Let the chaos in Wisconsin be a reminder why we should not put those w/o a college degree into power.

thank you, again, uncleb, for proving that for you, no matter what the issue, no matter how complicated the moving parts, it all comes down to israel.[/quote].

Not very complicated at all

"Remember, though: talking about the power of the Israel Lobby and the way it causes the U.S. to sacrifice its own interests for this foreign country is strictly prohibited and a sure sign of deep malice. And the only possible reason why Muslims in that region might harbor hostility toward the U.S. is because of primitive, crazed religious fanaticism and a contempt for Our Freedoms."

Didn't George Bush Jr. have a college degree?

Not a 14% match. Said was putting 14% of salary (rather than 0% like WI) into a pension plan.

The New UncleB wrote:

And the only possible reason why Muslims in that region might harbor hostility toward the U.S. is because of primitive, crazed religious fanaticism and a contempt for Our Freedoms."

OBL got Al Qaeda going in response to US presence on the Arabian peninsula during Gulf War I, which had f***-all to do with Israel.

smagpole wrote:

Not a 14% match. Said was putting 14% of salary (rather than 0% like WI) into a pension plan.

his/her 14% is matched by the state:

excerpt from that link: Teachers in the state plan already contribute to their pensions. They pay 14 percent of their salaries to the system; school districts match the money, chipping in 14 percent of their payrolls. Teachers in the system do not pay Social Security taxes or draw Social Security benefits.

tillerman5 wrote:

source for the 14% match:

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/article_3c7e5178-c26b-5379-93cf-2f2b34a252ec.html

and you don't have to pay into social security, which adds around $3,000 per year to your paycheck, AND you are not supporting the majority of the country that has to survive on social security alone.

So yeah, please go on about how other people have such a sweet deal.

At no point did I say that anyone had a sweet deal. I was asking for information about the WI teachers while sharing comparable data about Missouri teachers. Do they pay into social security? Or do they just get free pensions?

Only 6% of your paycheck goes to social security. 14% of my paycheck goes into my retirement pension. While it is wonderful that the state matches that 14%, I have a lot less income each year to "play" with. Do you know how difficult it is to save for your own retirement when 14% of your paycheck is taken away and put into a retirement fund that looks less and less promising each year? When social security goes kaput, you at least had that extra 8% of your paycheck to invest how you wanted. When my retirement goes kaput, I don't have much left. Not saying that anyone has a sweet deal. I'm stating the facts and calling out your BS.

And why should we pay social security when we don't get any of the benefits?

agip wrote:

thank you, again, uncleb, for proving that for you, no matter what the issue, no matter how complicated the moving parts, it all comes down to israel.

UncleB hates Israel because it represents the triumph of Western civilization over a culture of primitive religious savages who happen not to be white. To show how "enlightened" he is, he defends the marauding nomads who would do nothing but behead each other, stone each other to death and ruthlessly murder anyone whom the deem to be an "infidel."

yeah, sorry for the hostility - when someone who has an honest to god pension and can retire after 30 years complains, I get very angry. Probably more my problem than yours.

As for you points:

1) I, and all private sector workers, also have to save 14% of our incomes if we hope to retire with anything resembling our current incomes. So we also have less to 'play with.' But we don't get a 14% match, so you are WAY ahead on that point. And yes, I do know how hard it is. I have to also worry about the bloody stock market crashing, while your money is guaranteed by the state.

2) I don't have that 'extra' 8% at all - it is in my 401k and IRAs, which I have to manage in my spare time and pray for good stock/bond performance.

3) sounds like you are saying more 'I can't save more than 14%' so if the MO plan goes away I am dead.' Well, ok. You are. But the chance of that is pretty small. The chance of private sector workers mishandling their own 401k is about 1,000% more likely.

4) no, you shouldn't pay into ss if you don't receive the benefits. But your take home is certainly larger than everyone else's on the same gross income. And you are outside the 'compact between generations,' as a priviledged class, which is not good for national unity.

5)Here's the bottom line math:

I am saving 6% into SS, PLUS 15% into a 401k. That is 21% of my gross. (and you complain about 14%!) I have a 3% match, so I get 24% saved.

