Messageboard - Politics

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Are Ohio Public Employees Over-compensated?

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Politics Are Ohio Public Employees Over-compensated?

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 363 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #427793

    OK, I’ve read all of your arguments, positions, facts, hearsay. Some of them well put, others not so. I have read every word, hummed every tune, looked at it from every angle that everyone has mentioned. I even employed Watson from Jeopardy and have come to a conclusion….

    Drum Roll….

    Reform is necessary. But, passage of SB5 leads to an unbalance of power and would be a step backwards for Ohio as a whole. Don’t we already see a growing discrepancy between the have/have not’s in Ohio? Let us not accelerate the pace. Care for our public servants, they care for you, your children and the future.

    #427794

    gramarye
    Participant

    Parker wrote >>

    televisionset wrote >>

    ehill27 wrote >>
    Is the American middle class no longer worthy of a living wage, good benefits, and a retirement?

    I fully respect your moral view that some people (“American middle class”) are “worthy of a living wage, good benefits, and a retirement.” I don’t believe that some people should have the ability to threaten or use violence to take money from others to pay for “public” sector workers. Will you not use violence against me?

    Violence? Who is advocating violence? I hope no one on this thread at least.

    Parker, televisionset is invoking a libertarian (or anarchist) buzzword trope–when he says violence, he means law. The two are one and the same to some people.

    #427795

    kit444
    Participant

    gramarye wrote >>
    Parker, televisionset is invoking a libertarian (or anarchist) buzzword trope–when he says violence, he means law. The two are one and the same to some people.

    I heard the Objectivist dog whistle go off. I was hoping it would be ignored.

    #427796

    gramarye
    Participant

    Parker wrote >>

    gramarye wrote >>

    ehill27 wrote >>
    It saddens me that middle class folks would expend their energy fighting against a fair living standard for other middle class workers. Is the American middle class no longer worthy of a living wage, good benefits, and a retirement?

    I’ll ask the same thing I’ll ask of any question or proposal involving someone “deserving” more than they have: At whose expense?

    It seems the middle class is dragging itself down in a war for the dwindling scraps left behind by the minority.

    I don’t consider myself upper-class (which is what I presume you meant by “the minority”), though I concede that I have a chance at reaching that level. The issue is that the “war” has been going on for a long time now and the public sector unions have been winning, and they’ve been taking their spoils from far more than just the upper crust.

    However, the fact remains that the current budget problem is not caused by pensions, it’s really about lost revenue. Pension systems were established under adequate funding.

    Lost revenue from what baseline? The bubble highs of the mid-2000s? We may never see that level of revenue again.

    Also, many pension funds were showing unfunded liabilities even at bubble highs. Therefore, they were not established with “adequate funding.”

    The current problem is a demographic effect that will pass, but which needs to be dealt with in the short term.

    What demographic effect will pass? Family sizes continue to shrink. Longevity continues to rise. That demographic reality–fewer workers supporting more retirees–is not going away anytime soon.

    That does not mean we eliminate the only tool protecting workers, or steal their retirement.

    Since I propose to do neither, we can agree on this. Unions are not the only tool protecting workers; their own skills and experience provide that. Likewise, recalibrating contribution levels and benefits levels so that the pension funds no longer show unfunded liabilities is not “stealing.”

    As many on this thread have said, there is greater risk in the public sector that is followed with greater potential for reward.

    Is this a misprint? This is completely the opposite of the common understanding (it is the private sector that is far less stable and more risky, and where the rewards tend to be higher for those who make it).

    If you are in the private sector and are not being rewarded accordingly, following the logic of this thread it is your own fault.

    Indeed it is. I never claimed otherwise. As I have said many times in this thread, I am 100% responsible for my own retirement. It is not fair to demand that I also subsidize others. If I want a dependent, I’ll adopt a child, not a prison guard.

    #427797

    Walker wrote >>
    Keep it on topic, please. Thanks.

    In terms of determining the economic value of public sector workers, it just isn’t possible to do because of the way those folks acquire money.

    #427798

    Coy
    Participant

    Out of curiosity… if corporations can be deemed to have the same benefits as a “person” (per Supreme Court decision via 14th amendment), what about unions?
    And, if that is the case, wouldn’t restricting the ability of a union to collectively bargain be discriminatory?

    #427799

    DavidF
    Participant

    Kbear919 wrote >>
    OK, I’ve read all of your arguments, positions, facts, hearsay. Some of them well put, others not so. I have read every word, hummed every tune, looked at it from every angle that everyone has mentioned. I even employed Watson from Jeopardy and have come to a conclusion….
    Drum Roll….
    Reform is necessary. But, passage of SB5 leads to an unbalance of power and would be a step backwards for Ohio as a whole. Don’t we already see a growing discrepancy between the have/have not’s in Ohio? Let us not accelerate the pace. Care for our public servants, they care for you, your children and the future.

    Only sensible post in this entire thread. What is the economic sense in creating more instability and fear in the current environment. How many home sales, vehicles sales, investments, restaurant meals, etc. are being deferred while people wait to see if they are going to have a job tomorrow? This race to the bottom malarkey posited as though it’s just common sense by the right is no more sensible than trickle down was. It’s more of the same beat down the working class while the upper class (and yes Gram, demographically you are in the upper class) derives the benefits at the expense of others. There is not one person in this country who has derived his success free from the support and intervention of society at large. Stop pretending that we are each islands.

