Skip to main content

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie speaks during a news conference in Trenton, New Jersey March 28, 2014. On Thursday a law firm hired by Christie, a potential Republican 2016 contender for the White House, released a report clearing him of wrongdoing in
In 2011, Gov. Chris Christie made a big push to cut pensions for New Jersey's public workers, a push that included the promise that from now on, the state would do its part to keep the pension system funded after years of failing to meet its obligations. Now, as he says that the state once again can't contribute its share to its workers' pension fund—even though the workers are now contributing more and getting less—here's Christie's explanation:
“Promises were made that can’t be kept,” Christie said of the state’s public-employee pension system. “Welcome to the real world, folks.”
Yes, promises were made. By Chris Christie. Welcome to the real world of what happens when you take Chris Christie at his word, folks.

With his state's budget a mess and his eyes still on 2016 despite being under investigation in the George Washington Bridge lane closures scandal, Christie clearly sees targeting public workers again as a way to win some conservative love and posture for the media about his willingness to make "tough" choices:

“The easiest thing in the world for me to do now would be just to say: ‘The heck with it. I tried. We got a little bit. I couldn’t fix the whole problem, but I’m gone in three years,’ ” he said at the town hall. “I wouldn’t have to take the heat. I wouldn’t have people yelling at me.”
Christie, of course, wants everything to come down to people yelling at him, and him yelling back, showing what a tough guy he is. It's a strategy that's worked for him in the past, distracting from the real issues and focusing attention on his personality. It may not work as well now that, thanks to the bridge scandal, people have started to realize that "tough guy" really means bully, in Christie's case. Not to mention that now he's not just talking about breaking the state's basic promise to its workers that they will get retirement they earned, but is planning to break—bragging about breaking—his own promise to public employees. And while the Republican base might get behind stealing pensions from public workers, who really wants to vote for a politician who can't be trusted in 2014 to live up to the promises of a law he fought for in 2011?

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:41 AM PDT.

Also republished by Christie Watch and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think your point about wanting yelling (35+ / 0-)

    back and forth is astute.  

    Someone actually admitted on DK, "Yes. If it pisses you and the other Greenwald-Tweet-pearl-clutchers off, it's smart." Wow. Just....wow.

    by Inland on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:49:28 AM PDT

  •  Once again Christie shows that he can't be trusted (25+ / 0-)

    "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

    by elwior on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:50:29 AM PDT

  •  "Welcome to the real world-- (36+ / 0-)

    where i can promise you one thing, and then completely screw you over after i've been elected!  I'll never be held accountable for any promises i've made, and i still get to keep my own sweet, sweet retirement money!  That's the way we tough guys roll, baby."

  •  "This indignation I'm about to face... (16+ / 0-)

    ...for having both lied to and failed my constituents is proof that I am the victim. But I shall press on."

    I'll wait for another "the noose is tightening" diary. Maybe that will make me feel better for five minutes until I realize again that it's probably not.

    Almost everything you do will seem insignificant, but it is most important that you do it.

    by The Termite on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:55:31 AM PDT

  •  Not surprised because he and the other evil (14+ / 0-)

    rotten Rs do everything in bad faith. He blames working people for the problems created by the evil rotten rich and the evil minions (the majority of elected Rs).

    Looks like there will be mass retirements coming so that people can lessen the sting of being robbed to support evill big biz (welfare for the already wealthy).

    He's evil.

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:05:38 AM PDT

    •  It's like a hive mind...some billionaire emits a (4+ / 0-)

      pheromone and the Repubs begin spewing the same talking points. Screw the poors and nurture the rich.

      “Overcome the angry by non-anger; overcome the wicked by goodness; overcome the miser by generosity; overcome the liar by truth.” :: Buddha's Wisdom-The Dhammapada ::

      by Sam Sara on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:03:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They're the Borg; resistance is futile (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        METAL TREK

        I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

        by a2nite on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 02:04:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Christies wife works on Wall Street - I forget (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite

      for whom.  Christie is pure transaction politics.  

      I remember when he told Romney that Romney wasn't allowed to fund raise in New Jersey (even from previous Romney donors!) until Christie allowed it - and Romney obeyed.  

      Christie was holding out to see how the nomination fight was falling out.

      "Privatize to Profitize" explains every single Republican economic, social and governing philosophy. Take every taxpayer dollar from defense, education, health care, public lands, retirement - privatize it, and profit from it.

      by mumtaznepal on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:32:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "Welcome to the real world"? (20+ / 0-)

    Good grief, all I can think of when I read that is...

  •  Christie is the Koch's boy (12+ / 0-)

    Notice that crapping on the public employees is the exact same game that Scott Walker plays, and he's a major Koch sucker.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:21:42 AM PDT

  •  Every time I see Chris Christie's face (5+ / 0-)

    I see the ghost of Richard Nixon smiling back.

    Chris Christie partying like it's August 9, 1974.

  •  Republican=asshole (4+ / 0-)

    Documented every hour for the last 14 years. (or many more although used to be less frequent)

    I am pro-life. Bring our troops home ALIVE!

    by Doc Allen on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:22:18 AM PDT

  •  give the plan over to the retirees to run n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, elwior, ifthethunderdontgetya
  •  Please don't tell me Christie is goung to run on a (6+ / 0-)

    platform in which he claims to be "the great problem solver."

  •  Key lesson (14+ / 0-)

    The key lesson from all of this is if you are a worker, don't take the deferred compensation, get paid now.  In any kind of real or made up financial hardship, the first thing that any government or corporation will do is cut any deferred compensation for past workers.  The CEO and executives must be paid because it's a contract, but the past workers - SCREW Them.

    I live in Ca. and Willy Brown past leg leader wrote a whole column about that a few months ago.

  •  The campaign ads almost write themselves. (11+ / 0-)

    “Promises were made that can’t be kept,” Christie said of the state’s public-employee pension system. “Welcome to the real world, folks.”

    "In 20 years, the GOP will be small enough to drown in a bathtub." - me

    by estamm on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:25:39 AM PDT

  •  "You trusted me. You fucked up." (9+ / 0-)

    With apologies to Animal House. And with sympathy for everyone in NJ.

    "Think. It ain't illegal yet." - George Clinton | http://ideaddicted.blogspot.com

    by jbeach on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:29:11 AM PDT

  •  Read his lips no nude Taxis (3+ / 0-)

    Yep He just eliminated himself as a presidential contender

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:29:31 AM PDT

  •  remember that sound bite when he goes to jail (7+ / 0-)
  •  So we promised you pension in lieu of pay? Fuck U. (8+ / 0-)

    The new view of pay as compensation for work:

    'Hey, just work for us first, and we'll pay you whatever we fucking want after.'

  •  Politician : promise as Chris Christie : honesty (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ifthethunderdontgetya

    Slow thinkers - keep right

    by Dave the Wave on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:33:20 AM PDT

  •  Voting for Christie is like buying a pig in a poke (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ifthethunderdontgetya

    Ask NJ voters.

    Slow thinkers - keep right

    by Dave the Wave on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:34:55 AM PDT

  •  "Welcome to the real world"... (6+ / 0-)

    Since when is wearing contempt for your constituents on your sleeve a good strategy for a politician?
    Christie is a train-wreck of massive proportions.
    (No pun intended).

    "These 'Yet To Be' United States" --James Baldwin--

    by kevinbr38 on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:36:37 AM PDT

  •  It should not surprise anyone that this corrupt (5+ / 0-)

    thug would break his promises.  That is how he got to be governor in the first place.

  •  The sooner this blowhard disappears (5+ / 0-)

    from public view the better.

    "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

    by rocksout on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:41:19 AM PDT

  •  You Think Paying For Something Lets You Have It? (3+ / 0-)

    Is that 3 senators sitting beside you on the couch?

    --Then go away.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:41:33 AM PDT

  •  Kicking immigrant children on TV will soon be (8+ / 0-)

    the litmus test for eligibility to run for the Republican nomination. This will have to do for now.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:41:53 AM PDT

  •  Gee (6+ / 0-)

    Ya think his draconian tax cuts had anything to do with not being able to pay? Nah, couldn't be that.

  •  This shill has gotten way too many passes (8+ / 0-)

    From our so-called liberal media.

    Our prisons are filled with people less deserving of punishment than this corrupt a--hole.
    ~

  •  I'm not guilty of abusing the workers! (3+ / 0-)

    They were asking for it. And they made me.

    Just look at how they were parading around, not a care in the world, as if they had a future! How could I let that go on?

    I don't get no respect! They made me!

  •  Guide to chisco's word: if you're wealthy, you're (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrblifil, BelgianBastard, a2nite

    guaranteed; if you're not, pthaaaaat.  None of us peasants count and I still think quite a few peasants voted for him, Sandy ripoff and all.  After all, what's theft among friends.

    If you don't have a seat at the table, you're probably on the menu.

    by CarolinNJ on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:46:09 AM PDT

  •  Did Christie forget the U.S. Constitution? (6+ / 0-)

    There's this little thing called the Impairment of obligations of contracts clause, which prohibits states from cancelling contracts they have made.

  •  some one needs to make him (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AR2, dagnome, mt41w, notrouble

    permanently unemployed.  A pariah in New Jersey and no presidential hopes.   Live by 'screw you', die by it too.

  •  I hate to do this (6+ / 0-)

    But how do all you NJ democrats who voted for Chris Christie feel now?  

    •  love the sig line, by the way. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vet4change

      ecstatically baffled

      by el vasco on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:10:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I love to do this (5+ / 0-)

      How about all the elected Dems who endorsed Christie?

      Belleville Mayor Ray Kimble,
      Belleville Town Council members Steve Rovell and Michael Nicosia,
      Bloomfield Mayor Ray McCarthy,
      Burlington City Mayor Jim Fazzone,
      Chesilhurst Mayor Michael Blunt,
      Dover Mayor James Dodd,
      Dover Aldermen Christine Noriega, Michael Picciallo, James Visioli, Robert Rutan, and Michelle Yzarnotegui,
      Essex County Executive Joe DiVincenzo,
      Essex County Sheriff Armando Fontoura,
      Garfield Deputy Mayor Tana Raymond,
      Glen Ridge Mayor Peter Hughes,
      Glen Ridge Council President Stuart Patrick and Councilman David Lefkovitz,
      Harrison Mayor Ray McDonough,
      Harrison City Council members Laurence M. Bennett, Jesus R. Huaranga, James Doran, Victor Villalta, Carol Mandaglio, Michael Dolaghan, Francisco Nascimento, and Anselmo Millan,
      Livingston Mayor Rudy Fernandez,
      Long Branch Mayor Adam Schneider,
      Manville Mayor Angelo Corradino,
      Orange Mayor Dwayne Warren,
      Palmyra Mayor Karen Scheffler and Council President David Dorworth,
      Paterson City Council President Anthony Davis,
      Point Pleasant Borough Mayor William Schroeder,
      River Edge Mayor Sandy Moscaritolo,
      River Vale Mayor Joe Blundo,
      Scotch Plains Mayor Kevin Glover,
      Sea Bright Mayor Dina Long,
      Secaucus Mayor Michael Gonnelli,
      Secaucus Town Councilmembers James Clancy, Robert Contantino, Gary Jeffas, William McKeever, and Susan Pirro,
      Spring Lake Mayor Jennifer Naughton,
      Spring Lake Council President Janice Venables,
      Spring Lake Council members Bob Drasheff and Priscilla Reilly,
      Teaneck Councilmen Yitz Stern, Elie Katz, and Mark Schwartz,
      Union City Mayor and State Senator Brian Stack,
      Union City Commissioners Tilo Rivas, Lucio Fernandez, Maryury Martinetti, and Celin Valdivia,
      West New York Commissioner FiorD’Aliza Frias
  •  this is the (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chloris creator

    republicans sop and the 99% from sea to shining sea have been falling for it for decades, why because most that vote for the repugnant lying gopers believe they will hurt the other person and not them, a sad indictment on us as a society and as people.

  •  Christie's "Let Them Eat Cake!" Moment (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfdunphy

    (Never trust Christie around cake!)

  •  Christie is such a fraud, his tough guy (0+ / 0-)

    Act is so yesterday. Someone should tell him he won't be the republican nominee in 2016.

  •  Wow. (3+ / 0-)

    I totally forgot he still had a state to run.

    Seriously.

    And running it badly, he is.


    "I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather ....... Not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car ..." - Emo Philips

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:13:10 AM PDT

  •  So... this is the scorpion telling the frog (5+ / 0-)

    you're a sucker for trusting me?

    Nobody deserves poverty.

    by nominalize on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:14:13 AM PDT

  •  Nice line Chris! I think I'll try it on my bank! (8+ / 0-)

    "Mortgage payment?  Sorry.  Promises were made that can't be kept.  Welcome to the real world."

    I really should've thought of this before!

  •  Melisa Harris-Perry Told Christie (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Naniboujou, a2nite

    a year ago, "I'm gonna need you to 'Pump you brakes".

    http://www.onenewjersey.org/...

  •  Christie demystified: he's just a freakin/lout.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    decent wages don't eliminate jobs. Republicans eliminate jobs; and workers, and prospects, and then excuse it all and call for more austerity. there is no end to their ignorant, arrogant avarice. only political dinosaurs support their treachery.

    by renzo capetti on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:44:45 AM PDT

  •  Lets equate this to the "real world" as Christi... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mt41w, METAL TREK

    Lets equate this to the "real world" as Christie sees it: what would happen to a private sector employer that failed to make its promised, contracted match payments into employee 401k accounts?

    In the real world, the aggrieved employees would sue - and win.

  •  Welcome to getting voted out, Chris (0+ / 0-)

    if your voters have any brains.

    The US ranks 138th out of all 169 voting countries in actual voting. Since 1974, mid-term % of eligible voters who vote avgs. 37%. Democrats would dominate if they did one thing- GOTV. They never do. Curious.

    by Incredulousinusa on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:56:51 AM PDT

  •  I live in NJ and a current State Retired CO (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfdunphy, a2nite, METAL TREK

    There is nothing wrong with the pension system it currently has 74 billion dollars in it.Christie is full of shit he is like the rest of the republicans they want to gut the pensions of state and federal workers.And the post office.The so called reform he did gutted our cost of living increases.We no longer get them.Also current police and fire went from paying 8% to 9.5% into the system.And new hires have to retire with full benefits at 30 years instead of the old 25 years. So this fat ass has already cut the system and he's asking for more.This is what happens when you don't vote only 23% voted in the last Governors election of coarse the democrats put up a shitty candidate to go against him that the party(democratic party) bosses didn't even support they mostly supported Christie GO FIGURE!!

    •  I teach college classses to the inmates at EJSP (0+ / 0-)

      (Rahway) and I hear the CO's slam Christie for the reasons you just pointed out. It makes me feel good to see I'm not the ONLY one in NJ who feels the same way about our governor.

      A village can not reorganize village life to suit the village idiot.

      by METAL TREK on Tue Jul 29, 2014 at 07:32:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The "shit happens" excuse by Christie... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    notrouble

    ...a convenient, all-purpose clenser to justify eradicating any formerly given solemn promises now inconveniencing more important priorities (from the Governor's POV) - such as cutting taxes for upper-income folks and corporations.

  •  Christie, real world, blah, blah (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BelgianBastard

    How is it that this fuckhead is not being impeached? Impeach Obama? for what, trying to do something while the racist GOP stonewalls him, just like Turtle said way back when? My god, Christie is a bona fide crook. Payola must run NJ. Ohio has Dewine and pay to play and Kasich's secret "jobs committee" but NJ is so corrupted nobody gives a fuck that the Gov lies, cheats, steals, gives to cronies, takes from enemies. This poor, sad country. Squeeze it until there is no blood left. Retire to your gated communities, ladies and germs.

    oldenoughtoknowbetter

    by joedennis on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:20:10 AM PDT

  •  Pension plans by currency users are almost (0+ / 0-)

    always doomed to fail. Over time, the number of retirees relative to payers increases and the end result is unsustainable. The only authority that can guarantee retirement security ffor every American is the only body with the legal authority to create US Dollars, and thats Congress.

    IIf we'd just expand SS to every single man and woman in the country when they get to be 65 years old, then we would relieve a huge burden on our businesses, state and local Govt's. I think 2X the poverty level income for a household, or ~$40K a year would be sufficient for us to be proud of the standard of living we afford our parents and grandparents.

    "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

    by Auburn Parks on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:20:31 AM PDT

    •  Nonsense. (4+ / 0-)

      Based on that theory, any item based on actuarial math is doomed to fail.

      Say goodbye to the entire insurance industry then, because they function in much the same manner.

      Properly managed and funded pension plans are quite stable.  The problem - most pension plans today are not properly managed or funded.

      There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

      by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 02:38:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your contention that pension funds, if properly (0+ / 0-)

        managed, are sustainable is not supported by the evidence.

        But on a more important note, why don't you want the Dollar sovereign to guarantee retirements where they'll never be at risk, instead of inherently unstable currency users?

        "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

        by Auburn Parks on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 03:11:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Moving on from nonsense (4+ / 0-)

          to total bullshit.

          Pensions - and their ability to remain solvent - is a question of mathematics.  The idea that mathematics proves that pensions work is "not supported by evidence?"

          Should I point to the fact that pensions, in their current form, have been around as a retirement vehicle for almost two centuries at this point?

          You're bordering on actually spouting off unsupported right wing talking points at this point.

          I suggest you stop.  Now.

          There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

          by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 03:21:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, the idea that pensions aren;t sustainable (0+ / 0-)

            is supported by the evidence. How to find out the truth:

            We need to know a number of things:

            How many currency user pensions are there?
            What level are they funded too?
            What are the assumptions used to make sustainability projections?
            Whats their trajectory of workers to retirees?

            And so on. So far, we've both simply asserted a number of things.

            The only fact we have to go off of so far is that the US Govt is the issuer of the dollar and so can't run out. Whereas everyone can. Which brings us around to my original question....

            "why don't you want the Dollar sovereign to guarantee retirements where they'll never be at risk, instead of inherently unstable currency users?"

            "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

            by Auburn Parks on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 03:45:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What evidence is that? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Politburo, BelgianBastard, notrouble

              The fact that the word "unsustainable" gets kicked around in an echo chamber constantly?

              Bull.  Shit.

              Actuarial science is just that - science.  I repeat myself - if actuarial science doesn't work, then the vast majority of the financial services industry itself is entirely insolvent.

              While actuarial science itself is not entirely easy to understand, the basic mathematics of how pensions work (and that they are solvent) can be seen by any idiot that has rudimentary skills with a spreadsheet.

              Your problem - if I'm following what you seem to be trying to assert but can't correctly explain because you don't understand pensions - seems to be entirely based on the idea that you don't feel discount rates are realistic.

              As for the funding level - that leads right back to what I originally said - and I quote pension plans having to be "properly funded."  If the actuarially required contributions are paid on time, in full, the plan will be properly funded in perpetuity.

               As for the discount rate, that returns right back to the "properly managed" point.  Actuaries today have a tendency to choose very conservative, very achievable discount rates to calculate funding levels that hover right around the long term average rate of return one would get from an index fund.  When discount rates are too high on public pensions funds, it's generally because some politician in charge of the fund monkeyed with the rate to lower the ECR they'll need to budget to pay in for the year.

              Clear example of a properly funded, properly managed pension plan:  the NYSLRS.  It completely disproves your conventional (and unsupported) wisdom that pensions "don't work."

              Arguing about "taxes" and taxpayers, to paraphrase, being "on the hook" for pensions in the manner you did in your second response, as well as your ideas on how taxes should never increase - is the epitome of right wing talking points.  For fucks sake, it sounds like something Grover Norquist himself would say.  So get the fuck out of here with your hollow talking point bullshit and head on over to Red State or something.

              There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

              by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:40:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ahh yes, there are no examples of failed pension (0+ / 0-)

                plans.

                Your points about actuarial math are beyond pointless. Of course, we can make the numbers work any way we want to. The reality is that, more and more tax dollars are going to pay for retirees. That point is not debatable.

                Just like I don;'t think health care costs should be a burden shouldered by private businesses and states for their employees. Medicare for all.

                I dont think retirement security should be a burden shouldered by private businesses and states for their employees. SS for all.

                These responsibilities should be borne by the Dollar sovereign to ensure the programs fiscal sustainability.

                The question is why do you want to unnecessarily burden businesses and states with retirement and health care responsibilities?

                "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

                by Auburn Parks on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:21:41 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The idea that (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  notrouble, BelgianBastard, jbsoul

                  an example of a failed pension plan somehow invalidates pension plans entirely as a sound retirement vehicle is about as asinine as saying one failed 401k plan is an example that invalidates 401ks in general as a form of retirement savings - or pointing to any singular example of anything in general to state that such item will always fail.  It's beyond ludicrous, and has no basis in logic whatsoever.  On that logic, why anything fails or at what they fail is irrelevant.  The only thing relevant to you is that they failed.  That is the epitome of obtuse.

                  The statement that "more and more" tax dollars goes towards pensions is also downright fucking ignorant.  Most pension plans in the nation today - even the ones that aren't so well off - have finally started to enter a period of declining ECR rates as the losses of the recession are finally factored out of their actuarial calculations.  By stating the falsehood that payments keep increasing in perpetuity, you display a level of ignorance about pensions that rivals some of the worst rightwingnuts I have ever debated on the subject.

                  I suppose this all makes sense, as the practically unrelated monetary policy issues you keep trying to interject as solutions skew towards looney libertarianism - and libertarians traditionally loathe pensions, so they have little reason to actually put in the effort to understand how they work in the first place.

                  You've sufficiently embarrassed yourself at this point.  I'd advise you to quit while you're behind, however, I suspect a clinical case of the Dunning-Kruger effect will prevent you from understanding just how much of an ass you've made of yourself, and you'll continue on debating until the end of time if I choose to continue to engage your nonsense.

                  Given the lack of knowledge you've already displayed, and that you've shown you have no desire to actually learn something = I'm guessing trying to further explain these things to you is not worth my time

                  There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

                  by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:03:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  For posterity (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jbsoul

                  to end the conversation once and for all, let's work through the math - ignoring any and all actuarial issues to start.

                  Take an employee who starts a new job making $30k/year.

                  Let's say this employee works 30 years, and receives an average raise of 3% per year over the entirety of his or her career.  At retirement after year 30, the employees salary is roughly $70700.

                  Lets now say that this employees pension is 60% of their final average salary averaged out of their last 3 years of work - a common pension formula.  This works out to an annual pension payment of roughly $41k.

                  Lets now assume that the employer contributes towards the employees pension yearly at a rate of 10% of salary for every year of their working career and payments into the trust fund for this employee stop at retirement.  Let's also assume that the discount rate on the pension trust fund is 8% annually.  For simplicities sake, in this example, we assume that the pension is 100% funded by the employer, which is admittedly rare in this day and age.  However, at the end, we must consider that as employees also tend to share some of the burden, final costs to the employee will be even less than the numbers we arrive at here.

                  Let's now assume the pensioner collects the pension for 30 years and then passes away.  When the pensioner passes away, at those figures, the pension trust fund would still have a balance if it was an individual style retirement account (and accounted for in that manner) of approximately $43k.  This is where the actuarial math comes into play.

                  As an individual, this retiree needed to have $487k saved in an annuity at the 8% discount rate in order to end up with those figures.  However, as this is a pension trust fund, the funds and the risk are spread out amongst a large number of pensioners, and the actuarial tables reflect a life expectancy for the average pensioner of only 25 years.  Due to the shared manner in which the trust fund works, actuarially, the plan needed perhaps only about a ballpark figure of $400k to fund this pension.  Why?  As some pensioners die off before reaching the age in the actuarial tables, that results in additional funds that remain in the trust fund to fund other pensions.

                  Due to this, you can actually reduce the originally quoted employer contribution rate or discount rate and still be at a 100% funding level for this pensioner if you are looking at them individually.  You could reduce the employer contribution from 10% to around 8%, or you could reduce the discount rate from 8% down to around 6.75% - or some combination of the two - and still hit the required funding amount.

                  Returning to what I said above about 100% employer funded pensions being rare, let's now throw in the hypothetical that the employees also contributed 3% of their salary per year towards the pension trust fund.  At the end of the 30 years, thats roughly $110k. Subtract that from the $400k needed to fund the pension as noted above - suddenly now you can reduce the ECR down to 7.5%, the discount rate to 6.75%, and still have an fully funded pension from an actuarial standpoint.

                  With the average 401k match working out to roughly 4%, the "cost to the taxpayers" you're so worried about works out to be roughly providing the employees with what would be considered a good 401k match.  Consider that the nationwide compensation gap for choosing to be a state or local employee works out to about a 10% to 15% pay loss (as per a Pew report a year or so back), and the taxpayers are saving money when pay and pension costs are totaled together and compared with pay and 401k costs when summed up - by roughly 5% - 10%.

                  You can argue the pay gap (and I suspect based on what you've said already, you would), but the Pew report was pretty damn solid, and the only thing that can "refute" it is a shitload of other common right wing talking points.  Pew drilled down and looked job for job, education for education at state and local pay versus the private sector.  The right wing response to Pew is a vague "average" that lumps all workers together, pitting state and local workers who largely hold college educations against the national average comprised of a workforce that is largely without any higher education.

                  Returning from my tangent to address pensions themselves, all of this, save for the actuarial part itself, is basic, inarguable math that practically anyone with rudimentary knowledge of using Excel can understand.  While the actuarial math itself is not easy, it is fairly easy for anyone to understand that due to the common nature of a retirement trust fund covering the retirement of many individuals together, that shared risk drives required costs down - that is a simple enough concept.

                  Nothing here reflects that there is even a shred of mathematical evidence to support your "unsustainable" remarks.  What makes pensions potentially "unsustainable" has everything to do with the employer and trustees fiduciary duty.  If they significantly botch their duties as fund managers and lose a shitload of money or simply doesn't meet the discount rate long term - the pension becomes potentially unsustainable depending on how much is lost (or how little was gained compared to expected as per the discount rate) and what ECR and discount rate are needed to fix the shortfall.  If the employer fails to make full payment for the ECR each year, the fund may become potentially unsustainable depending on how much and how long they shorted the fund of ECR payments.

                  None of those reasons for causing a pension trust fund to have issues does anything to "prove" the "unsustainabliity" of pensions from a generalized standpoint.  What they do reflect - as I stated all the way back in my original post - is that if a trust fund is mismanaged, underfunded, or both, there may be sustainability issues, but if it is properly managed, there will not be barring an unforeseen event like a market catastrophe the likes of which the world has never seen before.

                  All of this is hypothetical and done simply as a proof of the underlying math.  Bottom line - no matter how many times you repeat the word "unsustainable" and insist that "the facts" somehow "prove you right", they do no such thing.  You can argue basic math until you are blue in the face, but the math won't change.  Math is objective.  It's an absolute  Terms like "unsustainable" are the epitome of subjective and carry no real substance.  No amount of pointing to a failed pension fund changes the basic math.  Instead, what pointing at failed pension funds tends to do is confirm that funds that have had stewards that have significantly shirked their fiduciary duties and underfunded and/or mismanaged the trust funds tend to tank.  Fucked up management does nothing at all to take away from the credibility of the math itself that reflects pensions are entirely workable.  It just proves that jackwagons like Chris Christie tend to destroy them by being jackwagons that don't fund them or piss money away with bad investment strategies.

                  There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

                  by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 10:19:51 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  And btw, not wanting to pay ever increasing (0+ / 0-)

            local taxes to pay for pensioners is not right wing, its just logical.

