This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
An Irrevocable Right to Benefits?
Lisa Fleisher of the WSJ reports, New Jersey Pension Gap Grows:
New
Jersey's pension gap grew to $53.9 billion in the last fiscal year, up
from $45.8 billion, thanks to market losses and a lack of state
funding, according to figures released Thursday by the state.
The
looming pension burden, largely ignored by the state for the past
decade, has ballooned into a nearly unmanageable problem that will push
state and local finances into a corner in coming years, dropping large
bills in the laps of already strained taxpayers.
Gov. Chris
Christie's administration said the gap, which reflected the state's
investment positions as of June 30, highlighted the need for proposed
cuts to current public workers' pensions.
The new calculations
mean the state has 62% of the money it needs to pay retirement benefits
promised to roughly 720,000 state and local workers over the next
decade, down from 66% a year earlier. But the state is using an annual
8.25% rate of return, which critics say masks the problem by being
overly optimistic
"As all states,
they're getting it wrong," said Eileen Norcross, a George Mason
University researcher who has studied New Jersey's budget and pensions.
Using a 3.5% rate of return, she had estimated the previous liability
at $173 billion.
For most of the past decade, New Jersey
politicians from both parties have skipped required payments to the
pension fund while giving increases in benefits to workers. Faced with a
tight budget, Mr. Christie skipped a $3.1 billion payment this year,
which experts said all but guaranteed a higher gap next year.
Mr.
Christie, a Republican, wants to reverse a 9% pension bump workers
received in 2001 under a Republican administration. A spokesman for
Senate President Stephen Sweeney said he would work on changes that
would "ensure workers who have been promised a pension get one," adding
the governor needed to fund the pensions.
Unions
argue their members have an irrevocable right to benefits they have
earned, and the governor has said he will meet the unions in court.
Public workers pay into their pensions at various rates—8.5% of salary
for police officers and firefighters; 5.5% for teachers, state and
municipal workers; and 3% for most judges.
"Once again, the
Christie administration wants to make middle-class retirees pay the
price for the disastrous consequences of reckless speculation and
financial malfeasance on Wall Street, and for the legislature's
continuing failure to fund the pension," said Bob Master, political
director for the New York-area Communications Workers of America.
Mr.
Christie in March signed a slew of pension and benefits changes pushed
by Democrats but said they didn't go far enough. In September, Mr.
Christie unveiled further proposals targeting current workers,
including raising the retirement age to 65, requiring all workers to
contribute 8.5% of their salaries to pensions, and eliminating
cost-of-living increases.
In a statement, state Treasurer Andrew
Sidamon-Eristoff said Thursday, "Unchecked, the cost of this
impossible burden will fall not just on the taxpayers of today, but on
future generations of New Jerseyans."
Average annual pensions
for new retirees as of July 2009 were roughly $39,500 for state
workers, $46,400 for teachers, $73,500 for police officers and
firefighters, and $105,600 for judges.
So who
is right, unions or the Christie administration? At this point, it
doesn't matter. Yes, Wall Street's elite made off like bandits,
squeezing the middle class once again. But Governor Christie, who spoke
with 60 Minutes this past Sunday,
is right when he says public sector workers and retirees will get
little sympathy from private sector workers who saw their 401K plans
implode in 2008. Moreover, with state budgets deep in the red, there is
no money left to pay for public works projects, let alone generous
public pension benefits. All stakeholders need to make concessions or
risk deeper cuts down the road.
If I were the unions, I would
use this as an opportunity to push for better governance at the large state public plans. And by better governance, I mean make sure that
alignment of interests are there. As for state governments, they have
little choice but to raise the retirement age, cut benefits, and
partially or fully remove inflation protection on public sector
pensions. They should also revise their rosy investment assumptions for
state plans.
This may seem unfair and unreasonable to public
sector workers, but to quote a strategist who I spoke with yesterday,
"deleveraging sucks". You can't have pensions apartheid between the
private and public sector. And there are no "irrevocable rights to
benefits". Just look at the mess Greece and Ireland are in right now.
When the money runs out, cuts are guaranteed.
That's one of the reasons why I was disappointed with the meetings at Kananaskis.
A lot of people are looking at politicians with gold plated pensions
asking themselves why couldn't they expand CPP and provide Canadians
with a more secure retirement? I know, the critics will holler:
"it's just another payroll tax". They're wrong and shortsighted and
I'm embarrassed to say this is the best Canada could come up with --
another giveaway to banks and insurance companies. And who's going to
end up bailing out PRPPs when they flop? Who else but Canadian
taxpayers!
There was a time when Canada led the way in terms
of health, education and social economic policy. Our leaders need to
rethink expanding CPP. If you do it right, you'll bolster the private
and public sector. But if you do it wrong, or introduce half-baked
measures, you're better off not doing anything at all. I'm serious, I'd
rather see no change than reforms that are doomed to fail.
»
- advertisements -
First, feel free to lose the Clint Eastwood theme.
Second, anyone who fails to see the difference between public sector pensions and private sector pensions is blind.
Third, I don't know what the hell you are talking about wrt New Orleans.
Fourth, if the rule of law is dead, then order is dead. That does not yet seem to be the case.
Fifth, if you, the taxpayer, wish to take up arms and move against your elected officials, their politically-appointed cronies, the Wall Street interests, and multinational corporations, that is your perogative. But if you fail to pay the pensioners the money you, through your government, promised to pay, then you are morally bankrupt.
Sixth, even if your well is dry, you owe the pensioners the money. Elect some people to office who will free up American free enterprise, reestablish the tax base, and pay what you owe to the pensioners that you, through your government, promised to pay.
ding ding fucking ding. Now you're getting it.
Yes, and you end up with either chaos or tyranny. Again, choose your poison.
Merry Christmas John! May we all wish/pray in the sprit of the season come together and find a way through that maybe involves a third non-poison choice.
Choose medical cannabis before you pick the poisons, chaos or tyranny, when you get the chance. It don't change, until you do.
Actually, we are going to get both - this is America.
"But if you fail to pay the pensioners the money you, through your government, promised to pay, then you are morally bankrupt."
Hey, don't point that holier than thou weapon at me!
I NEVER consented to the .GOV parasites voting themselves lottery tickets...
In fact, as a member of the Sons of the Revolution (two families) I now find myself without a country, and haven't had an AMERICAN to vote for in almost 2 decades - Actually, only a VERY few in my lifetime.
Seems the huddled masses that washed ashore brought their .GOV diseases with them, don't blow sunshine up my ass and blame me for this degenerate serfdom that you and your ilk voted and/or thuggishly fought for!
It seems to me that the government, in spite of its many shortcomings, has taken the morally sound position, while some of our fellow Americans, professing to be interested in liberty, would prefer to renege on its obligations.
Renege on it's obligations?
How many govt workers with retiree pensions defaulted,reneged, cheated ,screwed, or defaulted on their mortgage obligation?
Answer: None.
Why, because they believe in honoring obligations even if it means " no recourse"
Govt workers aren't allowed to declare bankruptcy either right?
Are you insane?
Sometimes people make promises to pay that they cannot honor. Just as govt workers dish out their defaults to creditors via . Mortgage defaults, credit card defaults, judicial judgements. Then would you suggest they are abusing their moral obligation? Or is it just when the govt worker is on the short end of the stick does morality play its part.
If what you are trying to say is that a government employee is in the wrong when, doing his job, participates in, for example, a foreclosure on a property on which the homeowner failed to meet his obligations, then you have misplaced your hatred and resentment. YOU have hired that employee, through your elected government, to do exactly that job. If he does it, HE HAS DONE WHAT YOU HIRED HIM TO DO! What part of this process is so hard to understand?
