Posted on 12/31/2016 3:18:06 PM PST by artichokegrower
When Bobby Deal retired from the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office last month, he did so with the promise of a nest egg worth at least $4.9 million, a sum he’ll be paid over the next 25 years. Deal now earns nearly 50 percent more per year as a retiree than he did when he worked for the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office.
That’s just for starters. A guaranteed 3 percent cost-of-living increase annually and the ability to bankroll a separate pension — funds from his Deferred Retirement Option Plan account potentially paid by taxpayers — will allow Deal one day to bring home twice as much money per year as a retiree as he did when he worked.
Deal, though considered highly paid when he was a cop, is far from alone as a pensioner who will make considerably more in retirement than when he was working. Deal is among a group of 16 July retirees who are guaranteed to turn $4 million in DROP benefits into $11 million in additional pension benefits. The DROP program is considered one of the greatest perks of the job for Jacksonville police officers and firefighters. It is much more lucrative than any other DROP program for state and other city employees.
No other police and fire pension fund in the state offers such lavish guarantees — money on top of a regular pension, potentially for life. And no other large municipal pension fund in the state is in such dire financial shape as the Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund, which is $1.65 billion in debt and is so underfunded that the city’s bond ratings have suffered. “Our pension benefits are so generous that we really are creating millionaires,” City Councilman Bill Gulliford said. --SNIP--
MORE HERE http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2014-08-30/story/5-million-cop-how-jacksonville-pension-program-can-turn-police
The System Is About to Burst Open: TRILLIONS In Unfunded Pensions “Foreshadow A Bleak Future”
http://www.shtfplan.com/commodities/the-system-is-about-to-burst-open-trillions-in-unfunded-pensions ^ | 22-Dec-16 | Shaun Bradley / FR Posted by ARGLOCKGUY
For millions of public sector workers in the U.S., state-run pension funds are the only chance left for a comfortable retirement. In the hopes of providing a stable future for their families, an entire generation was duped into putting decades of their earnings into these supposedly ‘risk-free’ investments.
Unfortunately, those who have entrusted the government to manage their life savings may end up destitute as a result.
Budgetary shortfalls that have plagued Detroit for years are now spreading to other municipalities. Since 2008, six local governments have been forced to renegotiate their debts in bankruptcy court, with many others on the same trajectory. The scale of the problem has been repeatedly understated by the media, but across the nation, a somber reality is beginning to set in.
States with large populations, like California, often find themselves in the spotlight when it comes to deficits, but there are several others that are in even worse shape. Illinois, New Jersey, and Connecticut are among those facing the biggest hurdles to meet their obligations to retirees.
Instead of maintaining a surplus, politicians have continuously prioritized spending today on things like sports stadiums, for example, to ensure re-election. Policymakers on both sides of the aisle have echoed solutions that involve either massive cuts to benefits or shifting the financial burden onto the taxpayer.
The price to prop up these insolvent funds will come in the form of higher property taxes, income taxes, and other stealth forms of subsidization.
The ongoing exodus of people from the Northeast to states that offer better opportunities and a lower cost of living is putting even more stress on the already fragile system. Pension payouts depend on the contributions of current workers, and as the labor force dwindles, so does the money available.
Well said, Dugway Duke.
And, where was the outrage when these lavish, ridiculous pension plans were designed and implemented?
I don’t like these extravagant plans any more than the next conservative, BUT...
The people taking advantage of the rules as were available to them, legally and above board, should NOT be the focus of derision (generally). The fact that they found themselves in a more advantageous position than others is no reason to punish them.
Change the system. And, Trump can’t directly ‘fix’ these State or Local issues. He CAN, however, do a great deal to create the environment that encourages State and Local government entities to change themselves.
That is the leadership we expect from him, and rightly so.
But, but, but, but the private sector pays the bills and the private sector has become informed of the extravagant perks related to the public employee pension.
CHANGE....... IT’S A COMMING!!
“All gov retirement benefits need to be indexed to average private sector retirement benefits.
The excess goes into the “social security trust fund”.
