Given the SAME rate of pay, the SAME years of service, and the SAME age at retirement (e.g., 30 years of service retiring at age 60) the Taxpayer paid-for share of the TYPICAL Public Sector pension is 2-4 times (6 times for safety workers) greater than the pension of the Private sector counterpart. In addition, while Retiree healthcare is often free or heavily subsidized in the Public Sector, this benefit has almost disappeared in the Private Sector.

The upshot of roughly equal “cash pay” but far far greater pensions and benefits in the Public Sector is far far greater Public Sector “total compensation” (pay + pensions + benefits). This is unnecessary to attract and retain a qualified workforce, is extraordinarily expensive and unsustainable, and is grossly unfair to taxpayers whose contribution (and the investment earnings thereon) routinely pay for 80-90% of Public Sector pensions.

It is SOOOOO way past time for a 50+% haircut … and for CURRENT, not just new workers.

You won’t need Rex or anyone else. The “math” will take care of it in due time. The longer reform is fought the uglier the forced-by-necessity reform will be

The highest paid pensioners in Central Falls RI were cops and FF’s and they took 55% pension cuts.

But they were in a huge scam where they were getting 5%-6% ANNUAL COLA’s. That is simply ridiculous. The highest paid pensioner retired at $63K in 1992, and after 20 years his pension had TRIPLED his highest years pay, he had a $190K pension, 3 times the highest he ever made while actually working. It is this kind of scamming/abuse that has brought the problem to public pensions. seesaw doesn’t get it. She will try to defend this scam, which hurts her and others like her who have modest pensions and did not abuse or scam the system, like SB400 did and all others where pensions were raised retroactively, a complete scam of public funds.

Actually seesaw they are % of the general fund, incoming taxes, aka revenue. In most muni’s pensions costs are in the 10%-20% range, and they are rising exponentially and will hot 30% to 50% if the pensions are not cut within a decade in many cities.

Statewide the pensions costs with state employees and schools is 9%. Since most state money passes thru to the local counties and cities that number is at least another 10%. That si 19% total statewide. It simply cannot be met at the rate it is rising.

The $100K club is only 3% of gov retirees, but the cost of that 3% is 15% of the pension costs. Do the math, once that $100K club hits 10% over HALF the pension costs will go to that 10%. Math simply won’t work. In 2005 there were only 1,500 in the $100K club, today there are 13K in the $100K club. That is in just 6 years it went up almost 10 FOLD.

Pension cuts are coming to EVERYONE in CA and every where else who have $100K pensions at ages 65 and below.

The pensions are going to fail even if there WERE a tax increase, the costs are exponential, there is simply never going to eb enough money to fund $100K plus pensions (and $60K+ and $80K+ pensions) to people who are 50, 55 or even 60. Average person will live to age 85. We will have more money being paid out to “retirees” and their pensions than current employees.

Plus there is NO chance of the voters increasing the sales tax. I Have been saying this forever, the sales tax is DOA. They tried it in San Diego, it failed by a landslide 3-1 margin. It will be no different statewide. The voters are FULLY aware that the sales tax increase is not and never will be “temporary” and they knwo it is for pensions and they will simply not approve it. Take that to the bank. The sales tax is DOA.