More than 6,400 Mass employees make over $100K

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

If you want to hate, hate on the CEO's making far more money than they will ever need....

Wrong again, because you don't get economics 101.

I agree that CEO compensation is insane. But CEOs in the private sector, unlike unionized employees in the public sector, cannot force anyone to absorb those costs.

If Bill Gates pays himself too much, the marketplace will respond by buying from his competitors. So Gates, unlike public unions, is only getting from his customers that which his customers freely choose to give him. He can't force his costs on anybody. Bill Gates isn't hurting anybody, the free marketplace does not allow him to do so. (On a side note, what he's doing is creating thousands of good jobs, and creating wealth for his millions of shareholders. He is also taxed at the highest rate, which reduces the tax burden on the rest of us.)

Taxpayers don't have the luxury of buying from someone else. Last time I checked, I don't have the option of not paying the portion of my taxes that I think are ridiculously excessive.

By what right do public unionized employees forcibly confiscate from taxpayers, revenue to cover costs that no one in the private sector would ever be williung to pay?

We have buried this issue for decades, but the check has arrived at our table, and it's a big check. We have elected politicians who are much more concerned with getting re-elected than they are concerned with solving tough problems, and it's about to blow up in our faces.

Or do you union guys not agree that we are facing a debt crisis, due in large part to your benefits?

I want to be clear, I do not hate cops and teachers. If my property taxes are raised so that cops and teachers don't have to live in trailers and eat cat food, that's one thing. If my property taxes are raised so that cops and teachers and cops can cling to insane, antiquated benefits that dwarf anything available in the private sector, that's something else. And no rational person can suggest that the latter isn't exactly what's happening.

In the private sector, we live with 401(k)s, and we pay, on average, 35% - 40% of our healthcare costs (the company pays the rest). And we all survive. There's no reason why public employees cannot do the same. They obviously won't LIKE making the switch, but that doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.

I have never heard of anyone who had to sell their house because of Bill Gates. Lots of people are forced out of their homes by property tax hikes.

[Chesapeake Bill]

Actually Jim I don't care to debate with you. Much like the various televangelists you don't want to discuss anything. Instead you merely want to espouse your own brand of the King James Bible. You aren't going to sway me to your way of seeing the world so lets just leave it at that. You can pick up your bible and try to win over other souls...I can tell that your insults about people not understanding economics 101 is really working.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Chesapeake Bill

Actually Jim I don't care to debate with you. Much like the various televangelists you don't want to discuss anything. Instead you merely want to espouse your own brand of the King James Bible. You aren't going to sway me to your way of seeing the world so lets just leave it at that. You can pick up your bible and try to win over other souls...I can tell that your insults about people not understanding economics 101 is really working.

I don't want to discuss anything? Please. I answered all of your points, you are the one who refuses to address one simple question.

Coward.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Have you ever worked in the private sector? I'm expected to do my job, regardless of how many hours it takes. That is standard, accepted practice, except for municipal employees I guess.

Everybody in the Private sector doesn't get paid Salary. There are plenty of people who work Hourly, get paid Overtime and at a time and a half rate.

Its not just the Public Sector employees that are getting paid overtime

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Everybody in the Private sector doesn't get paid Salary. There are plenty of people who work Hourly, get paid Overtime and at a time and a half rate.

Its not just the Public Sector employees that are getting paid overtime

I'm sure most of us wish boat mechanics worked this way...
no more, sorry, it actually took me 5 hours not 3....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Everybody in the Private sector doesn't get paid Salary. There are plenty of people who work Hourly, get paid Overtime and at a time and a half rate.

Its not just the Public Sector employees that are getting paid overtime

Dad, if you hyper-disect every one of my posts, I promise that you'll find these issues. I don't see you doing that to anyone else, but that's OK, because I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong.

I never, ever said that no one in the private sector gets paid hourly. But many, many people in the private sector (especially those that are full time with benefits) are "exempt", which means their salary covers their workweek, regardless of how many hours they work. Is that correct?

"Its not just the Public Sector employees that are getting paid overtime"

True, very true. But it's also very different, and here's why. In the private scetor, if a company wants to pay overtime, they still have to make their customers WANT to buy their product. If a company can figure out how to pass on that cost to their customers in a way that makes those customers still willing to voluntarily pay that cost, I say good for that company. But the customer has the easy choice to say "no" to that cost of overtime, simply by buying from a competitor.

The public sector has MUCH more authority over their customers (the taxpayers). If the public unions give themselves a big fat raise, I (as a taxpayer) cannot easily choose not to pay that cost. That cost is forcibly passed on to me, taken away from my kids' college fund, and I cannot stop it (unless I move, which is a lot more cumbersome than simply buying something from another company, and a lot more expensive).

