Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just wondering if it gonna affect school, transportation,goverment programs etc... is this s hitting the fan in detroit and will it spread?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,643 Posts
I am betting it won't be called a bail out. They will stiff the creditors big time. They will funnel money to City workers pension funds.
Then Obama will slip in the back door with some cash for schools and other services that he takes from the rest of us.
Time line election 2016.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
In Stockton union contracts and retirement guarantees are 100% in tact. Creditors who will lose are suing about that but have lost every decision thus far. I have heard it said Detrioit cant fund that, so it will be interesting. If I ws well off and lived there I'd get the $&@K out right now.

There will be money for the unions, if anyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,068 Posts
Bammy will have to do something. I expect it will be something behind the scenes as Smitty suggests. It cannot be too overt, at least not before the 2014 elections. But he also has to let his boyz in Chicago know that he has their back. I expect that when Chicago melts down, it will look a lot like when New York City blew up in the late 70's and early 80's, except they will never elect a Giuliani to put the pieces back together. So Bammy has to let them know that he will cover the losses, just not too directly.

What does scare me, from a prepper perspective, is what happens if/when we start getting a whole rash of municipal bankruptcies from cities the size of Stockton, CA and smaller. No one of them is enough to capture national headlines (beyond a day or two), but taken together it could cause a problem as big or bigger than the housing crash in 2008-09. Municipal bonds are a big time favorite of pension funds and other low-risk retirement funds. If/when they start to fall, it could cause a domino effect even for cities that have been relatively responsible if they have a guaranteed benefits plan for their workers. That might get ugly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,373 Posts
How long a go was it they bailed New York out...It's been a while. Though I don't think they were as bad off then as Detroit is now. Was it in the 70's? Somebody may remember it, the point being, The expense of bailing out Detroit will be a drop In the bucket compared to the waste and fraud that occurs in medicaid/welfare and other such social programs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,211 Posts
Just the beginning, . . . you can only shuffle losses so long on a table until they start falling off.

Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Houston, Baltimore, Atlanta, New Orleans, St. Louis: none of them are sitting in tall cotton.

Once the bankruptcy begins to take hold, . . . it will start dragging down the rest of the economy.

Just consider the outrage we saw a few months back when the unions trashed Madison, Wisconsin to the tune of several million dollars, . . . their thug mentality when they don't get their monthly allotment will make the 60's riots look like a May Day dance.

Unions have always lived up to the fact that "Union" was the first word of USSR, . . . and they fully will participate using the typical USSR thuggery.

May God bless,
Dwight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,588 Posts
If anything resembling a bailout is given to Detroit, every other city that is in financial straits will be lining up for theirs.
You can bet they are all watching this very closely.
As I said, something, somehow, will likely be done for the unions, but no one else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,373 Posts
Just another reason to live as far away from a city as possible.

Bailing out Detroit won't solve the problem, it may shift the focus or alter the appearance of the problem, but it won't solve the problem.

Government is in some kind of a weird problem solving feedback loop. They solve (or think they solve) a problem, their solution creates another problem to solve, which they solve which in turn creates another problem for them to solve. Job security?

It's as if they have lost sight of the original problem, which they shouldn't have tried to solve in the first place. It's like they lack a fundamental understanding of the nature of problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,702 Posts
We will have to pay for it.we do eventually anyway.I can think of alot of better uses for my tax dollars,they screwed it all up let them swim for it or sink.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
We hear the usual complaints about Union Pensions. I've spent most of my adult life working in "right to work" states so maybe I'm missing some thing, My observation is that PERS is usually a slush fund for politicians giving themselves loans or raking off collected interest. The issue is not that public employees get a pension but that other working Americans don't. Why do we pay junkies, gluttons and alcoholics not to work? Subsidize work you get productivity. Subsidize laziness you get sloth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
You mean 2014 election. The 2016 means very little to o'failure. He'd like "his house" back before 2014 so he can ram something else down the public's throat like obamascare