            I should never have to pay more taxes to the Feds, unless inflation is too high and rising, but thats not gonna happen anytime soon.

            "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

            by Auburn Parks on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 03:46:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I may be wrong...... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfdunphy

    I, perhaps, am more immersed than some in the thinking of the average, non political American due to my history in business and large family spread across the country. What I hear is a lot of resentment towards public employees, and especially their pensions. I don't like it any more than the next Kossak, but there it is. Christie is mining this seam of anger for all it's worth, and, without education, the voters will eat it up. There are a lot of public employees who need to retire before sixty five because their bodies and minds are too torn up by their jobs. The double dip has been abused by enough public servants to add to the resentment. It is ridiculous to blame the fault of the fall of Detroit on the public pensioners, but a lot of people do.  

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

    by shoeguy on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:35:46 AM PDT

  •  Some very real workers are going (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mt41w, BelgianBastard, a2nite

    to be hurt by this. Private companies have been cutting back on pensions and health benefits, even though the tax breaks were created so that the private pension plans would be the "third leg" of the savings table or stool, so that people would not have to depend solely on Social Security. Having states renege on pension obligations actually puts more strain on the Social Security system, since workers with less in private savings have to depend more on Social Security, i.e.  Big Government, which Is a result that the Republican platforms say they are opposed to as a mater of policy and philosophy. There are many state workers who work hard, and are very conscientious. Republicans say that they believe if you work hard, you should be rewarded. But this move punishes hard workers, producing the opposite result of what the Republicans say they believe in.

  •  'Welcome to the real world, folks' means (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    onionjim, BelgianBastard

    "I'm really a farking liar, and YOU are an ignorant sucker for believing ANYTHING I have told you..."

    America's LAST HOPE: vote the GOP OUT in 2014 elections. MAKE them LOSE the House Majority and reduce their numbers in the Senate. Democrats move America forward - Republicans take us backward and are KILLING OUR NATION!

    by dagnome on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:51:38 AM PDT

  •  I sure hope we can say to Christie (2+ / 0-)

    "Welcome to the real world, asshole, how do you like your orange outfit?"

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 11:58:05 AM PDT

  •  David Rosen (0+ / 0-)

    I bet this guy is laughing his head off.

    http://www.vox.com/...

  •  While investigating the influence of ALEC in NJ, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrblifil, erichiro

    e-mails and other records established a continuous flow of contacts among New Jersey legislators, legislative liaison’s inside Governor Chris Christie’s office, and ALEC’s 30-member staff that advises state legislators. This ongoing communication culminated with an ALEC policy seminar that was held in Trenton, New Jersey, in December, 2011. Moreover, Christie’s former chief of staff, Richard Bagger, was a member of ALEC’s board of directors in 2002 and 2004, representing Pfizer. Several other legislators were promoting ALEC bills. For instance, (ALEC member) Sen. Joseph Kyrillos (R-Monmouth) was promoting the Parent Trigger Act, but he and other legislators claim ALEC is only one of many sources they use to draft these bills, including other advocacy and lobbying organizations and legislators in other states. In denying ALEC’s all-encompassing influence on state legislators, these politicians are pointing to a source of the power of network governance—its ability to disseminate its influence through diffuse and dense networks made up of individual policy entrepreneurs and large and small organizations with a common ideological agenda.

    Because ALEC (and other network members) have a staff that works with legislators year around, sometimes bills that states send through their legislatures are more or less aggressive than the bill the ALEC task force has approved. For instance, in Bill A-980, New Jersey, under Governor Christie, created a bill that was more aggressive than ALEC’s Next Generation Charter Schools Act model bill. While the model bill does not mention for-profit charter schools, New Jersey added a provision that allows private for-profit entities to establish charter schools. The New Jersey bill also “eliminates the requirement that teachers in charter schools be certified by the state of New Jersey, eliminates streamlined teacher tenure in charter schools, and allows a local board of education to convert a public school into a charter school”.

    From the academic study "Privatizing Schooling and Policy Making: The American Legislative Exchange Council and New Political and Discursive Strategies of Education Governance"

  •  Running (2+ / 0-)

    This lying thief wants to be president. Never vote republican.

  •  George Costanza said (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BelgianBastard

    "When you look annoyed all the time, people think that you're busy".  A fine way to mask incompetence.

  •  As a public employee, I am sick of paying my share (4+ / 0-)

    And then watching the agencies not pick up their share. Then, they complain they can't afford to pay out the agreed upon formula. That's why I would never support a proposal in our contract to "allow" management to contribute the employees' share. You can't trust those bastards.

    It's beyond infuriating to watch elected officials and executive level department heads that make sure they're damned good and paid, but can't even provide the basic budget and pension management to ensure everyone is paid as agreed to. Falling victim to Wall Street bullshit like interest-rate swaps. All this bullshit about shared sacrifice, and tough choices is complete and utter bullshit. Yeah, some people are being forced to make tough choices, and to sacrifice. How much of a paycut and pension reduction is Christ Christie volunteering?

    Oh, and a big sarcastic thank you to all the Democratic party leaders who more or less conceded Christie's re-election. Way to sell-out your constituents!

    •  Naturally they can't afford it. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SixSixSix

      It's the equivalent of trying to play catch-up on a neglected 401k - by skipping payments for years, not only do you have to finally make good on all the principle, but you also have to cover the cost of all the capital gains that principle amount should have earned while it was in the trust fund.