    Stripping public employees of their bargaining rights will not solve the economic difficulties facing us. But it is a great excuse to create a scapegoats to tar and feather. This is nothing short of political vendetta. Pension reform, health care reform, wage adjustments are all possible under collective bargaining. The proof of that is in the fact that if you actually bothered to look at union contracts over the last 10 years, you see that rather than massive gains at the expense of the public, you’ll find time and time again that there have been concession on benefits, concessions on wages, concessions on work conditions. The idea that unions have unlimited powers is ludicrous.

    This is yet another assault on the middle class that is being propagated as necessary and somehow beneficial for the very people it will victimize.

    #427800
    Jeff Regensburger
    Jeff Regensburger
    Participant

    DavidF wrote >>
    There is not one person in this country who has derived his success free from the support and intervention of society at large. Stop pretending that we are each islands.

    Thomas Paine suggested something very similar over 200 years ago:

    Personal property is the effect of society; and it is as impossible for an individual to acquire personal property without the aid of society as it is for him to make land originally. Separate an individual from society, and give him an island or a continent to possess, and he cannot acquire personal property. He cannot be rich. So inseparably are the means connected with the end, in all cases, that where the former do not exist the latter cannot be obtained. All accumulation therefore of personal property beyond what a man’s own hands produce, is derived to him by living in society; and he owes on every principle of justice, of gratitude, and of civilization a part of that accumulation back again to society from whence the whole came.

    #427801

    GreatOutdoors
    Participant
    #427802

    berdawn
    Member

    wrong thread

    #427803

    Andrew Hall
    Member

    GreatOutdoors wrote >>
    Economic Policy Institute: Wisconsin, Ohio public employees are not overpaid

    I have a question about the numbers used there and elsewhere and have not seen an answer: Do these analyses account for the being no cap on non-public employee earnings? That makes averages misleading. Does anyone list the median incomes which would be telling?

    A.

    #427804

    berdawn
    Member

    I’m sure glad we didn’t privatize the road salting crews, yet.

    #427805

    Andrew Hall
    Member

    berdawn wrote >>
    I’m sure glad we didn’t privatize the road salting crews, yet.

    My privately-paid parking lot is in a lot better shape than my publically-maintained street (which has not seen a crystal of salt this or any other winter.)

    A.

    #427806

    berdawn
    Member

    Andrew Hall wrote >>

    berdawn wrote >>
    I’m sure glad we didn’t privatize the road salting crews, yet.

    My privately-paid parking lot is in a lot better shape than my publically-maintained street (which has not seen a crystal of salt this or any other winter.)
    A.

    Do you have a privately-paid freeway as well?

    #427807

    gramarye
    Participant

    DavidF wrote >>

    Kbear919 wrote >>
    OK, I’ve read all of your arguments, positions, facts, hearsay. Some of them well put, others not so. I have read every word, hummed every tune, looked at it from every angle that everyone has mentioned. I even employed Watson from Jeopardy and have come to a conclusion….
    Drum Roll….
    Reform is necessary. But, passage of SB5 leads to an unbalance of power and would be a step backwards for Ohio as a whole. Don’t we already see a growing discrepancy between the have/have not’s in Ohio? Let us not accelerate the pace. Care for our public servants, they care for you, your children and the future.

    Only sensible post in this entire thread. What is the economic sense in creating more instability and fear in the current environment. How many home sales, vehicles sales, investments, restaurant meals, etc. are being deferred while people wait to see if they are going to have a job tomorrow? This race to the bottom malarkey posited as though it’s just common sense by the right is no more sensible than trickle down was. It’s more of the same beat down the working class while the upper class (and yes Gram, demographically you are in the upper class) derives the benefits at the expense of others.

    Both the parenthetical and the main quote here are risible.

    If you say I’m in the upper class, then what is your definition of the middle class? Of course, I admitted earlier in this thread that the terms were fuzzy. However, if you’re of the opinion that even being in mid-to-high five figures puts you in the “upper class,” you’re defining a large part of the country as “upper class,” and you can expect correspondingly greater electoral pushback when you define the “upper class” as a “them” in an us vs. them world.

    Likewise, the notion that it is the upper class (at least as you’ve defined it) deriving benefits at the expense of others. The truth is completely the opposite. Those on the receiving end of redistributive policies are, by definition, the ones deriving benefits at the expense of others. Likewise, the public sector unions are deriving benefits at the expense of others because, quite literally, their benefits are funded by our (taxpayers’) expenses.

    There is not one person in this country who has derived his success free from the support and intervention of society at large. Stop pretending that we are each islands.

    I am not pretending that we are each islands. However, general social and economic interdependence is a two-way street; the subsidization of public sector pay and benefits by private sector workers is a one-way street. We subsidize them, not the other way around, and we’re fully within our rights to demand a stop to it, or as much of one as we can obtain against their death grip on the throats of too many public policymaking bodies. This is particularly true in times of economic stress, when their insulation from reality exacerbates the burden on the rest of us to support them and also means that the community as a whole is threatened because of the looming shortfalls in government budgets (though even when times were better, as I mentioned earlier, the massive unfunded liabilities loomed on the horizon).

    We are not islands. We are neighbors–and it is not always easy to maintain civil relations among neighbors, particularly when one encroaches on another’s property and then turns around and says that the person being encroached upon just needs to sacrifice.

    Stripping public employees of their bargaining rights will not solve the economic difficulties facing us.

    No, but it’s a healthy start, and a protection against a return to profligacy later.

    This is yet another assault on the middle class that is being propagated as necessary and somehow beneficial for the very people it will victimize.

    The existence of public sector unions is an ongoing institutional assault against the middle class, who, contrary to what you might have heard, still pay the lion’s share of this country’s taxes, especially the property taxes and other taxes at the local level that generally fund many public sector unions.

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 363 total)

The forum ‘Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: