3 @ 50. What Does It Mean?

Jeez, retirement's going to be sweet...

Some of our loyal readers have asked about the 3 @ 50 pension formula that many, if not most “public safety” employees receive. It’s pretty simple. You get to retire at age 50. The 3 is a multiplier applied to the number of years you have been employed. The guy or gal who works for 30 years would get 90% of his or her highest salary as a pension. For life. Pretty sweet gig, eh?

Go ahead have three. Somebody will pay for them later...

Many public agencies also tack on other benefits as income, boosting pensions even higher. The worst scam of all is foisted on the public by the agencies that consider the taxpayer’s payment of the employees’ share of pension paycheck deductions as income counted toward their pensions. This charming little ripoff is known colloquially as “PERS on PERS,” PERS being an acronym for Public Employee Retirement System.

So, what is the tie in to Fullerton?

Well, let’s start with the Three Dyspeptic Dinosaurs, Bankhead, Jones, and McKinley. Back in 2001, at the behest of Andy Goodrich and his union, these two voted to give the 3 @50 formula for the Fullerton Police and Fire Departments. The decision was voluntary and wittingly done. If that weren’t bad enough, of course the benefit was applied retroactively, meaning that many cops and firemen who had worked for decades under the previous formula were suddenly handed a titanic bonanza of taxpayer confiscated wealth, with the single stroke of Mayor Don Bankhead’s pen. And that single stroke of glaring incompetence has contributed to a massive unfunded pension liability that Fullerton citizens will have to carry indefinitely.

Yep, that's me!

And who is one of the principle beneficiaries of this generosity with the public purse? You guessed it. Former police Chief and current councilman Pat McKinley, who has picked up the moniker “Pat McPension” for his $215,000 a year pension – far more than he ever made working.

They may be dumb but they sure are slow...

Now this profligate behavior with public funds is typically the sort of behavior attributed to liberal Democrats. In Fullerton the heist was perpetrated by allegedly “conservative” Republicans who believe wearing stupid lapel pins is what really matters. Well, they sold us out, folks.

Bankhead, Jones and McKinley.

 

Behind Closed Doors Dead heads Dick Jones Don Bankhead I Aint a Swallerin That Patdown Pat McPension Repuglicanism Setting The Bar Low Watch Your Wallet

266 thoughts on “3 @ 50. What Does It Mean?

  1. The 3% to all these “heroes” because of 9-11 would be like giving everyone in the service a Medal of Honor, because one guy earned one and did something above and beyond. last time I checked It was New York that was attacked. FPD was busy trying to figure out how to beat up drunk kids and eating donuts.

  2. Some of us may never be able to retire even at the age of 67!!! when we can collect from a system WE PAID INTO INVOLUNTARILY!!!!

    THAT IS 17 YEARS LATER than these public servants, HOW IS THIS FAIR???
    WHY didn’t I become a “public servant”?

    Can I opt out of these public services and the obligation to them?
    please?

  3. Just remember it’s not a benefit provide to Fullerton by some dirty politicians. 3% @ 50 is a benefit that just about every PERS city in California offered and provided to their public safety employees. Most police departments bargained away other benefits to get it. I know ours gave up some holidays for pay and took a pay cut to get it. So it’s not as if it was some scam just thrown out there and provided. It was also voted on by almost every city, which shows that the people everyone voted in also thought it was a fair and legal benefit. Now that the world has crashed and we are looking at ways to save the world, this is a benefit that could be eliminated to assist. True. So take it for what it is, not some blog writeup by Tony or Chris to make it look like Fullerton provided another scam for their police.

    The trend is to put new employees on 2% at 55, which will help solve the problem. The other thing is that through the years the cities paid the employees portion of the retirement contribution. Another thing that was done by almost every city involved. That is also trending back to the employees paying their 9% contribution on their own. That will take 5 years to implement as contracts come up, but it will happen.

    I feel the current retirement benefits for current and long term employees won’t change, just the % contribution until they retire. OC tried to fight that and lost, along with the $5 million in tax payer money to fight it. People are scared to fight it again knowing the amount of time and money it will take, plus legally I think they know they will lose something trying to change a long term contract item such as that. It’s hard to say we didn’t allow you to contribute to your 401K, or invest in your retirement for the last 20 years, but now we are going to go back 20 years and change your retirement program anyways. It’s a moving forward, making changes, saving money attitude at this point.

