3 ms·
> 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 reasonabl
by 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 agoThey were both malfeasant. Accepting a bad deal because you thought taxpayers would just foot the bill doesn't absolve you of blame.
- fatbird 8y agoThey 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.