Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Crain’s jumps to Rauner’s defense
Next Post: Drury demands vote, won’t commit to voting “Yes”
Posted in:
* You gotta love this headline…
Tax hikes vs. spending cuts; two experts disagree
The experts? Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, who has been arguing for more state taxes for what seems like decades. And Ted Dabrowski, vice president of policy for the Illinois Policy Institute, which believes the budget can be balanced without a single penny in new tax hikes.
* From their discussion…
How do you see the next 10 days playing out in the legislature?
Dabrowski: “We believe a balanced budget without tax hikes is the way to go. The next 10 days will be a debate about that. It will be a debate about how much taxes should go up. There will be a debate about a compromise between the political elite ignoring what Illinoisans want and need… I want to talk a little bit about the polls that have been done showing that Illinoisans don’t want tax hikes, they want spending reforms.”
Martire: “What is our basic problem? I think it’s been a lack of political will for generations to deal with tax policy honestly. Tax is one of two, three-letter words ending in ‘X’ in the English language that really gets people excited. And generally, not in a good way. So, most elected officials want to avoid dealing with tax policy. Our chosen method for avoiding dealing with tax policy in Illinois has been, and everyone knows this, is to underfund what the state owed to its five pension systems and divert the revenue that should have gone to normal costs to instead fund current services.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 9:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Crain’s jumps to Rauner’s defense
Next Post: Drury demands vote, won’t commit to voting “Yes”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Truth vs. magic beans; two experts disagree
Comment by Reality Check Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:01 am
Reading that article was one of the few laughs I got out of the paper to today. The rest were from the comics page.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:03 am
==The rest were from the comics page.==
These days, how can you tell the difference?
Comment by A guy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:04 am
I read the whole thing waiting to hear from the second expert, did it get cut off?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:04 am
Dabrowski offers an opinion. Martire provides a fact.
Comment by Roman Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:05 am
The Civic Committee’s Budgetary framing…
The IPI Budgetary framing…
Which is most honest in numbers, and most honest in the limited role of government, but funding it adequately, and honestly to the mission of the government.
When actual business leaders say raise revenue, balance the budget, show stability, and pay the state’s bills… where are they wrong?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:08 am
== These days, how can you tell the difference? ==
The comics have more truth in them.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:08 am
Did Dabrowski ever work for Enron?
Comment by Team Warwick Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:09 am
This false equivalence of experts is part of the problem. This is like junk science being allowed as testimony.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:16 am
A dog and pony show.
Comment by Terry Salad Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:16 am
Ted’s IPI bio does not list any government finance experience but prominently states he ran Citi’s Mexico sales business. So it looks like anyone can be an expert now
Comment by Illinois O'Malley Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:20 am
Madigan’s expertise has left us a whopping pension debt and unfunded retiree healthcare system.
Comment by Arock Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:22 am
I did not see any real disagreement between the two. Dabrowski off-handedly explains why Martire’s scenario has come true over the last several decades.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:23 am
It’s like calling the Superfans experts on football recruiting.
Speaking of which, I’m pretty sure one of the Superfans last names was Dabrowski….
Comment by Boone's is back Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:24 am
==Did Dabrowski ever work for Enron?==
Not sure, but we do know Martire works for the IEA, IFT, SEIU, and AFSCME.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:25 am
“So it looks like anyone can be an expert now” Well, there is the Food Babe, so maybe I can be The Budget Dude?
Comment by Skeptic Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:25 am
A tax increase now and another in a few more years, to make up for the lost tax payers who moved out of state, because of the first tax increase. The never ending tax increase circle in Illinois!
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:27 am
===Madigan’s expertise has left us a whopping pension debt and unfunded retiree healthcare system===
A budget the last two years coulda helped
Wonder why Rauner didn’t want a budget all these months, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:28 am
Too many people that I talk with are just disgusted, they do not believe the “experts”, and they think legislators will say and do anything to get re-elected.
We are in a bad place generally, and in a very bad place in Illinois.
