|
Post by Karen on Sept 15, 2021 12:59:06 GMT
Hondo, the main point isn't your investment in the pension, the main point is that you have a pension, most don't. Many don't need to invest anything in it. I just learned recently of someone who worked as a teacher and was able to BUY another 10 years for peanuts more for his teacher pension. In increased his pension from 15 years to 25 years. He also has 2 other pensions from 2 other jobs, both are not from private companies. That always gets me going because his 3 pensions are coming mostly from other taxpayers. I'm all for pensions by private companies, but against gov/state/public schools/universities pensions. FD1000: Well you certainly have a right to your opinion and you stated it very well, however I will not apologize for having earned a pension. Just because you are against pensions doesn't make them bad. Perhaps if you had one, you would like them. I will not get into a running argument with you on this subject and I will not respond to any followup you post. Good investing to you FD1000. I wish you all of the luck you deserve. Pension envy is a terrible thing. My husband and I only worked for employers with defined benefit pension plans so we avoided all that. We retired with two each. A recent research study shows anyone not supporting pensions for all workers is in the minority and anyone not supporting public pensions likely does not understand either their origin, purpose and/or funding. This may help... www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/77-percent-of-americans-support-pensions-for-all-workers-according-to-new-research-from-the-national-institute-on-retirement-security-301250202.htmlFrom the article:This research finds that:More than three-fourths of Americans say all workers, not just state and local employees, should have access to a pension. Some 77 percent say all workers, not just state and local workers, should have a pension. This holds true across party lines. Eighty percent of Democrats, 75 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of Independents agree that all workers should have a pension.The vast majority of respondents agree that providing pensions to state and local employees is a good way to recruit and retain these employees. Some 75 percent of Americans agree that pensions are a good way to recruit and retain qualified teachers. With regard to public safety employees, 76 percent agree that pensions are an important recruitment and retention tool of these workers.Most Americans agree that public employees should receive pensions because workers contribute to the cost and these benefits help compensate for lower pay and risks of some jobs. Nearly three-fourths (72 percent) agree that state and local employees should receive pensions because they help finance part of the cost by contributing money from each paycheck. Sixty-nine percent say public school teachers deserve a pension to compensate for their lower pay. Similarly, Americans say high risk jobs are another reason that public employees should receive a pension, with 76 percent in agreement.State and local pensions are funded from three sources: employer contributions, employee contributions and investment earnings. Between 1993 and 2018, about 25 percent of public pension fund receipts came from employer contributions, 11 percent from employee contributions, and about 64 percent from investment earnings. This means that earnings on investments historically have made up the bulk of pension fund receipts, even during two market downturns, and taxpayers are funding only a portion of these benefits.Summary: So in this case, the poster at least stated their personal bias against public pensions and demonstrated they don't understand their funding. So their comments can be taken for what they are worth.
|
|
hondo
Commander
Posts: 145
|
Post by hondo on Sept 15, 2021 14:40:38 GMT
Karen: Thank you for your input and sharing the article.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Sept 15, 2021 14:54:21 GMT
No envy at all. All I want is for pensions + special benefits to be supported by private companies and not the taxpayers. I don't mind if you raise their salaries. Most of these employees have a lifetime jobs (or very limited layoffs) which doesn't exist in the private sector.
A good example: a relative went back to teach to complete her 10 year as a teacher and quit. Her family of 4 pays now about $200 for healthcare instead of $1600 per month. Is it fair? Who pays for the rest? BTW, $200 is much lower than most STEM jobs I know, except the top IT Silicon Valley companies, which pay really well.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 15, 2021 14:57:32 GMT
No envy at all. All I want is for pensions + special benefits to be supported by private companies and not the taxpayers. I don't mind if you raise their salaries. Most of these employees have a lifetime jobs (or very limited layoffs) which doesn't exist in the private sector. A good example: a relative went back to teach to complete her 10 year as a teacher and quit. Her family of 4 pays now about $200 for healthcare instead of $1600 per month. Is it fair? Who pays for the rest? Maybe you should actually READ the study I posted and TRY to understand that you have NO IDEA how public pensions are funded. Then maybe STOP posting misinformation about them.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Sept 15, 2021 15:00:32 GMT
I read it and... 1) Sure, pensions are great 2) "about 25 percent of public pension fund receipts came from employer contributions, 11 percent from employee contributions" where the 25% came from? the taxpayers?