YOU have hired that employee, through your elected government, to do exactly that job. If he does it, HE HAS DONE WHAT YOU HIRED HIM TO DO! What part of this process is so hard to understand?
Then I suggest you take it up with all those former and present elected officials. Ask them why they didn't stand for a strong dollar and a sound budget. Ask them why they looted the treasury and shiped our wealth overseas or provided it to the welfare queens in exchange for more and more power. Ask them where the SS surpluses have gone and why there is only IOU's for all those who made their payments in good faith.
You seem to be operating under some misunderstanding that I have an obligation to honor your contract with a bunch of crooks and liars. That my children should go hungry and cold so you can have your retirement pad in the villages. I'm sorry you got screwed hell I'm sorry we all got screwed. However if you think you have some special rights over and above the rest of us victims you are sadly mistaken!
Morally sound? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Just for a start you know they had no intention of ever paying you what they promised. The money was never there and was never going to be there. They knew when they set up the program,that it was a pyramid scheme and have been looting the pension fund from the beginning.
Time to get wise to what is happening, who is your friend and who isn't.
So it is Bernie Madoff*******************
Who holds the Key*********************
To the Public Pension*******************
Policy********************************
How can you say something so silly and cynical? Of course I expect the taxpayer, through their government, to pay me everything they owe me. Of course I expect that. Why would I have entered into the bargain otherwise?
Yes, if most taxpayers feel the way you, Remus, and HPD feel, then pensioners' property will be stolen from them. Yes, to do so is gutless and evil, but that does not mean you won't do it.
Again, I ask, do you believe in freedom and responsibility?
They have broken their word again and again, and broken the law as well. The big banks have looted the mortgage market, the pension funds, savings accounts, they have picked our pockets in a thousand ways.
What makes you so special? What makes you think they aren't going to take your money like they have taken everyone else's? When they promised to take OUR money and give it to YOU did you really believe them?
Have a nice day.
You forgot that in 2008 forward they began *looting* the god damn U$ Treasury as well!
Of course I'm sure Federalist has -0- problem with that as long as they keep sending that check to him...
By your definition, no.
"Again, I ask, do you believe in freedom and responsibility?"
Do you believe in skittle shitting unicorns?
Nevermind, that was a rhetorical question...
Sancho--honestly, do you always resort to such sophomoric responses when your effort at analysis fails? Do you have something rational to offer, or do you prefer to just lie in your own waste?
The questions is simple--do you believe in freedom and responsibility? I have not seen one poster come up on this thread with the guts to say "yes." Statists, all.
Actually, when faced with dissembling revisionists I usually have no retort as they think they can spin truth to their own purpose.
Thankfully, FACTS are stubborn; they can't change.
For the record, my family credo has been since the same since the 1770s: Live Free -or- Die Trying...
Based on everything you have posted to this thread, you have failed your family and its longstanding credo. You would not know freedom if it bit you in the ass. Freedeom mandates the liberty to enter freely into contracts and the honoring of those contracts. You would throw the contract you made with the public sector employee into the trash heap of fascistic power. That is the opposite of freedom. You advocate tyranny and slavery. Those are the stubborn facts, grasshopper.
I, as in me, myself and I as a "free" person, NEVER entered into a contract with you and your murderous brethren.
As in never, never, never, never, NEVER FUCKING EVER.
If you had the reading comprehension of a kindergarten student you would already know that by now, unless you're PURPOSELY evading the TRUTH that I NEVER consented to your United Empire of Kleptocracy, FUCKING PERIOD.
As far as I'm concerned, you can F.O.A.D.
Folks:
I have studied this issue, and have kept quite a few links and excerpts from reputable government web sites.
We have to differentiate between an employer-employee relationship and citizen-government relationship.
The employer-employee relationship applies to private employers and public employers; local, state, and federal.
The benefits these employees were offered are considered exchange transactions.
The employees willingly exchanged lower salaries to accrue benefits that at some point vested. In the private realm, defined contributuion plans have no protectuion, other than what is in their balances.
