And remember, Forbes is the unabashed "Capitalist Tool," with a history of Republican-leaning positions.  Steve Forbes himself ran (albeit incompetantly) for the Republican nomination for President. I'm not a reader of Forbes so I don't know how they lean these days.

As it turns out, Wisconsin taxpayers do not contribute to their government worker's pensions.

investigate important aspects of a story. To not be spoon fed info. by the politicians, say as in the run up to the Iraq war, but to do investigative journalism?

What the AP didn't mention was that this pizza joint is a cooperative owned by the workers.

but that "deferred income" is still coming from where???  The Wisconsin taxpayers, of course.

This is more bullshit trying to cover up the fact that public workers are getting way too much handed to them at the taxpayer's expense.

And if the state governments don't make cuts here they will be forced to do it elsewhere -- like closing schools, cutting out more college aid, spending less on roads and highways, etc.  And then it won't just be the overfed and "entitled" public workers complaining but it will be most of the electorate in the states.  

But, at least it is giving the media some great pictures of protesters to lead their news off with every night . . . . .

It's called solidarity.

is move state employees from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan.

I have no idea if the Wisconsin pension plan is fully funded to pay the expected benefits to all participants. There are a number of states that are significantly underfunded. Some of this can is attributed to less than expected returns, i.e. a lousy pension portfolio manager(s).

The pension shortfall is anywhere from $1T to $3T. The only way to fix the problem is the pension managers make up the shortfall through phenomenal future returns, postpone cost of living adjustments, cutting benefits, or increasing tax dollars. It's the potential of increased taxes to shore up the pension that has a lot of taxpayers pissed off.

"What they are actually asking is that the employees take a pay cut.

That may or may not be an appropriate request depending on your point of view – but the argument that the taxpayers are providing state workers with some gift is as false as the argument that state workers are paid better than employees with comparable education and skills in private industry.

Maybe state workers need to take pay cut along with so many of their fellow Americans. But let’s, at the least, recognize this sacrifice for what it is rather than pretending they’ve been getting away with some sweet deal that now must be brought to an end."

The author of the article is just saying that the issue should be presented honestly.

and say you are cutting their wages, which those monies are. Honesty is not about being liberal vs. conservation, republican vs. democrat. They all can be honest if they choose.

This has nothing to do with their base pay. If a teacher makes $50K, then that's what he or she gets over the course of 12 months. You need to separate base pay (SALARY) from benefits.

This is a defined benefit plan, aka a traditional pension, paid like an annuity over the employees life after retirement. The state, or agency the union employee works for contributes to the plan administered by professionals hired by the union. This is really no different from the private sector that still provides a Defined BENEFIT Plan vs a Defined Contribution Plan (401K).

I would like to see one of their paycheck stubs. I doubt there is nothing on it that shows employee contribution to their pension. If you have a 401K plan, then you would see employee contributions as a deduction from their base pay.

This is what pisses me off. Here is an excerpt from the article.

"The pension agreements are the result of collective bargaining. That means that the state has every opportunity to properly calculate the anticipated lifespan and then add on some margin for error. What’s more, the losses taken by the pension funds over the past few years can hardly be blamed on the employees"

So the Pension Plan fucks up, blames Wall Street for their losses, but don't blame the employees.
It's this shit that really pissed off the taxpayers.

insurance and pensions because they knew, that by demanding to keep their collective bargaining ability, they will get that money back and the bill overturned once a Democrat is elected to the governor's office and more Dems get elected in the state legislature.

This is still all about money.  How the state is hurting and the "entitled" public workers refuse to help.  When jobs are lost, schools are closed and other things are unfunded, the state of Wisconsin will pay again for the selfish attitude of the public workers.

I agree the taxpayers pay money to the state and the state  pays the employee . This is bullshit  

-- Modified on 2/25/2011 3:32:05 PM

Yeah, but the difference is that the money is part of their salary that they contribute to a fund.  In that sense it's like a company 401K. As for the size of their salaries, Wisconsin public employees have already agreed to cuts but the Governor won't take "yes" for an answer.  So this whole thing is no longer about $$$; it's about the Governor's demand that workers bargaining rights be removed and the workers refusal to accept it.

The thought of union made pizza is a real hoot.  I know its just a cooperative, and not a real union, but the idea of collective pizza pie making is hilarious.

