The President and the Union movement....

[Guest]

Since our current President was sworn in, you keep hearing from his followers, and that includes the few on here about how important things like the stimulus bill were.

I have maintained that the "stimulus" bill was loaded with a lot of little "traps" but we are just learning more and more about the relationship of this President and unions...

"...he included special restrictions on much of the economic-stimulus funds, requiring that large portions of the $787 billion be used only on projects involving unionized workers. The stimulus also included “Buy American” clauses that infuriated our trading partners. Though Obama was said to oppose adding trade restrictions to the bill, that didn’t stop him from signing it.

This article from Bloomberg goes into much of this President's love affair with unions and is one more example of where this is going...

"President Barack Obama’s union with labor unions has become a marriage made in hell. If he wants to save his presidency, and his party, he should seek a divorce.

When Obama met with House Republicans last month, he chastised them for mischaracterizing his health-care agenda. “You’d think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot,” he said. It’s not, of course, but Republicans can be forgiven for observing the truth that this president has been more in the tank for the labor movement than any U.S. president since World War II.

It certainly has made great financial sense for the president to align himself with the unions. After all, organized labor spent more than $100 million in the last election supporting Democrats. And for unions, the investment looks like a good one. Since taking office, Obama has doggedly pursued their agenda".

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aJarhKRzqHqY


And by the way, wouldnt it be great if our President held a news conference ?

[Guest]

In a town in Rhode Island, they asked the teachers to work a few minute more a day to help students and they refused. They average $78,000-80,000 while the average worker in the town makes $22,000.

They fired all the teachers. Hooray!!!!!!!!!
http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-unionized-rhode-island-teachers-refuse-to-work-25-minutes-more-per-day-so-town-fires-all-of-them-2010-2

[Guest]

Late 70's and early 80's employment was over 20,000. Early 21st century...2000-2005 employment was 6,000.....today there is only administration left around 2000.
Very strong, unyielding union, very highly paid members = thousands with no jobs and the loss of a manufacturing dynasty to off shore facilities.
We used to proudly brag that with all the "stuff" going off shore you can still buy GE major appliances made in the good old USA....until the unions drove a stake in the heart of the business.
Unions and high cost, plus spineless management = loss of USA manufacturing and the related jobs to offshore. Pick an industry that relies on manufacturing. Check out the employment losses over the last 50 years.
When you find the number of jobs lost is in the millions you may begin to understand the country needs manufacturing based businesses to get the country back on track.
ANother comment about the management of theses companies: they decimated manufacturing in the USA to lower costs, hence increase profitability....right? And the after all the manufacturing is off shore and costs are lower, using automotive as the example this time.....they go bankrupt......unions with selfish high paid leadership in conjunction with selfish high paid management, supported and complimented by a selfish and high do nothing government both local and federal = the problem we have today. There is no mystery. And Bush didn't do it. It has been in the works under every POTUS for the last 50 years.

So when I personally see and hear the alignment of Obama and the unions there is absolutely no good that can come from such affinity.....and there will CERTAINLY be no return of lost or new manufacturing under such a relationship. Only votes!!!!

btk

[Guest]

Obama has surrounded himself with public sector hacks. Most of cabinet and Czars have never worked in the private sector. Is it any wonder we are losing millions of jobs and have created absolutely zero new private sector jobs? Hurry 2012.

[Guest]

If it's any consolation, the millions of dollars of stimulus money that NH got to speed up a major road project (Manchester Airport connector highway linking the airport to the Everett Turnpike to get the traffic off local roads) is NOT being spent on union workers.

[Guest]

I have to control my temper and emotions when unions are brought into a discussion.

I have personally met Richard Trumka in a professional manner back when he was the president of the United Mine Workers of America. My then husband was breaking his back as a steelworker and member of the UMWA while Trumka stepped on him and other union workers to rise to his present -day position as president of the AFL-CIO - making more than $238,975 in annual salary (not to mention benefits and perks and his hefty promise of retirement benefits).

We paid union dues even though my exhusband drove hundreds of miles and spent weeks away from home to work at non-union jobs. His loyalty to the union was well bred and well intended, although I doubt he'll ever have enough hours working union jobs to get any benefits from paying the weekly dues.