All they hear is tax, tax, tax, so they vote for Trump and Rauner.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:28 am
Calling the dope from the IPI “an expert” is a huge mistake and we are sure they are already marketing your decision to award him the title to the rubes who give them money.
Comment by Annonin' Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:30 am
=== your decision to award him the title===
Um, that was the SJ-R’s decision, not mine. Try to keep up.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:32 am
== Not sure, but we do know Martire works for the IEA, IFT, SEIU, and AFSCME. ==
Try to disprove his numbers. It doesn’t matter who he works for if the numbers are honest.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:33 am
I’ve read some of Martrie’s stuff. He makes the claim that businesses/people won’t leave if taxes are raised.
He must live in Indiana.
Comment by Your Name Here Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:34 am
==believes the budget can be balanced without a single penny in new tax hikes.==
==We believe a balanced budget without tax hikes is the way to go. The next 10 days will be a debate about that. It will be a debate about how much taxes should go up.==
Seems like IPI is conceding that revenue is required.
Comment by njt Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:38 am
RNUG: Ralph Martire of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability states in a June 20 fact sheet that the Downstate “adequacy funding gap is $2.617 billion…40 percent of the state’s adequacy funding gap is downstate…”
If 40 percent of the state’s adequacy funding gap is $2.617 Billion, the total for the State is over $6.5 Billion. (And $6.5 Billion TODAY is about $8 Billion in new money spread out over 10 years, and even more spread out over 20 years.)
The question is not where $350 million in NEW money EACH year will come from, but where $800 million in NEW money EACH year will come from.
Comment by winners and losers Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:39 am
==Madigan’s expertise has left us a whopping pension debt and unfunded retiree healthcare system.==
Budget problems, especially pension, started long before Madigan was in charge. Both sides have plenty of blame to shoulder.
“[GOP]Thompson was governor from 1977 to 1991, followed by Edgar from 1991 to 1999, then Ryan from 1999 to 2003. So Republicans held the governorship for 15 of the last 29 years, more than half the time. Moreover, from 1993 to 2003, the Senate president was [GOP) James “Pate” Philip” - from the recent Illinois Issues edition.
Comment by Joe M Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:40 am
I’m confused, why is it not a good thing for people to get excited about “wax?” That’s a strange talking point to use…
Comment by Veil of Ignorance Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:40 am
Your Name Here - If people stayed when it went from 3% to 5%, and are still here now at 3.75%, why would they suddenly decide 4.95% was unbearable?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:41 am
- and they think legislators will say and do anything to get re-elected. -
That doesn’t sound too far off from reality.
To the post: I think we can agree there is not enough revenue and Illinois needs some new taxes. The IPI can believe what it wants, but that does not change the reality. No one is going to vote for the slash and burn budget of which the IPI would approve. They are an advocacy group preaching to a specific audience. If they want to call themselves experts, whatever, who is it hurting?
Comment by Mr. 305 Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:43 am
Arguing semantics is not going to move the conversation in any meangingful direction.
Comment by Mr. 305 Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:45 am
Martire haa made the claim that businesses/people want stability, and stability requires more adequate revenue.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:45 am
The simple fact is that we must raise more revenue than the current costs of programs that we really, really want in order to pay off the backlog of bills, our outstanding bonds and the pension debt. Does anyone seriously think that our current spending includes ONLY things that we really, really want and fraud and waste and worthless programs that can be eliminate so that we can have all the programs we really, really want and still run a surplus to pay off our obligations? If not, we need a tax increase.
Comment by Whatever Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:47 am
==Your Name Here - If people stayed when it went from 3% to 5%, and are still here now at 3.75%, why would they suddenly decide 4.95% was unbearable?==
It’s extremely difficult to just pick up and move. First there’s the matter of employment. Then someone has to buy my home with extremely high property taxes.
Is your argument that since Illinois has a captive audience, they should simply charge whatever they want? Thanks a bunch.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:47 am
==Try to disprove his numbers. It doesn’t matter who he works for if the numbers are honest.==
Try to prove his numbers and methods work outside of the public sector bubble. Because
I can plug numbers into a revenue spreadsheet all day and get numbers to work…in a bubble.
