. You just have your opinions on pensions and can’t for the life of you give me one iota of satisfaction by saying that tax cheats are also a problem in NJ and everywhere.
Outside of his Steven Douglas fellow, I am outnumbered on this blog but still go back and forth with you and take my lumps in the process. Nice never been disingenious or misleading on this blog. And quite frankly, this blog would much less interesting if I wasn’t on it. Tell me I’m wrong on the last point?
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 3:20 pm
Lol ………..Your response to my assertion that Public Sector pensions & benefits are too generous is that I’m not jumping on your bandwagon …… your DISTRACTION that tax cheats are a problem.
Sure, tax cheats are a problem. I’m sure we could find 100s of OTHER problems that need to be addressed, but does their existence LESSON the need to address the now LUDICROUSLY excessive Public Sector pensions & benefits ?
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 4:19 pm
Quoting Brother Love…
“…ALL Public Sector workers (and especially Police with the richest pensions & benefits) are monumentally ripping-off NJ’s Taxpayers with guaranteed 80% to 90% taxpayer-funded pensions that are 3.5 to 4 TIMES greater than what is necessary, just, fair to taxpayers or affordable.”
Roll all your misconceptions into one sentence.
1) “ALL Public Sector workers” are not overcompensated. There are thousands who, even with their pensions, earn less than, or equal to, equivalent private sector workers.
2) Pensions are 100% taxpayer funded. Whether the employee contributes directly, or the employer contributes “the employee share”, it’s all taxpayer money.
3) It is (still) invalid to compare pensions outside the context of total compensation.
4) There is a difference between “necessary, just, fair” and “affordable” they are not necessarily inclusive.
Most people would/should agree with Lance Roberts…
” In the next decade, and probably within five years, some large states are going to face insolvency due to pensions, absent major changes.”
They are not affordable in “some large states”
DON’T PAY THE BILLS, THE DEBT GETS LARGER
It does not logically follow that _because_ they are not affordable, they were not necessary, just, and fair.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 6:07 pm
Pasted from below (a quote from Mr. Douglas and my response), a much clearer picture of Public Sector “moocher”, Stephen Douglas:
———————————————————————-
Quoting Stephen Douglas ………….. “My wife and I are in an HMO Medicare Advantage program. Medicare is the primary provider, and the state pays for the supplemental insurance. All we pay is ten dollars co-pay per visit and five dollars per prescription. Yes, it’s pretty darn good.”
No, it’s MORE than “pretty darn good”. It’s just one more of the many many ways that taxpayers are ripped-off to unjustifiably grant Public Sector workers/retirees a FAR FAR FAR better deal than those who pay for it.
In the Private Sector, to have $10 co-pay and $5 prescription-payments you’d have to go back to the 1970’s.
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 8:54 am
Oh come-on, how can THIS guy be right ……
“Whatever amount you are saving for retirement is probably not enough.”
———————————–
Our resident CA Public Sector retiree was never a “denier of Public Sector pension problems”
He has always advocated realistic pension reform.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 9:08 am
It’s just that to the folks on this blog— reform means lose your whole pension cause I don’t have one.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 9:44 am
No El gaupo, it means REFORM as in make changes that better reflect the current financial burdens for cities and municipalities, the new economy, the longer life spans, the higher costs of health care etc……
It means REFORM not take away anyone’s pensions…now what exactly that would look like is anyone’s guess
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 1:27 pm
MJ,
That’s correct, but REFORM should ALSO mean that going forward (for the FUTURE service of all CURRENT workers), Taxpayer contributions towards Public Sector pensions & benefits should (on average for all workers taken together) be near equal to what Private Sector workers typically get form their employers in retirement security and employer-sponsored retiree healthcare benefits.
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 1:15 pm
“One of Chris Christie’s first actions as governor was to give himself breathing room on the budget by declining to make a $3.1 billion ‘required’ contribution…”
“Phil Murphy’s first budget includes a $3.2 billion pension payment…..for now.”
Each of which would have been unnecessary _if_ the state had not extremely shorted the annual normal costs* for the last twenty years. That would have been realistic pension reform… twenty years ago.
*Even better pension reform would have been if the annual normal cost were actuarially sound (meaning larger) to begin with.
…REFORM as in “make changes that better reflect the current financial burdens…”, is just a euphemism for “reductions”.
The ROOT CAUSE of the pension mess is _not_ grossly excessive pension generosity,
Lance Roberts…
“Whatever amount you are saving for retirement is probably not enough.”
For some states, it may be too late to plant that tree, after all.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 1:30 pm
Quoting Stephen Douglas ……..
“Each of which would have been unnecessary _if_ the state had not extremely shorted the annual normal costs* for the last twenty years. ”
And each of which would ALSO have been “unnecessary” if the LUDICROUSLY excessive pensions had never been granted in the first place.