The history of the labor union where I grewup, the UMWA, was paved with the best intentions for the safety, health and well fair of good, decent, honest, hard workers. It's turned into a greed infested cesspool of double talking suits with offices in DC. Sorry, but that felt sorta' good.

The number of union members has dropped so dramatically that the union leaders are fighting in other countries, IMHO not to help workers but to help themselves keep positions of influence and keep large salaries.

Sorry, but that felt sorta' good. Now, if you wanna know how I really feel about unions in New England....

[Guest]

Wow Donna,might there be a little "spin" in your post?
I am not defending the teachers or the superintendent for what happened in R.I. I am however going to give the facts of the case.Thisis what teachers were TOLD they had to do:
Add 25 minutes to the school day
private tutoring before and after school
eating lunch with students once a week
submitting to more rigorous evaluation
attending weekly after school planning sessions
participating in 2 weeks of training in the summer
As for the salaries.....I thought thet were a little high...with a doctorate degree and 10 years teaching $70,190....starting salary..$33,815 and average salary for a R.I. teacher...$54,730. These figures are from the R.I. State Board of Ed. I think your figures might have been fudged a little.
I also might add that I'm a little disappointed in your reaction to 100 people losing their jobs. I would imagine that many of them have families to support.

[Guest]

Here is the story Donna was referring to:

http://www.projo.com/news/content/Providence_schools_plan_02-16-10_KGHFE4H_v25.3a633af.html

To me, it isn't a matter of wanting to see someone "lose" their job; it's a matter of wanting to keep your job. If you see the economy taking a turn in a downward position, collective bargaining agreements or not; what do you do when your job may be on the line because there isn't enough tax payer money coming in to support your position at the current pay level with benefits.

I'm not calling teachers mobsters by any stretch of the imagination. I have nothing but admiration and respect for good teachers. But let's face it, part of Rhode Island's union problems historically stem from the background on this story on the front page of today's Providence Journal:

http://newsblog.projo.com/2010/02/bobo-marrapese-arrested-for-pa.html

[Guest]

this really has very little to do with money. The teachers are not asking for raises. This has more to do with" No Child Left Behind" and the complete collapse of parenting in America. If theres a lot of crime do we fire all the policemen and women? If there are lots of fires(California)should we fire all the fireffighters? There are really 2 things going on here. I have already mentioned the horrible parenting going on(almost everyday in the newspaper there is a story) and as more of a hidden agenda the elimination of collective bargaining not just for teachers but for everyone else.
And I hope cunningham is not saying that contracts that are collectively bargained should be ignored because the times aren't as good as they were.

[Guest]

Wow Donna,might there be a little "spin" in your post?
I am not defending the teachers or the superintendent for what happened in R.I. I am however going to give the facts of the case.Thisis what teachers were TOLD they had to do:
Add 25 minutes to the school day
private tutoring before and after school
eating lunch with students once a week
submitting to more rigorous evaluation
attending weekly after school planning sessions
participating in 2 weeks of training in the summer
As for the salaries.....I thought thet were a little high...with a doctorate degree and 10 years teaching $70,190....starting salary..$33,815 and average salary for a R.I. teacher...$54,730. These figures are from the R.I. State Board of Ed. I think your figures might have been fudged a little.
I also might add that I'm a little disappointed in your reaction to 100 people losing their jobs. I would imagine that many of them have families to support.

I am a bit confused WAYNET.....


I read the link supplied by DONNA2.....Your response adds a bit and subtracts a bit WITH NO CREDIBLE LINK !

Could you please supply the source of YOUR EXTRA INFORMATION ?

Thanks

[Guest]

Bucco, if Waynet will allow me, here is a link to the six conditions presented to the union AFTER they refused a list of four other offers included in the state's "Transformational Model Intervention" at Central Falls High School by school superintendent Frances Gallo. The union refused these final conditions because the teachers would not receive additional pay.

http://www.projo.com/ri/centralfalls/content/projo20100211_cfhighschool_keypoints.1094bb3d0.htm l

Here is a little of the background that led to firing 74 teachers:

http://www.projo.com/ri/centralfalls/content/central_falls_update_02-11-10_5HHDMPV_v52.398afed.html

From PROJO: Money was a sticking point. The superintendent (Central Falls School Supt. Frances Gallo) said she could not pay teachers for all the extra work she expected of them.