Defined benefit plans for private employers have protection from the PBGC, should their plan become insolvent.
State and local employees also engaged in exchange transactions. Their benefits are guaranted by the full faith and credit of the state, the taxpayers.
Social Security is not an employer-employee relationship, ultimately. It is a citizen-government relation ship. These transactions, payment of FICA taxes, are non exchange transactions.
Here, people don't willingly take less money. They are compelled, beyond volition, to pay taxes. In non exchange transactions, the government is not beholden to pay your Social Security benefits, beyond the current year.
If they do so, they are actually doing you a favor!
This is because taxes are not an assessment of benefits, but a way to pay for government, the general welfare.
Your Social Security taxes go for the general welfare.
Your taxes and your benefits are no more rtelated than the income taxes, or any other taxes you pay.
I can provide the links and excerpts to support my statements for all who are interested.
Don Levit
One more thing Don, I don't want to belabor the point but geez, most government employees get a lot better retirement plans and benefits than most Americans working in the private sector? Why the hell is that? It is easy to have good retirements when it is on someone else's dime or as has been stated before OPM, other people's money. It is easy to plan nice wonderful retirements when it is john q public getting it in the end.
LISTEN! THEY DO BECAUSE THEY BARGAINED FOR THOSE BENEFITS. THEY TOOK LESS PAY UP FRONT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PENSION LATER. GET IT? IT'S A CONTRACT. A BARGAIN. FREELY ENTERED. THE PENSIONER MET HIS PART OF THE BARGAIN. NOW THE TAXPAYER, THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT, MUST MEET ITS PART OF THE BARGAIN.
If the taxpayer fails in this regard, then all contracts, all property, all order, is destroyed. IT AIN'T THAT HARD.
TOTAL BULLSHIT. IF WE MUST USE CAPS...
DUDE. IT'S CALLED INSIDER DEALING. AND WATCHING PUBLIC SECTOR UNIONS GO DOWN IN FLAMES WILL BE A JIFFY-POP MOMENT IN LIFE.
INSIDER DEALING. GET IT YET?
You are all simply authoritarians. You would favor tyranny over liberty. I don't care if the retired police chief of Podunk, ND gets a $100,000 per year pension, provided there is no fraud involved. That would have been a freely-entered bargain between Podunk's people, through their elected government, and the police chief. They entered the contract. They owe him the money.
Again, it ain't that hard. Either you believe in freedom and responsibility, or you don't. If you do, you are a free man and there is hope for you future. If you don't, you are a slave, beholden to tyrants.
I see pension ghost towns on the horizon...where the silver went...born in a cross-fire hurricane....
Nobody in this country has one responsibility to pay one government employee one thin dime in retirement benefits , there federalist45. Nobody in this country owes anybody anything. It is good enough to be lucky to be able to be in this country. Now then, when the time comes, and it will, there will those who feel it is their duty to take back what is rightfully ours. That pearl of great price is liberty. If that gets in your way and rains on your retirement parade , then by all means, sit this one out, stay in your house and mind your manners while the dirty job gets done. Now if cops and others who think like you, want to enter into this situation on the side of the government, then by all means, knock yourselves out. At least we know where you stand. That is good enough. I like clarity.
What the hell are you talking about? Of course you owe every pensioner the money he bargained for. You, the taxpayer, elected officials who made these bargains in your behalf. You are obligated to make good on them. Elect different people if you don't like what those that you elected did.
To my knowledge, nothing has been taken from you through fraud or theft. If so, you should seek recourse through the courts. If not, then you probably should shut up, figure out why you failed in your bargain, then go make a better bargain.
Now, if the taxpayer fails to pay me what he owes me, then that is theft and is rooted in evil.
