Posted on 02/25/2011 9:30:19 PM PST by Outlaw Woman
Add another one to the list of Wisconsin myths: Over at Forbes.com, Rick Ungar has posted a piece that purports to show that Gov. Scott Walker is lying about how government-employee pensions are funded in Wisconsin. His thesis, drawing on this piece by David Cay Johnston, is that Wisconsin state employees participate in a deferred-compensation program, whereby they set aside their own money and the government matches it:
The pension plan is the direct result of deferred compensation — money that employees would have been paid as cash salary but choose, instead, to have placed in the state operated pension fund where the money can be professionally invested (at a lower cost of management) for the future.
His conclusion, therefore, is that 100 percent of the pension benefits currently received by state- and local-government employees is borne by the employees themselves:
If the Wisconsin governor and state legislature were to be honest, they would correctly frame this issue. They are not, in fact, asking state employees to make a larger contribution to their pension and benefits programs as that would not be possible — the employees are already paying 100% of the contributions.
What they are actually asking is that the employees take a pay cut.
Unfortunately, his “smoking gun” is ...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Check. Check. Check.
And the line ‘their’ money is ridiculous. THEIR money ORIGINATED with TAX DOLLARS.
So they are supposed to give their labor for free? The PUBLIC is the same as you and me, if we want a service we must PAY for it. Now if you don’t like what you’re getting for the money that’s another story.
“For that retirement contribution FERS provides the following formula. For regular employees you get 1% of average of highest three years multiplied by the number of years worked. So somebody that worked for 40 years would get forty percent of the average of their highest three years. Law enforcement has a slightly higher rate of return and a mandatory retirement age.”
I am not sure where you came up with the 30 percent number. My understanding is the the employee contributes 0.8 percent and the employer contributes 11.2 percent. The employer also pays the SS tax (6.2 percent) plus 5 percent for a defined benefit plan. Federal retirees have lots of surplus deferred compensation with an early retirement age of 57. In addition to the FERS benefit rate (1 percent for 30 years), the retiree has savings from the defined benefit plan plus match early SS benefits. The federal government pays SS benefits from early retirement age to the minimum SS retirement age (62). In addition, federal retirees enjoy retiree medical care that can extend through Medicare. The overall result is a very generous retirement compensation.
The worst part about federal government retirement compensation is that the benefits are unfunded. There is no portfolio (except for the defined benefit plan) to support the benefits. Unfunded liabilities for federal pensions are a huge problem.
It's not like that in all parts of the country.
In my area, we have principals with Masters Degrees and over 25 years in the system only pulling down $75K. Some of our teachers make less than $21,000 a year. The average salary is $42,000, which is definitely on par with the medium income. Heck, in my industry, the starting salary is $42,000 a year.
The support staff are making $15,000 a year, and the cafeteria staff are lucky to clear $5,000 a year. You can go on-line and find out how much every teacher is making at your local school.
We implemented a tax reduction several years ago, built a rainy day fund, and set aside a lot of money; however, our State's balanced budget amendment is forcing some nasty cuts in our district. I know; I was appointed to serve on the committee that makes the cuts. Lucky me.
And FTR, I am not a teacher nor an employee of the schools. My kids went to the local school for a few years until I was in a place where I could homeschool them. They did great with homeschooling. Unfortunately, I became gravely ill last year and had trouble opening a bottle of ketchup, let alone teaching 2 children 5 subjects a day, so I put them back in. Now that I'm on the mend, I will leave it to them for the upcoming school year.
That being said, there are lots of families struggling to get by on reduced incomes who don't have the option or the courage to homeschool. For them, I want the money spent in the most effective manner possible (it's our tax dollars!). I've been involved in the PTA for many years, so I've been at the schools at all hours and the classrooms are full of teachers at 4, 5, and 6 PM.
Are there crappy teachers out there? Definitely, yes. But in my neck of the woods, at least, I've met a lot of good, dedicated folks who aren't kicking back and letting the room run wild. We've hosted events on evenings and weekends, the teachers are there. Several teachers run a chess club (which swept the local awards) that meets 5 days a week for four months straight after school. There's drama, dance, art club, and several others, all started by teachers. Extra help is available every day on any topic needed for a student to succeed.
If you aren't already, get involved with your local school. See things from the inside. You'll be able to quickly identify the dead wood and the dedicated pros. Then get involved in the District. That's the fastest way to implement change.
You are what Rush calls ‘unreachable’.
You don’t have a clue on how things work or what the problem is.
I’m tired of trying to explain or educate or be helpful and direct you to sources of information. You’re unreachable.
Before posting responses to anything you might want to actually know what you are talking about.