Gallo said she offered to pay teachers $30 an hour for two additional weeks of training in the summer. Gallo also said she would try to find grant money to pay teachers for 90 minutes a week of after-school planning time, also at $30 an hour.

But she says she has no extra money to pay for other changes she is pushing for, including lengthening the instructional day by 25 minutes, so teachers work 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. instead of 7:50 a.m. to 2:25 p.m. She wants teachers to formalize a rotating tutoring schedule, so a teacher is available to help students for an hour before or after school, and she wants teachers to have lunch with students one day a week.

“Right now, they have no duties,” Gallo said. “But I don’t want them to see lunch as a duty. I want them to establish true relationships with not a few students, but all students.”

The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step, Gallo said. Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities."

[Guest]

this really has very little to do with money. The teachers are not asking for raises. This has more to do with" No Child Left Behind" and the complete collapse of parenting in America. If theres a lot of crime do we fire all the policemen and women? If there are lots of fires(California)should we fire all the fireffighters? There are really 2 things going on here. I have already mentioned the horrible parenting going on(almost everyday in the newspaper there is a story) and as more of a hidden agenda the elimination of collective bargaining not just for teachers but for everyone else.
And I hope cunningham is not saying that contracts that are collectively bargained should be ignored because the times aren't as good as they were.

When people making alot less money in the private sector are asked to multi-task and go above and beyond to keep their jobs, I do not think it is asking too much for public employees to give a little more too.
These "teachers" are making two to three times what the average private sector job pays.
And remember, public employees are payed by,we the taxpayers, which, by the way, are the employers.

[Guest]

Bucco, if Waynet will allow me, here is a link to the six conditions presented to the union AFTER they refused a list of four other offers included in the state's "Transformational Model Intervention" at Central Falls High School by school superintendent Frances Gallo. The union refused these final conditions because the teachers would not receive additional pay.

http://www.projo.com/ri/centralfalls/content/projo20100211_cfhighschool_keypoints.1094bb3d0.htm l

Here is a little of the background that led to firing 74 teachers:

http://www.projo.com/ri/centralfalls/content/central_falls_update_02-11-10_5HHDMPV_v52.398afed.html

From PROJO: Money was a sticking point. The superintendent (Central Falls School Supt. Frances Gallo) said she could not pay teachers for all the extra work she expected of them.

Gallo said she offered to pay teachers $30 an hour for two additional weeks of training in the summer. Gallo also said she would try to find grant money to pay teachers for 90 minutes a week of after-school planning time, also at $30 an hour.

But she says she has no extra money to pay for other changes she is pushing for, including lengthening the instructional day by 25 minutes, so teachers work 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. instead of 7:50 a.m. to 2:25 p.m. She wants teachers to formalize a rotating tutoring schedule, so a teacher is available to help students for an hour before or after school, and she wants teachers to have lunch with students one day a week.

“Right now, they have no duties,” Gallo said. “But I don’t want them to see lunch as a duty. I want them to establish true relationships with not a few students, but all students.”

The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step, Gallo said. Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities."


Thanks BK...I am married to a gal who taught for about 35 years and thus had interest in this, and just wanted to keep it into perspective ! Not questioning the veracity of Wayne, but links are important ESPECIALLY with localized stories !

Thanks again.....gotta tell you...my wife has been retired for about 15 years and never even got close to those salaries (wonder where Wayne got his)....but most of those duties were commonplace for her with no extra pay !

