"Nationwide, government employees are most of what remains of 'defined benefit' America. More than 80 percent of government workers have defined benefits—as opposed to defined-contribution—pension plans. Only about 20 percent of private-sector workers have defined-benefit plans. California's parlous condition owes much to burdensome health-care and pension promises negotiated with public employees' unions, promises that are suffocating the state's economic growth."
Read the entire column at http://www.newsweek.com/id/237640.
The pension noose is around our neck as we wait for the baby boomers to retire from their public employment and cash in their unfunded pension plan. Can we get the noose off before they cash in? I doubt it...
After seeing him strugle to understand the diference between defined benefits and defined contributions (http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2010/sidhu-on-defined-benefits/), it would be a good idea for someone to let Harry Sidhu know about George Will's article.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting the way the country is now that everyone pays less taxes. According to USA
ReplyDeleteToday, US taxpayers paid the least amount of taxes on their incomes last year since 1950 when Truman was President.
The largest corporation in the world, Exxon.Mobile paid zero dollars to the IRS last year.
Consider that if Governor Schwarzenegger didn't cut the car tax right after he took office, the state would have 30-billion dollars it doesn't have today.
Based on these facts, lets go after the unions?
Be real.
Over a thousand trillion dollars is being used for bets on companies failing and other things on Wall St. called hedge funds. That much money doesn't even exist. WTF?
Enforce the boarders, raise wages, make large corporations pay their fair share, enforce tariffs, build the middle class again and when people have jobs again that can afford them nice things, they will also have money for taxes.
This would seem to be the answer if it weren't for the 800 pound gorilla in the room. A thousand trillion dollars bet against people doing well. Maybe we could tax this non existent money being used against us.
I share your frustration but the tea baggers have much of it wrong. The year they showed up was the year they paid the least in taxes in 59 years. Spending is always a problem when you have no income. There are two sides to every coin but how much more do we have to lower taxes to balance the budget?
"Enforce the boarders, raise wages, make large corporations pay their fair share, enforce tariffs, build the middle class again and when people have jobs again that can afford them nice things, they will also have money for taxes."
ReplyDeleteYou are right except for the taxes. Government has an insatiable appetite for taxes. In my opinion, one of the chief reasons that taxes might be down, although mine have never been hire and I continually gross LESS, is because incomes are WAY down. And you can't blame this on a small number of of "tea baggers" just like I can't blame the move towards a socialist nation on a handful of tree huggers".
In OC, the Tea Party movement is made up of pissed off formerly and currently Democratic and Republican members who have a strong Libertarian philosophy. Smaller government is better. Lower taxes are better. Less government intrusion into our homes is better. Those are the basics of the Tea Party and having Repuglicans jumping on board to ride the wave is unfortunate. I have heard this before and found it to be quite true: A candidate who believes that the 2nd Amendment is an individual's inalienable right is a candidate who will likely respect all of the constitution. I think that is mostly true assuming the candidate isn't GOP or Democratic wing nut.
Big business should pay the same proportional taxes as other companies. Part of the reason they don't pay corporate income tax stems from the number of employees who do pay income tax. In other words, Chevron may not be paying the IRS directly but all of their US employees and subcontractors do pay. That makes Chevron a HUGE contributor to the tax base. Then consider the property taxes paid locally by the oil companies.
And yes let's talk about the unions. Specifically the PUBLIC EMPLOYEE unions. These are public sector workers who have very strong job security, regular pay checks, paid time off, medical insurance, and retirement pensions and retirement medical coverage. The last two items are the problem. More importantly, it isn't solely the unions' fault since there was an elected body who had to approve of the contract changes. Unfortunately, a handful of elected officials have given into unreasonable demands. It has only been recently that the media has even cared to mention the unfunded pension gifts that are destroying cities.
And here is the kicker: The small portion which is funded (by our taxes) is being aggressively invested. And guess where ALL that pension money is invested... WALL STREET and hedge funds.
That means the same people who are fighting for MORE retirement money are the same ones who invest in Wall Street in a big way. Then, when they LOSE their investment, guess who has to bail out the pension? Yep, you and I. It's a nice circle jerk for the fat cats with the purse strings.
First of all, it sucks that the Flyers might go to Irvine. If ever there was a place not to go I would say Irvine is close to the top of the list.
ReplyDeleteSecond, did Dick Cheney ever dig oil wells? What made him qualified to run Halliburton or the US for that matter.
Third, if not for Henry Ford, there would probably be no freeways so I hold him responsible for getting those built.
And your point on Caltrans not building anymore freeways? My point exactly.
Lets build this train.
Mostly in some agreement with your last 3 paragraphs there.
About the Tea Baggers and their support for less government. That can cost a lot of money. Take for instance the BP Gulf oil spill. Had the government used it's oversight to make sure BP used an acoustic shut off switch on their US rigs like other governments have done, we wouldn't be facing the cost of this cleanup. BP will probably do as Exxon did in 1989 and litigate their responsibility for a couple of decades. When they finally do settle, they will like Exxon, not pay for the full cost of a clean up. Not to mention the damage to the economy due to closed beaches, fishing grounds, restaurants, hotels and motels.
This small government you talk about can be more expensive than bigger government doing proper regulation.
All the oversight and taxes in the world will not prevent tragedy. Sometimes, stuff happens. More social workers, marines, middle management, and red tape will not fix BP or the mess they made. After the Exxon disaster, congress should have past a law that seizes assets of petroleum companies who have disasters. Much like a lien but they could have the power to use Exxon resources for 100% of the clean up. A smaller government might have been able to do it.
ReplyDeleteA smaller central government does not have to be proportionately inept to our current bloated government. If we cut the FAT from the government we might be able to focus on better regulating of offshore drilling. You don’t really think that BP is indifferent to this catastrophe, do you? They have instantly lost BILLIONS of dollars and will continue to lose BILLIONS of dollars. That’s why they give them selves the bonuses that they do, the risks involved are HUGE! I thought a few offshore rigs were no big deal until I heard a statistic that there are over 30,000 rigs in the gulf alone! A hundred rigs, ok. 30,000, rigs, OMG!