If you can’t get his numbers to work outside that bubble, then who funds him is extremely relevant.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 10:54 am
How much out migration occurred when Quinn raised the state tax? Numbers?
Comment by AnonymousOne Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:00 am
@City Zen, please post your balanced budget excel spreadsheet to the post, thank you.
Comment by Illinois O'Malley Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:02 am
City Zen
Anyone with an honest ounce of blood in their body knows Martiere is more right than wrong. The “public sector” has nothing to do with facts
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:03 am
===Try to prove his numbers and methods work outside of the public sector bubble. Because
I can plug numbers into a revenue spreadsheet all day and get numbers to work…in a bubble.===
LOL, dude, the “dorm brownies” are for later in the day.
Your response is… “Because… Numbers!”
I’ll make it easier for you.
Let’s say, after eating your “dorm brownie” you go and visit your “Prof” and you tell him/her the 84% is “like numbers, man.. you plug them in, I get like a B or something. Dude, it could SO be an A if I show you the bubble… ”
- City Zen -
Either show the numbers wrong, or don’t.
Don’t make a case the “numbers work” but … “Because… Numbers!”
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:09 am
*The “public sector” has nothing to do with facts *
Baloney. The public sector can fund itself by passing a law to increase taxes and fees. The private sector must market a product or service and hope enough people buy it to turn a profit. In a toxic, insecure environment like present day Illinois, both businesses and customers will leave if they have the means to do so. Academics like Martine can be just as biased towards a particular theory as any other individual.
Comment by Colby jack Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:21 am
OW. There’s lies, damn lies, and statistics. Right on dude. You seem to have more than a casual knowledge of such dorm chatter. Which hey, ok by me. Lol
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:36 am
“People can’t pay more” vs. ” People need/want things and we have to find a way to pay for them.”
what do people want to cut? Is there enough to make a difference.? You can’t have it both ways. Keeping things means paying for them. Dabrowski’s arguments are thinner than the old airmail paper.
Comment by Amalia Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:18 pm
OW - Like I said, apply Martire’s rules and methods to anything in life but the public sector. Get it to work, and I’ll concede the argument.
And I’m not sure what your dorm brownie conversation as I don’t do drugs, but I imagine it is a conversation heard at Chicago State every day, no drugs required.
Colby Jack gets it.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:20 pm
==Please post your balanced budget excel spreadsheet to the post, thank you.==
As soon as I see expense-side analysis from Martire with reductions of any kind.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:22 pm
Ralph looooovvveeesss his tax increases. Always has. But at least he’s honest about it and does the math. Ted and the IPI crowd are just as delusional and magic fairy dust balancing the budget as the WSJ and Trib edit boards.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:24 pm
==The public sector can fund itself by passing a law to increase taxes and fees. The private sector must market a product or service and hope enough people buy it to turn a profit.==
Let’s follow this logic for a moment. How much the private sector makes has to do with demand. People want or need it, they pay for it. How much is every breath of clean air worth to you? Every glass of water? Education? Every mile of the road you use? Just because you can’t put an exact amount on the worth of every item the public sector takes care of for you does not mean you don’t want or require them. People demand a lot of the state but then seem surprised that there is a cost. They get mad when they hear about child abuse on the news, but then they have no problem with the Agency getting cuts. So, as I’ve asked before, what can you do without? What will you give up so cuts can be made to an already stressed system?
Comment by HangingOn Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:25 pm
===…Like I said, apply Martire’s rules and methods to anything in life but the public sector. Get it to work, and I’ll concede the argument===
LOL, no, that’s yours. You want to prove that numbers aren’t honest, have at it. If you can’t, then it’s brownie eating in the dorm room. You want to show numbers are wrong, go for it, no one is stopping you but this is adorbs…
======Try to prove his numbers and methods work outside of the public sector bubble. Because
I can plug numbers into a revenue spreadsheet all day and get numbers to work…in a bubble.===
“Because.., Numbers!”… but you show where I’m wrong, lol. This might be my favorite in quite a long time.
