Who, exactly, supports public unions?

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by CTSurfrat

Jim,

Many of your points are completely valid. (Can you believe a teacher is saying this! I'm a conservative in a blue state and surrounded by liberals at work!) You are correct, my 7% plus interest will not cover the money paid out to me during my retirement. My contributions do go to help pay for the teachers who have already retired. And I agree, I have no interest in paying into SS, although I have for years with all the odd and summer jobs I have had. I will never see that money again b/c I will get no SS benefits. I have no confidence it will be there anyway. I also have no confidence that the teacher retirement plan will be there either. As such, I contribute to a 403b - the public sector version of a 401k.

Our health insurance percentage goes up every year, and we have to pay for it all when we retire.

I understand your feelings about funding someone else. I did not get in over my head with my mortgage, why can't I get bailed out or special financing. I don't want to pay for those who made bad decisions.

Many of these benefits for public sector employees were put in place, I believe, when salaries were much less than they are now. There are still many areas of the state with low teacher salaries. Even still, I do think you are correct, if we don't get a handle of some of these unrealistic benefits, we are all in trouble!

My post was not an attempt to say how bad or good teachers have it, it was just to provide some information.

So will you have a 70,000 dollar a year pension?

[TheSpecialist]

[QUOTE] It public employees want a $70,000 a year pension, than they can figure out, ON THEIR OWN, how to amass that much. If they choose to only put 7% of their pay into their pension, and it turns out that was less than half of what they needed, THAT SHOULD NOT BE MY PROBLEM TO SOLVE.
/QUOTE]


Although these numbers are from 2002, I highly doubt that anyones pension benefit has doubled since then.

If you are talking 70,000/ year pension where are you getting these actual numbers?


TEACHER RETIREMENT COMPARISONS

[CTSurfrat]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

So will you have a 70,000 dollar a year pension?

If a teacher earns 100k year after 35 years of teaching, then yes he/she will have a pension of 70k. Most teachers don't make that kind of money! In 2006-2007 year average ct teacher salary was about 61k.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by CTSurfrat

If a teacher earns 100k year after 35 years of teaching, then yes he/she will have a pension of 70k. Most teachers don't make that kind of money! In 2006-2007 year average ct teacher salary was about 61k.

Exactly, I know there are some exceptions like high paid administrators, but our friend Jim would have everyone believe that these people all earn a pension close to what their salary is, and that simply is not the case. Also in many cases these people are paying large payments for health insurance in their retirement.

Is the pension system out of control and costly , sure but what is the cheaper alternative. If they instituted 401k plans, than the employer would no doubt end up with a matching contribution of some sort. This would be a taxpayer cost. Also I believe these teachers would also then have to pay into SSi, as would their employer, and they would then receive benefits , another taxpayer cost.

[CTSurfrat]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Exactly, I know there are some exceptions like high paid administrators, but our friend Jim would have everyone believe that these people all earn a pension close to what their salary is, and that simply is not the case. Also in many cases these people are paying large payments for health insurance in their retirement.

Is the pension system out of control and costly , sure but what is the cheaper alternative. If they instituted 401k plans, than the employer would no doubt end up with a matching contribution of some sort. This would be a taxpayer cost. Also I believe these teachers would also then have to pay into SSi, as would their employer, and they would then receive benefits , another taxpayer cost.

From my district retirees pay about 12k a year for health insurance. We have the option to contribute to a 403b, which is similar to 401k, but there is no matching.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by CTSurfrat

From my district retirees pay about 12k a year for health insurance. We have the option to contribute to a 403b, which is similar to 401k, but there is no matching.

"From my district retirees pay about 12k a year for health insurance"

Please sir, tell me the other piece of that, which is, how much do the taxpayers pay for an eaverage health plan for retirees? Are you saying that the retired teacher pays 100% of the cost of the plan? I seriously doubt that.

"We have the option to contribute to a 403b, which is similar to 401k, but there is no matching"

Oh. So you want the taxpayers to match your contribution into your 403b, ON TOP OF GIVING YOU A GUARANTEED PENSION?

What's next? A hope diamond on your birthday, and a Fabrege egg for Christmas? Is there any limit to what you feel entitked to confiscate from your neighbors? Is there any limit to what property taxes should be? Is it ever enough?

you folks are public servents. And when the public you serve, collectively has less money than they used to, the sad reality is that we have less to give you. But your unions refise to listen to that, and they grotesquely claim that they are fighting for the middle class. It's repugnant.

[Swimmer]

Originally Posted by :deadhorse:Jim:deadhorse: in CT

"you folks are public servents. And when the public you serve, collectively has less money than they used to, the sad reality is that we have less to give you. But your unions refise to listen to that, and they grotesquely claim that they are fighting for the middle class. It's repugnant.

