Why can't teachers/cops live with 401(k)'s instead of pensions?

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, you insult me instead of simply answering the question...

"You're clueless, you just don't get it."
"very cowardly"

Uh huh.

Right.

I feel sorry for you.
I really do.

[Chesapeake Bill]

Jim,

Depsite your acertions, I do get it. You do not. The Nobel Prize winning economist George Friedman even understands the value that government research puts into the economy. Were it not for DARPA attempting to share research we might not have the internet, arguably one of the largest economic drivers of the modern era. Without scientists at NASA trying to build a better space ship we would not have the IPod. Government's role (particularly the military machine's) is to absorb the high cost of product development through research so it can then find comemrcial applications. Sure you can pick some obscure research about bovine flatulence research and argue its validity. What you cannot do is back up you statments about public servants building wealth. Public servants oversee the billions spent on research every year so that our economy continues to thrive and rebound. If the students are not educated they cannot compete and the economy suffers. If crime goes up businesses leave. Therefore public service does help build wealth. I find your tirades like those of a big bully who fires shots across the bow of others but calls foul when they fire back.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Jim,

Depsite your acertions, I do get it. You do not. The Nobel Prize winning economist George Friedman even understands the value that government research puts into the economy. Were it not for DARPA attempting to share research we might not have the internet, arguably one of the largest economic drivers of the modern era. Without scientists at NASA trying to build a better space ship we would not have the IPod. Government's role (particularly the military machine's) is to absorb the high cost of product development through research so it can then find comemrcial applications. Sure you can pick some obscure research about bovine flatulence research and argue its validity. What you cannot do is back up you statments about public servants building wealth. Public servants oversee the billions spent on research every year so that our economy continues to thrive and rebound. If the students are not educated they cannot compete and the economy suffers. If crime goes up businesses leave. Therefore public service does help build wealth. I find your tirades like those of a big bully who fires shots across the bow of others but calls foul when they fire back.

There would be no commercial spinoffs from government funded research without entrepeneurs. Nor would there be government funding of anything without those businesses and the employees created by entrepeneurs and the taxes collected from them.

Jim wants to know why public servants should get better bennies than the private servants who fund them. And he especially referred to the more local type public employees, not the rarified research types.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Jim,

Depsite your acertions, I do get it. You do not. The Nobel Prize winning economist George Friedman even understands the value that government research puts into the economy. Were it not for DARPA attempting to share research we might not have the internet, arguably one of the largest economic drivers of the modern era. Without scientists at NASA trying to build a better space ship we would not have the IPod. Government's role (particularly the military machine's) is to absorb the high cost of product development through research so it can then find comemrcial applications. Sure you can pick some obscure research about bovine flatulence research and argue its validity. What you cannot do is back up you statments about public servants building wealth. Public servants oversee the billions spent on research every year so that our economy continues to thrive and rebound. If the students are not educated they cannot compete and the economy suffers. If crime goes up businesses leave. Therefore public service does help build wealth. I find your tirades like those of a big bully who fires shots across the bow of others but calls foul when they fire back.

really?, what does any of what you wrote have to do with teachers and police and the burden of unfunded pension obligations?

[scottw]

[QUOTE=likwid;828806Uh huh.

Right.

I feel sorry for you.
I really do.[/QUOTE]

predictable

[scottw]

but if you want to talk about federal workers...maybe we should just change the name from "public servants" to 'highly paid/compensated government professionals"
....similar situation...maybe the answer is even more tax money funding more studies creating more wealth to help pay for these highly paid government workers and their luxurious benefits as they accomplish what could never be accomplished in the private sector?


Federal workers earning double their private counterparts
Updated 8/13/2010 10:53 AM

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

At a time when workers' pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees' average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds.
Federal workers have been awarded bigger average pay and benefit increases than private employees for nine years in a row. The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade.

Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.

The federal compensation advantage has grown from $30,415 in 2000 to $61,998 last year.

•Benefits. Federal workers received average benefits worth $41,791 in 2009. Most of this was the government's contribution to pensions. Employees contributed an additional $10,569.

•Pay. The average federal salary has grown 33% faster than inflation since 2000. USA TODAY reported in March that the federal government pays an average of 20% more than private firms for comparable occupations. The analysis did not consider differences in experience and education.

•Total compensation. Federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.