===… I imagine it is a conversation heard at Chicago State every day, no drugs required.===
Why is that. Use your words.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 12:31 pm
HanginOn, you are so right! Of special note is Education. When your children or grandchildren are in school, only the best, brightest and most masterful of teachers should be teaching your kids. After they graduate, all teachers become leaches and bums and not worth a penny of your tax dollars. In other words, once I’ve got mine, I aint paying one dime for anyone else.
I look at Governor Junk that way. He’s got plenty—and pays plenty for his kids to get the best—of everything. You? Who gives a hoot? Don’t deserve it.
I’ll bet some commenters here are doing very well in life thanks to their “public servants’” efforts. But they wouldn’t acknowledge that for any money in the world.
Comment by AnonymousOne Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 1:28 pm
If public servants had 401ks and SSA I would be less upset. I hate taxpayer guaranteed investment returns.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 2:16 pm
==If public servants had 401ks and SSA==
Number one, the use of the word servant may be part of the problem. State employees are not servants. They are employees whose job it is to make your life safer and more comfortable, but that does not a servant make.
Many teachers had jobs before teaching and therefore forfeited everything they put into SS. Also, many public employees do pay into SS.
I can’t find it now, but didn’t someone on here actually prove using real math that 401k plans would end up costing the state more? Plus they would actually have to pay into them, unlike what they did with the pensions.
Comment by HangingOn Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 2:58 pm
===Try to disprove his numbers. It doesn’t matter who he works for if the numbers are honest.==
Try to prove his numbers and methods work outside of the public sector bubble. Because
I can plug numbers into a revenue spreadsheet all day and get numbers to work…in a bubble.
If you can’t get his numbers to work outside that bubble, then who funds him is extremely relevant.=
Sorry, the public sector isn’t the private sector. Not trying to insult you because I think you actually get that.
You don’t want a tax increase, I get that too.
Martire talks about making the state work fiscally. I have personally heard him talk about the need for spending curbs and he did use the “cuts” word as well.
His point is that we cannot cut our way out of the failed fiscal formula that has been used. Basic math (addition and subtraction) that clearly baffles the myopic IPI (focused on maybe one year with a clear desire to welch on our debts).
We need revenue. Not just for the current budget, but also to fix past failures.
A private sector business has many options not available to public sector and serves an entirely different purpose.
Additionally, your attack on Martire’s “employers” is beneath you. You are better than that.
While they may contribute and sit on his Board public sector unions are not alone, they are joined by private sector folks and donations. If you ever met with him one on one you would know where he is at. He is not a “union” guy. Independent and honest even if you disagree with him.
Do better next time. You are better.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:00 pm
==I can’t find it now, but didn’t someone on here actually prove using real math that 401k plans would end up costing the state more? Plus they would actually have to pay into them, unlike what they did with the pensions.==
Of course they would. Any defined-contribution recipient would have to off-set the risk that a market downturn at retirement would reduce the benefits of the plan. So DC recipients would demand either higher wages or a higher contribution than currently occurs to offset the risk. If market returns are higher than expected, they get a windfall. The main reason in favor of defined-benefit plans is that they are more efficient. A retirees downside is capped but so is the upside.
Comment by C Ball Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:17 pm
==If public servants had 401ks and SSA I would be less upset==
Ahhh. The old “I don’t have it so neither should you” argument. You seem to do an awful lot of complaining about what other people have.
***********
To the post:
The problem I have with the IPI is that there proclamations that the current situation can be remedied with cuts alone flies in the face of basic mathematical realities. Their arguments are disingenuous and tell me they are more concerned about ideology than reality.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:05 pm
“I can’t find it now, but didn’t someone on here actually prove using real math that 401k plans would end up costing the state more?”
That’s impossible. A 401k costs very little to set up. Matching can be 1-3%, not guaranteed of course and all the investment gains/losses are on the employees.