I am betting it won't be called a bail out. They will stiff the creditors big time. They will funnel money to City workers pension funds.
Then Obama will slip in the back door with some cash for schools and other services that he takes from the rest of us.
Time line election 2016.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
There are three crimes in PERS or any other govt. engaged defined benefit pension plan. All three are killing the system and which one is worse I don't know:

1) Government agencies are not adequately funding them. They simply don't set aside enough money with each pay check to provide for the defined benefit.
2) There is no change in the defined benefit when market conditions change. There were people signed in the 90's/00's that expect phat pay outs because
the payout was promised on returns from that era and when the market corrected they never corrected their expecations one dollar = shortfall big time.
3) The one that bothers me most and most complicated but should not be understated is the "gaming" fo the system by unionites and bureacrats. This is
a long explanation and please don't think its rare - its not:

An employee makes, lets say $60,000, on average for 20 years and is gauranteed 50% of their pay for life after 20 years of service - so $30,000 a year right?
The city/county/state whatever sets aside the "right" amount for them each year and it should all be there right? There should be enough invested to pay
them $30,000 a year for life. Except this gamer decided to work an extra year or two. This happens in every agency, but I'm going to use schools as an
example. They decide to be vice principle year 21 and for that they get $90,000. In year 22 they get promoted to curriculum pinciple and earn $110,000
and now they retire. Their CONTRACT entitles them to 50% of their average pay of the last 2 years. That is now $100,000 average and their retirement
just went from $30,000 to $50,000 a year for LIFE. The schools did not set aside the money to compensate them for life at $50k a year but $30k a year
and the schools retirement plan is now short the capital it takes to produce $50k a year vs $30k a year as they earned. That is the GAMING of the
defined benefit plan and I know for a FACT many public agencies base the entire retirement off the ONE last year of their service. Which is stupid pathetic.

We hear the usual complaints about Union Pensions. I've spent most of my adult life working in "right to work" states so maybe I'm missing some thing, My observation is that PERS is usually a slush fund for politicians giving themselves loans or raking off collected interest. The issue is not that public employees get a pension but that other working Americans don't. Why do we pay junkies, gluttons and alcoholics not to work? Subsidize work you get productivity. Subsidize laziness you get sloth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
There are three crimes in PERS or any other govt. engaged defined benefit pension plan. All three are killing the system and which one is worse I don't know:

1) Government agencies are not adequately funding them. They simply don't set aside enough money with each pay check to provide for the defined benefit.
2) There is no change in the defined benefit when market conditions change. There were people signed in the 90's/00's that expect phat pay outs because
the payout was promised on returns from that era and when the market corrected they never corrected their expecations one dollar = shortfall big time.
3) The one that bothers me most and most complicated but should not be understated is the "gaming" fo the system by unionites and bureacrats. This is
a long explanation and please don't think its rare - its not:

An employee makes, lets say $60,000, on average for 20 years and is gauranteed 50% of their pay for life after 20 years of service - so $30,000 a year right?
The city/county/state whatever sets aside the "right" amount for them each year and it should all be there right? There should be enough invested to pay
them $30,000 a year for life. Except this gamer decided to work an extra year or two. This happens in every agency, but I'm going to use schools as an
example. They decide to be vice principle year 21 and for that they get $90,000. In year 22 they get promoted to curriculum pinciple and earn $110,000
and now they retire. Their CONTRACT entitles them to 50% of their average pay of the last 2 years. That is now $100,000 average and their retirement
just went from $30,000 to $50,000 a year for LIFE. The schools did not set aside the money to compensate them for life at $50k a year but $30k a year
and the schools retirement plan is now short the capital it takes to produce $50k a year vs $30k a year as they earned. That is the GAMING of the
defined benefit plan and I know for a FACT many public agencies base the entire retirement off the ONE last year of their service. Which is stupid pathetic.
I can understand the need for reform. However still begs the question as a society are we going to reward people for working or taking?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
As a society we do both right now. Govt employees are now the best paid employees in the world. Earnings in the private sector have corrected but public employees keep on taking and getting more. Reform would be fine, and you'd even think common sense. If you said to the employees we'll give you a defined benefit based on your total pay for total number of years it'd be fair right (no gaming); you watch how they'd kick and scream how unfair that some how - is? I'd say they would also have to accept that with ups and downs in the market their return (defined benefit) might change. And finally the govt entity needs to set aside the money - no more waiting for the retiree claim to put in the money.