Obviously, we both know the answer to your rhetorical question.  But to me, that's not the point.  The Governor has said the state can't afford to fund the benefits, but covered up the fact that the pension was funded by salary deductions.  There is a difference, even if you refuse to see it.  But the ultimate point is, state workers already have agreed to reductions but the Guv won't take "yes" for an answer and wants to also strip them of collective bargaining rights.  To me it's un-American to force people to give up that right, which is the only way an individual has a voice at the bargaining table.  No one should be forced to join a union, either, even if they benefit from its activities.  By the same token, no one should be forced to give up a hard-won right.  As Megyn Kelly (a rock-ribbed Foxie) said today, why can't governors, when dealing with union negotiators, just say "no," demands for increases?

The Wisconsin Lie Exposed – Taxpayers Actually Contribute Nothing To Public Employee Pensions
is  the title and is laughable since the state pays the employee a salary and that money comes from taxpayers.

So you like liberal logic .The whole premise is faulty since the salary is paid by the state and the money to pay that salary comes from the taxpayers  in order  to pay into a pension .Really laughable

-- Modified on 2/25/2011 4:57:52 PM

Sure it is liberal logic to say taxpayers money is not being used.

Kinda like saying  when  a private employer agrees to match the contributions of the employee the money they are putting in the plan isn't really the employer's money but the employee's money  



-- Modified on 2/25/2011 5:20:16 PM

Nope!  Doughnuts!

How about responding to the fact that the public employee unions have said they'd accept cuts to their salary but the Governor won't accept that and is holding out for rescinding their right to collective bargaining.

So it is not money included in their salary but it still comes from taxpayers and   the future is what the concern should be over .



-- Modified on 2/25/2011 6:03:56 PM

I saw we take AVERAGE benefits package for the top Fortune 500 companies and grant those to the State Employees.

How does that sound to you. Think the Unions will be reasonable and accept getting what most American's get???

It might even mean a pay increase for its members.

The cost per hour for Public employees is MUCH higher for provate sector!! That is what the Wisconsin governor is saying!! We can't afford that anymore!!

You are using one of Phil's tactics though. What data did BLS use to make the chart with? The private sector has a broader range of job titles than the private sector. Some local governments use union labor from the same locals as the private sector uses and the pay is equal. Does the chart reflect private sector contracted union labor contracted to the governments? I could go on and on Snow. Ask Phil to supply you with some "ass facts" to support your position.

yor mind is closed so why bother.

You don;'t believe it, why should I care.

Bottom line is governemnt employees make as much or more than many of their counterparts, but larger benefits packages and fat pensions. States can't afford it anymore....

You know what is both funny and sad, we can debate all day, in the end the Unions will lose. Not for political easons but just out of fact. THE MONEY IS ALMOST GONE!!! THERE IS NO MORE!! SIMPLE CONCEPT!!

What money were you referring to?

I  don't usually agree with you, but I do on this one.  There is no more money.  In the past, local schools could rely on money from: 1) the Feds; 2) their State; 3) higher local taxes.  All of that money is gone.  At the local level residents are taxed up the wazoo.  Also,  with declining property values and foreclosures, local tax revenues are  down.  So everything must be cut, including salaries and benefits.  The problem then pits people with kids in the system (who  don't want cuts) against people without kids. The broader problem is people are hypocrits.  They wail about excess government spending right up until something they like gets cut.  But it's just too late for that.
Where I part company with many of the more conservative posters is, I don't think this is a good reason  to bust unions.  How about having the guts to just tell them "NO!"  Most public employees are forbidden from striking.  When the sanitation workers started an illegal strike in NYC they got slammed.  I don't think the union has recovered from the fines and they won't think about striking in the foreseeable future.  Public employee unions have no real teeth, so why take away their voice, too?

...right near the very large black hole that sucked up all the trillions in losses from the financial  collapse! LOL!

fund the governments in this country. The politicians are saying that the middle and working classes are the cause of the economic meltdown so services to those classes must be cut.

they simply figured it was someone else's money and had no qualms spending it. Government officials buying votes and using it to yield incluence and everyone else with their hadns out trying to get a piece of the collective tax pie.

I know a lot of people on this board HATE the Tea Party. But from what I can tell, their #1 agenda item is to get spending under control. Sorry, but I really have to back that!!

They're not just funding it, they're CARRYING IT!!!

Welcome to ATLAS SHRUGGED baby!! They are telling everyone to go stuff it!!  I LOVE IT!!!!

Want to know why the US economy is dropping to third ??

Easy, pain in the ass Unions and very unfavorable tax laws for businesses!!

Face it Charlie, you can cry all day about it, but they are just doing like the Dems in Wisonsin, leaving and taking their resources with them...

Check Mate, Unions Lose.

Such deep thinking

When will you people get it!!! They are leaving in DROVES!!

That's why our economy is dropping to third. And tell me this, how many poor people create jobs!! NONE!!!

They have the money, they have the means, that're gone!! YOU'RE SCREWED!!!

Real Simple Concept!!