[Guest]

You are welcome Bucco. I have nothing but respect for good teachers. Those salaries don't reflect all of the pay either. Those figures are just basic steps and don't include extra pay for extra degrees and so forth. But remember, this is Rhode Island. The state requires monitors on elementary school buses. These monitors, who are union members, get off of the bus at stops and assure there are no children in the bus' path. When I lived in RI three years ago, these monitors in one town made $45 an hour and were guaranteed four hours of pay per day, five days a week. This at a cost of $11.7 million annually. I'd wager a bet that your wife didn't make that kind of money.

http://www.projo.com/opinion/editorials/content/ED_mandate31_01-31-09_CAD3HCC_v24.401fd50.html

[Guest]

www.teacher-world.com/teacher-salary/rhode-island is the link for their salaries. If this doesn't work just google teacher salaries rhode island. I think the numbers are a bit high because Rhode Island is ranked I believe 15th in salaries.
As for the 6 points I don't think I added or subtracted anything from them.

But Donna the average salary in R.I. is $54,730 and thats with a B.S.degree and a Masters. Do you really think that that's 2-3 times more than the private sector?

As I said in my first post I am not defending either side but at least lets be fair.

[Guest]

link didn't print correctly
www.teacher-world.com/teacher-salary/rhode-island

[Guest]

Please,please those salaries absolutely,definitely take into account the degrees earned plus years of service. They are not base salaries. Teachers in R.I. start at $33,815. That is their base salary.

[Guest]

No, Waynet, I'm sorry you may have misunderstood. Those salary figures are not beginning step pay numbers, but the average high school teacher salaries at Central High School according to the school's superintendent. According to super. Supt. Frances Gallo in a Providence Journal article, "The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step . Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities."

[Guest]

So WAYNET....can I assume that you support the President's backing of and supporting with legislation unions ?

[Guest]

No, Waynet, I'm sorry you may have misunderstood. Those salary figures are not beginning step pay numbers, but the average high school teacher salaries at Central High School according to the school's superintendent. According to super. Supt. Frances Gallo in a Providence Journal article, "The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step . Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities."

Unbelievable.. It used to an honorable job for average money and good perks. Now it is great money and great perks and no heavy lifting.

[Guest]

No, Waynet, I'm sorry you may have misunderstood. Those salary figures are not beginning step pay numbers, but the average high school teacher salaries at Central High School according to the school's superintendent. According to super. Supt. Frances Gallo in a Providence Journal article, "The average teacher’s salary at the high school ranges between $72,000 and $78,000 a year, because most are at the district’s top step . Union officials have been pushing for $90 per hour and want the district to pay for more of the additional responsibilities."This is another "bubble" that will soon burst.

[Guest]

This is another "bubble" that will soon burst.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQVK-EMZK-8&feature=player_embedded#
It sure is. How would you like to retire at 75-80% of your average of the last 4 years on the job? Illinois "teachers" are costing their state Billions every year.
Average Social Security is what $14,000? How about 80% of $70,000? Many teachers will get 50-$60,000 dollars a year to live on. Pension funds will not cover it so the taxpayers will?

[Guest]

Donna'I can only speak for Connecticut but I am fairly sure that all states operate the same way with minor differences. Connecticut is 70% of top 3 years. Here is the point that your message neglects to point out.TEACHERS PAY INTO THEIR OWN RETIREMENTS SEPERATE FROM OTHER STATE ACCOUNTS. As a matter of fact we recently had to enact a state amendment to protect our account because the state kept borrowing money form it and not paying it back. So,after 35 years of teaching a CT. teacher gets about $56,000. Is that so bad? Anyone who says we cost states billions of dollars just does not know what they are talking about.
Why is it that anytime we have bad economic times the teachers are the first group blamed?
By the way,at least in CT.most of us also have to pay our own health insurance out of this pension. For me and my wife that's $14,000 per year.
Also in CT even if we have accumulated the necessary credits to collect social security we BY LAW CANNOT. That's right we pay in and get NOTHING out so our retirement is all we have.

[Guest]

Donna'I can only speak for Connecticut but I am fairly sure that all states operate the same way with minor differences. Connecticut is 70% of top 3 years. Here is the point that your message neglects to point out.TEACHERS PAY INTO THEIR OWN RETIREMENTS SEPERATE FROM OTHER STATE ACCOUNTS. As a matter of fact we recently had to enact a state amendment to protect our account because the state kept borrowing money form it and not paying it back. So,after 35 years of teaching a CT. teacher gets about $56,000. Is that so bad? Anyone who says we cost states billions of dollars just does not know what they are talking about.
Why is it that anytime we have bad economic times the teachers are the first group blamed?
By the way,at least in CT.most of us also have to pay our own health insurance out of this pension. For me and my wife that's $14,000 per year.
Also in CT even if we have accumulated the necessary credits to collect social security we BY LAW CANNOT. That's right we pay in and get NOTHING out so our retirement is all we have.