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 9:21 am
With pension and Social Security, my wife and I have a retirement income of about 75 percent of pre-retirement wages, and our pre-retirement wages were slightly below average for California.
Posted by MJ on May 1, 2018 at 9:42 am
Mr. Douglas, then you and your wife are doing pretty darn well! I’m guessing that since you have previously stated you are a retired public worker that you got to keep your platinum health benefits for you and your wife.
Would you care to explain how that works in CA?
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 12:03 pm
Depends on where you are in California. All pension plans are not the same.
Some have fully paid medical. Some have no retiree healthcare. Some have no paid insurance, but, are allowed to remain in the group plan, if they pay themselves (that is a big advantage).
My wife and I are in an HMO Medicare Advantage program. Medicare is the primary provider, and the state pays for the supplemental insurance. All we pay is ten dollars co-pay per visit and five dollars per prescription. Yes, it’s pretty darn good.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 1:36 pm
Quoting ………….. “My wife and I are in an HMO Medicare Advantage program. Medicare is the primary provider, and the state pays for the supplemental insurance. All we pay is ten dollars co-pay per visit and five dollars per prescription. Yes, it’s pretty darn good.”
No, it’s MORE than “pretty darn good”. It’s just one more of the many many ways that taxpayers are ripped-off to unjustifiably grant Public Sector workers/retirees a FAR FAR FAR better deal than those who pay for it.
In the Private Sector, to have $10 co-pay and $5 prescription-payments you’d have to go back to the 1970’s.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 2:07 pm
Medicare is his primary TL. That means the state is a secondary insurer and the rates are not much. Most of those plans go for a few hundred a month.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 2:10 pm
You guys make it all seem like you are one pay check away from losing your homes!! Let me tell you, I used to deliver flowers on the side and bartend (for a few months before I was a cop). And to a man the best tippers by far were lower middle and middle class folks. It always seems that those who are just fine are the biggest complainers. Amazon prime just went up $20 a year. Waa waa!!!! Whatever will I do?!?!?
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 2:19 pm
El gaupo,
Was your last post supposed to be a “justification” for the absurdly low Doctor and Drug Co-pays ?
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 6:38 pm
Linked below is an interview with the actuary who played a primary role in the design of Medicare, ERISA, who named the PBGC, and who ……. 40 years ago ….. predicted the State & Local Public Sector pension mess now playing out throughout America, and who (for Tim Alexander’s benefit) believes that the Federal Gov’t should NOT bail-out Underfunded State & Local Pension Plans).
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/3053446007001/#sp=show-clips
It’s a long video but worth the time. The only thing I would add, is that he should have taken it a bit further in opining on WHY the State & Local Gov’t didn’t want to be required to follow the conservative valuation requirements that ERISA ultimately applied only to Single-Employer Private Sector Plans. To me, it’s VERY clear that if States & Cities couldn’t HIDE the true (much higher) cost of the pensions they wanted to grant their workers (by using MUCH more liberal valuation assumptions & methodology….. thereby UNDERSTATING the Plan’s true cost), then the annual COST of these Plans would be so high, and Taxpayer protests so loud, that these Plans would have had to be far LESS generous (jeopardizing the cozy relationship between the Public Sector Unions and our self-interested, contribution-soliciting, vote-selling Elected Officials).
THAT (excessive “generosity”) is now and has always been the ROOT CAUSE of the pension mess spreading across America’s States & Cities. Under-funding is not the CAUSE of the problem, but a CONSEQUENCE of the true root cause …… grossly excessive pension “generosity”.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 7:56 pm
You had me at hello.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 8:06 pm
Sure, why listen to something that shows I’m over-compensated, and my pension may be toast.
Posted by PS Drone on May 1, 2018 at 8:52 pm
As JavaGold always said – “haircuts coming, get ready”.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 9:52 pm
TL that of course is you’re opinion dear. I obviously do not share it.
As for Haircuts—- won’t happen under this gov. At least not to current employees.
If you look at the numbers for PFRS, the drop dead date is in the 2050s. Hopefully I won’t have dropped dead by then.
Last year numbers. Pfrs paid out about $2.1B. Took in about $1.3B. The fund has $25B in it. Had to only make less than 4% on investments to break even.
As I have stated before, I know I have a good job. However, I do not apologize for it. Just like you can care less what I think of your income, benifits, house size, car you drive or what have you, I could care less too what you think. If any of you were in my shoes, there is no question you would feel the same way!!!!! Most of you who oppose me do not reveal your income, what you do for a living etc. that’s fine. Just like most of you, I have kids I gotta out through college etc.
you could’ve taken my job up until your 35th bday. How come you didn’t if we have it so fuckin great.
