3 ms·
I can see your point from a policy level. However, once you have generations of government employees on this scheme such that their retirement planning is based
by tareqak 8y ago
I can see your point from a policy level. However, once you have generations of government employees on this scheme such that their retirement planning is based around it, then it becomes much harder for everyone involved to adjust.
From the article, it seems that teachers don't have Social Security withheld, so they don't have that as a fallback either:
Teachers, like any other public employees who don’t have Social Security withheld, are not eligible for Social Security benefits; even if they earn Social Security by working a side job, those benefits are adjusted downward based on their pension income.
- lotsofpulp 8y agoPrivate companies do it all the time, it’s called freezing the pension plan.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoPrivate companies have to overcome the complaining of the unions (if applicable) and justify their actions to the shareholders. Politicians have to overcome a complaining police/teachers/whatever union that is plastering voters (analogous to shareholders in the private example) eyeballs with negative adds about how politician X "doesn't care about the teachers" or whatever. It's much easier to just go with the flow and blame it on the prior set of politicians since that doesn't make as many people hate you as attempting to change things would.
- paulie_a 8y agoAnd that should be considered fraud.
- lotsofpulp 8y agoWhy would that be considered fraud? Pension freezes still pay out accrued and agreed upon benefits.