Would you say that's a significant difference Dad?

Dad, can you answer a simple direct question?

"Since most of the private sector did away with pensions years ago, because they were too expensive, why is it unfair to ask public unionized employees to follow suit? If everyone else is forced to find a way to live with whatever we accumulate in our 401(k)s, why can't teachers and cops do the same thing? Why can't public servents live with the same benefits offered to the taxpayers whom they serve?"

[The Dad Fisherman]

I'm not Hyper-dissecting anything......it just sounded from your statement that everybody in the private sector gets salary and the public sector are the ones getting the overtime.

I was just clarifying


and trust me...I've done it to others too....

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by Piscator

If you think most details that are paid out for 8 hours are actually 8 hours long, you are mistaken. Very ofter a case of beer to the guy overseeing the work (phone company, construction etc) will turn a 3 hour detail into an 8 hour detail with the sign of a paper. The city doesn't pay but the company and ultimatly the consumer does in the end.

You are correct about some of what you say, but, around here most details today are 7-8 hours with construction crews excavating and putting in new sewer lines etc:. What is that cop usually doing, on the cell phone, drinking coffee, looking in the hole or bullsh-ting with the worker, that is why some get hit by an oncoming car.

What gets me is the city says it is a safety issue. The cop that goes on his regular 4-midnight shift leaves the road construction 3-3:30 and no cop takes his place. Where is the safety issue when the work goes on to 5 PM.

[Fly Rod]

You can go back and forth about municipal employees and the private sector employees, one thing that they have in common is they are both on a fixed income, you know exactly what you are going to get in your pay check week to week for a 40 hour work week, unless you get a pay raise before you see a change in your pay check.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'm not Hyper-dissecting anything......it just sounded from your statement that everybody in the private sector gets salary and the public sector are the ones getting the overtime.

I was just clarifying


and trust me...I've done it to others too....

Fair enough. How about answering my question?

[Jim in CT]

When I worked as an employee benefits actuary, there were 3 occasions where my firm was hired by towns to see what the savings would be if (1) public employees switched from pensions to 401(k)'s, and (2) public employees paid the same percentage of their healthcare costs as the average taxpayer in the town.

They were very cool studies. In all 3 cases, we determined that those actions would save each household about $1600 per year in property taxes. Those changes were not implemented in any of the 3 towns, and by coincidence all 3 towns were run by Democrats.

What that means is this. The average family pays $1600 per year just for the portion of public benefits that go beyond what's available to everyone else.

I'd like someone, anyone, to tell me why public employees have the right to take $1600 away from my kids each year, just so they can cling to benefits that don't exist anywhere else. Why is their financial security more important to society that the security of my kids?

And as a side note, that $1600 annual surcharge was at existing property tax levels. Now that towns are realizing they can't come close to paying for what the unions demanded, taxes will go up, menaing that annual surcharge will be much more than $1600.

Anyone in a union out there, please tell me why you deserve that money and those benefits. I'm a rational, reasonable guy, alwaya willing to listen.

Chris Christie for president!!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

it just sounded from your statement that everybody in the private sector gets salary and the public sector are the ones getting the overtime.

....

Dad, as far as I'm concerned, a company in the private sector can do whatever they want. They can pay all employees $10 million a year for all I care. Because in the private scetor (unlike the public sector) no one is forced to pay that cost unless they decide it's a good deal for them. Private sector companies can't increase prices, and then say "pay these new higher prices or I'll seize your house".

Do you not see a big difference there? The private sector (in the vast majority of cases) cannot greedily screw their customers. Competition prohibits that.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Would you say that's a significant difference Dad?

Dad, can you answer a simple direct question?

OMG, I can't answer it, its impossible. I have been beaten by you, painted into a corner and trapped by your Superior Intellect and Amazing Internet Prowess....Kirk to Bridge, Get us out of here.

You posted a question and people here are trying to give you there take on it....but everytime they post something you don't agree with you come back w/ the "Can't Anybody answer a simple question" argument.

I'll Answer them for you and then maybe we can move on.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Would you say that's a significant difference Dad?

Difference in What? I stated that Private Sector Employees receive time and a half for overtime worked also.....so in that case the answer is No....No difference at all. Overtime is Overtime

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Dad, can you answer a simple direct question?

Yes.....but note that your "Simple Direct" Question is really 3 questions

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Since most of the private sector did away with pensions years ago, because they were too expensive, why is it unfair to ask public unionized employees to follow suit?

