It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Public services being cut to pay for pensions

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

So nobody had their hands in the cookie jar?




posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blaine91555
This is what happens when public servants are paid more than their counterparts in the private sector and lavished with union perks. The source of it is unions and politicians pandering for union support.

I'd imagine if you could get into the minds of the local socialist leaning politicians, you would find they don't worry because they assume at some point the Federal government will bail them out, so why worry?

Government often seems to hire the least capable and pay them too much for doing too little work. Not a doubt in my mind a person from the private sector could do two peoples jobs and still have half the day to daydream while surfing the Internet.


It's not just the pay and the perks, it's that there has been so many of them. At least in Illinois. There they have townships/villages, and every township is like a separate government. It is seriously the biggest racket!



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: JAGStorm

So nobody had their hands in the cookie jar?


We're talking about Illinois, of COURSE people had their hands in the cookie jar, that is pretty much accepted as
normal behavior there!

www.illinoispolicy.org...




Under Public Act 100-0281, which Rauner signed Aug. 24th, Illinois police chiefs will no longer have the option of collecting a second pension by being rehired by a city as a civilian. And police officers who return to service in a new city after retiring won’t be able to collect a second police pension by enrolling in that city’s local police pension fund.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: JAGStorm

So nobody had their hands in the cookie jar?


We're talking about Illinois, of COURSE people had their hands in the cookie jar, that is pretty much accepted as
normal behavior there!

www.illinoispolicy.org...




Under Public Act 100-0281, which Rauner signed Aug. 24th, Illinois police chiefs will no longer have the option of collecting a second pension by being rehired by a city as a civilian. And police officers who return to service in a new city after retiring won’t be able to collect a second police pension by enrolling in that city’s local police pension fund.


We haven't even gotten into govt administrators spiking salaries a year or two prior to retirement to inflate their pension payouts as it is based on last year or two of salary, not average earnings over your career.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

It's not just there either.

I have a friend here who recently dealt with government employees in the Alaska government for a truly urgent matter. It took a full year for a document at one end of the hall at the statehouse to get to an office at the other end of the hall. Already approved and just needing to be filed at the office at the other end of the hall.

Local government has become so bureaucratic that simple things can take years, in the case I mentioned two years and of course those that do the work keep screaming for more and more benefits.
edit on 9/10/2019 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: JAGStorm

So nobody had their hands in the cookie jar?


We're talking about Illinois, of COURSE people had their hands in the cookie jar, that is pretty much accepted as
normal behavior there!

www.illinoispolicy.org...




Under Public Act 100-0281, which Rauner signed Aug. 24th, Illinois police chiefs will no longer have the option of collecting a second pension by being rehired by a city as a civilian. And police officers who return to service in a new city after retiring won’t be able to collect a second police pension by enrolling in that city’s local police pension fund.


The other issue is that nepotism in IL is practically a way of life. So all these pensioners are cousins, uncles, brothers of some alderman or police chief doling out jobs to help out his family members, friends, etc.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Oh I know. Point I'm making is the taxpayer going to get mad enough to not do a bail out. Is the government just going assume that they should? Why should the taxpayer have to foot the bill twice? How would the government try and sell it to the people? The scary part is some people would be ok with it. Hell half of them don't even know its happening.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:15 PM
link   
Chris Christie putting the smack down on teachers and pensions in NJ.




posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

The sell will be that these are loyal, hardworking public servants who have served the public for all these years, and they'll do what they do whenever they need a public employee tax increase - they'll trot out the policemen, firefighters, and EMTs as though they are the only ones being paid for with the money which is not true at all.

No one wants to cut the funding for those three groups because everyone understands the hard work and sacrifices those people do make.

They also make a very convenient political shield.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
Chris Christie putting the smack down on teachers and pensions in NJ.

"You cannot pay what you do not have!"

Man love that part!!



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555



Ladies and gentleman, your bureaucrats!

And since many of them are unionized, they are hard to fire.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: mamabeth
a reply to: JAGStorm

The biggest problem is the baby boomers are retiring and I'm
one of them.


The entire baby boomers played by the games that Govment set up. I worked for 35 years at the same company paid in SS taxes my company paid in SS taxes. The day they try to change the rules on SS that will be the day the boomers burn down DC and tar and feather the DC critters.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: JON666

The problem is that the rules are unsustainable, so some generation is going to get burned. And some generation is going to have to be the first.