What I am telling you about retired cops, firefighters, and military personnel is NOT that they would be on the side of government. No, that would be you. After all, you will be asking the same government that helped create the disaster to take away the pensions of those you obligated yourself, through that government, to pay. You would be on the side of government, grasshopper, not me. I would be the one on my farm trying to make a go of it in the absence of the pension you owe me. See? Get it?
"Now, if the taxpayer fails to pay me what he owes me, then that is theft and is rooted in evil."
Actually, a DEBT created by an artifice to DEFRAUD is NULL-AND-VOID in a LAWFUL society.
Good thing for you and your thuggish brethren that your efforts to create/protect a Banana Republik Kleptrocracy has been full realized...
I hope you and your ilk choke on the ill-gotten gains you're gonna extract from 'MeRiKa via the tyrannical, gerrymandering politicos that used your parasitical lust in their climb for power.
Again, what the hell are you talking about? A freely-entered contract creates obligations and benefits in both parties. In the case of the public employee, there is, in almost every case, no fraud. So nothing is "null and void."
The thugs, Sancho, are those who would steal the pensions of those who worked for them. You fail to take into account the 30 years of hard work and the 30 years of deferred wages. That was part of the bargain. What, did you think you, as the taxpayer, were going to get engineers worth $100,000 per year for $50,000 per year without owing them the rest on the back end? Of course you didn't. You knew what you were bargaining for, and you freely entered the contract.
What I am reading here is pure evil--people justifying, promoting, the theft of money owed to other people just because they, themselves, are unhappy and resent those who made a better bargain. Lord, what a bunch of whining, sniveling, cowardly wimps this country has raised. Buck up. Work hard. Study your options and make a good bargain for yourself. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR LIFE. I didn't hurt you. I didn't defraud you. I didn't take from you. I worked for you for certain wage and future benefit. I expect you to meet your end of the deal. If you don't, you are a gutless, evil, morally bankrupt criminal.
ut in the spirit of the season, MERRY CHRISTMAS, and may God forgive us all.
Uh...reading comprehenstion der comrade.
I didn't CONSENT to you and you ilks' FRAUDULENT corruption of the USofA, not once!
In fact, I NEVER have requested assistance from you either!
And yet, while I ran my own business I've been coerced to financially support your tyrannical empire at the point-of-a-gun.
That is why starting in 2002 I plowed every cent of my net worth into PMs, and when I move them via a large truck I won't be relying on you and your thuggish brethren for "protection", as me and my family have been able to defend ourselves against common criminals in the New World since 1642.
Unfortunately, at the national level the DemoRAT/GOPher disease conquered the American Experiment and turned it into a Fascist/Collectivist nightmare, due to uncontrolled immigration and pandering to the lowest common denominator in politics, HUMAN GREED.
So, don't expect my tribute to continue once I've retired, it won't.
*STARVE THE BEAST*
You just don't get it, do you? It is called representative government for a reason. You elect your government, and your government acts in your behalf. In your behalf, the government made a bargain with me for my services. I fulfilled my end of the bargain. I now expect the benefits of my bargain. See, simple. If you don't like what your elected officials did in your behalf, take it up with them, not me.
I have no tyrannical empire. I hold a gun on no one. As for your business, I hope you did your due diligence and understood the risks associated with your bargain. If not, shame on you.
When I lost a load in the tech stock bubble, I accepted responsibility for my losses. I failed to do my due diligence. I did not whine to mommy. I did not ask for a bailout. I just took my medicine.
You, dear taxpayer, need to accept the bargain your government made in your behalf. You owe the pensioner. Failure to pay up is morally bankrupt. It is criminal. It is theft. Do it, and chaos ensues. Out of chaos, either greater chaos or tyranny.
Don't ever try to lay blame for your choices on someone else. Accept responsibility for the exercise of the freedoms I defended in your behalf (at the risk of my own life). In short, grow up.
