The fact that PERS is a boondoggle for this state and completely out of line with other state's retirement plans is not debatable at this point.
The only debate is what do we do about it? One one side you have responsible people who want to rein the system in so that Oregon does not go bankrupt and taxpayers are not paying for the retired extravagance of public employees. On the other side you have big union. (From now on I will insert the word "big" in front of groups that I disagree with, similar to liberals naming of "big oil," "big tobacco," etc.)
Word came down yesterday that the taxpayers had won a major victory in court over the extravagance of PERS. This is good news for you and I however Lars predicted that today's fishwrapper headlines would portray the story not as a victory for the taxpayers but as a loss for public employees (government).
Here we are:
Employees lose PERS ruling
Workers wary of pension cuts, repayments
PERS divides high court a second time
High court rules PERS retirees must repay benefits
4 comments:
When he mentioned it on the air yesterday, I had no doubt that he'd called it correctly. I don't know that that makes him psychic - he just has his eyes open.
I was being a little facetious Jay.
if the fishwraper wasn't so dependable, maybe.
My "Alternative Maximum Tax" proposal will force PERS reforms. My proposal sets the maximum effective income tax rate for all Oregon taxpayers at the effective tax rate paid by a state employee earning the state median income. (Effective tax rate takes into account untaxed benefits like PERS and other fringes, and is thus lower than what the rest of us are currently paying.)
Post a Comment