Business Insider

WARNING: The Federal Employees Pension System Is Running An Even Bigger Deficit Than Social Security
Bruce Krasting | Oct. 21, 2010,

I don’t think there is anyone who looks at the issue of entitlements in the US who is not gravely concerned about the direction we are on. Economists of all stripes, damn near everyone in D.C. and a long list of academics have all highlighted the problems. But the same groups that are raising red flags are misleading us on when and how this problem will affect us. They say/think it is a tomorrow problem. Actually it is hitting us today.

I want to focus on the Federal Employees Retirement System (“FERS”). This is a retirement program for federal workers. The program is similar to Social Security in a number of ways.

-FERS collects money from government workers and their employer.

-The program pays benefits to eligible workers and their families.

-FERS has a trust fund. Currently there is $775b of Special Issue Treasury securities in the fund. This is equivalent to 6% of our total debt and is therefore a very big deal. FERS holds as much of our paper as do the Chinese and the Federal Reserve.

-FERS is running a cash flow deficit. This is a new phenomenon. FERS is converting itself into a defined contribution plan that will address some of the problems. However the cash drain experienced in 2010 will not be reversed in the foreseeable future. It will increase. Some numbers from OMB:

Read more: WARNING: The Federal Employees Pension System Is Running An Even Bigger Deficit Than Social Security

quick...somebody build a spaceship!!!

[Chesapeake Bill]

I'd be the first to press the button and send you wherever you want to go...

For every article that says they are overcompensated there is another in a different paper that says they are undercompensated.If you base your reasoning on the Moonies you are putting yourself at risk. Do a little research on your own instead of taking everything at face value or spitting out sound bites. Your credibility wanes...

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

I'd be the first to press the button and send you wherever you want to go...

For every article that says they are overcompensated there is another in a different paper that says they are undercompensated.If you base your reasoning on the Moonies you are putting yourself at risk. Do a little research on your own instead of taking everything at face value or spitting out sound bites. Your credibility wanes...

my credability?

how is it possible that employees making far more than their counterparts in the private sector, recieving much more generous benefits and guarantees(or do you have an article that shows they're not?) which are bankrupting their "employer" at every level of government are "undercompensated" ?

your reasoning will lead to oblivion

this is like your wife maxing out all of your credit cards and then you ask her how she's planning to pay for it and she tells you that you are going to pay for it and that she plans to keep on spending because her spending creates your wealth

WAKE UP!!!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

For every article that says they are overcompensated there is another in a different paper that says they are undercompensated. ...

Please post a credible source that suggests that spending on municipal employees is not putting states and towns in a huge hole, or that municipal employees compensation is falling further behind private sector employees.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

•Pay. The average federal salary has grown 33% faster than inflation since 2000. USA TODAY reported in March that the federal government pays an average of 20% more than private firms for comparable occupations. The analysis did not consider differences in experience and education.

I can tell you from my experience, where I'm working now, that the Government employees make a shade less than the private sector for the IT field. I work for an IT contractor and I make about 3% more than my equivelant government counterpart. My health insurance is also better and my contribution is roughly half of theirs. They do have it better in time off where they start w/ 15 days off and I started w/ 13...and they receive 13 sick days to my 5. I am Private sector versus the public sector (DOD).

I can also tell you that I am making less here than my last job in the private sector. So in my experience the Government is less than or equal too the private sector as far as pay. Not twice as much.

As I stated this is in the IT field so I can't vouch for other fields in Government.

As to the Monkeys and Peanuts analogy.....the IT field would be extremely affected by sub par pay and benefits. IT Guys notoriously move around in search of better pay/benefits, so if you didn't make things comparable to Private sector you would have an IT Workforce in the DOD that was made up of tech school graduates that probably wouldn't spend more than 2 years on the job before leaving. How efficient is that for an organisation to operate....6 months to ramp up your talent then they leave a year/year and a half down the road.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Jim,

Depsite your acertions, I do get it. You do not. The Nobel Prize winning economist George Friedman even understands the value that government research puts into the economy. Were it not for DARPA attempting to share research we might not have the internet, arguably one of the largest economic drivers of the modern era. Without scientists at NASA trying to build a better space ship we would not have the IPod. Government's role (particularly the military machine's) is to absorb the high cost of product development through research so it can then find comemrcial applications. Sure you can pick some obscure research about bovine flatulence research and argue its validity. What you cannot do is back up you statments about public servants building wealth. Public servants oversee the billions spent on research every year so that our economy continues to thrive and rebound. If the students are not educated they cannot compete and the economy suffers. If crime goes up businesses leave. Therefore public service does help build wealth. I find your tirades like those of a big bully who fires shots across the bow of others but calls foul when they fire back.