    Enjoy your weekend everyone. 🙂

    1. I notice you omit reference to the retroactivity portion of the scam and the unfunded liabilities.

      And scam it is – despite your protestations.

      1. What retro portion? My city is the highest or last final year. Doesn’t include overtime or vacation/sick/time bank payouts.

        Unfunded liabilities is a topic that goes both ways with me. Cities didn’t have to pay a penny for many many years. If they kept that money in the pension fund, then they would have plenty of money right now to fund all portions of the retirement funds. They spent it on other things and it’s all gone now. So I go both ways on that way, fault goes all different ways now that the cities finally have to pay a penny for it all.

        Scam is your word. It’s a benefit that the people you voted into office offered and approved statewide. No one said much then, but they are saying things now. It is what it is, legal and debatable.

        1. Scam is my word too. Anything that forces one generation to finance another and then accept half of the other’s benefits is a scam.

        2. Retro is applying a current benefit for past service. Don’t play dumb although it’s so easy for you.

          Spend 29 years working for 2.5 at 55 and then get 3 at 50?!! Instant retirement and instant payoff. It’s just an outright gift of public money handed over by traitors like Bankhead and Jones to benefit swine like McPension.

          Ca-ching is right.

      2. Sorry Fred. Scam is just a word that ill informed people use in this kind of context for things they personally dislike. It’s really nothing more than an attempt by you to smear good people.

    2. Enjoy your weekend?
      Does your weekend start tomorrow, it’s only Thursday….
      What about over time, disability, does that affect the retirement benefits?

      Yes, RI things have crashed as you put it and there isn’t enough money….what to do, file bankruptcy perhaps and start over?

      1. Yes. Mine started yesterday.

        Overtime does not affect the PERS retirement in my city. Someone on here said in their city overtime and all the payouts contributed to their retirement. I don’t believe that but if it does, it does.

        Bankruptcy is a bad option for cities. It’s a last resort, no way to save the city option. Most cities will be able to balance their budgets and survive just fine. Most have. Bankruptcy also doesn’t just let cities off the hook for retirement pension funds. That’s why you have heard of what, maybe 2 cities go the bankruptcy route?

    3. Good try Reality Is. Here’s the problem:

      If you do the math on 3 @ 50, a 9% contribution will not even cover the increased amount required each year if the pension fund earns just 1% less. That is, if 3 @ 50 pensions require an annual pension fund contribution equivalent to 35% of payroll based on CalPERS current long term earnings projection of 7.75% per year, if they lower that projection by just ONE PERCENT, to 6.75% per year, the annual pension fund contribution rises from 35% of payroll to 45% of payroll.

      There are two things that will solve this: First, as even Gov. Brown has now proposed, every state employee will pay 50% of whatever amount is required each year to go into their pension fund. No matter how high it gets. Second, benefits to all workers, active and retired, need to be reduced to the original 2% at 55 formulas. The idea 3% at 50 can be sustained if current employees start kicking in 9% is a fantasy.

    4. “I know ours gave up some holidays for pay and took a pay cut to get it.” Well wise guy Reality Is, what holiday did they give up? I won’t even bother asking about that “pay cut” bs.

    5. You are a recipient of this retirement program, are you not? Not surprising, your take on the matter. You have a nice weekend as well.

  4. Another interesting thing is that they have the ability to “buy” more years of seniority.
    I believe Pat McKinley put in 16 or 17 years as Chief of Police then “bought” some addn years by paying in a lump sum to the pension fund. He is now fully vested as a 20yr employee would be.

    1. Show us this as fact. Please. This is the kind of stuff that just makes people assume things are done a certain way.

      If you work 5 years, you are vested. AFter you turn 50, you can collect what you are vested in. Peanuts.