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 15, 2021 15:01:50 GMT
I read it and... 1) Sure, pensions are great 2) "about 25 percent of public pension fund receipts came from employer contributions, 11 percent from employee contributions" where the 25% came from? the taxpayers? State and local pensions are funded from three sources: employer contributions, employee contributions and investment earnings. Between 1993 and 2018, about 25 percent of public pension fund receipts came from employer contributions, 11 percent from employee contributions, and about 64 percent from investment earnings. This means that earnings on investments historically have made up the bulk of pension fund receipts, even during two market downturns, and taxpayers are funding only a portion of these benefits.
Ugh. Now your argument is transcending to somewhere I can barely even go. Do you REALLY think those SPECIFIC taxpayers, WHO ARE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RECEIVING A LIFETIME BENEFIT, are bellyaching that they partially participated in the funding of their benefit? (Think 401k.) Do you REALLY NOT UNDERSAND the value of that taxpayer's/employee's partial contribution to that benefit? Are you REALLY upset that public employees partially contribute to their pension? Or are you just trying to grab at straws as you come to grips with your bias and apparent ignorance on this topic?
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Sept 15, 2021 15:18:04 GMT
I also mention other benefits 1) What is your answer to a very low healthcare for many years after someone stopped being a teacher 2) Another example from Connecticut, America’s Richest State, Has a Huge Pension Problem( link) and ( another). "Connecticut balanced its budget this session with a massive influx of federal COVID-relief funds, helping close a budget deficit," " This trickle-down effect has caused funding problems statewide, resulting in higher student tuition for public colleges and universities" Opps, who paid for the shortfall? the taxpayers...again. Only someone who has a pension and special benefits which came mainly from taxpayers can justify them. Again, raise salaries but no special benefits for decades to be paid by taxpayers. There is a good reason most private companies stopped their pensions and changed to 401K.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Sept 15, 2021 15:18:47 GMT
In 1970 I got a job as an inner city high school teacher straight out of college; a common choice among my set (youngsters with degrees but zero marketable skills) to avoid military service. At first, friends and girls regarded my job as kind of cool. I had a steady job with easy hours, summers off, and had a lot of fun with the kids I was supposed to be teaching.
As I got a little older, and friends graduated from medical, dental. law or business schools -- I saw attitudes were slowly changing about me ..... to something like sympathy or mild contempt. By the time I was 30, I was far less desireable to date. Near-poverty wasn't cool any more.
Over the years a couple of opportunities came my way which increased my income; but every paycheck still deducted for city wage tax, Federal withholding, obligatory union dues, Pennsylvania income tax, Social Security, medical coverage and pension contribution, plus a "set aside" for my annual summer paychecks when I wasn't working.
Take-home was almost exactly HALF my gross. My relatively weak income was even a major cause of my divorce. Wife would NOT understand why we couldn't have the toys her upper-middle gal pals had. She split the month she graduated from nursing school (which I paid for ). I lost everything in the settlement -- just hanged on to my mortgaged house and my future pension by my fingernails.
It all changed again when I retired after 36 years with a generous pension + social security (which came later) + investment income. Resentful attitudes are quite common now. No one pities me anymore.
If you're going to argue that the country can't afford all the public sector pensions it's rewarding, I sympathize. Once upon a time I totally agreed with you. Now, with governing class fiscal irresponsibility at full flood, I no longer give a damn.
|
|
|
Post by Chahta on Sept 15, 2021 15:46:11 GMT
In 2009 when I lost about 35-40% of pay and benefits due to the crappy economy, I still paid taxes to fund the state and federal employees retirement. They never suffered like I did. Think I resented that?
