6 ms·

Look, obviously you and I have pretty different ideology, I get that. But I think you should consider why union membership is declining in the US. It's not som

Look, obviously you and I have pretty different ideology, I get that. But I think you should consider why union membership is declining in the US. It's not some giant right-wing conspiracy. It's because the structure of industry is changing, firms are getting smaller, and the overall economy is getting more competitive. It's not like all the employees just decided, hey, we should all voluntarily decide to take a worse deal, great idea, let's do it. What upsets me as a taxpayer is why this same thing doesn't apply in the public sector. Like, I get that teachers work hard, but if we paid by outcomes, the way any sane private-sector company does, half of teachers would just get fired. Look at any major big-city school district if you want to see the mediocrity in action, whether Chicago Public Schools (CPS), Oakland Unified, etc. So yeah, it seems a little unfair that one sector of the economy gets paid for being mediocre at best, and other fires people and demands performance. Yeah, I'm a little upset.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
I can appreciate we have different viewpoints. I can appreciate that, as a taxpayer, you’re upset. I also see the issues with institutions like CPS (having lived in Chicago proper). I don't believe paying teachers for outcomes when outcomes are primarily driven by influences outside of a teacher's control [1], but that is a discussion for another thread. I don’t think it’s a secret I’m hard to the left. People first. That’s how empathy works, economic efficiency be damned. Are there issues with how pension systems are gamed? Certainly, and fixes need to be put in place (benefit systems should never have the capacity to be gamed). Should public sector workers have reduced benefits or salaries because the American public has allowed their representatives to hand all the gains to Corporate America? Absolutely not. We have slowly, over decades, mortgaged the future (at local, state, and federal levels, speaking specifically about the US). The bills are coming due, and everyone is surprisingly shocked. I can’t tell you what to do, but I have gotten involved in politics and intend to contribute to a solution. I encourage you to do the same. [1] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-sector/our-insights/drivers-of-student-performance-insights-from-north-america https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-sector/our-insigh...
- eldavido 9y ago
  Hi fellow Chicagoan (now live in Oakland). Thanks for the polite and civil response. Let's teach these Californians how to have a respectful across-the-aisle dialog ;) It's funny, I'm on an HOA board and spent the entire day trying to figure out our reserve liability, and how to balance it. It's in fact EXACTLY identical to a pension, where you have to put money aside to offset future expenses today. The main thing is that I hate unfunded mandates. As a voter, I don't mind paying for things even if they're a little expensive. I just wish we'd get honest about the costs. Situations like we're in smack of expedience to the point of dishonesty, where the long-term math is impossibly broken. I'm seeing this on a micro scale on my HOA. We need to have more in reserves but people hardly even know how to think about the problem, let alone implement concrete policy solutions to fix it. It's softened my views a bit to see how something as colossally fucked as Illinois can happen on a small, person-to-person micro scale. So yeah nice chatting...my HOA is 1000 people, which is the size of a small city. I feel like a small-city mayor who everyone sort of hates but grudgingly admits does an ok job :)
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    Great chat! My contact info is in my profile, and I'm always interested in solving macro problems such as these if you want to chat more. People get...optimistic, right? Pensions assumed an 8% return, which at the time, was realistic. And then the return curve declined. We're close to 5% returns into the future [1]. So what now? Where does the money come from to top up these pensions? Are we going to break our contract to pay these people because of poor forecasts? No, we're likely going to raise taxes (in a hopefully progressive manner). Same thing with Social Security. Why did Social Security "lend" its funds to the US government [2]? Because the US government is the safest, most reliable investment in the world. But then, politicians go and spend that money. They're not around to deal with the fallout from their shortsightedness (and arguably, greed). There is no accountability built into the system. That's a flaw in the system, that we don't account for those incentives and guard against them. A better system needs to be constructed that accounts for centuries of existence and benefit delivery. > So yeah, it seems a little unfair that one sector of the economy gets paid for being mediocre at best, and other fires people and demands performance. Yeah, I'm a little upset. Sidenote: I think the labor system in the US is seriously dysfunctional compared to the rest of the Western world and needs to be fixed as well (more labor protections). One election at a time. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-02/5-is-the-new-8-for-reliable-returns-for-pension-funds https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-02/5-is-the-... [2] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html
sjg007 9y ago
Road construction and big building unions seem to be doing just fine.