$56,000 is 4 times what the average SS recipient gets. You think teachers are more deserving then most people? Pensions are dried up most places. Taxpayers will have to pay?

[Guest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQVK-EMZK-8&feature=player_embedded#
It sure is. How would you like to retire at 75-80% of your average of the last 4 years on the job? Illinois "teachers" are costing their state Billions every year.
Average Social Security is what $14,000? How about 80% of $70,000? Many teachers will get 50-$60,000 dollars a year to live on. Pension funds will not cover it so the taxpayers will?Actually..... they wont.... and that is why the bubble will burst. There was recently a review of towns/cities that are facing certain bankruptcy, in part due to unsustainable pensions, education costs, prison costs etc. Here is the rub: raising taxes to cover ever rising costs has resulted in a mass exodus where residents simply can't/wont be extorted any longer. The result-->even LESS revenue coming in to cover the costs. POP--the bubble has burst.

[Guest]

Donna, I will write this again....Teachers pay in to their own retirement at 6% per year. This money is then invested. It is out of this investment that teachers retirement is paid. The cost of teachers pensions to the state is ZERO.
I don't know why you insist on comparing pension plans to S.Security. There is none.
Maybe instead of worrying about teachers you should look at WAll Street.

[Guest]

Unions, Unions, Unions the death of America.

[Guest]

Donna, I will write this again....Teachers pay in to their own retirement at 6% per year. This money is then invested. It is out of this investment that teachers retirement is paid. The cost of teachers pensions to the state is ZERO.
I don't know why you insist on comparing pension plans to S.Security. There is none.
Maybe instead of worrying about teachers you should look at WAll Street.

And I'm telling to again that the pension money is underwater and they expect the taxpayer to pay. Teacher's money is paid by the taxpayers. When you win the million dollar lottery in this state, they give you $50,000 a year before taxes for 20 years. Are you telling me that you have over 1 million in your pension account under your name? So, everybody who became a teacher hit the lottery? Why should social security people eat dog food while the teachers eat filet mignon? After all, all the money originally came from the taxpayers.

[Guest]

You really dont get it do you. The public did pay my salary that part is true.However again for the last time I will tell you. I put in 6% of my salary toward my retirement for 35 years as did every teacher in CT. Thats my money, out of my salary ,not the public. That money is invested and most years has made a profit. The CT fund is upwards of 3 billion dollars and that is where my filet mignon comes from not the public,not the gov't,not you.
How you can begrudge me my well earned pension after working 35 years? That really upsets me. 35 years of teaching B.S. degree,Masters degree,6th year degree all paid for by me to become a better teacher. Why are you so jealous of my pension? I earned it!

[Guest]

You really dont get it do you. The public did pay my salary that part is true.However again for the last time I will tell you. I put in 6% of my salary toward my retirement for 35 years as did every teacher in CT. Thats my money, out of my salary ,not the public. That money is invested and most years has made a profit. The CT fund is upwards of 3 billion dollars and that is where my filet mignon comes from not the public,not the gov't,not you.
How you can begrudge me my well earned pension after working 35 years? That really upsets me. 35 years of teaching B.S. degree,Masters degree,6th year degree all paid for by me to become a better teacher. Why are you so jealous of my pension? I earned it!

You did NOT contribute to Social Security and I did...BUT Social Security is handled just a bit differently !

Is that correct ? You talk as if you did something special...you did contribute to YOUR pension plan...lucky you....I contributed to Social Security and you did not !

That is one question, ie. you didnt contribute to Social Security ? Second one is..you talk as if NO public funds were used for your pension...is that what you are saying ?

[Guest]

You did NOT contribute to Social Security and I did...BUT Social Security is handled just a bit differently !