|
|
|
Post by bb2 on Sept 15, 2021 16:52:05 GMT
Retirement benefit funding in many states is in trouble because they've been poorly managed, in turn because public employee unions have political power. Teachers can and do strike; what politician won't give in to that! Kids in school is what makes this country run like it does. I know a retired motorcycle cop who retired after 20 years, worked from 30 to 50, with 100K/yr in income for life, not to mention the extra benefits like health. Retired fire captain at my golf club just traded in his Maserati for a very large BMW. So people do get a little exercised about public unions because of the generosity and frankly, some abuse. If you're allowed overtime and your annual pay is calculated based on your last three years of work, you'll rack up the OT for sure. Take no sick days and cash that time in too. But some of this is being slowly fixed with more employee contributions, less payout, more reasonable assumptions but I imagine the federal government will have to help some states out. Who's going to tell a cop or fireman he makes too much? They have the guns and hoses. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Sept 15, 2021 19:14:02 GMT
Arguing with someone whose mind is made up is an exercise in futility. I’ll just add a bit and summarize: Firstly, if teachers have things so great, just why is it that so few want the job? Seems to me that either the premise is incorrect, or people are just too dumb to act in their own best interest. For that reason, given typically poor salaries, FUTURE benefits have to be very good. Secondly, as stated, the publically-funded portion of this is not the bulk of the inflows. Thirdly, a goodly percentage of funding issues are due to ‘borrowing’ from the funds by state governments. In states where such actions do not take place (ny), the funds are solvent. Teachers earn every penny of their salaries and benefits. People who have never done the job have no concept of what is involved or what constitutes fair pay.
|
|
hondo
Commander
Posts: 145
|
Post by hondo on Sept 16, 2021 21:52:32 GMT
Retirement benefit funding in many states is in trouble because they've been poorly managed, in turn because public employee unions have political power. Teachers can and do strike; what politician won't give in to that! Kids in school is what makes this country run like it does. I know a retired motorcycle cop who retired after 20 years, worked from 30 to 50, with 100K/yr in income for life, not to mention the extra benefits like health. Retired fire captain at my golf club just traded in his Maserati for a very large BMW. So people do get a little exercised about public unions because of the generosity and frankly, some abuse. If you're allowed overtime and your annual pay is calculated based on your last three years of work, you'll rack up the OT for sure. Take no sick days and cash that time in too. But some of this is being slowly fixed with more employee contributions, less payout, more reasonable assumptions but I imagine the federal government will have to help some states out. Who's going to tell a cop or fireman he makes too much? They have the guns and hoses. Sorry.You should be sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Oct 1, 2021 13:28:04 GMT
I also mention other benefits 1) What is your answer to a very low healthcare for many years after someone stopped being a teacher 2) Another example from Connecticut, America’s Richest State, Has a Huge Pension Problem( link) and ( another). "Connecticut balanced its budget this session with a massive influx of federal COVID-relief funds, helping close a budget deficit," " This trickle-down effect has caused funding problems statewide, resulting in higher student tuition for public colleges and universities" Opps, who paid for the shortfall? the taxpayers...again. Only someone who has a pension and special benefits which came mainly from taxpayers can justify them. Again, raise salaries but no special benefits for decades to be paid by taxpayers. There is a good reason most private companies stopped their pensions and changed to 401K.You really should stop posting about topics that you don't understand or not little about. Like this one.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Oct 1, 2021 13:41:34 GMT
Karen --
I have no beef with you and don't want to start one.
I don't always see eye-to-eye with FD, but do want to read his perspectives. If you believe him wrong (or generally wrong-headed) then please do reply with something substantive on the issue you find objectionable.
Telling someone to "stop posting" does nothing to either help, entertain or enlighten.