toomuchtodo 9y ago

I can appreciate we have different viewpoints. I can appreciate that, as a taxpayer, you’re upset. I also see the issues with institutions like CPS (having lived in Chicago proper). I don't believe paying teachers for outcomes when outcomes are primarily driven by influences outside of a teacher's control [1], but that is a discussion for another thread. I don’t think it’s a secret I’m hard to the left. People first. That’s how empathy works, economic efficiency be damned. Are there issues with how pension systems are gamed? Certainly, and fixes need to be put in place (benefit systems should never have the capacity to be gamed). Should public sector workers have reduced benefits or salaries because the American public has allowed their representatives to hand all the gains to Corporate America? Absolutely not. We have slowly, over decades, mortgaged the future (at local, state, and federal levels, speaking specifically about the US). The bills are coming due, and everyone is surprisingly shocked. I can’t tell you what to do, but I have gotten involved in politics and intend to contribute to a solution. I encourage you to do the same. [1] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-sector/our-insights/drivers-of-student-performance-insights-from-north-america https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-sector/our-insigh...

eldavido 9y ago
Hi fellow Chicagoan (now live in Oakland). Thanks for the polite and civil response. Let's teach these Californians how to have a respectful across-the-aisle dialog ;) It's funny, I'm on an HOA board and spent the entire day trying to figure out our reserve liability, and how to balance it. It's in fact EXACTLY identical to a pension, where you have to put money aside to offset future expenses today. The main thing is that I hate unfunded mandates. As a voter, I don't mind paying for things even if they're a little expensive. I just wish we'd get honest about the costs. Situations like we're in smack of expedience to the point of dishonesty, where the long-term math is impossibly broken. I'm seeing this on a micro scale on my HOA. We need to have more in reserves but people hardly even know how to think about the problem, let alone implement concrete policy solutions to fix it. It's softened my views a bit to see how something as colossally fucked as Illinois can happen on a small, person-to-person micro scale. So yeah nice chatting...my HOA is 1000 people, which is the size of a small city. I feel like a small-city mayor who everyone sort of hates but grudgingly admits does an ok job :)
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  Great chat! My contact info is in my profile, and I'm always interested in solving macro problems such as these if you want to chat more. People get...optimistic, right? Pensions assumed an 8% return, which at the time, was realistic. And then the return curve declined. We're close to 5% returns into the future [1]. So what now? Where does the money come from to top up these pensions? Are we going to break our contract to pay these people because of poor forecasts? No, we're likely going to raise taxes (in a hopefully progressive manner). Same thing with Social Security. Why did Social Security "lend" its funds to the US government [2]? Because the US government is the safest, most reliable investment in the world. But then, politicians go and spend that money. They're not around to deal with the fallout from their shortsightedness (and arguably, greed). There is no accountability built into the system. That's a flaw in the system, that we don't account for those incentives and guard against them. A better system needs to be constructed that accounts for centuries of existence and benefit delivery. > So yeah, it seems a little unfair that one sector of the economy gets paid for being mediocre at best, and other fires people and demands performance. Yeah, I'm a little upset. Sidenote: I think the labor system in the US is seriously dysfunctional compared to the rest of the Western world and needs to be fixed as well (more labor protections). One election at a time. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-02/5-is-the-new-8-for-reliable-returns-for-pension-funds https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-02/5-is-the-... [2] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/fundFAQ.html

sjg007 9y ago

Road construction and big building unions seem to be doing just fine.