      So yes, he is vested at 5 years and can’t retire at 50. But the amount he collects depends on his years of service. I can’t just buy 5 years of service right now and retire. If I could I would have done 5 years of work and retired 20 years ago. 🙂

      1. State “public safety” can do just this….. The buy back is causing a real headache in the PERS system since Ole Jerry is wanting to get rid of alot of people who are buying back time. They have changed their minds about a dozen times this year on union seniority and the contracts signed as they apply to people in that bargaining unit. Jerry pushed and his Frankenstein is fighting him back…. and he gave them the strength to fight him.

      1. I am kind of wondering how that much money 1 BILLION is attributed to only “a few” criminals….imagine if there were more than “a few” taking advantage………………………………scaaaary stuff.
        ya think we need a little reform?

  5. What does [email protected] mean? For some in the short term it means direct deposit in their accounts at the Sterling Bank in Coeur D Alene. For others it is a set of golden handcuffs which now or WILL force them to obey orders even if they violate the Constitution, or any laws. They day is coming when the golden handcuffs will turn into iron shackles. There is a massive unfunded liability and yet they still keep spiking away as the PERS system is continually infested with worthless paper such as derivatives and the like. Who’s is kidding who? At the local level we need reps that play hardball at the table when the doors are closed and will STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS AND SAFETY. The stranglehold the unions have is by design. The implosion of the economy is well underway. If how they treated Kelly Thomas on a warm summer night with full wallets and full stomachs is any indication of how we will be treated in a crisis you all better wake up. WE ARE NOT IN KANSAS ANYMORE

    1. Well put, truthseeker. Your comment about derivatives infesting the public employee pension funds is accurate. These funds are desperate to keep earning 7.75% and they are so big, and want to earn an amount that is so out of step with genuine sustainable returns, as a result they are tanking our markets and gambling with our economic future.

      1. Generally pensions are limited to investing in nominally very safe vehicles, in this case they could invest in derivatives only because they were given (fake) AAA ratings, same as sovereign debt. And derivatives flourished because the weren’t regulated. And they weren’t regulated because banks and investment banks didn’t want them to be. So, it’s kind of hard to blame the pension funds for that.

        1. I don’t think the point is to “blame” the pension funds…. the money was “pie in the sky” to begin with or as someone said a “prediction”,
          a “gamble” if you will…like gambling that your house is going to go up in value and taking out a loan or multiple loans and the value drops and the money is gone….what happens in real life is that the bank wants it’s money or you lose your home.
          You took the risk, you signed the loan, you lose…, why should the government employees be exempt from the economic collapse, the taxpayer/homeowner isn’t?

          1. Huh? All of that is beside the point, I am talking about the mechanics of how funds are administered, and they are designed to be limited to only the most prudent investments. Whether you or anyone thinks pension funds or ‘predicting stuff’ are good ideas is a discussion for you guys to have.

        2. So we can’t blame the pension funds for losing their investments in a time of nearly unprecedented and blatant risk-taking throughout the whole financial world?

          There were plenty of warnings signs of the pending meltdown. Many people made pronouncments.They were ignored.

          The pension funds lost thier investors money. Excuses are worthless.

          1. I am not sure you understand my post or I understand yours…..what do you think should be done about the pensions?
            I think (my personal opinion) it’s time to renegotiate given almost everything has dropped in value….you?

            1. I think everyone agrees with you. The argument is how that should be done and what can actually be done. Changes are being made daily to contracts for new employees. I think Fullerton just changed their new employees to 2% at 55. I think Fullerton also just changed their cops to pay a portion of their 9% contribution and gave them a raise on the back end. Was it a 3 year contract?

              Outside of bankruptcy, which in most cities won’t happen until they cut major major amounts and services, existing employees retirements won’t be touched. You may not believe that but it’s true. The OC lawsuit makes that very clear. Time will tell how it all plays out.

  6. “Now this profligate behavior with public funds is typically the sort of behavior attributed to liberal Democrats. ”

    And who signed this bill ito law?

    That’s right a liberal Democrat Governor.

    1. Of course. And all the repugs in the legislature went along for what they thought was a political free lunch.

      Nobody forced Bankhead and Jones to vote for that. They did it on their own. Willingly. Happily.

      They screwed the rest of us to help their union campaign supporters.