|
|
|
Post by rhythmmethod on Oct 1, 2021 14:00:28 GMT
Karen -- I have no beef with you and don't want to start one. I don't always see eye-to-eye with FD, but do want to read his perspectives. If you believe him wrong (or generally wrong-headed) then please do reply with something substantive on the issue you find objectionable. Telling someone to "stop posting" does nothing to either help, entertain or enlighten. Yes, What richardsok said. This is getting very tiresome! - Karen,
|
|
|
Post by win1177 on Oct 1, 2021 14:23:53 GMT
Hondo, the main point isn't your investment in the pension, the main point is that you have a pension, most don't. Many don't need to invest anything in it. I just learned recently of someone who worked as a teacher and was able to BUY another 10 years for peanuts more for his teacher pension. In increased his pension from 15 years to 25 years. He also has 2 other pensions from 2 other jobs, both are not from private companies. That always gets me going because his 3 pensions are coming mostly from other taxpayers. I'm all for pensions by private companies, but against gov/state/public schools/universities pensions. FD, I worked VERY hard for my state govt. pension, and it sort of pisses me off when people automatically assume state employees are “slackers, living off the Govt. teat”, etc. I probably gave up easily $50,000-$100,000 (or more) in income each year by teaching/ working at our state medial school, compared to what I could make as an MD in private practice. I see the pension as sort of a back end “payment” for the years (28) of lost income, for the years of teaching and other “non-reimbursed” time as a professor. I did enjoy the teaching and patient care, and also the fact that I could take VERY complicated cases w/o any concern regarding payment (supported by the state taxpayers- indigent care). Some of those “complicated cases” are still alive/ doing well, because I was the ONLY person willing to take the risk of helping them. Many private MD’s will not touch the complicated cases we routinely took, as their is too much risk. Called “cherry picking”. Working at a state funded university medical center allowed me to take them, and (sometimes) even save their life. I did buy some additional time, but it was time I spent in GA and TX teaching & working at state medial schools. I just rolled over my IRA money (from my 401k or 403b money I had in their retirement accounts) into the SC retirement system. So it was MY money. Your outright dismissal of ALL state pensions smacks of a bit of elitism (and maybe some envy)? I feel as if I EARNED every penny of that pension. It does provide a bit of a “safe base” of income, sort of like a slug of high quality bonds provides for a portfolio. It is just based on my salary as a Professor, not any additional money. It, when combined with SS when I take it, will provide about 60-70% of our needs very easily, so we will be fine. It has allowed me to be more aggressive in the rest of our portfolio, which has paid off with higher returns over the long run. Win
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Oct 1, 2021 14:39:57 GMT
Karen -- I have no beef with you and don't want to start one. I don't always see eye-to-eye with FD, but do want to read his perspectives. If you believe him wrong (or generally wrong-headed) then please do reply with something substantive on the issue you find objectionable. Telling someone to "stop posting" does nothing to either help, entertain or enlighten. Yes, What richardsok said. This is getting very tiresome! - Karen , Fair, but FD's constant ranting about teachers is ALSO annoying. Despite all the wonderful benefits to which teachers are supposedly given access, STILL we have trouble getting good people into, and REMAINING in, the profession. The attrition rate in the first three years is HORRENDOUS! Somehow FD thinks that cutting benefits (easy), and paying higher salaries instead (how?), is going to result in some net 'gain'. On the basis of WHAT analysis?
He's entitled to his opinion, of course, but until he can actually DEMONSTRATE how we can get good people into the profession, and keep them, by doing as he suggests; I suggest that he's engaging in wishful thinking. What I know is that my daughter and son-in-law, both of whom are teachers, have actively attempted to dissuade others in the family from entering the profession. Not sure how FD's personal opinion stacks up against the those realities? One would think they'd be touting their plush jobs and cushy benefits; no?
|
|
|
Post by rhythmmethod on Oct 1, 2021 15:05:28 GMT
Yes, racqueteer, I agree with that observation as well. I wish FD1000, would not beat his chest so much. That is also very tiresome. Truly smart people don’t need to remind themselves, or others how smart they are.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Oct 1, 2021 15:07:59 GMT
Just because some like to rant repeatedly, it doesn't mean it should be here.
