Commentary: What's driving the U.S. over a cliff?

CNN (of all inconceivable places) ^ | April 16, 2009 | John Feehery

[bpjam]

(CNN) -- I was talking to a close family friend during my vacation in Florida, and he was criticizing the governor there for taking the stimulus money that came from the federal government.

"Florida should just cut government spending, and not use the Feds as a crutch," he said with great vehemence.

Now, this family friend is not a wealthy guy, but he lives a comfortable life, made more comfortable by the fact that he gets a nice monthly pension check from the state. I didn't dare suggest to him that perhaps cutting back on his monthly pension might be one way to cut that spending, because if I had, I would have had a seven-iron flying at my head.

[bpjam]

(My repeated apologies if somebody else has already posted this, but I can never find things in the search function before I post - which probably prevents me from posting more).

But I'm shocked to see something close to rational on the CNN website....

[lormand]

Answer:

ZERO Hussien!

[Hodar]

I didn't dare suggest to him that perhaps cutting back on his monthly pension might be one way to cut that spending, because if I had, I would have had a seven-iron flying at my head.

So, the CNN's reporter's idea of cutting back on goverment spending is to renig on benefits paid to a State or Federal employee who accepted lower pay, for a pension check when they retires? How about renigging on the file members of our military who put their lives on the line for 20 yrs or more, that could save some money too. You know, thowing those disabled Vets out of the hospitals could save a few bucks. And what about those old people, we could renig on the Social Security payments promised them decades ago. The fact is, these people EARNED their pension, they took state or federal jobs that pay less than the commercial world, typically have more expensive medical, dental and vision insurance plans, and no bonus opportunities or stock options. I have no issue with State or Federal employees of any stripe - their pension is a long term compensation for the lower payscale typically found in their jobs.

Or, we coult toss the illegals out of our country, go back to teaching English in our schools (and other languges as electives). We could limit the aide we give welfare Moms, so they are held accountable for the decisions the make in life. We could lower taxes on everyone, and as Pres. Reagan demonstrated, see record tax incomes, unprecidented economic grown, low unemployment and expontially accelerated R&D efforts.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of John Feehery.

And most certainly do not reflect the views of CNN, its employees or management.

[rockrr]

This guy (Feehery) seems to have the same problem that lefties do - they don’t understand (or disrespect) the difference between earnings and entitlements. Why should the guy give up part of his retirement pension? He EARNED it!

There is no parallel between an individual’s earning vs. spending habits as compared to a government’s spend and tax habits.

[ex-snook]

10 years of exporting jobs, factories and deficit dollars plus spending as world’s super nation builder, has run us out of money.

[drjulie]

These are good questions that reflect key problems. Any changes should not impact current beneficiaries but we need to look “down the road”. The SS retirement age needs to be raised to be aligned with higher life expectancies. Of course, in a perfect world we get rid of this program but I doubt that is going to happen. End of life care is difficult because we often make the assessments in hindsight. When you are caring for someone you don’t necessarily know that it is his/her last “3 months”. As for government pensions and benefits, in the past government paid less but in exchange one had better benefits and security. These days government employees might be doing better than the private sector. This needs to be analyzed. I know in our state a recent study suggested that government employees make significantly more than private employees in similar positions.

[Max in Utah]

renig

Renege might be better. :)

[EGPWS]

CNN still totes a bit of credibility in reporting?

[b4its2late]

BO.

[Dallas59]

Thanks for posting since CNN is off my TV and Internet for good.

[DTogo]

What's driving the U.S. over a cliff?

The Federal Government, driven by self-serving power-hungry politicians (Statists) at the wheel.

[Vaquero]

Commentary: What's driving the U.S. over a cliff?????

[Hodar]

That’s why I’m an engineer. I ain’t smart enough to be an English teacher. :-)

Renig - isn’t that something somehow tied to Michael Jackson?

[Uncle Chip]

I have no issue with State or Federal employees of any stripe - their pension is a long term compensation for the lower payscale typically found in their jobs.