      If the average person understood pensions better, they'd be screaming bloody murder every time some pol tried to short or completely skip the required actuarial payments.  The problem is most people today don't seem to grasp that a pension plan is like any other forced savings plan, and instead, wrongly have the impression governments set up their pensions as PAYGO plans - so they infer the level of the benefit paid out is the same as their cost as a taxpayer.  The reality on a properly funded and managed pension plan, the cost to the employer is pennies on the dollar to the level of benefits paid out.

      Because of this, when the bill comes due for the principle and interest, the ignorant end up not realizing that what is owed isn't just principle, and politicians robbed both them and the pensioners.

      There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

      by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:53:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed. And I think the media is often complicit.. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Darth Stateworker, a2nite

        They often exaggerate just how "generous" these plans are, but fail to mention that employees have had deductions made from every paycheck they've ever received to cover the employee contribution. If management were to properly contribute their share, and the funds were managed well, there shouldn't be any issue.

        Instead, though, many agencies don't make their required contributions and then have to scramble to cover their obligation, which requires them to cough up money that should have been accruing naturally over time.

        •  I'd go further than simply saying (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SixSixSix, jbsoul

          the media is complicit.

          The opinion I've formed based on most of the articles I read in mainstream sources, they are either active participants in trying to tear down pensions or the reporters themselves are pretty damn stupid when it comes to how they work - and why the underfunded plans are underfunded in the first place.

          Sure, if you look at sources and writers outside the mainstream - folks like David Sirota and David Cay Johnston - they accurately explain the issues.

          However, that's not generally what is published.  Most of the shit I see published seems to read like right wing stink tanks pre-written "reporting" simply rehashed and reworded by inept and/or lazy reporters.  That's the best case scenario for what ends up out there.  In the worst case - they're active participants misleading the public.

          Take discount rates - political reporters will lose their minds over how "unrealistic" a 7% discount rate is - even though one can clearly demonstrate by looking at long term market index trends that such a rate is less than the long term average rate of return.  You can easily show the Dow has returned something on order of 8.5% over the last century to investors that would have exactly tracked it and reinvested all dividends.

          As pension trust funds are extremely long game investors, what they really need is not to hit their discount rate over the short term.  They need to hit the discount rate over a span of decades.  So setting a discount rate that is lower than the historical long term returns of major indexes is more than an acceptable level of risk.  Political reporters don't seem to grasp that concept, and instead, go apeshit that discount rates aren't "risk free" and tracking interest rates on T-Bills and such.

          I've read elsewhere that the issues with pension reporting today seem largely driven by newspapers now largely using political reporters to cover items that were formerly apolitical and complex (like pensions) from a political perspective (because such items have become political in todays environment) instead of having policy reporters covering them from a policy perspective.   A politics reporter has no clue about how the math works or how the market works, and therefore, cannot adequately understand or explain what is going on.  Policy reporters understand the issue and can properly convey to their readership what the issues are.

          This could explain why so many reports on pensions today seem like they were written by stink tanks - because the stink tanks are who these reporters turn to when they don't know how something works.  The stink tanks are all too happy to oblige with a bunch of word salad and bogus infinite horizon cost projections that use almost impossible to occur worst case scenarios to scare the shit out of people.

          When it comes to reporting that funds weren't paid into trust funds that should have, as I said above - half of them act like these are PAYGO plans and this is simply occurring because this is how they are supposed to function.  This perpetuates the false idea that pensions are so expensive as to be "unsustainable."  They don't seem to understand or care that a well funded, well managed plan will "overfund" itself during boom years, leaving the trust fund with a healthy cushion to fall back on in bust years to attenuate the blow of increasing ECRs due to lost trust fund revenues in down markets.

          It seems simple enough - a trust fund that had been able to get itself "overfunded" during the Clinton boom, was relatively wise during the first Bush recession, and been able to get to 110% - 115% funded during the Bush boom in between the Bush recessions would likely have been able to ride out even the 2008 recession without too large an impact on ECRs.  It doesn't take genius fund managers who can beat the markets by miles to do that.  You only need fund managers wise enough to not be too stupid to recognize the cycles or take idiotic risks.  Shit, we were barely 100% funded here in NY before the 2008 recession and the fund value only dropped down to around ~85% if I recall correctly - which in actuaries minds is still extremely healthy for a pension trust fund.

          It's always about proper funding and management, and many reporters simply don't get that.

          There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

          by Darth Stateworker on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 07:46:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Excellent comment. It's certainly disheartening... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Darth Stateworker, jbsoul

            I think you're right on. I think it became apparent that many members of the media were financially illiterate when the recession hit in 2008, and rather than focus on Credit Default Swaps, they seemed to boil it down to poor people not paying their mortgages. If you didn't understand the real causes of the recession, and went to the stink tanks, that may have been very well what they were being told by "experts" in their field. Throw in the huge cuts to newsrooms, and the for-profit, corporate nature of many media outlets, and it's not at all surprising, though it is definitely harmful and misleading.

  •  CalPers saw con this coming (0+ / 0-)

    in 1938. In 2004-06 Ahrnold tried to change the law which provides that the actuarial obligations of member agencies, as determined by CalPers' Board (which has, by law, a majority of plan participants), constitutes an actual lien on all taxable properties inside the agency, ie, default isn't a realistic option. When the Alaska PERS was enacted, we were careful to include this feature in the act.
    Generations of thieves see this as a "bug, not a feature", natch...  

    "the northern lights have seen queer sights, but the queerest they ever did see. Was that night on the marge of Lake Labarge, I cremated Sam McGee". - Robert Service, Bard of the Yukon

    by Joe Jackson on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:24:48 PM PDT

    •  Wasn't there a bankruptcy of a town... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joe Jackson, a2nite

      in CA that was trying to welch on this? I think I read it in the Economist (the article was written by someone who was clearly ejaculating the whole time). I don't remember enough details to google it.