Hey Jim, do you do your brother-in-law's taxes? You know the guy who retired from where was it now, Meridian, Ct. police, or what department was it, refresh my memory. I'll bet you do taxes on the side to make ends meet. Hey Jim, when people pay you cash do you claim it all? Ya, have to watch out for those actuaries. They are a devious bunch.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"From my district retirees pay about 12k a year for health insurance"

Please sir, tell me the other piece of that, which is, how much do the taxpayers pay for an eaverage health plan for retirees? Are you saying that the retired teacher pays 100% of the cost of the plan? I seriously doubt that.

"We have the option to contribute to a 403b, which is similar to 401k, but there is no matching"

Oh. So you want the taxpayers to match your contribution into your 403b, ON TOP OF GIVING YOU A GUARANTEED PENSION?

What's next? A hope diamond on your birthday, and a Fabrege egg for Christmas? Is there any limit to what you feel entitked to confiscate from your neighbors? Is there any limit to what property taxes should be? Is it ever enough?

you folks are public servents. And when the public you serve, collectively has less money than they used to, the sad reality is that we have less to give you. But your unions refise to listen to that, and they grotesquely claim that they are fighting for the middle class. It's repugnant.

Seriously if you think you have it that bad here, then why not take you money and move to South America?

[CTSurfrat]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"From my district retirees pay about 12k a year for health insurance"

Please sir, tell me the other piece of that, which is, how much do the taxpayers pay for an eaverage health plan for retirees? Are you saying that the retired teacher pays 100% of the cost of the plan? I seriously doubt that.

"We have the option to contribute to a 403b, which is similar to 401k, but there is no matching"

Oh. So you want the taxpayers to match your contribution into your 403b, ON TOP OF GIVING YOU A GUARANTEED PENSION?

Jim,

Slow down! This seems to be a very emotional topic for you. First of all, yes, retirees from my district pay 100% of their health insurance, the district pays NONE of it. Second, I never said I wanted taxpayers to match anything, I just stated the fact that we have 403b plans and that the town does not match at all. I never hinted, insinuated or stated that I wanted them to match the money I contribute.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by CTSurfrat

Jim,

Slow down! This seems to be a very emotional topic for you. First of all, yes, retirees from my district pay 100% of their health insurance, the district pays NONE of it. Second, I never said I wanted taxpayers to match anything, I just stated the fact that we have 403b plans and that the town does not match at all. I never hinted, insinuated or stated that I wanted them to match the money I contribute.

Ct Surfrat that takes a big bite out of your pension then, sorry to hear that.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

but our friend Jim would have everyone believe that these people all earn a pension close to what their salary is, and that simply is not the case. Also in many cases these people are paying large payments for health insurance in their retirement.

Is the pension system out of control and costly , sure but what is the cheaper alternative. If they instituted 401k plans, than the employer would no doubt end up with a matching contribution of some sort. This would be a taxpayer cost. Also I believe these teachers would also then have to pay into SSi, as would their employer, and they would then receive benefits , another taxpayer cost.

Specialist, you are either ignorant or biased.

"Jim would have everyone believe that these people all earn a pension close to what their salary is"

I never said any such thing. The pension payout is what, a % of their highest 3 years, or something? All I'm saying is, whatever the promised benefits are, the resulting debt proves that the benefits are simply too rich. Here in CT, the unfunded liabilities for retirement asnd healthcare benefits are $34 billion, which is $10,000 per person. Either our taxes are way too low (no one is saying that), or the benrfits are too rich. What other possibility is there?

"these people are paying large payments for health insurance in their retirement"

EARTH TO SPECIALIST. In the real world, where people have to earn their money instead of confiscating it through taxes, no one gets healthcare in retirement. It's simply too expensive for any customer to voluntarily absorb that cost. Public union employees force me, through force of law, to give you benefits that NO ONE would voluntarily pay for. Is that fair?

"If they instituted 401k plans, than the employer would no doubt end up with a matching contribution of some sort. This would be a taxpayer cost. "

You need to get SOME FACTS before you form your opinions, sir. Yes, 401(k) contributions involve a cost, but that cost IS A PITTANCE compared to the cost of a guaranteed pension. For God's sake man, why on earth do you think the enitre non-union world switched to 401(k)'s 20 years ago? Because it was CHEAPER.

You have no idea what you're talking about. None.

"Also I believe these teachers would also then have to pay into SSi, as would their employer, and they would then receive benefits , another taxpayer cost"

Oh. So you are suggesting that teachers MADE A SACRIFICE by opting out of social security? You're saying it's CHEAPER for society to give teachers pensions, than it is for them to participate in social security?

Do you ever get tired of being so unbelievably wrong? Seriously? You really, really think that guaranteed pensions cost taxpayers LESS than social security?