Either we all understand that this has to happen and we all make sacrifices in what we expected, or we may all face a situation where there will be nothing for any of us and it will be a sudden, hard stop.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

The city I lived in had higher property taxes for the kind of city it was, and that was a large par of it, the pension issue for police and fire.
They did make changes for new hires, but those legacy costs made the city taxes high.

It truly isn't fair to expect people to have to pay for those legacy costs.
Either in not enough protection, or crazy high taxes.

Especially since many police and fire work 20 years for their pensions, then retire, collect that first pension and get another job.
There should be a better way.
People should not collect full pensions and health care at 40-45 years of age. Let them work a desk job for 10 years, work the schools, something less strenuous....let them put in at least 30 years.
These pensions are a slap in the face to the large numbers of people in the country who will NEVER get a pension....no matter what their education, job or income level.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 11:00 PM
link   
After twenty five years, a teacher can retire and collect a pension here. They get almost ten grand more than a new teacher starting on the job full time for their pension. No other job I know of has that high of a retirement payment. That does not sound right to me.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 11:02 PM
link   
The major problem is that the money put into the retirement funds was not left in the retirement funds to accrue interest. It was borrowed against, and put into investment funds that were far more risky than they were touted to be. They were used as leverage to get bigger loans and expand spending beyond what was sustainable. In the private sector this would be illegal, but because it is government run it is legal.

It is completely underpants on head idiotic. Using future liabilities as something of value to prop up credit ratings is asinine and a practice that needs to be outlawed. This should tell us all that credit ratings not about actually rating how good someone or something is for their money, but how much debt can be leveraged out of greed before the whole game collapses.

I say this as someone who will never be able to collect social security because it will surely be completely gone by the time I have any chance of collecting what I have put in.



posted on Sep, 10 2019 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse
Some local school districts around where I live force teachers into an early retirement because it is cheaper to do so than continue to pay them. A major problem with the pay scale of schools is it is entirely time based and not merit based. So a teacher who has been teaching for 25 years gets to the maximum end of the pay scale, and continues to get higher and higher retirement funding. In my understanding the only other requirement to getting into a higher bracket is the higher degree held (at least in my state).

It turns out that they would rather pay a "retired" teacher in perpetuity at 50% of their pay grade and hire a new teacher to replace them for 25% ish more cost.

The only real fix to that would be to up the initial pay, but have it level out lower at the tail end, while decreasing the retirement fund payouts. Unfortunately teachers Unions will never have anything to do with that as it would drain their coffers and make them irrelevant early on... in spite of it being mandatory in my state to pay Union dues as a teacher, as they are automatically deduced from all paychecks even if you are not a member of the Union.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Lifelong Illinois resident here, I'm about 40yrs old.

I worked on a third-generation family farm my first 25 yrs. It was broken up between my father and his siblings, who started renting out their shares for tip-top dollar... In other words, too expensive for us or any farmer to afford, except for the HUGE farming operations in our area.

Fortunately, my wife and I run a successful website; the advertising revenue is ample, and dependable. My skill set is also diverse and highly marketable. This means we can relocate to pretty much anywhere.

we've looked all around the country, but we're zeroing in on Tennessee. Truthfully, though, getting the hell out of this state will feel like a substantial pay raise for both of us.

So long Illinois friends and family. Good luck to you. There's a disaster happening right now... don't wait until the entire ship has sunk beneath the waves to realize it!
edit on 9112019 by M4nWithNoN4me because: Punctuation



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Where I live we have several properties that are way over assessed for taxes. The owners have been trying to fight for a re-assessment. The local Teacher's Union has lawyers fighting the re-assessment. The Union believes that money is theirs.



posted on Sep, 11 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm




My friends have already have felt the pains in Illinois, streets not being cleared of snow, not enough police, yet sky high taxes. This isn't right. I've seen some of this happening in my area too. The police force is a skeleton crew. The sheriff even told me how stretched they are.

Back to the question if public services etc aren't really providing a service or are providing a partial service, why do taxpayers have to pay for it?


Capitalist ideology is to run down public services to the point the public demand a change which leads to privatization, you gotta find who would benefit from that.
The UK is seeing the tory government run down the NHS, (un)surprisingly lots of tory politicians have squillions of quid invested in private health care companies.
Taxpayers should get what they pay for but, with the choices being between capitalist Democrats or uber-capitalist Republicans is it any wonder public services are run down?







 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join