|
|
|
Post by bb2 on Oct 1, 2021 16:14:57 GMT
From Barron's, www.barrons.com/advisor/articles/frugal-retirement-spending-advisors-51632945615?mod=hp_INTERESTS_retirement&refsec=hp_INTERESTS_retirementThis article is a collection of short thoughts on spending from various advisors. For example: "Matt Gulbransen, president, Pine Grove Financial Group: When a client has a 95% or 100% probability of success based on modeling, sometimes I say very jokingly: “Do you really want to leave this much money to your kids?” You have to use humor, and you have to make statements that disrupt their traditional thinking and allow them to open up and engage. If Bill and Sally have been dedicated savers their whole life, and have talked about how they want to go on international trips in retirement, and then they retire and don’t do it, it’s almost like, “What the hell are you doing? You’ve worked so hard to get to this point. You guys have got to get out and spend that money.” They’ll kind of laugh and joke, and I’ll say, “No, seriously, what is your big picture?” Oftentimes I’ll tell clients, “You know, I didn’t see you take any distributions in the last quarter. Why aren’t you spending your money?” That’s not something they expect me to say, and I think it allows them to start to have more productive conversations at home." -- or-- "Bijan Golkar, CEO, FPC Investment Advisory: I make a visual and interactive guide to the time value of money. When clients see the numbers on a spreadsheet and see how much they could have left at what I jokingly call their “expiration date,” they start thinking, “Hey, maybe we can enjoy this a little bit more.” We’ll set a minimum withdrawal rate that they’re comfortable with. And when markets do better than we expect, quarterly, semiannually or annually, we’ll actually create little bonuses for them. One couple last year had a $400,000 excess. They said, “We want to take a couple of huge trips with our grandkids.” They were able to have a heck of a time, and their plan was in even better shape than it was before. " Trouble is, you have to believe these guys. 5 years ago all these models/spreadsheets were using 4% withdrawal rate. It was 6% when I started all this, 20 yrs ago. Now they're talking 3%.
|
|
|
Post by win1177 on Oct 1, 2021 16:40:19 GMT
From Barron's, www.barrons.com/advisor/articles/frugal-retirement-spending-advisors-51632945615?mod=hp_INTERESTS_retirement&refsec=hp_INTERESTS_retirementThis article is a collection of short thoughts on spending from various advisors. For example: "Matt Gulbransen, president, Pine Grove Financial Group: When a client has a 95% or 100% probability of success based on modeling, sometimes I say very jokingly: “Do you really want to leave this much money to your kids?” You have to use humor, and you have to make statements that disrupt their traditional thinking and allow them to open up and engage. If Bill and Sally have been dedicated savers their whole life, and have talked about how they want to go on international trips in retirement, and then they retire and don’t do it, it’s almost like, “What the hell are you doing? You’ve worked so hard to get to this point. You guys have got to get out and spend that money.” They’ll kind of laugh and joke, and I’ll say, “No, seriously, what is your big picture?” Oftentimes I’ll tell clients, “You know, I didn’t see you take any distributions in the last quarter. Why aren’t you spending your money?” That’s not something they expect me to say, and I think it allows them to start to have more productive conversations at home." -- or-- "Bijan Golkar, CEO, FPC Investment Advisory: I make a visual and interactive guide to the time value of money. When clients see the numbers on a spreadsheet and see how much they could have left at what I jokingly call their “expiration date,” they start thinking, “Hey, maybe we can enjoy this a little bit more.” We’ll set a minimum withdrawal rate that they’re comfortable with. And when markets do better than we expect, quarterly, semiannually or annually, we’ll actually create little bonuses for them. One couple last year had a $400,000 excess. They said, “We want to take a couple of huge trips with our grandkids.” They were able to have a heck of a time, and their plan was in even better shape than it was before. " Trouble is, you have to believe these guys. 5 years ago all these models/spreadsheets were using 4% withdrawal rate. It was 6% when I started all this, 20 yrs ago. Now they're talking 3%. BB2, I think the “spending after retirement” issue is going to be HUGE for me. I’ve gotten so used to squeezing every bit of “juice out of every penny” (how my wife describes me), I think it will be VERY hard for me to suddenly “switch gears” and spend freely. Our portfolio is way more than I ever dreamed, and running safe withdrawal rate scenarios show we can easily live off the income alone (2.5%). But I still buy used cars, shop the sales at grocery stores, buy “essentials” (TP, paper towels, etc.) in bulk at Costco, etc., etc. It’s second nature, after nearly 63 years of saving/ investing/ cost cutting. So I really don’t see that changing too much. And I imagine a lot of other retirees are similar. After many years of saving and scrimping, it’s awfully hard to suddenly switch gears an spend like a “drunken sailor” (no offense to an Navy vets!). Win
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Oct 1, 2021 23:58:37 GMT
Karen ---
FD can defend himself. He needs no help from me and isn't going to get any.