  7. You guys working and paying in right now are giving McKinley his bloated pension. You know, the one you won’t be getting? Be sure to tell him thanks next time you see him!

    1. Not really true. Current employees don’t pay a dollar toward their retirement and never have. So you are paying for him and have been. I’m sure he thanks you. Employees will pay some soon I’m sure. Goal is 9% but that usually takes time to implement.

      1. I know that’s the party line, but money doesn’t grow on trees. The payouts are far larger than the individuals’ contributions. That money is coming from ‘investments,’ we’re told. Taxes paid by working working employees are invested, too. And yet cities like Vallejo go bankrupt trying to finance the ‘investments.’

        You can’t tell me some of the money paid by working stiffs isn’t going to the parasites like McKinley to make up the difference between what they paid in and what they’re taking out.

        Admit it, pensions are nothing more than a huge ponzi scheme. Bernie Madoff didn’t even come close to pulling off something this size.

            1. No objection from me. There are lots of things I’d like to see expanded to cover more people. For example. Medicare for everybody. We could just call it Health Care.

              1. Might as well, open the flood gates since there is so much water in the boat at this point, everyone might as well swim in it.
                I’ll take my slice (or sliver) too…if there is anything left over……
                BTW, I’m a citizen, what place does that put me in line, sice I’m following the rules and all.

          1. Key words: “properly designed and administered.”

            The only reason this discussion is happening is because of the ones that AREN’T properly designed and administered and are taking the whole ship down with them.

            I’m not saying ALL pensions are a Ponzi scheme, but the ones that retroactively increase their payouts, and allow padding with unused overtime and sick days, etc. etc. etc. are impossible to fund. The economy couldn’t have sustained that even in 1998.

  8. You know, this retiring at 50 is outrageous IMO
    BUT what makes it even MORE outrageous is when I hear about multiple pensions, disability that is TAX FREE and

    there is (more times than not) (on a blog like this one) where some government worker will come on and smugly boast about how they plan to move out of state to AVOID THOSE PESKY TAXES we suckers pay here in California when they retire…for some reason that always bugs me the most.

  9. “The guy or gal who works for 30 years would get 90% of his or her highest salary as a pension. For life. Pretty sweet gig, eh?”

    In 2001 a guy or gal who was working when Fullerton opted in to 3% at 50 had been working for 20 years.

    Their starting pay in 1981 was around $1500 a month.
    With no expectation
    of any “bloated” pension.
    $18,000 a year is below the federal poverty level for a family of three.

    1. What about social security benefits, does that apply to your 2001 payout scenario?

      Do you think that it is fair that govenrment workers can retire at 50 but the rest of us cannot collect full SS until 66 or 67?

      What’s good for the goose….

      1. that is a good question…were the books showing a surplus in 2001?

        I’m wondering the timeline when we went in the red as far as funding pensions and what happened beyond that point……
        in other words what time was it when did the titanic took on more water than it could handle?

        1. At the time, the Pets.com sock puppet was worth $1 billion.

          Of course there was a theoretical surplus for anyone willing to pretend that economies don’t cycle.

        2. All cities had surplus and major extra money until a few years ago. Most didn’t pay a penny for pensions for years too. Crazy change in times.

          1. It is a “Crazy change in times”. True that. Some people have said in the news that ‘this all wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t for the “Change in times”. Meaning if the markets hadnt crashed, nobody would be having a problem of paying public workers their overinflated, bloated pensions. Nobody would have “Woken up” to this heist. Probably that is a true statement, but it it isnt really the point is it?
            Yes, the crashing market has brought all of this to light, but it was still the same old criminal scam then that it is seen to be now. The overpaid retirees,( you are one of those, right?) and by that I mean any adult male who retires at 50 years old with a “pension” that approximates their entire annual salary (for the rest of their lives). And for what .. for doing an average job for 20 years? For that alone one should be ashamed of themselves. Well, that is simply a criminal pay-off and those receiving it KNEW it was wrong, and know it isnt really sustainable, but per you “Hey, everyone is doing it”. right? “Every PERS in California” … blah blah blah. This doesn’t absolve you of your own personal integrity. if its wrong now, it was wrong then. Period. I love your snarky attitude about “things will never get undone, things will never change”. You HOPE thats the case. Youre banking on it (literally). Well, as we can easily see, things are changing right now. And soon will change more. I’m hoping Fullerton goes BK and we dump this entire program. No more overpaid free riding public servants.