Is that correct ? You talk as if you did something special...you did contribute to YOUR pension plan...lucky you....I contributed to Social Security and you did not !

That is one question, ie. you didnt contribute to Social Security ? Second one is..you talk as if NO public funds were used for your pension...is that what you are saying ?

Also, we pay 15% for our Social Security...what? you say 7.5%? I paid 71/2% and my employer paid 71/2 %....Slitting it in half is just a FDR trick to make it look better because the employer doesn't care if he pays me or the government, therefore I paid 15% every paycheck for 48 years.

I didn't get summers off or a week off every couple of months either.

All I'm saying is that there is a great injustice to the whole darn system.
Why should I eat dog food?

Edit: My rant is not directed to you Mr. Bucco. Sorry I have your quote in my post.

[Guest]

Bucco,as a teacher in CT when I started teaching we were not allowed to get into the S.Security system because we had our own retirement system.It was not voluntary. However over the years I have paid social security while working at various jobs to subsidize my income. Now that I am retired I cannot by CT. law collect both a pension and Social security so I paid into the system and get nothing back.
As for public funds going into my pension there are none. Our pension is our pension the funds of which come from the teachers only. Why is that so hard for you to believe?

[Guest]

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-state-pensions-0218.artfeb18,0,2842427.story


50 state report pensions have 3.3 trillion liability. Ct, is like in 5th place with billions in liabilities. Talk of starting 401K for state employees.

The bubble is ready to burst.

[Guest]

Bucco,as a teacher in CT when I started teaching we were not allowed to get into the S.Security system because we had our own retirement system.It was not voluntary. However over the years I have paid social security while working at various jobs to subsidize my income. Now that I am retired I cannot by CT. law collect both a pension and Social security so I paid into the system and get nothing back.
As for public funds going into my pension there are none. Our pension is our pension the funds of which come from the teachers only. Why is that so hard for you to believe?

First of all, your other posts on this subject never mentioned that you did not pay into Social Security, which I am sure was an oversight...you "implied" that you paid something extra for your pension which you did not !

Secondly, since I am not up to snuff on CT teacher pension, I will take your word on no taxpayer money but I am sure you then can explain this from the article linked by Donna...

"If left unchecked, the growing unfunded pension liability could eventually force states such as Connecticut to either raise taxes or cut services in order to pay for the pensions that are mandated under union contracts. Though currently underfunded, the pensions must be paid."

[Guest]

To Donna and Bucco.....one more time....WE(TEACHERS)ARE NOT PART OF THE STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM. WE FUND OUR OWN INDEPENDANT RETIREMENT SYSTEM. State of Connecticut workers are under the state plans we are not. It's our money that goes in and with good investment strategies it's our money that pays us. I do understand that states are having difficulties meeting their contrctual obligations for retired workers but for once leave teachers alone. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US!!!!

[Guest]

To Donna and Bucco.....one more time....WE(TEACHERS)ARE NOT PART OF THE STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM. WE FUND OUR OWN INDEPENDANT RETIREMENT SYSTEM. State of Connecticut workers are under the state plans we are not. It's our money that goes in and with good investment strategies it's our money that pays us. I do understand that states are having difficulties meeting their contrctual obligations for retired workers but for once leave teachers alone. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US!!!!


I will not argue with you Wayne, but would ask you to please supply some sort of link, because as a result of your posts, I have done some reading and all of them point to problems with the STATE funding TEACHERS pensions and the possibility of raising taxes to support them.

If that is true I am having trouble with your rationale, but will await the link to support that NO taxpayer money is used for teacher retirement in CT !

Thanks

[Guest]

This is from the webpage of the state of CT....the section outlining how teacher pension benefits are arrived at....

"Your contributions pay only part of the cost of your retirement benefits. The State of Connecticut pays the remaining cost.

http://www.osc.state.ct.us/empret/tier1summ/aboutplan.htm

Will bow if you have other info to the contrary as you are the one who actually lived it !!!