But, personal abuse aside, I generally respond to ANYONE who writes, "You really should stop posting .... etc." Free expression of differing viewpoints is the mother's milk of discussion forums, and YOUR posts have a way of pushing the needle right into Red on the ol' Meanie-Meter.
I particularly dislike one poster labeling another a "problem" to Chang. FD takes unpopular opinions, yes, and irks some by sticking to his viewpoint, true. But -- unless I have missed it -- he does not descend to rudeness.
Did I read your previous post? Maybe. Don't recall. Don't care, neither. Back-and-forth arguments over the benefits/vices of public pensions are not - *yawn* - high on my list of interests. (Bor-r-ring.) Nor am I generally big on frowning schoolmarms or bossy hall monitors.
But I do suggest that if you are right and FD is wrong, then the intelligent readers of this forum are probably capable of seeing it.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Oct 3, 2021 0:02:49 GMT
It's not surprising that the people who get pensions want to defend it. I can assure you that there are more slackers in Gov/State jobs than in private companies, after all, the owner pays it from his/her own pocket. Sure, there are great employees in Gov/State jobs but it doesn't change the facts they cost too much money. BTW, I worked years on State/Gov contracts on site and I have seen the slacking first hand. It wasn't pretty. I have seen more than half coming late to work, taking 60-90 minutes lunch break and leaving early while they pay my company 5-6 times to do their job. Later, I had to turn it over to state/Gov employees and didn't even try to understand or follow up.
To sum it up: in 37 years in private and Gov/State jobs/contracts in IT. The private sector had 80/20 good/bad employees, but the state/Gov were at 20/80. I also know other who worked in other projects, agencies and the impression was similar.
School: I compare what I experience where I came from to the USA. I followed my kids thru school, especially high school, and we live in a good part of town. The US teachers were not good to say the least, especially in sciences. We had to teach them the tough stuff. All the Asian were taught by their parents too. All my school teachers in math, statistics, physics have a degree from university in that field, no parents were ever involved. In my university, all my professors actually worked in the private sector in IT and finance economic (one of them became the Fed chair 2 years later). The IT professors had connection to actual companies because they worked there.
Do you wonder why the US needs so many STEM talent from other countries, while US university tuition keeps going up and exceeding inflation?
Why did private companies cut pensions and started 401K? Why the state/gov can't do it? How long do we have to wait for that?
Maybe you were the exception to the rule, but I have seen in my own eyes and experienced it. If state/gov are so efficient, why not let them run/manage everything?
Is this really new? So, instead of defending it, come up with ideas how to improve it. No, it's not a rant. It's the truth and it hurts.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Oct 3, 2021 3:37:27 GMT
No, FD, it's mostly more ranting, along with extrapolating what YOU'VE seen with what happens everywhere. You still haven't addressed MY points:
1. If the job's so cushy and overpaid, why is it so hard to get and keep quality people? 2. Why don't people with straight Masters and Doctorate degrees enter the field of teaching, and of those coming in as a second career, why do THEY consider the job to be so difficult to perform - MY experience?
3 Don't confuse what teachers are forced to do by self-styled 'experts', with their capability to do the job well - IF LEFT ALONE. 4. If you don't have a plan for actually IMPROVING education that goes beyond spending less and hoping that magically makes things better, then your OPINION is worth precisely what you're being paid to offer it. 5. My actual EXPERIENCE (vs. your OPINION) is quite a bit different than yours. Perhaps it's GEORGIA which is the problem? It certainly used to be one of the poorest-paying states, and you DO tend to get what you pay for.
6. Training may, in fact, NOT be equal in all states. Maybe that's why NY-certified teachers are in such demand in other states. 7. NY, which I know something about, has a union, a solvent pension fund, and, perhaps, the best education available in ANY state. Seems as if THEY might be the folks to emulate? Of course, that's diametrically opposed to what YOU'RE spouting.