YOU save 14% and get 28%. Again: Me: 21% gets me 24%. You: 14% gets you 28%.

my master point is that retiring people in their 50s is not sustainable in a time where people live into their 80s.

Pensions aren't matched, a pension is X amount of $ for working X amount of years and earning X amont of money over those years= you get X @ mo. in retirement. a defined benefit plan

401k and 403b's are where they match X% and people invest X% of their check.

pension plans are out dated and largly unsustainable- all governments would be smart to completely ax them tomorrow.

aquafina wrote:

Pensions aren't matched, a pension is X amount of $ for working X amount of years and earning X amont of money over those years= you get X @ mo. in retirement. a defined benefit plan

401k and 403b's are where they match X% and people invest X% of their check.

pension plans are out dated and largly unsustainable- all governments would be smart to completely ax them tomorrow.

true - I was mixing facts a little bit. But my point stands - the workers pay 14% and the state pays 14% and that combined pot of money is supposed to become large enough to pay for the workers' retirement for life.

While technically it is not a match like in a 401k, it really is. It is chipped in by the state just like the 3% in my 401k is chipped in by my company.

aquafina wrote:

Pensions aren't matched, a pension is X amount of $ for working X amount of years and earning X amont of money over those years= you get X @ mo. in retirement. a defined benefit plan

401k and 403b's are where they match X% and people invest X% of their check.

pension plans are out dated and largly unsustainable- all governments would be smart to completely ax them tomorrow.

I certainly agree with your last point here. Although it may seem that I have a great deal as a MO teacher, I would prefer to have my 6% go to SS and then do what I want with the rest of the 8% that currently pays into my pension. In case you didn't read the article closely, you should know that they have already drastically cut the future retiree benefits. Hopefully I will at least get my 14% back when it is time for me to retire. I doubt that I will be retiring at age 57. Hopefully by 67.

And for what it is worth, we have 0% matching on our 403b.

I think I've got a good thing going with my employer. I don't get a match on my 403(b), but with my other retirement plan, I pay 2.5% of my salary and my employer matches 13%.

I still don’t get where you say there's a contribution to a pension, a pension has no contribution by the worker. Its money paid for working X # of years- period.

Anyway, it's time for teachers to come down off the cross and stop being martyrs. Is the job hard, yes; but certainly not impossible. No need for tenure, pensions, or anything outside the scope of what those of us in the "real world" get.

You (teachers) should embrace:

Differential pay- Yes you should pay the math teacher MORE than the Art teacher, the gym teacher should make less than the chemistry teacher.

The death of tenure- (That would be HUGE.) Don’t good teachers want the bad teachers gone? Don’t you want your profession to be viewed as a.... profession?

School choice & charter schools- This creates leverage for good teachers. They don’t want to pay? You go to a new school for more $$ or a better assignment etc..

Eliminate all funding for the arts, theater, music, etc. Dump that money into the STEM disciplines instead.

And the USA vetoed a UN resolution condemning the ongoing settlements, a resolution drafted using the USA's own words on the topic(!), because of OBL? 14 for, 1 against, yet again. Further isolating ourselves from the world as we back every single thing Israel does

This is the general attitude, but it is empirically false.

1) Public sectors do make concessions. I haven't looked at CBAs in Wisconsin, but in the vast majority of states public sector workers have taken pay cuts and made other concessions.

2) Because unions negotiate three year deals (generally), pay for unionized employees in the public sector doesn't fall as quickly. However, when the economy bounces back, the private sector employees will see big raises but public sector employees will not.

This post is dead on. Add in the most "gubment" workers are specalized, have degrees, etc... and you have the sitiuation. Many of the low-skill jobs were outsourced years ago.

It's a power play between the

1) Right Wing, Ku Klux Klan, GOP, Tea Party, Police Unions & Fire Unions

and

2) Civil Service Unions, Teachers Unions, Democratic Party

Also worth mentioning that Union leaders have no excuse to cry poverty. Their salaries are not tied to corporate profits, they are paid for by rank and file members paying their dues and some have Mafia ties. Big Labor is corrupt and Obama will always support the Union elites.

Teamsters- James Hoffa $383,132 in 2009

United Food & Commercial Workers- Jack Loveall $500,000 in 2003, plus 2 pilots for private jet.

Longshoreman- Robert McEllrath

UAW- Bob King