Not that I agree with her, but at least TL puts forth an argument (always the same, at least she is consistent). The rest of it is just as Tim Alexander would say just drivel.
You really think that because you think my pension is too much that I will give some back? Right after you my friend.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 10:54 pm
I don’t expect you to GIVE BACK the 50% to 75% share of your pension that was never necessary, just, fair to taxpayers, or affordable (but assuredly STOLEN from the taxpayers via the collusion between between your Unions and NJ’s Elected Officials).
But I do hope that circumstances will ultimately allow Taxpayer to simple renege on paying those NEVER-JUST “promises”.
Posted by Stephen Douglas on May 1, 2018 at 9:42 pm
Quoting Tough Love…
“The only thing I would add, is that he should have taken it a bit further in opining on WHY the State & Local Gov’t didn’t want to be required to follow the conservative valuation requirements that ERISA ultimately applied only to Single-Employer Private Sector Plans.”
If only I had a dollar for every time Brother Love expressed that same thought about dozens of pension experts over the years. Mebbe there’s a reason they don’t mention it?
What a poser.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 9:56 pm
You would damn near be a millionaire bro. Brother Love (I’m sorry TL, I literally can’t resist) speaks out quite often. Occasionally she is right. As in a broken clock is still right twice a day. Blind squirrel finds a nut….in other news TL is right. Lol.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 11:06 pm
Stephen Douglas,
Why didn’t you also paste the 2-nd half of the paragraph, where I stated:
“To me, it’s VERY clear that if States & Cities couldn’t HIDE the true (much higher) cost of the pensions they wanted to grant their workers (by using MUCH more liberal valuation assumptions & methodology….. thereby UNDERSTATING the Plan’s true cost), then the annual COST of these Plans would be so high, and Taxpayer protests so loud, that these Plans would have had to be far LESS generous (jeopardizing the cozy relationship between the Public Sector Unions and our self-interested, contribution-soliciting, vote-selling Elected Officials).”
Go ahead …………. tell me that’s not TRUE !
AND of course to the logical conclusion that follows:
“THAT (excessive “generosity”) is now and has always been the ROOT CAUSE of the pension mess spreading across America’s States & Cities. Under-funding is not the CAUSE of the problem, but a CONSEQUENCE of the true root cause …… grossly excessive pension “generosity”.
Posted by geo8rge on May 1, 2018 at 7:55 pm
NJ budget in brief: http://www.nj.gov/treasury/omb/publications/19bib/BIB.pdf
Big jump in “Ebola Hospital Preparedness and Response” while “Breastfeeding Peer Counseling” took a hit. What do they know that we don’t?
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 8:50 pm
Per a NJ.com article, as part a a wage settlement ………… “Other features of the contract include a one-time payment of $650 to retirees”
I know COLAs are frozen, so what makes it legal for the State to GIFT $650 to those who are already retired and providing no services ?
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 9:36 pm
The contract was retroactive to 2015. I’m sure it was just for retirees who have retired under the “new” contract that itself expires next year.
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 9:44 pm
I’ll repeat what I stated above ………………
“I know COLAs are frozen, so what makes it legal for the State to GIFT $650 to those who are already retired and providing no services ?”
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 10:01 pm
The people who got the $650 were employed in what would have been the first year of two of the contract. Therefore they would be entitled to any retroactive increase while they were an active employee. If I retire in dec 2020 and my contract expired in dec 2019, and the new contract is settled in 2021, I would be entitled to any increase that was retroactively awarded for 2020. The money would go into my base pay and my pension would be adjusted. Not quite he same thing as a post retirement COLA.
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 10:06 pm
In all fairness. These folks got a 4% raise over 4 years. Even with Murphy. That is not very good by any metric. Usually, contracts do run past the expiration date, but usually by no more than a year or so tops. Christie had no intention of negotiating with the CWA. He fully intended to let his term expire before he did. BTW, the taxpayer tab on bridge gate is up to $15M. But but but Mastro cleared. Our boy Chris. For the common man he was….
Posted by El gaupo on May 1, 2018 at 10:08 pm
God forbid you give me a Thanks El Guapo now I understand( regardless of whether you agree w it 🙄😉
Posted by Tough Love on May 1, 2018 at 10:59 pm
Ok El gaupo, I’ll accept that answer if indeed that $650 is limited to that small group of VERY recent retirees. The article did NOT suggest that the $650 payout was limited to this group.
Posted by MJ on May 2, 2018 at 6:19 am
El gaupo and Mr. Douglas, I do enjoy having both of you on this blog….Mr. Douglas I love your dry and witty sense of humor and El guapo you do add a certain flair…….
Posted by El gaupo on May 2, 2018 at 7:09 am
So I’ve been told. Lol.