and those govt workers should never have demanded and nor should they expect it....
Of course this should never have been promised. It used to be people took a job in public service and accepted lower pay than the private sector, but traded that for job security. Today many public sector jobs pay better than their equivalent jobs in the private sector. And their benefits packages can be ludicrous.
Of course they will expect this since this is what has been promised. So they will demand it, and they will rise in anger when they will be asked to start contributing 2x-3x more than they have been, and/or to accept less in retirement. It should be expected that the courts will seek to protect the public workers retirement system from changes - the judges are in the same boat! We need a state Constitutional Amendment to reform it and the sooner the better because they have a huge voting block in local, state and federal employees who will vote their own pocketbook - not to mention their spouses and families. The private sector will have to stand tall and fast. I would still not be surprised to see a court rule that a Constitutional Amendment is unconstitutional.
Everyone would love to a plan where they contribute for 25-30 years in order to guarantee a lifetime at 90% annual income thereafter. Of course this cannot be guaranteed - the state cannot print money, to pay these sums they have to earn it, raise it in their ponzi scheme, or tax the residents. Soon many states will press Congress for bail outs because they cannot print money and will blame Congress for whatever excuse they can dream up for their shortfalls. And if Congress does bail them out, all sense of fairness should require them to have to equalize Social Security. Otherwise it’s just more of the same - government working to protect itself as exempt from laws, exempt from economics, and as a special class worthy of more than ‘regular citizens’.