If you're saying that some publicly funded entities to produce valuable work, you get no argument from me.

However, the facts are that (1) in CT, Mass, and RI, we have tax rates that are higher than average.

(2) despite those high tax rates, we have managed to spend way more than we have, menaing we have lots of debt

(3) a huge reason for that over-spending is bennies to public employees.

Those 3 facts tell me that teh benefits promised to public employees are more than the taxpayers can reasonably afford. Pointing out that NASA does some worthwhile things, does not refute my point.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I can tell you from my experience, where I'm working now, that the Government employees make a shade less than the private sector for the IT field. I work for an IT contractor and I make about 3% more than my equivelant government counterpart. My health insurance is also better and my contribution is roughly half of theirs. They do have it better in time off where they start w/ 15 days off and I started w/ 13...and they receive 13 sick days to my 5. I am Private sector versus the public sector (DOD).

I can also tell you that I am making less here than my last job in the private sector. So in my experience the Government is less than or equal too the private sector as far as pay. Not twice as much.

As I stated this is in the IT field so I can't vouch for other fields in Government.

As to the Monkeys and Peanuts analogy.....the IT field would be extremely affected by sub par pay and benefits. IT Guys notoriously move around in search of better pay/benefits, so if you didn't make things comparable to Private sector you would have an IT Workforce in the DOD that was made up of tech school graduates that probably wouldn't spend more than 2 years on the job before leaving. How efficient is that for an organisation to operate....6 months to ramp up your talent then they leave a year/year and a half down the road.

That's an interesting observation, but as you said, it's in our national security interests to have qualified IT guys working for the DOD. Furthermore, I have never seen data that suggests that federal spending of DOD IT employees is the #1 driver of the federal deficit. However, state spending on benefits of municipal employees is a huge driver of state/town deficits.

In other words, DOD IT employees are not pushing the federal government to the brink of bankruptcy. But retirement/healthcare benefits to municipal employees absolutely are pushing local governments to the brink of bankruptcy.

That couple in my neighborhood (both public schoolteachers) make a combined salary of about $150k. That's more than double the median household income in CT, and they work far fewer hours. And with the bennies they get, the difference is much greater. And no matter how bad they are at their job, with tenure, it's virtually impossible to get rid of them (not that they are bad teachers, i have no idea).

And cops being able to collect pensions after 20 years, at age 43? While everyone else hopes to retire at 65?

If everyone here is comfortable with forking over another paycheck or two every year, so that teachers and cops can keep benefits that dwarf what's available to the taxpayers, then we should do it. That's how democracy works.

I just don't see why they deserve so much more than what's available to those of us stuck with the bill, and I'm not sure any post here directly addressed that.

[scottw]

I really wonder what some believe is going to happen, boatloads of money will suddenly appear to make things all better??? the feds have been subsidizing the states have been subsidizing the towns and cities and that is OVER! 14 TRILLION dollars OVER!

this isn't a little bump in the road...this is a sink hole

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I have never seen data that suggests that federal spending of DOD IT employees is the #1 driver of the federal deficit.

You didn't read Scott's Post above?

Granted it was for all federal employees...not just IT...then again I was just putting forth what I've seen

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

You didn't read Scott's Post above?

Granted it was for all federal employees...not just IT...then again I was just putting forth what I've seen

I did indeed read it. And from what I read, there was a concern with benefits paid to all federal workers, not salaries paid to IT contractors.

Dad, in your area, do most IT workers in the private scetor have guaranteed pensions? Not here in CT.

The biggest challenge by far for the federal budget is unfunded obligations for Medicare. However, the majority of states that have huge debt, are in that posiiton largely because of public employee benefits.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I did indeed read it. And from what I read, there was a concern with benefits paid to all federal workers, not salaries paid to IT contractors.

I was drawing a comparison to the Federal vs. Private sector salaries in the IT field. That the federal salaries are below or equal too private.....not grossly above.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I was drawing a comparison to the Federal vs. Private sector salaries in the IT field. That the federal salaries are below or equal too private.....not grossly above.

I saw that, and I found that interesting. In your area (are you in Mass?) do IT workers in the private scetor get guaranteed pensions? If not, that's something you need to consider when comparing public to private. If public salaries are 5% less than the private scetor, but they get pensions, then in my opinion total compensation is much higher in the public sector.

