Right, like I said the promise goes both ways. The city or other authority offering the pension expects a certain amount of productivity out of the employee an

Right, like I said the promise goes both ways. The city or other authority offering the pension expects a certain amount of productivity out of the employee and in many cases the employees "pulled out the cover" on their city. In general I support the idea of defined-benefit retirement plans, and even to some extent the right of public employees to organize into unions, but when I think about the secretary at the local bureau who types one letter at a time on her computer, with a pencil eraser, because her fingernails are six inches long, or when I think about the bus drivers who can't be fired from the San Francisco MTA, even though they are convicted criminals who can't hold a commercial drivers' license, then my faith in public systems begins to erode. Goldbricking and loafing can only proliferate a certain amount before the ability of the city to pay for the promised pension is impaired. Your argument favors the idea of state or national pension systems, because they are large enough to average out the stupidity. With municipal systems you're virtually guaranteed to have a few cities unable to meet their promises.