4 ms·

Or all of New Jersey. Governor Christie loves to vilify public employees while refusing to pay the legally required contributions to pension funds. I get it -

Or all of New Jersey. Governor Christie loves to vilify public employees while refusing to pay the legally required contributions to pension funds. I get it - pensions are expensive. Figure out a plan to start transitioning off of them for new hires. But this is just a refusal to meet contracted obligations, while laying the blame at the feet of the people that held up their end.

crusso 11y ago
You have to consider the cyclical nature of these types of political pathologies. The unions get big benefit from the politicians they help to elect, the politicians looking to get elected make big promises to the unions... wash, rinse, repeat. The people who "held up their end" were the same people who provided the political force that elected the leadership that THEY wanted. The political and union leadership the unions elected created the messes that everyone is now having to deal with. I'm not a Christie fan, but blaming him for attempting to break the dysfunctional cycle seems misplaced.
jqm 11y ago
I'm sure it's not true of all public employees, but many of those I am familiar with richly deserve vilifying. There is no shortage of people who did very little during their working career and expect to retire after 20-25 years with full health benefits and a livable pension paid for the rest of their lives. In my opinion, this is a form of freeloading and it certainly isn't sustainable. I don't know what the solution is. I'd like to see better pension schemes for private sector workers.. particularly those who don't stay at a company for 20 years. I suppose maybe a national scheme similar to Social Security. I don't know...
- derefr 11y ago
  Whatever else it is, it was an option that was clearly on the table 20 years ago when these people were deciding on a career, and is probably in large part why they went into the public sector in the first place (as part of a larger package of "job security.") It's not freeloading, I think, to accept the "gift" of a nice career freely given; any more than it is freeloading to accept a scholarship, or an inheritance.
  - jqm 11y ago
    You are right. Freeloading probably isn't the right term. But it is an abusive scheme.. particularly given that performance expectations usually aren't reasonable, and once someone has "gotten on", they are usually very hard to get rid of. In the meantime, someone in the private sector is being increasingly squeezed for performance, can be gotten rid of almost on a whim and is very unlikely to have lifetime pension benefits.. particularly ridiculously unsustainable ones like public employees. True, they do have the potential of a larger salary and probably more job satisfaction. I just wish a balance could be found allowing people to actually enter productive jobs and make an effort towards improving the world while enjoying (a more reasonable version) of the pension benefits public "workers" (I use the term loosely) enjoy.
- gaius 11y ago
  If you want to see how this plays out - look at Greece. There a civil servant retires at 50 or 95% of their final salary. Or did...
jbooth 11y ago
Christie knows that he'll lose that case, having to pay a bunch of legal fees and damages on top of the pension money. He also knows it'll take years, happen on the next guy's watch, and he can run for President in the meantime claiming that he balanced the budget and reduced expenses. See also, the pennies on the dollar we got on that big EPA settlement with Exxon (pennies now are worth something, dollars during another gov's term worth nothing), and the fact that we didn't build another tunnel to NYC, even though it's about 50 years overdue and the feds were offering to pay for 95% of it. I'd be less offended if he had any chance at all of being a top 5 contender for the nomination. Screwing everyone for his own benefit is one thing, screwing everyone for self-delusion is a whole other level.
bobcostas55 11y ago
Held up their end in a blatantly and transparently corrupt bargain. I don't see why we shouldn't lay the blame at their feet.

crusso 11y ago

You have to consider the cyclical nature of these types of political pathologies. The unions get big benefit from the politicians they help to elect, the politicians looking to get elected make big promises to the unions... wash, rinse, repeat. The people who "held up their end" were the same people who provided the political force that elected the leadership that THEY wanted. The political and union leadership the unions elected created the messes that everyone is now having to deal with. I'm not a Christie fan, but blaming him for attempting to break the dysfunctional cycle seems misplaced.

jqm 11y ago

I'm sure it's not true of all public employees, but many of those I am familiar with richly deserve vilifying. There is no shortage of people who did very little during their working career and expect to retire after 20-25 years with full health benefits and a livable pension paid for the rest of their lives. In my opinion, this is a form of freeloading and it certainly isn't sustainable. I don't know what the solution is. I'd like to see better pension schemes for private sector workers.. particularly those who don't stay at a company for 20 years. I suppose maybe a national scheme similar to Social Security. I don't know...

derefr 11y ago
Whatever else it is, it was an option that was clearly on the table 20 years ago when these people were deciding on a career, and is probably in large part why they went into the public sector in the first place (as part of a larger package of "job security.") It's not freeloading, I think, to accept the "gift" of a nice career freely given; any more than it is freeloading to accept a scholarship, or an inheritance.
- jqm 11y ago
  You are right. Freeloading probably isn't the right term. But it is an abusive scheme.. particularly given that performance expectations usually aren't reasonable, and once someone has "gotten on", they are usually very hard to get rid of. In the meantime, someone in the private sector is being increasingly squeezed for performance, can be gotten rid of almost on a whim and is very unlikely to have lifetime pension benefits.. particularly ridiculously unsustainable ones like public employees. True, they do have the potential of a larger salary and probably more job satisfaction. I just wish a balance could be found allowing people to actually enter productive jobs and make an effort towards improving the world while enjoying (a more reasonable version) of the pension benefits public "workers" (I use the term loosely) enjoy.
gaius 11y ago
If you want to see how this plays out - look at Greece. There a civil servant retires at 50 or 95% of their final salary. Or did...

jbooth 11y ago

Christie knows that he'll lose that case, having to pay a bunch of legal fees and damages on top of the pension money. He also knows it'll take years, happen on the next guy's watch, and he can run for President in the meantime claiming that he balanced the budget and reduced expenses. See also, the pennies on the dollar we got on that big EPA settlement with Exxon (pennies now are worth something, dollars during another gov's term worth nothing), and the fact that we didn't build another tunnel to NYC, even though it's about 50 years overdue and the feds were offering to pay for 95% of it. I'd be less offended if he had any chance at all of being a top 5 contender for the nomination. Screwing everyone for his own benefit is one thing, screwing everyone for self-delusion is a whole other level.

bobcostas55 11y ago

Held up their end in a blatantly and transparently corrupt bargain. I don't see why we shouldn't lay the blame at their feet.