Monday, February 28, 2011

Mystery Money

This one is just too juicy to leave in the comments section. Sean is claiming that taxpayers pay nothing towards government union pensions, citing an article in Forbes.

Here is what he had to say: Denis, the workers have ALREADY AGREED to the PAYCUTS. Forbes: Wisconsin Lie Exposed - Taxpayers Actually Contribute Nothing to Employee Pensions:

Lets get this party started Sean. Where does the pension money come from?


Anonymous said...

As if I need a reminder as to why I read nothing by that "author" - why, the money comes from the Pension Fairy. How stupid can you Republiscab dudes be?

Sean Cranley said...

Read the article first, then if you disagree, explain why you think the author is wrong.

Denis Navratil said...

I read the article and I still think the money has come from the taxpayer. If you believe otherwise,please share with us the source of the money.

BradK said...

I can explain this simply after work... The taxpayer funds the pension because the taxpayer pays the salary. However, the crux of the article is also correct, it's just the explicit description that is off - because the pension is setup as deferred compensation. Again, when I get off of work, I can explain it simply.

Denis Navratil said...

The article makes some accurate points but the headline, that the taxpayer pays nothing for pensions is completely false. Unless by nothing you mean everything. It is a game of semantics that the left is playing because straight speaking just isn't working for them. So they are misleading/lying instead.

Anonymous said...

Taxpayers are not forced to contribute to Democratic candidates. Taxpayers are forced to pay workers, the workers are forced to pay dues, some of the dues are paid to Democratic candidates by well-paid union bigwigs. Get it?

Nemo said...

Anon 11:13, you have hit the crux of the matter for all the hubbub and why Senator Coggs and his ilk have their panties in a bunch over this. Having to raise the 73% of his reported total campaign cash currently made by taking it from working people via union goons is much easier for Spencer than getting it based on his performance. Union goons: when you care enough to take the very most.

Sean Cranley said...

Goons Nemo? What a dor . . . So do you admit that this is about defunding the Democratic Party, by attacking the workers who support them so that an antidemocracy one GOPlutoparty rule can be established?

Anyway, We have already established that public workers are under compensated with respect to comparable private sector workers. And as Brad points out the workers fund their pensions (which are deferred payment) out of their salaries. Which they have earned for their service to the citizens of Wisconsin who pay them the salaries they are owed.

You don't "contribute" to your employee's pay checks Denis, you pay them because you owe them the money they earned. just like if I buy some trinkets at your store, I'm not "contributing" to you pay, I'm paying the money I owe for the goods you provided me.

So when Walker or groups like the Millionaire's Club for Growths or the American's for GOProsperity for Millionaires say that public workers don't contribute to their pensions, and I'll be blunt, they are lying.

Denis Navratil said...

Sean, just curious, are pensions (which consist entirely of deferred compensation, per the article) included in the calculation when you claims that public employees are undercompensated relative to the private sector? How can we calculate a public employees compensation unless we know when they will die? If we are going to compensate public employees, aren't we at least entitled to know how much that compensation is going to cost us? How can you say someone is undercompensated when you can't say what their compensation is?

Sean Cranley said...

Why do you keep asking me questions, that I've already provided the answer for?

In answering your first question again, please review the following which I've copied from my response to you under your post from last Tuesday On No Bid Contracts:

Rutgers Prof Jeffrey Keefe just completed a study which shows that when controlling for education level Wisconsin Public Employees are under compensated by 4.8% compared to similar private sector employees, and that INCLUDES their pension and health insurance benefit packages:

59% of full-time Wisconsin public sector workers hold at least a four-year college degree, compared with 30% of full-time private sector workers. Wisconsin state and local governments pay college-educated employees 25% less in annual compensation, on average, than private employers.

The above was also posted a couple times over at Kay's Blue Racine, first on 2/14 on which you commented 9 times including your first "Odd then that public sector employees never seem to leave for the greener pastures in the private sector." which of course is false, perhaps you remember.

I posted it again in response to you under my post Pander to Payoff Putocrats on KBR on 2/22. I know you read that one because you said you might have a longer response later, but you had achieved a goal (you haven't and you didn't).

As to your second question, the article I linked, which you claim to have read provided the answer, but suffice it to say that there are such things as actuarial tables (perhaps you've heard of them) that financial institutions and insurance comapnies use to predict average lifespans for groups of people, like public employees.

Denis Navratil said...

Sean, what you are basically saying is that in lieu of wages today, current employees will receive payments in their retirement. Since we really don't have the money to pay it all out in wages, it is deferred so that future generations will have to pick up the tab. Note that many of those who will be paying later do not have a vote now. Not to worry though, this generational theft is for the children.

Denis Navratil said...

Sean, help me figure out a teachers compensation using the following example. Teacher works 25 years with an average wage of $60K and an average family health plan valued at $20K. Assuming pensions are simply deferred compensation, and assuming said teacher collects pension of 40K in pension for another 25 years, and, improbably, 0$ in retirement health care, would you say that that teacher is earning $120K per year?

Anonymous said...

Why not ask Sean how come he and all his leftie pals are not protesting Sait Obama since his Federal union employees do not have collective bargaining rights.

Sean Cranley said...

No Denis, the pension money is taken out of the employees wages TODAY and invested in the most efficient way possible with professional money managers overseeing large pools of capital. So the cost is NOT deferred to later generations as you claimed.

I know you said you read the article Denis, but you couldn't have. Are you being truthful? Could you possibly have read the article and NOT understand this? Or perhaps you're just desperately dancing on a losing argument, again.

You think teachers average $60K over a career!? SHEESH! I'm sorry, I sometimes forget when I'm not dealing with a member of the reality based community. There's no point in further discussion of this particular fantasy of yours.

Denis Navratil said...

I guess you don't want to share with us the average compensation of our public school teachers. I can understand that as the comparison with private sector compensation will not help your argument. Talking compensation with a public union stooge is a bit like trying to determine the value of a trade-in vehicle when buying a new car. You get bogged down and you never get a straight answer. So yes, it is probably time to put an end to this discussion, especially as it has been established beyond even your unreasonable doubts that public union pensions do indeed come from the taxpayer.

Sean Cranley said...

You're out of your element Denis!

You could find this information yourself the same way I did, but if you insist on being spoon fed, prior to being shown that your WRONG AGAIN, the average 2009-2010 teacher salary in Wisconsin was $52,644.

Keep in mind that to be a public school teacher, you need to have a bachelors degree and complete a teaching certificate (which often takes an extra year or two of college)

Education and experience level also make a difference in teacher salaries: secondary school teachers in the 90th wage percentile earned $69,550, while the entry-level teacher salary is generally in the $30,000s.

To get to the top of the pay scale cited above you need to have a masters degree or above, which many do.

Geographic location and local cost of living is also a variable:

•Green Bay: $55,110
•Kenosha: $68,400
•Madison: $50,770
•Milwaukee: $54,620
•Racine: $49,710

And of course you are TOTALLY WRONG when you say that comparison with the private sector will not help my case, on the contrary! You force me to post this apples to apples comparison for the umpteenth time. Perhaps this time it will get through your mental armour:

59% of full-time Wisconsin public sector workers hold at least a four-year college degree, compared with 30% of full-time private sector workers (I'll do the math for you Denis, that's almost DOUBLE). Wisconsin state and local governments pay college-educated employees 25% less in annual compensation, on average, than private employers.

And AGAIN, yes the annual compensation INCLUDE BENEFITS!

Mark it strike Dude. You keep settin'em up, I'll keep knockin'em down!