[Guest]

To Donna and Bucco.....one more time....WE(TEACHERS)ARE NOT PART OF THE STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM. WE FUND OUR OWN INDEPENDANT RETIREMENT SYSTEM. State of Connecticut workers are under the state plans we are not. It's our money that goes in and with good investment strategies it's our money that pays us. I do understand that states are having difficulties meeting their contrctual obligations for retired workers but for once leave teachers alone. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US!!!!

Is that a put your head in the sand solution? The teachers organize the biggest boondoggle public employee union and it hasn't got anything to do with teachers?

Seems like nobody wants to look at the real facts. All the entitlement payouts like Medicare, medicaid, social security are all running in the DEEP RED and nobody is addressing it. 78 million baby boomers are retiring and everybody thinks their exempt from all the liabilities.

The Obama team is already looking into stealing the 401K funds like Argentina did.
Look, the name of this thread is "Where did our real wealth go?" The USA is ready to triple our national debt and the unions are begging for money. Social security is in big danger. I just thought we could discuss what we could or should do.
I am scared. Does anybody think these problems will go away?

[Guest]

WAYNENET....Have you found that link to validate you claim that NO taxpayer money is spent on teacher retirement in CT ???

I find this important because I try very hard not to just "say stuff" and pass them off as facts. Opinion is different, but you cant just say stuff to make a point.

If I have strayed, I will surely apologize to you, but I am interested in how you make that statement !

Thank you

[Guest]

Donna, I will write this again....Teachers pay in to their own retirement at 6% per year. This money is then invested. It is out of this investment that teachers retirement is paid. The cost of teachers pensions to the state is ZERO.
I don't know why you insist on comparing pension plans to S.Security. There is none.
Maybe instead of worrying about teachers you should look at WAll Street.Is this statement true or false (Pa. is the reference state): As a result of the economic turmoil and market collapse of 2008 the teaches pension funds declined in value to the point where taxpaye /alternative resources were needed to be tapped to meet current obligations.

I thought that was the case just before I moved.

Are teachers pensions "fixed" or can they collapse (like many 401K's did)?

[Guest]

Is this statement true or false (Pa. is the reference state): As a result of the economic turmoil and market collapse of 2008 the teaches pension funds declined in value to the point where taxpaye /alternative resources were needed to be tapped to meet current obligations.

I thought that was the case just before I moved.

Are teachers pensions "fixed" or can they collapse (like many 401K's did)?
You live by the union, you should die by the union. There should be no taxpayer money going to these unions, ever.

[Guest]

"What’s really going on, I think, is that the nature of class war has changed. The old virus has mutated. The old social and political divisions have given way to two new classes — rather as on the trains. Those in economy are most of us, paying for the comforts of those in first class. And those in first class are the new political class — all those who owe their advancement and their security and their pensions and their privileges not to their backgrounds or their talents, or even necessarily their political parties, but to the state and our taxes."

- Minette Marrin

[Guest]

Bumping this so that WAYNET can respond to the varied questions asked of him

[Guest]

It is very strange that the unions back the democrats.

The unions get their money, to back the democrats, from emplyees of private companies.

When they destroy the companies the Government will own them.

Then the unions will get their money from the Government and they will give it back to the democrats.

If you do not understand this don't worry neither do the unions and the democrats.

[Guest]

Bumping this so that WAYNET can respond to the varied questions asked of himHey Bucco... you can exhale now and stop holding your breath.

[Guest]

It is very strange that the unions back the democrats.

The unions get their money, to back the democrats, from emplyees of private companies.

When they destroy the companies the Government will own them.

Then the unions will get their money from the Government and they will give it back to the democrats.

If you do not understand this don't worry neither do the unions and the democrats.

It is a vicious circle, huh? And the teacher's union takes money from private people ( taxpayers) and set themselves up for life with fat pensions. All in the name of the children.

[Guest]

Donna: Bad metaphor. It's the people in first class subsidizing the low fares of the people in economy class. It is definitely NOT first class riding on the backs of economy class. (Mind you, I say this being the beneficiary of Aer Lingus providing my finacee and I with Boston-London and Dublin-Boston tickets for a grand total of $575 per person ROUND TRIP, Paris to Dublin fare for $0 - yes ZERO - that went up to $200 once all the taxes and fees were added but still a cheap price).