Originally Posted by UGLY

Ban it is not a matter of making people feel bad. The facts are the facts. The states can not afford the pensions that are now offered. I dont blame the teachers for accepting what they are offered. I do blame the unions for not compromising in order to strengthen the state economies. Here in Denver we passed an amendment that limited tax spending and all new taxes would have to pass a majority vote. When we did that the liberal congress passed a law that gave teachers a raise every year. So no more revenues are being generated but the expenditures are increasing.

All public employees are under fire, especially considering 90% of the people in America do not have such good retirement.

Another thing you act as if you do the job because of some selfless devotion to the youth of today. That is not the case, you do it because it is a job that pays, you make a living from it. If you did merely to serve then you would volunteer your time.

Instead of making this an emotional debate, debate the issue on its merit. Can states afford to keep paying these pensions and why.

Our union, as well as all unions in Iowa, have made TONS of concessions. I can speak for our own union from firsthand experience, and all unions in Iowa based on a recent Des Moines Register article detailing which concessions our unions have made.

Don't you think it's a bit presumptive to assume why I do my job?! Seriously? You, or anyone else, aside from my wife, has no idea why I do my job, and you' be surprised to learn that it has a TON more to do with your simple run down, aside from my apparent "self-interest." That may be the most ignorant thing I've ever seen you write, assuming you know why I do my job; only for the money.

I'm actually insulted...

Originally Posted by quinn14

Come on Ban, let us not get away from facts. If my retirement depended on tax dollars only, then of course I would support tax increases. I just showed you how teachers in Ohio are paid. THey are paid by tax payers and get their pensions from tax payers. What they contribute to their own retirement takes away what they would pay from mine (social security). Only because government controls stuff like this, is the fact that it can happen.
Try working at McDonalds and telling the state that you will stop paying a certain percentage of taxes to SS and you will be putting it into your own account. It wouldn't happen. Come on, Ban, realize that government is crooked and count your blessings if you are on their dole.

Also, don't forget that Bush tried to get a plan passed where every worker in America could use a portion of their SS taxes towards their own 401k plan and he was called a jackass for it.

Retirement doesn't rely on tax payer dollars only; that's the point of the article that I posted. Only 14%, on average, comes from taxpayers, the rest is contributed by the employees. That is a myth. Maybe Ohio is different, but it isn't the norm. In addition, and also like I said, public employees are tax payers as well, so they also contribute to this "public dole."

Our state is in much better shape than most, so we aren't having this debate like other states are. I'm assuming that it will come, but for now, we are in decent shape in Iowa.

Originally Posted by quinn14

Also, don't forget that Bush tried to get a plan passed where every worker in America could use a portion of their SS taxes towards their own 401k plan and he was called a jackass for it.

For the record, I actually support(ed) this idea. Yes, I'm a democrat, but not so partisan as to not see good ideas.

However, it would need some revisions, as this will be nothing but a windfall for investment companies. Perhaps some concessions on their part by way of giving up on some tax breaks?

Originally Posted by UGLY

Again you have got to tell me how people who are paid by taxes are actually tax payers.

Also I do not presume why you do your job. I only presume that you would not invest the time and effort for free. If you are a servant, that implies to me either indentured or works for free.

You tell me what the largest burdens of a state budget are.

Do educators pay taxes? If so, then are they also not directly paying into public sector salaries, including others within education, police, fire, city workers, etc? In fact, if they make as much as you claim-administrators and college coaches certainly do-are they not paying more in taxes than others?

How could I work for free? How could I work full-time in education for free, yet find time to work another full-time job to provide livelihood? You may hate your job where you have no concept that people can actually love their work and what they do while getting paid for it, but some do love their job while getting paid for it. Trust me, I've worked my crap jobs long before I ever found something that I loved and felt I was doing good things by my work. Ask Spider if he would do his work for free. I know he loves it and is dedicated to it, so ask him why he doesn't work for free.

The largest share of the Iowa budget is education (I won't use the word "burden," as educators aren't burdens). However, because we operate under the business model by providing welfare to business and don't calculate that as "expense," I promise you that business tax breaks, credits, cash assistance, free land, etc, etc, costs us FAR more than education does. In Iowa alone, it's about $100 million per year in corporate welfare, FAR more than what we spend on education. And, for what? High CEO salaries, lowering wages, lost benefits, and jobs shipped overseas. THAT, my friend, is a waste. Iowa's educational system is lucky, as it costs us less than most, and our kids' scores are always among the highest in the country.

Sorry, I'm not going to bow down and apologize because (1) I like my job (2) I've worked hard to educate myself to earn this position and (3) because I am a public employee.

You ought to be ashamed that your bitterness against public employees and your hatred of your own job is so strong that you condemn those who are trying to do what's best for people. Try consulting your apparent "Christian" principles for once. You certainly don't sound like the Jesus that speaks in our church.

Over and out...

Originally Posted by UGLY

We agree about the personal ss accounts 100%

How are these 'personal ss account' different than just not having social security?