|
|
|
Post by anovice on Oct 3, 2021 12:18:15 GMT
No envy at all. All I want is for pensions + special benefits to be supported by private companies and not the taxpayers. I don't mind if you raise their salaries. Most of these employees have a lifetime jobs (or very limited layoffs) which doesn't exist in the private sector. A good example: a relative went back to teach to complete her 10 year as a teacher and quit. Her family of 4 pays now about $200 for healthcare instead of $1600 per month. Is it fair? Who pays for the rest? BTW, $200 is much lower than most STEM jobs I know, except the top IT Silicon Valley companies, which pay really well. FD1000: I hope that you agree my guaranteed 7% annual return in Teachers' Retirement System of the City of New York, Fixed Return Fund, was well earned. www.trsnyc.org/memberportal/Investments/FixedReturnFund
|
|
|
Post by chang on Oct 3, 2021 13:39:45 GMT
Karen: Please do not post personal attacks on posters here. If someone is giving you apoplexy, just block them.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Oct 3, 2021 13:41:24 GMT
Raq, NY has better education than GA but I can guarantee you that the best 10 high school in GA where I live compete well with other states. I would welcome any improvement and pay would be one of them as I said before. I'm against any pension or health benefits when someone isn't working anymore. Forcing teachers to do stuff dictating by bureaucrats is another problem. I happen to know a NY teacher that went back to finish 10 year in the system and then stopped. She did it so can join the teachers' health benefit and pay about $200-250 monthly for years to come instead of $1600-1700 when they had to use the ACA, why on earth is she eligible for that? Looking at several sites I found that the average NY teacher salary is almost 82K( link), looks pretty good to me and not deserving additional pension and healthcare after retirement, after all, you get a lifetime job and union protection when you slack. I know several teachers in NY and CA with pensions ranging at $5-6K. Teachers are only one part of state/Gov, there are a lot of other employees. I'm talking about hundreds of employees I had worked with in several states, many making a pretty good salary working in IT and healthcare or many slackers who work for the CDC one of the best paying jobs in Government that match the private sector.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Oct 3, 2021 13:49:38 GMT
It's not surprising that the people who get pensions want to defend it. I can assure you that there are more slackers in Gov/State jobs than in private companies, after all, the owner pays it from his/her own pocket. Sure, there are great employees in Gov/State jobs but it doesn't change the facts they cost too much money. BTW, I worked years on State/Gov contracts on site and I have seen the slacking first hand. It wasn't pretty. I have seen more than half coming late to work, taking 60-90 minutes lunch break and leaving early while they pay my company 5-6 times to do their job. Later, I had to turn it over to state/Gov employees and didn't even try to understand or follow up. To sum it up: in 37 years in private and Gov/State jobs/contracts in IT. The private sector had 80/20 good/bad employees, but the state/Gov were at 20/80. I also know other who worked in other projects, agencies and the impression was similar. School: I compare what I experience where I came from to the USA. I followed my kids thru school, especially high school, and we live in a good part of town. The US teachers were not good to say the least, especially in sciences. We had to teach them the tough stuff. All the Asian were taught by their parents too. All my school teachers in math, statistics, physics have a degree from university in that field, no parents were ever involved. In my university, all my professors actually worked in the private sector in IT and finance economic (one of them became the Fed chair 2 years later). The IT professors had connection to actual companies because they worked there. Do you wonder why the US needs so many STEM talent from other countries, while US university tuition keeps going up and exceeding inflation? Why did private companies cut pensions and started 401K? Why the state/gov can't do it? How long do we have to wait for that? Maybe you were the exception to the rule, but I have seen in my own eyes and experienced it. If state/gov are so efficient, why not let them run/manage everything? Is this really new? So, instead of defending it, come up with ideas how to improve it. No, it's not a rant. It's the truth and it hurts. I would LOVE to explore some of these issues with you, FD, but I don't know if it's ok, or if others actually CARE about what either of us have to say. Frankly, you're all over the place on this. You're talking about 'teachers' as if they are all, at every level, the same. You throw in "Federal/State Government" employees as if THEY are the same thing as 'teachers'. You want to equate the situation in Israel with the US as if THOSE are the same thing - I'm fairly sure they have different mandates. I'm qualified to speak about NY teachers in the secondary and elementary schools. With all due respect, you've literally NO idea what is happening in the schools now. If you REALLY want your hair to curl, I can put you in touch with my son-in-law who would be happy to tell you exactly what's wrong with what is being done now, and in the recent past, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with good education and is COMPLETELY outside teachers' ability to influence.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Oct 3, 2021 14:30:33 GMT
Raq, NY has better education than GA but I can guarantee you that the best 10 high school in GA where I live compete well with other states. I would welcome any improvement and pay would be one of them as I said before. I'm against any pension or health benefits when someone isn't working anymore. Forcing teachers to do stuff dictating by bureaucrats is another problem. I happen to know a NY teacher that went back to finish 10 year in the system and then stopped. She did it so can join the teachers' health benefit and pay about $200-250 monthly for years to come instead of $1600-1700 when they had to use the ACA, why on earth is she eligible for that? Looking at several sites I found that the average NY teacher salary is almost 82K( link), looks pretty good to me and not deserving additional pension and healthcare after retirement, after all, you get a lifetime job and union protection when you slack. I know several teachers in NY and CA with pensions ranging at $5-6K. Teachers are only one part of state/Gov, there are a lot of other employees. I'm talking about hundreds of employees I had worked with in several states, many making a pretty good salary working in IT and healthcare or many slackers who work for the CDC one of the best paying jobs in Government that match the private sector. FD, there are ALWAYS going to be anecdotal cases, in EVERY profession, where INDIVIDUALS under-exert. I'm not sure that has any bearing on MOST, let alone ALL. You don't make policy based on anecdotes.