I can understand the need for reform. However still begs the question as a society are we going to reward people for working or taking?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
As a society we do both right now. Govt employees are now the best paid employees in the world. Earnings in the private sector have corrected but public employees keep on taking and getting more. Reform would be fine, and you'd even think common sense. If you said to the employees we'll give you a defined benefit based on your total pay for total number of years it'd be fair right (no gaming); you watch how they'd kick and scream how unfair that some how - is? I'd say they would also have to accept that with ups and downs in the market their return (defined benefit) might change. And finally the govt entity needs to set aside the money - no more waiting for the retiree claim to put in the money.
Sorry guy your broad brush is invalidating your argument
State of Nevada Employees have taken repeated cuts to both wages and benefits the result is prior to my retirement last year I was taking home less than I had seven years before despite receiving a promotion. Recently the state with great fan fare announced they were giving back what had been taken away. They didn't mention what they gave back was 2.5% (Far less than they took) They also failed to mention that this coincided with an increase in PERS contributions that ate up the return and a call that since NVPERS was over funded that politicians should be given greater access to the fund to address the states economic woes. I don't think PERS is over funded now but I guarantee it would not be if that came to pass. A popular tactic when attacking compensation packages for state employees is to lump them in with higher compensated City, County and Federal employees as "Government Workers" Another discrepancy is to lump them in with appointed employees who often set their own compensation packages the Director of my former Dept. is paid approx $75K above his pay grade similar findings have been found on Deputy Directors and don't even get started on gubernatorial staff. How did they justify this?That they had saved the state money. What money? The wage cuts, staffing reductions and furloughs they had inflicted on the line staff who do the work. When you hear these arguments(Mine included) consider motivations and what they are not telling you. In my case at least if you think of anything I'll be happy to answer.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,645 Posts
As a society we do both right now. Govt employees are now the best paid employees in the world. Earnings in the private sector have corrected but public employees keep on taking and getting more. Reform would be fine, and you'd even think common sense. If you said to the employees we'll give you a defined benefit based on your total pay for total number of years it'd be fair right (no gaming); you watch how they'd kick and scream how unfair that some how - is? I'd say they would also have to accept that with ups and downs in the market their return (defined benefit) might change. And finally the govt entity needs to set aside the money - no more waiting for the retiree claim to put in the money.
Sorry to bust your bubble there but that is not the truth here. I work for the State of Texas. I have only been with the agency 5 yrs but in that time we have not had a raise until this year. It's a whoppin 1% or $50 per month, whichever is greater. I don't know about other places but we aren't getting rich. Oh, and BTW, me and my co-workers will get the $50.

That could possibly be true for federal employee's but not the state, county or city folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
With out malice I was accused of painting with a broad brush, but you two fine Preppers are painting with a razor sharp pencil, and my facts are correct;

Which federal worker job pays better: Government or private? - Jan. 31, 2012

Only one group of public employees trails the private sector and that is those with advanced degrees.

Sorry to bust your bubble there but that is not the truth here. I work for the State of Texas. I have only been with the agency 5 yrs but in that time we have not had a raise until this year. It's a whoppin 1% or $50 per month, whichever is greater. I don't know about other places but we aren't getting rich. Oh, and BTW, me and my co-workers will get the $50.

That could possibly be true for federal employee's but not the state, county or city folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,373 Posts
PS while you guys may not have had raises or suffered furloughs the private sector has slashed wages, hours and benefits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,799 Posts
What will happen now you ask? The same thing that happened for Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae, for Chrysler, for Chevy and Solendra. The Tax payers one way or the other are going to end up picking up the check. And you can bet several other cities will be right behind them with their hands out too! So get the KY out...
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top