welfare vs wages

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Overtime will take them, on average, into the mid 60s. Hardly a rich person's salary. Especially living in a city.

Add in covered healthcare and 70% of average salary as a pension and we're a far cry from minimum wage.

That's why even Rahmbo is looking to privatize garbage collection.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Add in covered healthcare and 70% of average salary as a pension and we're a far cry from minimum wage.

That's why even Rahmbo is looking to privatize garbage collection.

So you're saying garbage collectors deserve to live in poverty?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

So you're saying garbage collectors deserve to live in poverty?

No I'm not saying that. Private collectors are paid comparable wages to public workers. It's all in the pension.

And no garbage collectors should not earn a rich-person's salary unless there's a MG (Masters' of Garbage) program at Wharton I'm not familiar with.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

No I'm not saying that. Private collectors are paid comparable wages to public workers. It's all in the pension.

And no garbage collectors should not earn a rich-person's salary unless there's a MG (Masters' of Garbage) program at Wharton I'm not familiar with.

So a 60K salary is "rich" to you? Because 44K plus health care adds up to a mid-60s salary (estimate a third more for health care and Social Security costs- much of which the employing company gets to deduct).

Seventy percent pension would mean a collector would be living on about $30-35K a year in retirement. You consider this overly lavish?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

So a 60K salary is "rich" to you? Because 44K plus health care adds up to a mid-60s salary (estimate a third more for health care and Social Security costs- much of which the employing company gets to deduct).

Seventy percent pension would mean a collector would be living on about $30-35K a year in retirement. You consider this overly lavish?

60K is not rich and I think is fair pay, it's also a far cry from minimum wage and with healthcare added I would definitely consider it middle class.

When the $30-$35K comes from the taxpayer, then yes I consider it lavish. Drawing from the employee's 401K, I consider livable with Medicare and SS added. I also call it self-reliant and not taxpayer subsidized.

Illinois and many other states don't have a problem with payroll it's pensions that have been neglected/pilfered and mismanaged at no fault of the taxpayer yet guess who's on the line?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

60K is not rich and I think is fair pay, it's also a far cry from minimum wage and with healthcare added I would definitely consider it middle class.

When the $30-$35K comes from the taxpayer, then yes I consider it lavish. Drawing from the employee's 401K, I consider livable with Medicare and SS added. I also call it self-reliant and not taxpayer subsidized.

Illinois and many other states don't have a problem with payroll it's pensions that have been neglected/pilfered and mismanaged at no fault of the taxpayer yet guess who's on the line?

You are aware many public employees don't get 401Ks, aren't you? And that many also don't get SS? So their pensions, which were PROMISED TO THEM, are all they get. My uncle, who was a state trooper for over 30 years, is one of those public employees who gets no SS.

Yes, it's horrible that elected officials overestimated market returns and so chronically underfunded pensions, but who was in charge of electing those officials? Right... we taxpayers. And we taxpayers are the ones who benefit from not having garbage-strewn streets, highways that are in reasonable condition, police on patrol and fire fighters. We pay their salaries because they WORK FOR US. The least we can do is not renege on the employment contracts we made with them. God forbid they get to live a middle class life and have some security in their retirement years. God forbid.

[GenuineRisk]

Some info on Detroit, which is looking at cutting pensions:

But the average pension benefit in Detroit is not especially high. The average annual payment is about $19,000, said Bruce Babiarz, a spokesman for the pension funds. And it is about $30,000 for retired police officers and firefighters, who do not get Social Security benefits, he said. Some retired workers get larger pensions, though: about 82 retirees who either worked many years or had high-salaried jobs are paid pensions of more than $90,000 a year, he said.

Among them is Isaiah McKinnon, who was the city’s police chief in the 1990s and whose pension is just over $92,000 a year. Dr. McKinnon said he and other officers earned their retirement money by serving in a dangerous profession. Dr. McKinnon was shot at eight times while on the job and was stabbed twice, and he has scars from the attacks on his neck and abdomen, he said.

Dr. McKinnon, who holds a doctoral degree in education administration, is an associate professor at the University of Detroit Mercy. He expressed concern about retired rank-and-file officers whose pensions were based on salaries far lower than his.

“We’re in this predicament, and everyone has to suffer to an extent,” Dr. McKinnon said. “But the predicament and the percentage — that has to be talked about.”

So, out of 21,000 municipal retirees, only 82 are getting over $90,000 a year. And if the average pension is $19,000, that means quite a few are getting less than $19,000 a year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/us...anted=all&_r=0

[dellinger63]

God forbid some young middle class family who has never been on the public dole is unable to afford a tutor or even help out with college for their children because of the politicians who hired family as pension fund managers, who in turn fleeced the money.

Privatizing the sanitation department and other bloated, mismanaged, patronage filled departments will prevent that problem from ever happening again.