IF... The salaries/benefits were high enough, there would be an excess of people trying to land the jobs. If THAT were the case, districts could pick and choose who to hire and could, in fact, NOT extend tenure to ANYONE if they wished to DO that. Unions don't exist, or have real power, in a great many states; so let's not drag that into the mix. NY has a union and tenure; yet ALSO has good education GENERALLY (not just in the best ten); so it isn't the unions which are the problem. Nor tenure. The benefits are why you can get SOME good people into the profession. Without them, you have to be able to raise salaries and improve working conditions. There is ZERO indication that anyone is interested in DOING that; so here we are.
In NY, teachers are MANDATED to contribute to their pensions just as they are mandated to contribute to SS. Their employers kick in as well. Those contributions are invested and compound. In the private sector, do employers not similarly contribute to IRAs, etc? Matching contributions, perhaps? This isn't a 'gift'; by any stretch of the imagination.
Healthcare... I paid into this along the way, every year. In my mind, it's like an annuity that I've paid into IN ORDER to retain its benefits after retirement.
Look, here's the deal: I contract to do a job to the best of my ability; given the limitation that I am not really free to 'call the shots' on how things are done in my class. The contract includes salary and benefits; just as with any OTHER employee. If it doesn't total enough, then I'm free not to accept the terms. Districts aren't just GIVING AWAY anything they don't HAVE to. Teaching jobs go begging in urban areas especially. In YOUR words, you're getting candidates who aren't capable of doing the job (which, btw,is to provide a MINIMUM level of competence to ALL students; not 'excellence' to any who want it). Can you not see that what YOU feel you're experiencing is not curable by offering LESS? You need to be offering enough to be able to 'pick and choose' from willing candidates. You need to then let them actually DO the job and stop interfering. By all means, hold them to high standards for the three years leading up to tenure.
The problem is that there are not huge numbers of people who want to teach; at least as things stand. If you want good people, then you HAVE to provide some incentive to get them. So far, that incentive is lacking to a greater (Georgia?) to lesser (NY?) extent. THAT'S the reality.
|
|
|
Post by racqueteer on Oct 3, 2021 14:48:00 GMT
Looking at several sites I found that the average NY teacher salary is almost 82K( link), looks pretty good to me and not deserving additional pension and healthcare after retirement, after all, you get a lifetime job and union protection when you slack. I know several teachers in NY and CA with pensions ranging at $5-6K. I note that the average STARTING salary is something like $45k. So this indicates, to me, that NY has an aging teaching population with 20+ years in (wag). Of COURSE the average salary is going to be high. The fact that the teaching population is aging indicates, to me, that either jobs are not available or a lot of newer teachers are not hacking it in the vocation. As I noted, attrition amongst new teachers is staggering. So you are looking at a select group of probably highly-competent, highly-experienced, people driving the 'average'. THEIR background is from the 2000's (or earlier). A lot has changed in that time. We really need to look at what is happening NOW and not 20+ years ago.
|
|