Sorry, I will call them public employees.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:06 pm
Demoralized, I am not saving for my retirement so public workers can retire with my guarantee. It’s ridiculous.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:08 pm
So get a different job and stop whining about what someone else gets. It’s juvenile.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:14 pm
==stop whining about what someone else gets==
He can’t help it he’s jealous of the $1100 a month I’ll get if I manage to work for 20 years at the state lol In 20 years that may cover the home I’ll end up in. Hope meals are included.
Comment by HangingOn Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:16 pm
Hanging:
Ron doesn’t care about the amount. The fact that you’ll get anything at all upsets him. He’s generally not in favor of benefits of any kind for public employees. You have to read everything he says through that prism.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:19 pm
Demoralized, that’s absolute nonsense. I just don’t think taxpayers should be in the market guaranteeing business.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:35 pm
“He can’t help it he’s jealous of the $1100 a month”
Wow, sounds like SS would be way better than our ruined pension system that is destroying Illinois.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:36 pm
Ron, have you ever heard of an annuity? Guess what? You, too can invest in one and get a guaranteed rate of return. Want a growing annuity? Sure, and that growth rate will be priced appropriately.
Comment by Hieronymus Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:50 pm
I’ll say it again. It is what it is. Get over it. No amount of anger about what someone else gets is going to change the reality of the situation. Tier II addressed the problem going forward. You want 401K’s for new employees? Go for it. But you’re out of luck with existing employees. I suggest you come to terms with that.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:50 pm
JS Mill
I get the public and private sector are different. But Martire’s numbers exist purely in a vacuum. That’s not his fault, rather the nature of the exercise. We can solve social security (remove the cap, bump up the withholding rate a few %) and federal deficits (raise every tax bracket 3%) the same way. It’s easy to play the revenue side. Of course he’s right, but no different than why my solutions above are right. Many advantages to having a captive audience and mandatory payments.
Martire says we have not enough state employees, and he’s right there too. But what he doesn’t cite is that Illinois’ overall public sector compensation packages are amongst the highest in the country (there’s a study out there, I can’t find it right now). So maybe it stands to reason we don’t hire as many state employees because they make more than their counterparts in other states. See my point? One side of the story…the side that just happens to benefit the parties that pay him. Bizarro IPI.
==You don’t want a tax increase, I get that too.==
Not entirely. I honestly thought they’d have settled on 4.5% long ago, and I was onboard with that. I’m aware the state needs more revenue. Add some service taxes, tax retirement income, remove some exemptions.
==Additionally, your attack on Martire’s “employers” is beneath you. You are better than that.==
Actually, I’m not. It’s extremely relevant to the conversation. I’ve had people cite Martire in public forums, then I tell them his associations and financial backers, and the response is typically that of disappointment. And I’ve reviewed numerous union filings w/ the Dept of Labor. They are the public sector equivalents of corporate behemoths. I’ll question their motives just as much as I question Monsanto’s. So the connection is important.
There’s a breakdown of CTBA revenue sources out on the web somewhere. If there’s significant private funding, I’d love to see proof.
And I’m sure Mr. Martire is a swell, intelligent guy. I don’t doubt his financial creds for one second. His bias, on the other hand…
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:50 pm
Ron, have you ever heard of an annuity? Guess rwhat? You, too can invest in one and get a guaranteed rate of return. Want a growing annuity? Sure, and that growth rate will be priced appropriately.
Comment by Hieronymus Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:52 pm
“- Demoralized - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:50 pm:
I’ll say it again. It is what it is. Get over it. No amount of anger about what someone else gets is going to change the reality of the situation. Tier II addressed the problem going forward. You want 401K’s for new employees? Go for it. But you’re out of luck with existing employees. I suggest you come to terms with that.”
I have acknowledged this many times. But we need to eliminate any mention of public employee benefits from our atrocious state constitution so this will NEVER happen again.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:52 pm
- City Zen -
That’s a whole lotta words for….