It does make it worse and no, they are not worth it; the proof is in the statistics. 2/3 of 8th graders in wi do not have reading level skills required at that age.
The whole Forbes point is INSANE.
If this were deferred compensation - outside of 401K etc - the Feds would want their income tax cut - PURE AND SIMPLE.
Any of these people paying current income taxes on these earnings? Anyone want to support where in the federal tax code that would be legal? Remember - the claim is “they are earning it - and choosing to pay it into this account” - hello?
What a crock.
And - even if it were legal - then is this just another example of the government employees getting a benefit the rest of us can’t get?
Of course - it might be fun - declare it as income that they have put into this “plan” - then have IRS send them tax claim on 20 years of these hidden, unreported, earnings.
I don’t need Rush to give me the names I have for you. You are a part of the whiner generation that thinks everything is free. Well it’s not. You have to pay people if you want them to work for you. Go ahead and privatize everything government, that doesn’t bother me in the least, you will still be forced to pay.
You are unreachable. Stop wasting your time and others. Get a clue
Keep telling yourself that
Funny thing, however, for all the WI teachers “degrees” and pay increases, WI kids edu levels keep dropping.
When they say "We pay taxes, too" Oh, how I would like to scream at them "You are paying your taxes with MY money."
But I am sure they would not get the concept.
Even if true, which it isn’t, that would still leave the an inmate watching the inmates. Surely they wouldn’t be so dastardly as to strike up a deal in their common interest, would they?
A politician on a state-funded salary stands to lose absolutely nothing if other state employees get a huge pay raise.
It’s not like he gets a percentage of the state’s profit.
In WI, here is one example of union waste of 1/2 billion taxpayer dollars. How much went to the DP?
Here is a report from 2000 that shows the waste of WEAC of at least $ 50 million a year times 10+ years === 1/2 billion dollars.
This problem has been documented and known for a long time and the union refused to do anything..
There is a need to summarize the significant past problems in dealing with WEAC (teachers union). Everyone knows that the DP supports wholeheartly the teachers union and gives away taxpayer money to them. The union has an unfair power/leverage that increases taxpayer costs. Another issue is the unfair process of mediation/arbitration.
Here is a report from 2000 stating that WEAC controls 85% of the teacher’s health insurance without competition.
http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume13/Vol13no8.pdf page 20
The market for teachers’health insurance in Wisconsin is characterized by several traits. The health insurance is
determined through the collective bargaining process. The health insurance plans provided by the districts are rarely
put out to bid.37 The WEAInsurance Corporation, an entity affiliated with the state’s largest teachers union, provides
insurance coverage to roughly 85% of the districts. The peculiarities of this market suggest that competition between
insurers to write health insurance coverage is severely limited in most districts.
The current study reports the results of a statistical analysis that tested whether the WEAInsurance Corporation
charges more for health insurance coverage than other insurers. The analysis controlled for various factors believed
to be associated with the price of insurance coverage. The results suggest that the WEA Insurance Corporation does
charge more for its insurance product than other insurers. Possible explanations for this finding are that the WEA
Insurance Corporation provides more extensive insurance protection to those it insures, that it provides a higher level
of service to its customers, and that it derives market power from its affiliation with the WEA.
Reform that would foster competition in the market for teachers’ health insurance would serve the interests of
Wisconsin’s taxpayers and teachers. A model for reform is the health insurance pool for state employees. This is
administered by the Department of Employee Trust Funds (ETF), as is a similar pool available to Wisconsin public
employers. On a statewide basis, savings that could accrue to school districts through participation in the state
employee health insurance pool are estimated to be approximately $50,000,000 per year.
That’s part of a systemic problem. Wisconsin has an entrench union mindset; Texas is a right to work state. Are the teachers in Texas unionized? Yes. Do all of them belong? No, and they can’t force a teacher to join, either.
There seems to be alot of confusion distinguishing between the public and private sector unions.
The public sector lives for tax increases to fund themselves. There are many who do get the concept especially when we open our property taxes every year.
Private schools don’t do the same job public teachers do. Public teachers must take ALL students coming in the door. Private schools get to DISCRIMINATE based on academic ability and behavior.
Make the public school kids act like their private school counterparts and most teachers would gladly take a pay cut.
The harder or more undesirable the job the more money you end up spending to get it done.
Fair point.
But it still doesn’t explain why 70% of the 8th graders in WI public schools can’t read to level.
AND, if the teachers’ unions didn’t have a death grip on the public schools, changes and innovations could be implemented to counter the downward trend in educational success.
So, you're saying WI public school teachers would go do something else for work, if they are not compensated at their current rates?
LOL, I'd like to see them try that.
What private enterprise would hire a public school teacher?
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.