Reply With Quote
so you were wrong..
Look at your rankings and then check their geographical location. Notice anything the lower ones seem to have in common?
so you were wrong..
I know in San Antonio you have 55 year old firemen retiring at 88% of income and full health benefits.
I'm not wrong. Are you just too stupid to see the common denominator?
you want WI to become more like texas.. and I pointed out the horrible way texas treats the poor and children..you were wrong..
So you know one group in one city in Texas is a member of a union with collective bargaining rights.
Out of something like 156,000 state employees.
Are you really THAT ignorant? Teachers, State Employees, city employees, bus drivers, policemen, firemen...ALL are union.
Not sure about local bus driver unions or police unions or fire unions.
I would imagine unionization %'s would be roughly the same.
How are unions that don't have the power to strike and only represent a small fraction of government employees a problem?
You quoted education and poverty statistics. Are you too stupid to understand that when you live in a border state and have a constant flood of poor, non-english speaking illegal immigrants coming into your state that it skews the numbers when compared to other states that don't?
So it's someone else's fault.... got it.
what has perry done to change any of this? Other than remain quiet when bush was in office to then all of a sudden complain when obama came into office..
Oh, that's a no-brainer.
Unions provide protection to lazy jackasses that would otherwise be fired, in a job that they had to show accountability for.
and you know this how? Do you know anyone peronsally fitting your description?
... if they have put in 33 years at the Department and started at age 22.
http://www.sanantonio.gov/safd/ffwag...=1440&ver=true
How many years do you think they should work before retiring?
Yes, I work with several.
you work for a union?
no.
I am a union member, and wish I didn't have to be. The ethics of some of the people around me are absolutely disgusting, and they couldn't make it in a non-union job.
You would get better discussions if you used the word "stupid" less.
Probably have lower blood pressure as well.
Well meant and freely given.
Oh, I dunno...maybe 65-70 like the private sector? I assume you can do simple math. If that retiree at 55 lives to 85 that is approximately 2.5 million of benefits per retiree.
Hmmm.
Base pay 4412
multiplied by longitivity bonus of 18%
4412*1.18=5206.16
Multiplied by maximum vesting rate of 87.5%
5206.16*.875=4555
4555 times 12 months times 30 years (87 YO - 55 YO)
4555*12*30=1,639,940
Don't know where you got your figure of 2.5M
Lastly:
The math isn't quite that simple.
The actual amount of money required to pay out that 1.6M is significantly less than 1.6M.
(edit)
Here is the appropriate equation:
(90% sure it is the correct one, double checking)
Ordinarily I would just stick it into excel, but excel formula guidance for NPV says it only goes up to 254 payments. 30 years times 12 months is 360 payments.
So I gots ta do it the hard way.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 02-25-2011 at 02:24 PM.
That's a big part of the problem I have with public sector unions, with a lesser, though not smaller, item the matter of collective bargaining against the taxpaying public.
Private sector unions have had their flaws, but at the end of the day in a free society labor absolutely has a right to organize as it so desires. Also, such unions can function/offer an apprenticeship like path to its members and uphold some degree of professionalism. I don't find the argument of improved wages that compelling because ultimately that leads to fewer employment opportunities and increased offshoring. Unions probably work best in a non-free trade environment.
Shattering myths in the PEU debate
Yeah, I thought the association of the state's problems with the union bennies was a bit of a stretch as well. But I thought the analysis was pretty good as regards inverse incentives.. The bulk of the article seems to ring fairly true.
Last edited by TeyshaBlue; 02-25-2011 at 02:58 PM.
Heritage VRWC stink tank has as much credibility as Fox Repug Propaganda network
He wants to take away collective bargaining rights from some unions but not others.
Why is that, Darrin?
Doing it the hard way yields, at a modest 3% return over inflation of 3%:
$1,083,098.62
If you distributed this amount in 360 equal payments of 4555 (+inflation over time), it would total this starting number.
To achieve that amount, the city would have to reserve much less than this figure over the 33 years of service.
To achieve this amount of reserve required for 33 years, would be about $875 per month.
Assuming a 6% return, this would mean an investment of some $208,000 in present day money over the course of 33 years.
Not entirely a "break the bank" scenario to me.
Time.
Value.
Of.
Money.
(edit)
The above calculation is what the City of San Antonio would have to set aside to save up for their fireman's pensions.
Assumptions:
22 year old firefighter works for 33 years and retires at age 55, living to age 85.
3% inflation, 6% investment yield for city reserving fund over the entire 68 year span
Cosmic Cowboy, using "simple math" came up with $2.5M future dollars spent on the fireman's pension.
I came up with $1.6M, to be arrived at by setting aside $875/month over the course of the firefighters working years. I assume this is mostly done by the city, with some possible matching done by the firefighter himself.
Now, I ask again:
Is this an unreasonable amount of money to pay a firefighter?
Last edited by RandomGuy; 02-25-2011 at 03:02 PM.
Reason is libertarian.
What's this VRWC acronym you are constantly spewing?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
