5 ms·

This is a dishonest characterization. Those people put their work into those pensions. They deserve them as much as you deserve your paycheck. The problem is we

by ebbv 9y ago

This is a dishonest characterization. Those people put their work into those pensions. They deserve them as much as you deserve your paycheck. The problem is we keep electinng crooks and weasels who undermine services and programs so they are doomed and then say “Look these programs don’t work!!”

nitrogen 9y ago
When it all hits the fan you can't talk about what people deserve (or at least ask what do the future generations of taxpayers deserve?), you have to talk about what is actually possible.
- pessimizer 9y ago
  We need to talk about what is ethical. There's no difference between seizing pensions and simply seizing bank accounts or other property. The reason it's possible to seize pensions from state workers is because state workers are powerless. It's no more ethical than retroactively seizing their salaries.
  - EpicEng 9y ago
    Ok, so what's your solution? What approach is ethical in regards to the previous generation and the current? Someone has to pay the bill. Discussing what's "fair" or ethical is all well and good, but lacking context re what is _possible_ and _practical_ it's just an academic exercise.
    - Frondo 9y ago
      Raise taxes on the rich. Raise taxes on the big businesses in Illinois--or, if they're anything like Oregon and Washington, stop giving them so many tax breaks. That's one solution.
      - nradov 9y ago
        Raise taxes enough and rich people and big businesses will simply leave Illinois.
        Frondo 9y ago
        That doesn't really happen. Certainly it is a scare tactic that the rich have successfully employed to fool people with, but rich folks tend to stay put even more than poor people. Here's one article of many, many you can find: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/06/do-taxes-really-cause-the-rich-to-move/487835/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/06/do-taxes-really-cause... The closing paragraph: "Ultimately, the study finds that, while some millionaires do move to lower-tax destinations, the overall rate of millionaire migration is extremely low. When all is said and done, the super-rich tend to migrate less then the rest of us. The reason for this is simple—most people depend on the places they live for their incomes, since their businesses are based there. Indeed, this new study confirms an increasingly important fact of our economic geography: because some places generate a lot more wealth than others, the amount of money we make is largely tied to where we live."
        squeegee5 9y ago
        Precisely. Why does Apple run an operation in Ireland instead of Illinois or California? It isn't the result of some sense of corporate generosity. It is pure fantasy to imagine capital will not flee the state when burdened with anticompetitive taxation.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - jhoward321 9y ago
        They'll just leave, like they're already doing. Illinois already has net decreasing taxable revenue, driving out the wealthy tax payers just exacerbates the issue.
  - tatersolid 9y ago
    > state workers are powerless You’ve never been to Illinois, have you? State workers here run The Democratic Machine. They are effectively the willing soldiers of an organized crime syndicate, getting paid exorbitant sums to perform little work. And they all get “promoted” just before their 25 years are up so they pull the maximum pension possible.
matt_wulfeck 9y ago
I would be inclined to believe you if this problem wasn’t pervasive. Pensions like these are built on promises and backed by tax payers. As a tax payer we have every right to oversee the situation and compel changes if we deem them necessary.
EpicEng 9y ago
That's all well and good, so what's your solution? How do you fund these pensions without screwing over everyone else? What policy is fair to everyone else without screwing the previous generation? In each of your comments you defend the pensioners, which is fine, but there's a limited pool of money. We live in the real world where you have to work within the confines of reality. Opining about how unfair it is to cut pensions doesn't solve anything or move the conversation forward. It's little more than whining.
oh_sigh 9y ago
If I convince the mayor of my small town to sign a document saying the town will pay me $100k for 100 years for my 'services' for the next 5 years, does no future generation have the right to renegotiate that?

by ebbv 9y ago

nitrogen 9y ago

When it all hits the fan you can't talk about what people deserve (or at least ask what do the future generations of taxpayers deserve?), you have to talk about what is actually possible.

pessimizer 9y ago
We need to talk about what is ethical. There's no difference between seizing pensions and simply seizing bank accounts or other property. The reason it's possible to seize pensions from state workers is because state workers are powerless. It's no more ethical than retroactively seizing their salaries.
- EpicEng 9y ago
  Ok, so what's your solution? What approach is ethical in regards to the previous generation and the current? Someone has to pay the bill. Discussing what's "fair" or ethical is all well and good, but lacking context re what is _possible_ and _practical_ it's just an academic exercise.
  - Frondo 9y ago
    Raise taxes on the rich. Raise taxes on the big businesses in Illinois--or, if they're anything like Oregon and Washington, stop giving them so many tax breaks. That's one solution.
    - nradov 9y ago
      Raise taxes enough and rich people and big businesses will simply leave Illinois.
      - Frondo 9y ago
        That doesn't really happen. Certainly it is a scare tactic that the rich have successfully employed to fool people with, but rich folks tend to stay put even more than poor people. Here's one article of many, many you can find: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/06/do-taxes-really-cause-the-rich-to-move/487835/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/06/do-taxes-really-cause... The closing paragraph: "Ultimately, the study finds that, while some millionaires do move to lower-tax destinations, the overall rate of millionaire migration is extremely low. When all is said and done, the super-rich tend to migrate less then the rest of us. The reason for this is simple—most people depend on the places they live for their incomes, since their businesses are based there. Indeed, this new study confirms an increasingly important fact of our economic geography: because some places generate a lot more wealth than others, the amount of money we make is largely tied to where we live."
      - squeegee5 9y ago
        Precisely. Why does Apple run an operation in Ireland instead of Illinois or California? It isn't the result of some sense of corporate generosity. It is pure fantasy to imagine capital will not flee the state when burdened with anticompetitive taxation.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - jhoward321 9y ago
      They'll just leave, like they're already doing. Illinois already has net decreasing taxable revenue, driving out the wealthy tax payers just exacerbates the issue.
- tatersolid 9y ago
  > state workers are powerless You’ve never been to Illinois, have you? State workers here run The Democratic Machine. They are effectively the willing soldiers of an organized crime syndicate, getting paid exorbitant sums to perform little work. And they all get “promoted” just before their 25 years are up so they pull the maximum pension possible.

matt_wulfeck 9y ago

I would be inclined to believe you if this problem wasn’t pervasive. Pensions like these are built on promises and backed by tax payers. As a tax payer we have every right to oversee the situation and compel changes if we deem them necessary.

EpicEng 9y ago

That's all well and good, so what's your solution? How do you fund these pensions without screwing over everyone else? What policy is fair to everyone else without screwing the previous generation? In each of your comments you defend the pensioners, which is fine, but there's a limited pool of money. We live in the real world where you have to work within the confines of reality. Opining about how unfair it is to cut pensions doesn't solve anything or move the conversation forward. It's little more than whining.

oh_sigh 9y ago

If I convince the mayor of my small town to sign a document saying the town will pay me $100k for 100 years for my 'services' for the next 5 years, does no future generation have the right to renegotiate that?