      I ride the wild horse .

      by BelgianBastard on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:25:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, Stockton. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BelgianBastard, a2nite

        They had their own plan. Agencies can make a one-way decision to opt-in or maintain their own plan. CalPers participation is mandatory for all state departments including legislative and Judicial except judges. Being lawyers they cut their own sweet deal.
        By a stroke of luck my agency opted in to adsorb a smaller Sanitary District in the same town that was already in CalPers. The LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Comission) required this as a condition of approval. I got PERS in exchange for managing a wastewater treatment plant and collection system for my final 14 years of service. My agency was required to fund prior service; so to speak I took a little shit for a big reward.  

        "the northern lights have seen queer sights, but the queerest they ever did see. Was that night on the marge of Lake Labarge, I cremated Sam McGee". - Robert Service, Bard of the Yukon

        by Joe Jackson on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 08:45:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks. That's enough for me to do my homework. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Joe Jackson

          I appreciate it.

          And good to know you weren't screwed, at least.

          P.S. Love your handle: reminds me of Shoeless Joe Jackson (just the handle, not the scandal). I have a soft spot for the guy because he was never taught to write.

          I ride the wild horse .

          by BelgianBastard on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 09:37:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Don't Forget (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    the kick-the-can "printing press"  

    Christie has on retainer:


    Christie bolsters new budget with $2.6 billion short-term loan

    by Salvador Rizzo, The Star-Ledger -- July 14, 2014

    TRENTON — Crunched for cash, New Jersey officials have taken out a short-term loan of $2.6 billion to pay the first bills coming due in the state budget.

    Gov. Chris Christie's new $32.5 billion budget took effect July 1. His administration took out a $2.6 billion loan from J.P. Morgan on the same day as a "cash flow facility to help meet the state’s working capital needs," according to the state Treasury Department.
    [...]


    Sooner or later were going to have to: Trade in those Carbon Footprints ...

    by jamess on Mon Jul 28, 2014 at 05:42:23 PM PDT

  •  Keep being a dimwit, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    Vote Republican,tea party and anal retentive  libertarians.  
    Who could ever trust a guy who constantly lies--apparently a lot of people from New Jersey.  Wake up America,they are out to hurt you.

  •  Why isn't this pig in jail? (0+ / 0-)

    How much lying, stealing, and conniving is OK with New Jersey? They should rise up as a state, march to Christie's office, and forcibly escort him to court where he should be impeached -charged with thievery, fraud, and nepotism- and then left to linger in a cold jail cell until he apologizes for being such an abject piece of crap. Then maybe he could work a minimum wage job until that inevitable heart attack comes to claim him.

  •  Public pension sysytems need to be reformed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    They should be converted to defined contribution systems with workers in control of their own accounts so this sort of thing doesn't happen.

    •  Wrong. (0+ / 0-)

      The issue is that laws governing the fiduciary duty of government in maintaining these pensions needs to be strengthened to ensure jackwagons like Chris Christie can't continuously underfund them.

      Additionally, as has been discussed time and time again in financial rags, it's time for the 401k to go bye-bye as a primary retirement vehicle.  When section 401 of the IRC was written, subsection k was intended to allow for a supplementary form of retirement savings for executives who maxed out a pension plan.

      It was bastardized in the 80's when Wall Streeters figured out that they could reap huge management fees by convincing people that 401ks were "better" by appealing to their greed and telling them that 401ks might earn them a better retirement.

      The problem:  the average person does not have the time or the knowledge to be a savvy investor.  Wall Streeters knew this - they just didn't care.  The point is as Matthew McConeheys character explained in "The Wolf of Wall Street": it's all about taking money from your clients pocket and putting it in your pocket.

      They can't do that with pension funds that have their own fund managers.

      It's time to return to a traditional 3 legged stool approach to retirement planning.  For everyone.  We shouldn't be arguing to end pension plans for public employees.  We should be screaming to bring them back for everyone else.

      There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

      by Darth Stateworker on Wed Jul 30, 2014 at 08:13:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry you are wrong (0+ / 0-)

        There is nothing appreciably different financially between pensions or 401ks. Pension funds are  not magical investment vehicles. They invest in the same securities and financial instruments as the private sector. The public fund managers are no better, often worse than managers of private funds. Most public pension systems perform WORSE than index funds which charge very little in fees, compared to the cost the public pays top maintain the public pension system. The public does not need to be savvy to just put their 401k money into a conservative index fund.
        Putting money in a 401k guarantees the government cannot play games with funding. Keeping public pension systems intact guarantees that they will continue to do so.

        •  If you think (0+ / 0-)

          pensions and 401ks are the same, it isn't me who is "wrong. "

          Simply because both are invested does not make them the same. At all.  To claim it does means either you are being extremely obtuse or reflective of a significant lack of knowledge on how each one works.

          Using such logic, you might as well say cars and airplanes are the same because they both move.

          There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

          by Darth Stateworker on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 09:58:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Secondly (0+ / 0-)

          You claim that pension funds for worse than index funds are unsupported by reality.  For example,  Pews report shows many track or even beat index funds long term.

          If you'd like to provide statistical data to refute Pew, by all means - have at it.  Otherwise, you're doing little more than arguing with conventional wisdom,  and conventional wisdom is little more than unsupported straw men.

          There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy.

          by Darth Stateworker on Fri Aug 01, 2014 at 10:04:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  If he couldn't keep a promise to one state... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    why in the world should we believe he would keep one to our whole country???

  •  Chris Christie: Not Trustworthy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    Chris Christie: Not Trustworthy

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site