6 ms·

California progressives have a sort of "feast the beast" strategy. Provide massive benefits on loan. When those loans come due, raise taxes to pay for them. Rep

• jfim 8y ago
  > Why can neither side just follow a sane general strategy of setting taxes and choosing the best benefits to fit under the revenue generated? Why be reasonable when you can get benefits for yourself and have someone else down the road pay for them? I wonder when this will break though. California has had it comparatively easy with a surging economy (at least in the Bay area), but the next recession will likely send all the pensions even further into the red.
  • jasonbarrah 8y ago
    "When the public discovers they can vote themselves money from the public treasury, the [American] experiment will be over"-Tocqueville 1838
  • fatbird 8y ago
    > Why be reasonable when you can get benefits for yourself and have someone else down the road pay for them? The only reason someone down the road has to pay for them is because the state/municipality reneged on its half of the bargain to actually fund the pension at the time, counting on future earnings to skate by. The teachers unions accepted lower pay raises or frozen wages in exchange for a good pension. Don't blame them for the malfeasance of the counterparty.
    • PKop 8y ago
      They were both malfeasant. Accepting a bad deal because you thought taxpayers would just foot the bill doesn't absolve you of blame.
      • fatbird 8y ago
        They didn't accept a bad deal. They deferred current compensation in a scheme that's been known to work properly for a century when the managing side of it doesn't underfund its obligations. This is not, in any way, a "both sides are to blame" issue.
• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• rconti 8y ago
  Hardly just a California thing; see Social Security. (Which is actually quite easily fixable, if we had the political will). But also posted today was an article about surging bankruptcy filings among the very group (baby boomers) that benefited MOST from a successful economy. Subsequent generations are being saddled with their excesses, and yet we still have a looming crisis.
  • dragonwriter 8y ago
    > But also posted today was an article about surging bankruptcy filings among the very group (baby boomers) that benefited MOST from a successful economy. The oldest baby boomers were still fairly early in their working life when the gains from the economy stopped broadly reaching the working class. The generation who benefitted the most from the long post-WWII economic boom with wide distribution of gains were the Boomers’ parents.
    • antisthenes 8y ago
      > The oldest baby boomers were still fairly early in their working life when the gains from the economy stopped broadly reaching the working class. They were just the right age for reaping all the benefits from rising land and real estate prices, despite the real wage flat-lining at the end of 1970s Not to mention that advancement and career progression were far more expedient in their day, allowing them to reap benefits earlier in their life than millenials today, who might still be working entry level jobs by their 30s. > The generation who benefitted the most from the long post-WWII economic boom with wide distribution of gains were the Boomers’ parents. And guess who inherited that wealth, since that generation is mostly dead now?
      • dragonwriter 8y ago
        > And guess who inherited that wealth, since that generation is mostly dead now? By that standard, Millennials are the eventual beneficiaries, too.
  • FPGAhacker 8y ago
• seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  It is worse than that: teachers are given paltry salaries with the promise of a nice pension to make up for it. So to the local governments, they can “pay for it later” unless they actually don’t. Parents are just as culpable as they want a great education for their kids but don’t really want to pay for it, coupled with proposition 13 many schools in california are a mess.
  • scarface74 8y ago
    Exactly. Let’s get rid of pensions and let the market sort it out - and this is coming from a teachers kid. If you get rid of pensions and try to pay the teachers the same amount as you pay them now, there will be a teacher shortage forcing the government to pay more. They will have to raise taxes to cover it but at least all sides will know the true costs. I don’t think the pension system in my state is too out of whack. It’s only 2% every year worked of your final salary up to 60% (80%?).
    • seanmcdirmid 8y ago
      I think more than a few districts nationally are already moving to 401ks like private industry is, but paying now is a bitter pill to swallow. And how do you convert existing pensions to a 401k when the money doesn’t really exist?
      • scarface74 8y ago
        In a way they are screwed. The pension system like social security is a pyramid scheme. But didn’t the private sector basically contribute the value of the pension to the 401K using some type of present value calculation?
        • germinalphrase 8y ago
          I know this discussion is focus on California, but for context this is not true in all states. Yes, many states have extremely underfunded pensions (Illinois sounds like a disaster) but others (like neighboring Wisconsin) are fully/nearly fully funded.
• e40 8y ago
  California progressives have a sort of "feast the beast" strategy Why is this just a progressive thing?
  • claydavisss 8y ago
    Because public employee unions are the only reliably effective voting bloc in California. Democrats know full well that public employee compensation is a Ponzi schema in the state but won't bite the hand that feeds them.
  • leereeves 8y ago
    It's in contrast to the conservative strategy "starve the beast".
    • jewelthief91 8y ago
      IIRC conservatives don't have a great track record of following through with this.
  • madengr 8y ago
    Because a "starve the beast" strategy, like in Kansas, is a product of conservatives. Though school funding in Kansas was fine, despite the hysteria created by the media. There can NEVER be enough money for schools, per the article: "Some districts are predicting deficits and many districts are bracing for what’s to come by cutting programs, reducing staff or drawing down their reserves—even though per-pupil funding is at its highest level in three decades and voters recently extended a tax hike on the rich to help pay for schools." Maybe CA should work on it's illegal immigration problem, which is probably a big drain on the schools. Funny to read about all the economic woes in CA despite it's supposed great economy. In reality it's a dump.
• metabagel 8y ago
  Yet somehow the California economy is massive and thriving. So, apparently you're leaving something out or shading your analysis. I'll wait for peer review of your theory.