4 ms·

Teachers don’t get social security, and unlike firefighters or police officers, most retirees earn modest pensions of about $55,000 a year. This seems like the

by apo 8y ago

Teachers don’t get social security, and unlike firefighters or police officers, most retirees earn modest pensions of about $55,000 a year. This seems like the most important sentence in the entire article. Why are California teachers paying into a separate pension system rather than Social Security like everyone else? What would it take to decommission STRS for CA teachers?

claydavisss 8y ago
Given the fact that they don't work a full year, their expected SS benefits would be a fraction of their teacher pension.
germinalphrase 8y ago
In some states, they pay into both.
madengr 8y ago
Hell, I'd love to get out of SS. My money would have much better growth without that ponzi scheme. The problem is letting the government (state or federal) manage you retirement "fund", then wondering why you don't have any.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Why are California teachers paying into a separate pension system rather than Social Security like everyone else? Lots of state and local public employees nationally don't pay into Social Security (and consequently don't qualify for SS benefits for the earnings while in public employment; these workers also get reduced Social Security benefits if they did qualify based on either other work of their own or as a surviving spouse.) Nationally, this is true of the majority of police, firefighters, and other emergency workers, and a large minority of teachers, and smaller minorities of other public employees. Many public employees, OTOH, pay into both SS and a public employee pension. Public employers were originally completely excluded from Social Security, but were permitted (but not required) to participate after 1950.
djrogers 8y ago
> unlike firefighters or police officers, most retirees earn modest pensions of about $55,000 a year. That’s a very misleading statistic - it represents an average service time of about 24 years, barely more than half of a career. Full-career retirees average 105% of their final year’s pay in pension benefits, or about double what’s quoted here. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewbiggs/2015/08/28/california-teacher-retirement-benefits-are-hardly-modest-but-calstrs-doesnt-want-you-to-know-that/#acc59ec6d3d2 https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewbiggs/2015/08/28/californ...
- magicalist 8y ago
  > That’s a very misleading statistic Is it? It sounds like you're not arguing that "most retirees" don't get that amount, but that they don't deserve the amount they get.

by apo 8y ago

claydavisss 8y ago

Given the fact that they don't work a full year, their expected SS benefits would be a fraction of their teacher pension.

germinalphrase 8y ago

In some states, they pay into both.

madengr 8y ago

Hell, I'd love to get out of SS. My money would have much better growth without that ponzi scheme. The problem is letting the government (state or federal) manage you retirement "fund", then wondering why you don't have any.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Why are California teachers paying into a separate pension system rather than Social Security like everyone else? Lots of state and local public employees nationally don't pay into Social Security (and consequently don't qualify for SS benefits for the earnings while in public employment; these workers also get reduced Social Security benefits if they did qualify based on either other work of their own or as a surviving spouse.) Nationally, this is true of the majority of police, firefighters, and other emergency workers, and a large minority of teachers, and smaller minorities of other public employees. Many public employees, OTOH, pay into both SS and a public employee pension. Public employers were originally completely excluded from Social Security, but were permitted (but not required) to participate after 1950.

djrogers 8y ago

> unlike firefighters or police officers, most retirees earn modest pensions of about $55,000 a year. That’s a very misleading statistic - it represents an average service time of about 24 years, barely more than half of a career. Full-career retirees average 105% of their final year’s pay in pension benefits, or about double what’s quoted here. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewbiggs/2015/08/28/california-teacher-retirement-benefits-are-hardly-modest-but-calstrs-doesnt-want-you-to-know-that/#acc59ec6d3d2 https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewbiggs/2015/08/28/californ...

magicalist 8y ago
> That’s a very misleading statistic Is it? It sounds like you're not arguing that "most retirees" don't get that amount, but that they don't deserve the amount they get.