Who, exactly, supports public unions?

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Instead of biotching lay out a proposal that would fix the mess"

How about this?

RETIREMENT: Just like everyone else, you put as much into your retirement plan as you choose (with a modest employer match). Whatever you can accumulate over the course of your career, is yours to keep. No more, no less. And everyone takes part in social security. That's how it works for the entire private sector. What could be more fair? But if you suggest that, MSNBC says you're declaring war on the middle class or some such nonesense.

HEALTHCARE: If the entire private scetor pays 30% of the cost of their plans, then you can too. What could be more fair?

Try making that wrong.

Great but you didn't answer my question. What would bea fair way to make these people whole, cause it is not fair for them to start with zero. I am not a public employee, and my health care is paid 100%. I am a blue collar worker.

As far as health care you are wrong there are still corporations out there that cover 100% of employee health care, and many that have employees paying less than 30%. You need to stop using broad strokes with your approach.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

Great but you didn't answer my question. What would bea fair way to make these people whole, cause it is not fair for them to start with zero. I am not a public employee, and my health care is paid 100%. I am a blue collar worker.

As far as health care you are wrong there are still corporations out there that cover 100% of employee health care, and many that have employees paying less than 30%. You need to stop using broad strokes with your approach.

Specialist, can you elaoborate on who is starting "with zero"? EVERYONE starts with $0. That's what happens when you "start". Not sure what you mean by "making them whole". You get "made whole" by socking away enough of your own money to fund your own retirement. That's what most adults are expected to do in th ereal world, so I see no reason why union folk cannot get on board.

You are trying to refute my healthcare opinion by suggesting that some people get 100% of their healthcare paid for? Specialist, you cannot manage to such a rare exception. Some people also win the lottery, but that's not a viable strategy for the majority of us. When I say "all", can we assume that if I'm right for 98% of the group, that's close enough? Nit-picking isn't debate. I guess when you know you don't have facts or common sense that can justify the cost of the benefits, all you can do is dodge and dodge and dodge...

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Specialist, can you elaoborate on who is starting "with zero"? EVERYONE starts with $0. That's what happens when you "start". Not sure what you mean by "making them whole". You get "made whole" by socking away enough of your own money to fund your own retirement. That's what most adults are expected to do in th ereal world, so I see no reason why union folk cannot get on board.

You are trying to refute my healthcare opinion by suggesting that some people get 100% of their healthcare paid for? Specialist, you cannot manage to such a rare exception. Some people also win the lottery, but that's not a viable strategy for the majority of us. When I say "all", can we assume that if I'm right for 98% of the group, that's close enough? Nit-picking isn't debate. I guess when you know you don't have facts or common sense that can justify the cost of the benefits, all you can do is dodge and dodge and dodge...

New employees start with zero that is fine, but what would you do with current tenured employees? You are stating take away their pensions and start them with zero? I am saying based on years of service give them a lumpsum into a 401k plan to equal what they would earn if you freeze their pensions today. Then all pesions would be null and void. All most everyone would be happy clams. The taxpayers because there would be no more pensions, and the people who would lose them would be bought out of them and given a substantial start to their 401k.

If your employer came to you tomorrow and said, "Jim business is down and I can no longer contribute to your 401k, and any contributions I have already made I will be taking back." Would you be ok with that?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by TheSpecialist

New employees start with zero that is fine, but what would you do with current tenured employees? You are stating take away their pensions and start them with zero? I am saying based on years of service give them a lumpsum into a 401k plan to equal what they would earn if you freeze their pensions today. Then all pesions would be null and void. All most everyone would be happy clams. The taxpayers because there would be no more pensions, and the people who would lose them would be bought out of them and given a substantial start to their 401k.

If your employer came to you tomorrow and said, "Jim business is down and I can no longer contribute to your 401k, and any contributions I have already made I will be taking back." Would you be ok with that?

Sorry, you did clear that up...

"what would you do with current tenured employees? You are stating take away their pensions and start them with zero? "

No, you don't wipe away what people already have vested in their pensions. YOu transition them gradually from pensions to 401(k)s. This is precisely what happened to almost the entire private scetor, 20 years ago. No rational person would just erase what you have already accrued. That is an important point to make clear, so it was good you thought of that.

I have never heard anyone suggest that any contributions be taken back. I'm saying union folk cannot contribute 5% of their pay toward a pension that gives them 70% of their salary for the rest of their lives. You either need to drastically increase the employee contribution, or decrease the benefit. That is mathematical fact. I don't LIKE THAT by the way, but I accept it as unfortunate truth. Liberals would say that means I hate the middle class, which is insane.

[TheSpecialist]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Sorry, you did clear that up...

"what would you do with current tenured employees? You are stating take away their pensions and start them with zero? "

No, you don't wipe away what people already have vested in their pensions. YOu transition them gradually from pensions to 401(k)s. This is precisely what happened to almost the entire private scetor, 20 years ago. No rational person would just erase what you have already accrued. That is an important point to make clear, so it was good you thought of that.

I have never heard anyone suggest that any contributions be taken back. I'm saying union folk cannot contribute 5% of their pay toward a pension that gives them 70% of their salary for the rest of their lives. You either need to drastically increase the employee contribution, or decrease the benefit. That is mathematical fact. I don't LIKE THAT by the way, but I accept it as unfortunate truth. Liberals would say that means I hate the middle class, which is insane.

Fair Enough.