Reevaluating Pension Entitlements in the Public Sector

NY Post ^ | January 06, 2011 | William Sullivan

[Scanian]

Unfunded state and city pension liability has been isolated by many analysts as the next big crisis on the horizon. But it looms in relative silence, largely because Americans simply do not want to talk about it.

Let's be honest; it's not exactly dinner table conversation. Many Americans have family and friends that work in public jobs and many of them expect a considerable pension that could be compromised if the system is altered. So the issue is far too personal for public pensioners to embrace any logic that could suggest the system is flawed, while non-pensioners usually want to avoid friction about a sensitive subject.

But despite our reluctance to talk about it, there is absolutely no question that lavish public pensions are a crippling problem for our country.

First, consider that broken and indebted pension funds across the country are quite regularly granting $45K or more annually for fifty to fifty-five year old "retirees" in lifetime pension payments, a payout that would rival or exceed a million dollar annuity settlement for any private sector employee. In some glaring cases, retirees much younger receive higher payouts. Take Glenn Goss, the Florida police officer who retired at 42 earning $65K in pension payments, which, with his projected life expectancy, makes him a $2 million liability to Florida taxpayers. Or perhaps take John McLaughlin, New York firefighter who at 48 retired with an $86K pension, which he collects tax-free on respiratory disability despite being a marathon runner.

[camle]

well. reneging on a deal may be possible by political bullying, but it remains dishonorable adn dastardly. I for one, would rather not take that step.

[LuvFreeRepublic]

To be honest with you, I don't want to take that step either, but we may not have a choice. First things first though, get things in line for future hires, cut waste, cut foreign aid, and then see if it is possible to honor existing promises. Reneging has far reaching implications and most likely they will be negative. But the whole country crashing is a big negative as well. No easy answers and evaluating all options is what needs to be done. Pray.

[freekitty]

I remember those days. The telephone company was one of the worst. and if people only knew how sneaky hidden the Senate is with commerce interstate/intrastate.

[camle]

why izzit that I hear all this about people who work for the government and how useless adn overp[aiod they are, and how we have to punish them, slash their pensions, reneg on our agreements when there are far more welfare cases out there who don’t even provide a service for what they take out of government?

why are we letting the politicians control this debate? they’re scapegoating their own employees rather than admi that their lack of due dilligence is what created the situation in the first place, and not to mention those who don’t bother to work for a living, yet gobble up tax dollars.

we need to stop reacting to where our noses are pointed, and look around, there’s somebody behind the curtain that we need to hold accountable, and it aint’ employees.

[Senator John Blutarski]

My comment was actually intended to be ironic. Something does indeed need to be done not only about the clear unaffordability of public sector unionism today, but also because of the blatant and arrogant criminal abuse of the public employee pension programs.

I’m pretty confident, however, that nothing much more than transparently cosmetic reforms will be undertaken. Our politicians lack the will to do anything more. The ultimate end to this carnival of greed will only come about as a result of the slow motion collapse of local and state government finances.