Maybe not, but "Big Brother" does! Incumbents at every level of Govt have rigged the system in their favor, via gerrymandering, franking, and most importantly, via quid-pro-quo arrangements with Lobbyists, that fund their re-election campaigns. Hard to expect tax-payers to feel hunk-dory about losing their FRNs in a rigged card game! Besides, most tax payers are gonna be scrabbling around for food, fuel, etc, to survive the coming hard times -- why should public employees be exempt?
Your "government" doesn't represent me, in fact it doesn't represent the Sons of Liberty either!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Sons_of_Liberty_Broad...
Oh, and I as a True-born Son of Liberty get "IT".
Which is EXACTLY why I'm moving me and mine to an undisclosed location, where you and your thuggish brethren are almost non-existant -- Good luck skimming the sheeple left behind for your protection racket.
P.S. One day, perhaps soon, the United Empire of Kleptocracy will fall under its own weight, and I will watch with glee from afar, as you and your ilk are thrown under the bus and get your JUST rewards...
Don't you smell the bananas? The whole system is shot through with fraud from top to bottom. You are sticking up for your end of the fraud, against everyone else, as if it were possible to separate them. It's not. When the system goes down, those inside go down along with those outside. Only those at the top who engineered the whole thing will get away with the loot. You think you are a big shot pushing around the suckers but you are just as big a sucker. Get wise and realise we are your natural allies not your enemies.
I suspect that you are joking, since no one can actually be as dense as you make yourself appear to be, but no, I have no end of the fraud, and I do believe that the taxpayer is morally bound by his obligation to me.
There is no fraud where I enter into a free negotiation, bargain for a benefit in exchange for my services, and then perform those services as expected. I then am OWED the benefits of my bargain.
Again, it is not hard. It is quite simple. It is what contract is freedome is all about. You either believe in freedom and responsibility or you don't. I do. You don't.
As for being allies, I advocated that on several posts but the pension-haters/resenters who, presumably made terrible bargains that resulted in failure, refused to acknowledge the common ground. I am the one who, throughout this thread, has advocated that if the haters allow themselves to be led down the path of division, they are only doing the bidding of the whores who created this mess. None of them appears to want to hear that or to listen to reason.
Again, it is all about freedom and responsibility, which I choose, and tyranny and slavery, which they choose.
Someone in Govt "promised" to pay public employees from the largess that they extract from tax payers at the point of a gun -- look into why the gun was necessary.
You have the right to protect your own life, liberty, and justly acquired
property from the forceful aggression of others. So you may rightfully ask
others to help protect you. But you do NOT have a right to initiate force
against the life, liberty, or property of others. Thus, you have NO right
to designate some person to initiate force against others on your behalf.
You cannot give Govt. Officials any rights that you do not have yourself.
(Example: I DO NOT have the right to expropriate Peter's property to pay Paul, no matter how "deserving" Paul happens to think of himself!)
Virtue can only exist when there is FREE choice.
Evil does not arise only from evil people, but also from good people who
tolerate the initiation of force as a means to their own ends. In this manner, good people have empowered evil throughout History.
I hope you have better luck collecting your "bargain" than the rest of us.
Have a nice day.
Oh so you think it is ok for certain fire department and police officials in California and New York to be able to retire at over 100,000 a year in retirement benefits, fool? These people are greedy, plain and simple and they look at the taxpayer as their pimp daddy. Well enough is enough. It is obvious you have a ax to grind in this area. Leo has been talking about this stuff for a long time. So some of the government employees are starting to think that maybe their honey pot retirement deals are not going to be the dream , layed back thingy they dreamed of in sunny Florida ,kicking back, catching some rays on the beach, while drinking a ice cold toddy. Well too fucking bad. I will shed a real tear now.
If there is fraud, you charge them criminally through the grand jury. You may even be able to recover some of the losses for the taxpayer. But you have to prove the fraud in a court of law. If you can't, then that is unfortunate. But it does not mean you don't owe a pensioner his pension.
Do you believe in the rule of law, the sanctity of contracts, liberty, free enterprise, and private property? Do you believe in freedom and responsibility?