Its Not....Ask Away. No law says you can't ask

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If everyone else is forced to find a way to live with whatever we accumulate in our 401(k)s, why can't teachers and cops do the same thing?

They Could

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Why can't public servents live with the same benefits offered to the taxpayers whom they serve?"

They Could

There....now can we move on.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Fair enough. How about answering my question?

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

Ok, I concede that I asked you that question after you posted. Whoop-dee-do.

Now, how about the fact that not you, nor anyone else, tried to answer it. If someone directly addressed my question, I missed it, so please show me.

Dad, it gets tiresome when I make the attempt to directly respond to dozens of questions and points, and no one will respond to one of mine.

You say folks "gave their take" on it? Where? Where did someone directly address the question I asked about the fairness of forcing taxpayers to bear these costs?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

OMG, I can't answer it, its impossible. I have been beaten by you, painted into a corner and trapped by your Superior Intellect and Amazing Internet Prowess....Kirk to Bridge, Get us out of here.

You posted a question and people here are trying to give you there take on it....but everytime they post something you don't agree with you come back w/ the "Can't Anybody answer a simple question" argument.

I'll Answer them for you and then maybe we can move on.



Difference in What? I stated that Private Sector Employees receive time and a half for overtime worked also.....so in that case the answer is No....No difference at all. Overtime is Overtime



Yes.....but note that your "Simple Direct" Question is really 3 questions



Its Not....Ask Away. No law says you can't ask



They Could



They Could

There....now can we move on.

Dad -

"OMG, I can't answer it, its impossible. I have been beaten by you, painted into a corner and trapped by your Superior Intellect"

You said it, not me. I make no claims to have any special intellect. What I have is common sense, intellectual curiosity, honesty, and the desire to debate other similar individuals, especuially those who disagree with me, since that's how you learn. Unfortunately, it only works if the other folks are as willing to answer direct questions as I am, and on this issue, they keep dodging.

"Overtime is Overtime"

In the private sctor, customers can easily and freely choose to refuse to pay the costs of employee overtime. In the public sector, if unions want overtime, they take it from taxpayers with force of law. You claim you see no difference between money that is voluntarily traded and money that is confiscasted with force of law? Those 2 things are identical to you?

You did answer part of my question, in that you admit there is no reason why they can't live with 401(k)s. So, given how burdensome current tax rates are, don't you think they SHOULD live with 401(k)s, given that you concede that they COULD? Seems to me that the only answer to that question is "yes", unless you believe that public employees are somehow more entitled to wealth than taxpayers.

Dad, I admit I'm asking tough questions, these are not softballs.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

How about the fact you added the question AFTER I made that post

Yes, how about that fact? Why is that important?

Dad, you seem, at times, extyremely rational, so I was curious to see your answer to my question.

Do you only feel comfortable answering questions that have been asked before you join the discussion?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Yes, how about that fact? Why is that important?

Because you asked me why I hadn't answered a question....That I didn't know was asked

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Do you only feel comfortable answering questions that have been asked before you join the discussion?

as opposed to what.....answering questions that haven't been asked yet.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Because you asked me why I hadn't answered a question....That I didn't know was asked



as opposed to what.....answering questions that haven't been asked yet.

Dad, you read my posts thoroughly enough that you were quick to point out several flaws, which is fine. My point was, while you were dissecting every detail of my post looking for flaws, you might have also taken the time to answer the question I asked, which gets to the heart of the issue.

If you want to correct my grammar and punctuation, I have no problem with that. But how about you also take the time to answer the question I'm asking?

Again, I see you dodged my other, pertinent question, which was this...given that you concede that public employees "could" live with 401(k)s, don't you think they SHOULD be asked to live with 401(k)s?

My position is this...

- people in the private sector are surviving with 401(k}s
- pensions are much more expensive than 401(k}s
- public employees are public servents, they are supposed to serve the public
- taxes are pretty high right now

Given all these things, it seems morally obvious to me that public employees should, finally, have to accept benefits that reflect what's available to the public they serve, and benefits that the taxpayers can reasonably afford.

Where am I wrong?

[scottw]

you two should get a room

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, I see you dodged my other, pertinent question, which was this...given that you concede that public employees "could" live with 401(k)s, don't you think they SHOULD be asked to live with 401(k)s?

Then go ahead and ask them....I'm not stopping you.