Oh yeah and gov workers can’t receive any benefits until they’re 68.”
NOW THAT IS A FANTASTIC AND fair IDEA!!
“No. Public employee pension systems need to be shifted to a defined contribution basis.”
No. If the country/economy goes down the shiitter, then the “gov servants” are mostly to blame, they should bear most of the cost.
If the average person gets 600/month from SS, then the average gov worker should get 599/month.
If the average person can’t get SS until 67, then the average gov worker can’t get it until 68.
Now That’s “public service”.
Exact opposite of what exists now.
When you extorted your unjustifiable contracts, you didn’t care about the Taxpayers that will be forced to pay for your salary and benefits that is more, and better, than theirs, no…
You said: Either give me what I want, or I will hurt you.
I will GO ON STRIKE and I WILL HURT YOU!!!
NOT, If you don’t give me what I want, I will quit, and get a different job… NO!
It was, GIVE ME WHAT I WANT OR I WILL HURT YOU!!!
You were told over, and over, and over again, through the years, and extorted contracts, that it was unsustainable.
But YOU didn’t listen, and YOU didn’t care.
And the local government said OK, because there was nothing they could do, And, knowing it would be somebody else’s problem down the road, well...
Well, guess what?
It’s down the road, and now… it’s YOUR problem!!!
The trough is empty, and the teat is dry.
Can you hear ME now???
You were all fat dumb and happy as long as your snout was in the PublicTrough up past your eyeballs,
but now…
Now… that the food level has dropped below Your eyes, even YOU can see the writing on the wall as well as the rest of us.
There WILL be reduced benefits to be sure, if not outright eliminations…
And guess what???
I, DON’T, CARE!!!
public employee unions pay millions of dollars to get democrats elected to run local governments, the democrats pay up by “negotiating” huge giveaways to those unions that bought them, and those unions again dump millions more dollars into democrat coffers . . .
next thing you know, a city managers retirement pay is more than we pay the president of the United States.
there is no justification. you’re the beneficiary of the rape being perpetrated upon the taxpayers that you live amongst. if you’re going to knowingly drink their blood, don’t act like you’re not an accessory to the crime.
jus’ sayin’
No memory and no imagination?
The "lavish retirements" can be taxed retroactively, like Clinton introduced taxing Social Security benefits in 1993...
Here’s a general principle which should be applied. Example Obama wanted to raise [residential retirement pay. No one involved in the vote or decision to do anything to raise benefits to pensions should benefit from that. So if the president’s pay was increased or El Monte raises pension benefits, the people in office at that time should not benefit.
No private sector company could survive if their payroll included every single employee they ever had.
publius911 wrote: “The “lavish retirements” can be taxed retroactively, like Clinton introduced taxing Social Security benefits in 1993...”
So, you are advocating that the federal government impose retroactive tax income at confiscatory rates that it determines is too large?
Great idea. Why not have the federal government place confiscatory taxes on homes that are too large? Etc.
>>No. Public employee pension systems need to be shifted to a defined contribution basis.
EXACTLY! Worth saying again.
This is how our city operates.
Going forward, public sector pensions should be defined contribution. So should Social Security. How states and cities with massive unfunded liabilities deal with the legacy problem is a separate question. I would agree with you that there should be no bailouts. That implies bankruptcies and forced writedowns if the unions won't come to the table and bargain constructively before hitting the ditch. Right now, the unions still seem to be banking on an eventual bailout. There will probably have to be some painful failures to sober them up. Trump is likely to face a similar point of decision on a major municipality or state. He will need to stand tough.
“How states and cities with massive unfunded liabilities deal with the legacy problem is a separate question.”
That is the main problem. And it’s obviously gotten so bad it’s reached ‘jumped the shark’ proportions.
The proper solution will look akin to what I suggested however extremely painful it is to those affected gov workers.
Public servants need to learn their place.
people are losing their minds. on a conservative site, people are advocating the use of the federal tax code to punish people that they dislike. the use of the awesome authority of the central government as a tool of revenge.
a cretinous idea if there ever was one.
this is exactly the same thing as using the irs as a political weapon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.