So seriously, how many jobs do you want 80 year-olds to work to honor your pension. How much suffering before you say enough is enough? Because if there is no cut-off point, then congratulations, you've just become a slave owner.
That maybe all well and good Don, but I have had this argument with a lot of government retirees around here and they always get pissy when I tell them it is not my job to pay their retirements. I think they should be in the SS system like everyone else and also they should have to work to 65, like everybody else instead of qualifying for retirement after 20 years. I mean come on sir, this retirement fund stuff it totally off the chain and we the taxpayers are not going to be left holding the bag, on this I can most assuredly stipulate.
John graduated from college in 1976. The economy sucked, jobs were impossible to find, so he accepted a commission in the Navy. To his surprise, he liked it. Not because it paid well or because it was safe. He liked it because it offered his something outside of himself to be a part of, it offered him security, it offered him a lifetime of service and benefits. He stayed. He chose the Surface Warfare route. He made 17 deployments in 30 years, worked 20 hours per day at sea and 16 per day in port. As an engineer, he saw the sun about once each week, if he was lucky. He found time to get married and have kids--3 of them. He had a chance to leave to go into GE's engineering-to-management program, but the Navy was routinely rewarding him with promotions and bonuses. And each time he considered his options, he chose to stay because he knew he had medical care and a pension for life. He knew his family would always be secure. During his deployments his ships participated in no fewer than a dozen actions, launching cruise missiles, launching attack aircraft, and even engaging with close-in ship's defense systems. He was in the Gulf when USS COLE was attacked. He was, in fact, aboard USS COLE. He was injured in the explosion but fully recovered. His ships fought in the Iraq War (OIF), the Adriactic in the Kosovo campaign, off Somalia, in the Red Sea, and in the Gulf. He went on, then, to make Captain, and retired in 2007. He was grateful for his Navy career. He felt it had given him a chance to contribute to his Nation's defense in time of need. He believed he had led men and women well, that he had improved his division, department, command, and the Navy. He was also very pleased that he had made the bargain he made, 30 years ago. He knew that, along the way, especially in the boom 80s, the bubble 90s, and even at times in the 2000s, he could have gone out to many large companies and made alot more money. But, he figured, the security of medical benefits and a pension were worth it. He made a bargain with the government and he kept up his end. John will live to be 90. He is now 55. His pension will pay him for the next 35 years.
Survival is not by charity but by what you have earned. Making a profit by creating and producing a service or product and selling it honestly creates value as this is the reward.
Federalist45...Have a go at "Atlas Shrugged" it might change your perception.
Yes but John participated in illegal and immoral and unconstitutional wars because he "liked it" . What kind of choice is this to join the military because you can't find a job and then stay because you like it? Good grief. Who likes war? The next thing you are going to tell me is that those mean old Muslims attacked the Cole? When I was in the military,the draftees used to call people like this , lifer ducks, because they were distrusted and despised and because they were gung ho military bozos who were staying in for the full 21 year stretch. I hated that crap and wanted out as soon as possible. They took time out of my young life and I wanted to get back to doing what I was doing before they bothered me. This is the way normal Americans behave about military crap. Nobody is supposed to like it. Who in their right mind wants some asshole to run around behind you , holding your dick all the time while you take a piss? Give me a break. These new military volunteers for the zionist mercenary armies of the 21st century are a real trip.
I figure that you are either a radical leftist who cannot grasp duty above and beyond self, or you are 15 years old. The fact that you did not have the will or talent to serve your country beyond an initial term does not mean that all of those who do choose to serve are wrong in any way. I cannot believe that, after 30 years of service to my fellow Americans, that so many people can come on this site, pretend to be interested in liberty and free enterprise and private property and private contracts, and criticize those who serve to defend those honored principles.
You, Sir, appear to be anti Semitic Nazi. I pity you, and wish you well in overcoming our ignorance. Peace and love.