[Fly Rod]

Jim, the bottom line is that you had an opprutunity at one time as we all did to apply for work with the city, state or feds, you being a vet would have started out with four weeks paid vacation for time served in the military and on your way to a pension, apparently you chose another path of employment. Get over it, build a houseboat(no property taxes) kiss a mailperson, fireperson, a female that is.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

Jim, the bottom line is that you had an opprutunity at one time as we all did to apply for work with the city, state or feds, you being a vet would have started out with four weeks paid vacation for time served in the military and on your way to a pension, apparently you chose another path of employment. Get over it, build a houseboat(no property taxes) kiss a mailperson, fireperson, a female that is.

it's just going to be really ugly when the teats all run dry and the checks bounce and all of these entitlement recievers realize they've been Bernie Maidoff'ed ....maybe we can just get some advanced Obama end of life counseling for a whole bunch of people to help bail out the ship, that may be one way to make Obamacare actually work... instead of offering early retirement we'll offer to RETIRE them early if ya know what I mean "everyone needs to have a little skin in the game"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

Jim, the bottom line is that you had an opprutunity at one time as we all did to apply for work with the city, state or feds, you being a vet would have started out with four weeks paid vacation for time served in the military and on your way to a pension, apparently you chose another path of employment. Get over it, build a houseboat(no property taxes) kiss a mailperson, fireperson, a female that is.

No, Fly Rod, that's not the bottom line. I'm pretty comfortable, never said I wasn't. I went into actuarial science for the $$ and so I'd be home every day at 4:30.

The botom line is this. The cost of those benefits is crippling state and local governments, and taxpayers who aren't as lucky as I am will soon be forced to make enormous sacrifices so that these unionized municipal employees can continue to cling to these insane benefits. There is a reason those benefits don't exist in the private sector anymore. Those union benefits literally destroyed the auto industry in this country. I don't want my town or your town to resemble Flint, Michigan, just so cops can retire at age 45 with a guaranteed pension for life. And that's where we are headed.

If you're OK with that scenario, i would be interested to know why. If you don't think those benefits are resulting in staggering debt, please show me data to support that. But stop trying to distract attention away from the issue at hand by posting that I'm jealous.

I hate everything about muncipal unions (I served time on my town's BOE, I know exactly how they operate, witgh tactics that would have impressed Vito Corleone. Every time I brought up the subject of 401(k)s, the union rep would claim that I hate children). I'm not jeaolous of them...I'm not jealous of anyone who greedily takes what belongs to others. I have nothing but contempt for those parasites, and the politicians who lay down for them.

Fly Rod, I'll "get over it" when my property taxes stop going up 10% a year. I'll get over it when public employees stop forcing taxpayers to choose between paying property taxes and buying food and medicine.

Public service is supposed to be for those who hear a call to serve, not for those looking for the surest path to wealth.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Then go ahead and ask them....I'm not stopping you.

Nice dodge, coward. I asked you if you thought they should make the switch to 401(k)s. I'm sorry if that question points out how obviously flawed your personal agenda is. If your position on this issue is so weak that you cannot begin to answer a question that simple, perhaps you should ask yourself why you believe what you do?

You can keep pointing out all of the hypertechnical flaws in my posts. The logic is unassailable. Your refusal to answer my question makes that crystal clear.

[The Dad Fisherman]

I'm a #^&#^&#^&#^&.....Get over it

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'm a #^&#^&#^&#^&.....Get over it

And a coward. Hell, you couldn't even man up to meet me for that music stand

-spence

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Nice dodge, coward. I asked you if you thought they should make the switch to 401(k)s.

and besides.....thats not what you asked.

This is what you asked

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Again, I see you dodged my other, pertinent question, which was this...given that you concede that public employees "could" live with 401(k)s, don't you think they SHOULD be asked to live with 401(k)s?

and I said Go ahead and ask them.....seems like I answered the question you asked.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

And a coward. Hell, you couldn't even man up to meet me for that music stand

-spence

When the Subject line of the PM you sent me said "To My Future Gimp"...I got a-scared

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I'm a #^&#^&#^&#^&.....Get over it

Maybe you are, maybe you aren't. I truly couldn't care less.

You have a habit, with me at least, of ignoring the issue at hand, and focusing instead on trivial (in my opinion) details. I want to be as accurate as possible, i think you'll see that I never got defensive to the corrections you made to my posts.

But along the way, you repeatedly dodged (or perhaps missed) my main point. So I'll ask it one last time, and you can choose whether or not to answer.

"Dad, pretend you are governor of Mass. Given the current economic climate, would you recommend that public employees switch from pensions to 401(k)'s? Or would you recommend leaving the pensions in place, and raising taxes significantly to pay for that?"

If I've made any typos or spelling mistakes, feel free to call me on them. But perhaps you could also give a yes or no answer to that question, with maybe a sentence or 2 of explanation as to why.

Answer it, don't answer it, ignore it and insult me instead...your choice.