Are you one???

[Jack Black]

The Fed has already renigged on Social Security several times. They have unilatteraly adjusted the age limits up, increased the tax bite on benefits, etc. In fact even the formula by which benefits are granted is mysterious and can be changed at any time by the program.

I expect more renigging on Social Security because the program is unsound.

So far they have done better on Military and employee pensions.

Still as a taxpayer I am unhappy with the provision of these pensions to said employees. Your contention that Govt. workers worked for less for the pension benefit may have been true in the past: today government workers, on average, earn far more than people in private industry.

Private industry has largely moved to 401K programs (defined contribution) while public employees are still by and large on defined benefit programs. Anyone who has been around these programs know that they are administered dishonestly: the promotions to much higher job levels at the end of a career to increase retirement payouts is common. Also common are amazingly short times to retire, as low as 20 years in some cases. Also common is double dipping.

So while in general I strongly agree that everyeone, including government should live up to their contradtual obligations, I no longer see the retirement benefits of government emplyees as ‘sacred’ beyond all other programs. In some cities, counties and states it may be the case that the over-generous benefits (and lets face it in many cases the recipients are negotiating with themselves for these benefits) are bankrupting these governments.

That means, eventually that bankruptcy may be needed to formally break the retirement obligations and allow the cities to resume operating. Very similar to the GM situation.

[norton]

Your statement about government employees earning 'lower pay' so they'll get a pension disqualifies the rest of your post. Not only the numbers included in the article but 30 years experience tell me that, for the most part, BOTH public sector salaries and pensions are far and away more generous than private sector counterparts.

Too bad because I agree with the last part of your post.

[A_Former_Democrat]

Answer: Selfishness. In both politicians and the people who elect them

[Jack Black]

Here is information (a few years old already) for my state comparing Average private vs. public wages. In each group the order of numbers is Private Sector, Govt. Sector, differnce. In every case the Govt. workers make way more.

We are being impoverished by out government.

2003 Average Wage Comparison

Region
Private sector
Government sector
Difference

Kitsap (Bremerton)
$28,943
$63,009
$34,066

Walla Walla (Walla Walla)
$30,854
$49,112
$18,258

Thurston (Olympia)
$32,488
$50,689
$18,201

Pierce (Tacoma)
$36,943
$53,311
$16,368

Kittitas (Ellensburg)
$24,649
$39,570
$14,921

Spokane (Spokane)
$33,961
$48,606
$14,645

Yakima (Yakima)
$31,051
$43,224
$12,173

Franklin (Pasco)
$32,281
$44,411
$12,130

Clark (Vancouver)
$37,553
$49,068
$11,515

Benton (Richland)
$43,165
$54,284
$11,119

Whatcom (Bellingham)
$32,352
$42,049
$9,697

Snohomish (Everett)
$42,042
$48,714
$6,672

King (Seattle)
$57,497
$53,557
<$3,940>

State
$44,210
$50,625
$6,415

[Hodar]

Since the late 1970’s, the pension paid to Federal Employees is 1.1% of their annual salary for each year they work. Thus, a Fed. Employee who works for the DoD for 20 years can expect Social Security, whatever his TSP (401K type of account pays) and then 22% of the average of his top 3 years income.

There is no longer the option for Federal Employees to work 20 yrs and then retire with 75% of their annual salary for life. That was a sweet deal, but it’s long gone now.

The pay for civilian employees is CLOSER to commercial than it used to be; but if you care to compare what an engineer in California makes, against a DoD engineer living in California earns - the annual paycheck of the DoD worker will be substancially LESS. Typically stated, the Fed and State worker’s LONG TERM benefits (I mean, after 15+ yrs) tend to equalize out the benefits in the commercial world.

I made mid ~$150K range working commercial, but make only in the low 90K range now. No union, no bonus, less vacation, higher insurance premiums, no stock options - but a far more enjoyable lifestyle and my retirement will at least be 75% of what I’m earning now. A sacrifice now, so that in 20+ years I’ll be comfortably retired.