I was talking about teachers. Here in CT, public schoolteachers make more than double what private schoolteachers make, with far inferior results (although you can't just compare test scores obviously, because private schools select who to let in).

[Fishpart]

Read an article several weeks ago ON AVERAGE public sector employees are compensated 120% of private sector employees and when benefits are included (sick time, vacation, retirement) it jumps to 150%.

Sure ONE GUY can make more in the private sector, but as a whole public employees make way more.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I saw that, and I found that interesting. In your area (are you in Mass?) do IT workers in the private scetor get guaranteed pensions? If not, that's something you need to consider when comparing public to private. If public salaries are 5% less than the private scetor, but they get pensions, then in my opinion total compensation is much higher in the public sector.

I was talking about teachers. Here in CT, public schoolteachers make more than double what private schoolteachers make, with far inferior results (although you can't just compare test scores obviously, because private schools select who to let in).

total compensation really needs to be considered, the numbers for RI state employees was released a while back showing "total compensation" and it was mind numbing( I used to think of this everytime I'd drive through the Newport Bridge toll booth where I think the average worker was making in excess of 60 grand+++ plus all the other stuff and I'd have to wait for them to finish stuffing the sandwich in their mouth before I could get my reciept, EasyPass is great)....I just read an article in the WSJ talking about the Utah plan for revamping the pension system going to a 401K and the government contributing 10-12% a year...one of the first comments said 10-12%??? the private sector employers have to factor in all costs for total compensation to determine your value or overall compensation level as an employee, something tells me that governement simple looks at compensation levels and then piles on the benefits without regard to how they're going to pay for it in the future...thus our insolvent current state...

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I saw that, and I found that interesting. In your area (are you in Mass?) do IT workers in the private scetor get guaranteed pensions? If not, that's something you need to consider when comparing public to private. If public salaries are 5% less than the private scetor, but they get pensions, then in my opinion total compensation is much higher in the public sector.

Those that are grandfathered in recieve a pension, Government employees hired after 1984 are enrolled in FERS, which is comparable to a 401k (not exactly, but comparable).

http://www.opm.gov/forms/pdfimage/RI90-1.pdf

Most of the guys I work w/ are not grandfathered in, so they are comparable to private sector

[scottw]

[QUOTE=The Dad Fisherman;828892]Those that are grandfathered in recieve a pension, Government employees hired after 1984 are enrolled in FERS, which is comparable to a 401k (not exactly, but comparable).


FERS is running a cash flow deficit. This is a new phenomenon. FERS is converting itself into a defined contribution plan that will address some of the problems. However the cash drain experienced in 2010 will not be reversed in the foreseeable future. It will increase.


January 2011
factor in :
Even controlling for the effects of census employment, federal employment has increased constantly throughout the recession and into today. Since January 2008, net of census hiring, the federal government has grown by 3.5 percent, gaining 98,000 jobs.


What about employment in the rest of the economy? Since the beginning of the recession, state governments have added 42,000 employees to their payrolls. Local governments have cut 258,000 jobs (1.7 percent of their January 2008 workforce). Overall, total government employment has shrunk by 0.5 percent since January 2008. And the private sector has lost 7.2 million jobs, or 6 percent of its January 2008 workforce.

if you are perpetually on unemployment...you are essentially a government worker...are you not?


read about the new bureaucracies, offices, commissions, buildings, titles, and on and on.... jobs being "created" to institute and manage Obamacare and your head will really spin

[scottw]

Our view on public pensions: Lavish benefits hurt states - USATODAY.com

The Pew Center on the States estimates that state and local governments have promised $3.35 trillion in benefit plans and have underfunded these plans by $1 trillion.

In some states and localities, it is not uncommon to see pensions of 2.5%-3% of a worker's final salary, times the number of years worked. At 3%, a worker can retire in his or her 50s, after 33 years of service, and continue drawing the same income. With deals like this, plus retiree health benefits, New York City now spends $144,000 a year for a sanitation worker, according to the Manhattan Institute think tank.

here's govmt for ya...
News Tribune exclusive: State hires hundreds despite hiring freeze | Government / Politics - The News Tribune


News Tribune exclusive: State hires hundreds despite hiring freeze

Officially, there is a hiring freeze on the books. But state agencies have won exemptions that have opened the door to 1,700 hires since the freeze began in March, a News Tribune analysis found.

like the Obamacare exemptions...

I bet you can guess which states continue to hire workers to the payrolls and which are being more judicious