Replies

Private employers can and do alter the "contract" to reduce and sometimes eliminate benefits, and nobody has stopped them so far. (We were told that employment specifics were not a contract and legal efforts were in vain.)

To say that Deferred compensation is reason for public sector employees' willingness to work for lower wages is a joke when you look at what those "civil servants" make for the little work they do.

And, yes, this even applies to the military, police, firefighters, and others who "serve and protect"...just not for all the same reasons.

No country can afford o continue paying out over half of every civil budget to people who once worked for a public entity...it's hard to fill a pot-hole today when the money has already been paid out to support the guy who filled it in twenty years before. Further, it's absurd to pay "deferred compensation" to employees who "retire" in mid life or before and immediately double dip themselves into competition with civilians who need the income to eat.

When civil "servants" (and entrenched mega unions)are willing to play by the same rules as the rest of us, I'll listen to the wails of victimhood.

Maybe.

Did the taxpayers sign contracts to give government employees/officials lavish pensions?

Or did government employees/officials sign contracts with themselves to obligate the taxpayer to fund their lavish pensions?

Does that sound like a conflict-of-interest to you?

Why should people who don’t even have pensions of their own be required to fund YOUR pension just because you are a government employee/official?

Government is the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth. It’s not even debatable. Governments, primarily redistributionist governments, murdered 262,000,000 of their own citizens in the 20th century alone.

And you, evidently, approve of government raping the peasants as long as the money goes into your pocket.

Why, that would be yes when it involves 2 groups contracting to steal from a 3rd...

If your contract terms were a line item on a general election ballot then it would be OK...

Funny that you make that comment when unions typically are adamantly against individuals contracting amongst themselves for employment.