new hampshire senate/house of reps

[topp]

not quite right.  Depends on the state I assume, but, state and local workers pay their percentage of their salary into the respective retirement system.  It was set up this way so our weekly paychecks wouldn't be as much, but, our future was taken care of. This is real money.  What I pay into it benefits those who have already retired. There will be more state, county workers in the future. What they pay into it will pay my way when I'm retired.  That is, until these politicians saw how lucrative it is and they dip their hands in it and it disappears on other projects that benefit everyone else. This system was the healthiest of all state funds and the politicians salivated over it.

The money you pay in, does not, and never has gone to a "big bank account".  You pay out now (along with the taxpayer), for those ALREADY retired....
And when you retire, those working (and the taxpayer) pays your retirement.

That is a Ponzi scheme (those that put in now are paying for those "out" now, and unless new payers are found those out later get nothing.)

From 1983 until recently, Public Unions in VA were not required to pay into their pensions at all.  It was the Taxpayer only that paid into it FOR the union workers.  And here is a kicker- you have to pay into it (proposed) but get a pay raise to offset the  payment... http://www.pionline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=CO&Date=20110314&Category=SLIDESHOW2&ArtNo=310009999&Ref=PH&Params=Itemnr=3

[Lt.Del]

That's all well and nice, but, the governor was looking for money.  He found it in the VRS fund---not a bank account, but, the best investment portfolios in Virginia which is why they became so attractive to public spenders.  he dipped his hands in it and took $500 million out of it.  I am furious at that.  Call it ponzi, call it whatever, it is making the most money of any fund Va has.

From 1983 until recently, Public Unions in VA were not required to pay into their pensions at all.  It was the Taxpayer only that paid into it FOR the union workers.  And here is a kicker- you have to pay into it (proposed) but get a pay raise to offset the  payment

 I know of no 'union' worker in Va who is a public servant....Virginia is a 'right to work' state. see Va Code
Va. Code Ann. §§ 40.1-58 through 40.1-69




http://www.nrtw.org/c/vartwlaw.htm

very interesting......from this site ( http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/right-work-news-case-national-right-work-act-3142011  )
The logic of state Right-to-Work laws is ironclad: Not only is safeguarding worker freedom the right thing to do,it also yields tremendous economic benefits. Recent studies from the Cato Institute and the National Institute for Labor Relations Research suggest that Right-to-Work states enjoy higher job growth and more cost-of-living-adjusted disposable income for workers than their forced-unionism counterparts.

They also seem to be weathering the recession better than old Midwestern industrial bastions like Michigan, Illinois and Indiana, states that lack protections for individual workers' rights.

Perhaps the most compelling evidence in favor of state Right-to-Work laws was reported in a Wall Street Journal editorial last year. Citizens are voting with their feet, leaving forced-unionism states in droves for job opportunities with their Right-to-Work neighbors.


The NRTWA’s economic rationale is compelling:

● Among America’s 22 right-to-work states (including Florida, Georgia, and Texas), non-farm private-sector employment grew 3.7 percent from 1999 to 2009, while it shrank 2.8 percent among America’s 28 forced-unionism states (e.g. California, Illinois, and New York).

● During those ten years, real personal income rose 28.3 percent in right-to-work states and sank 14.7 percent in forced-unionism states.

● In 2009, cost-of-living-adjusted, per-capita, disposable personal income was $35,543 in right-to-work states versus $33,389 in forced-unionism states. Americans in right-to-work states enjoyed more freedom — and a $2,154 premium.

Notwithstanding that right-to-work states are comparatively prosperous engines of job growth, the case for right-to-work laws is not merely economic, but moral.

“Government has granted union officials the unprecedented power to force individual employees to pay up or be fired and to coerce workers into subsidizing union speech,” says the National Right to Work Committee’s Patrick Semmens. “This fundamental violation of individual liberty — an infringement on freedom of speech and freedom of association — finally would end with passage of the NRTWA.”

[project85]

in NH they just with in a month ago voted out right to work. these new 3 month on the job republicans are really messing up NH.

also like a few people said fire, police, teachers, our unions are public unions. not like waste management or something.

and like i heard also about paying quality people. one of the guys pushing this on us the hardest is a retired union airline pilot. imagine them losing there CBA rights and some dufid ends up flying the planes for half price. SICKNING

[Buddy]

Union till I die....enough said!
If you like to be under paid and have no say in your place of work or what your employer can make you do work non union. For those of us who think or trade is worth a fair dollar work union. Its all about training, you must be trained and be well educated about your field if you want to paid a fair dollar. In order for a union and its members to be useful you must have good leadership.  It all about give and take.

[PromiseKeeper]

I wonder what would happen if this ended up at a Federal level and they started taking away our veteran's pensions? Public employees at a different level. Could it happen? Would the reaction be different and why? I'm sure that would take the emotions to a whole new level. In the end is it really any different? Maybe we could privatize our military and save a bundle....hire China?

Now before you fire the first volley across my bow.... know this.... I'm a staunch supporter of our past and present soldiers. I fly the flag proudly. It gives me a knot in my stomach to think any of the things we as a nation are doing to public SERVANTS is right. If anyone should be paid a premium, it is to those who serve, protect, and train our future leaders.

I heard it said recently that the standards at which we teach will be the standards of the next generation of government. What message are we sending? I have personally sat my young adult children down and apologized for what our generation is doing to them.

This is akin to one of the Big 3 automakers eliminating the research and development departments to save a few dollars. Short term gain....long term loss when the future of the company (or country) is in danger.

Bottom line: Where will we be in 5 or 10 years?  Better off or wondering where all that money went?

[Grim 82]

That is a Ponzi scheme (those that put in now are paying for those "out" now, and unless new payers are found those out later get nothing.)

Agreed, all of those great benefits sound too good to be true, and lo and behold...

As far as republican or democrat or whatever, keep in mind that they are both on the same team, and that team is NOT middle class America. At the end of the day these d-bags think that they have the authority to do whatever they want, including stealing the money that was intended to be paid out to those of you who have a stake in this. Realize that their needs will always come before yours, and will always come at taxpayer expense.

As far as unions and government, nobody cares about my well-being as much as me, so I'll take my chances taking care of myself, thanks. I do hope those of you involved directly find the justice that you seek. The bottom line is that a deal is a deal, and individuals that held up their end of the deal are going to get screwed.

[project85]

I wonder what would happen if this ended up at a Federal level and they started taking away our veteran's pensions? Public employees at a different level. Could it happen? Would the reaction be different and why? I'm sure that would take the emotions to a whole new level. In the end is it really any different?

Funny you say this, we talked abouth this same thing yesterday. Veterans a re kinda in the same boat, would the public wanna take 20% of there retirement away, and treat them like this?

[Grim 82]

I'm pretty sure there would be some voting from the rooftops.

[project85]

now the word is the senators will not pass the house's bill if it contains the removal of collective bargaining. ya, i hope