“Yeah, I can’t, using math or numbers, say he’s wrong”
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:54 pm
City Zen, extending out the retirement age to. That will help Social Security significantly.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:55 pm
Or… - City Zen -
“I can’t use numbers, or math in any way, to prove he’s wrong, so I’ll just end like I started all this. He’s biased.”
===Not sure, but we do know Martire works for the IEA, IFT, SEIU, and AFSCME.===
That’s fun.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:58 pm
Ron, the constitution could also be amended to mandate that the actuarially required normal contributions be made each year. Then this never need happen again.
Comment by Hieronymus Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:04 pm
Ron, or are you saying that it is OK to make a contractual agreement that can then be ignored by one side after the other side has already performed it’s half of the deal whenever it is expedient to do so?
Comment by Hieronymus Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:13 pm
Benefits should be allowed to be changed as times change. Like happens in the private sector.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:08 pm
Company retirement plans, 401k matches and health benefits are changed all the time.
There is no reason private sector taxpayers should guaranteeing market returns for anyone.
Comment by Ron Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:09 pm
No one has performed into the future, but our constitution apparently says that doesn’t matter.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:10 pm
==Ron, or are you saying that it is OK to make a contractual agreement that can then be ignored by one side after the other side has already performed it’s half of the deal whenever it is expedient to do so==
Take a Tier 1 state employee that started working in 2010. Even though he’s less than 25% through his career with the state, we can’t change one thing about his pension. We can’t ask him to contribute 1% more to his pension or add even one year to his required years of service as those actions would “diminish and impair” a pension. He’s treated exactly like the guy hired in 1980 or 1960, yet time continues.
25 years or so to go in a career and we can’t change one thing about his pension setup. That’s one hefty commitment.
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:56 pm
OW - Good to see you’re enjoying those brownies. Just remember to brush your teeth and don’t drive. #foryourhealth
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:57 pm
- City Zen -
I’m a cannoli person, but your concern my my health is nice.
I figured… you squared… up the equation. #MathHumor
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 7:04 pm
== There is no reason private sector taxpayers should guaranteeing market returns for anyone. ==
The PBGC guarantees private companies pension funds, partially using taxpayer funding. They are there to make sure the workers don’t get totally shafted by robber baron businessmen and vulture capitalists trashing pension funds. Do you want to eliminate the PBGC also?
== Benefits should be allowed to be changed as times change. Like happens in the private sector. ==
The private sector has stock options, bonuses, large pay raises, guaranteed pension benefits (where pensions exist by the PBGC), and the ability to sue their employer for breach of contract. All items government workers don’t have. And, while private workers have Social Security, some government workers are forbidden to pay into it, or if they have other jobs, even collect it …
Remove sovereign protection of governmental units from lawsuits by government employees, and give government workers all the rest of that list … and you might have a case.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 8:03 pm
And another item that government workers don’t have: privacy. Unlike the private sector, government worker’s salaries are public record. What is their lack of privacy worth?
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 8:29 pm
==Remove sovereign protection of governmental units from lawsuits by government employees, and give government workers all the rest of that list … and you might have a case.==
Government workers are hereby granted all the shares of Illinois stock their hearts desire. Buy low, as they say.
If they can somehow figure out how to derive bonuses from a balanced budget, they can take all the spoils they desire. Bonus dependent on profits and performance, of course.
If they can find a pension buried somewhere within the bowels of any employer I ever worked for, they can join that party as well.
If they can find any employment contract, sue away. Of course, wrongful termination suits are available if necessary, as they always have been.
I don’t have Social Security per se as much as it is thrust upon me and my employer, but if they wanna join that sinking ship, hop aboard!
I believe we have a deal, no?
Comment by City Zen Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 8:43 pm
== I believe we have a deal, no? ==
What’s the bill number?
Get back to me when it is passed and signed.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:16 pm
===Government workers are hereby granted all the shares of Illinois stock their hearts desire. Buy low, as they say.===
This is textbook making an argument with dorm room thinking.
You can’t take serious arguments not possible outside in the real world.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 11:20 pm