  10. KaChing Kaching its only Fullerton taxpayer money. If it were only pension funds being wasted on the bloated 3% formula, that would be ok. But how about all settlements for lunkheads like Rincon be taken out of the pension before it is paid! That way even one eyed policemen double dipping pension collectors could find the right way to use a Taser!

  11. Good point Johnny Doughnut.

    You can’t compare numbers decades apart.

    How can one criticize the decision of signing off on 3% at 50 TODAY when it was done 10 years ago when the economy was thriving.

    251 other cities opted in. How could so many others have been duped?

    They were not.

    It made sense with the information that was provided at the time. It does not work if the
    numbers change.

    If it is broke fix it.

    PS Pete Wilson (Rep) rejected 3% at 50

    1. Incorrect. The decision was made in a political rather than an actuarial environment.

      Even basic fairness would dictate that you don’t hand out retroactive goodies that were never agreed to during the years of service.

      The decision was reckless and the public trust was violated. Jones and Bankhead cared more about their campaign supporters than they did their constituents. And McPension was on of the beneficiaries.

      All three need to go.

      1. Even with “agreed to” goodies,,,,,funding pensions with “pie in the sky” money is wrong……those who invest in the stock market are not “guaranteed” that the investment will pay off if the stock tanks, why should the pension system be any different if the money is not there???
        Why should the taxpayer is hogtied to a obligation when the economy tanks????
        The tax revenues are down because people are losing money!!!

  12. And what was the motivation of the other council members in the 251 other cities that bought into this “scheme” that according to you was not supported by any actuarial studies.

    Why would a police officer choose to work in Fullerton if the benefits were not as good as Brea, or LaHabra or Placentia, or Anaheim?

    How then was it not in the cities interest to opt in to 3% at 50.

    It would have made no sense and contrary to the interest of the city to not opt in.

    Basic fairness would ask that you judge a decision based on the circumstances in which it was made. And not the current economic conditions that no one could have predicted.

    And I believe the courts decided that you can apply 3% at 50 retroactivly.

    1. That’s easy. They all sold out.

      Let’s look at all the great cops we got competing with the other 3 @ 50 sell outs: Cicinelli, Hampton, Blatney, Wolfe, Mejia, Major, Thayer, Tong, etc., etc.

      Hahahaha! What a harvest of haplessness!

        1. And Chief Sellers. Let’s not forget about Chief Sellers. And Sarge Goodlie, of course! What a rogue’s gallery. It sure is good we were able to compete with La Habra and Anaheim, otherwise who knows what sort of sub-oar cops we might have ended up with!!!!

    2. “Basic fairness” is a double edge sword…
      a decision based “on the circumstances in which it was made” should be reviewed if the “circumstances” or “economic conditions” change, right?. right?
      You, yourself state “no one could have predicted” them so let us employ “basic fairness” in the light of the current economic conditions rather than hide behing the “no one could have predicted” there would a collapsed economy, or “oops mentality” as I like to call it.
      And in the future; how about we make decisions on $$$ that we KNOW will be there rather than “predictions” because I do not gamble with my money and I don’t want others to gamble with it either.

    3. “Basic fairness would ask that you judge a decision based on the circumstances in which it was made. And not the current economic conditions that no one could have predicted.”

      Try that one on the casino when your winning streak ends.

      1. Again if YOU want to GAMBLE that is a personal decision, I personally think it is FOOLISH to do so,,,,,but do not do it with taxpayer money.
        I do not want my children and grandchildren paying for the government’s miscalculated predictions.
        Gamble with your own money THAT is”””””” fair””””

      2. Yeah, sometime between the roll of the dice and the snake eyes “current economic conditions that no one could have predicted” occurred.

        See if the casino will give you a break!

        1. Fred,
          I was never in the casino…neither were my children,,,,,,,

          All I know is my home is worth half and when I sell it the loss is all mine….I cannot go to the bank and explain the “current economic conditions that none predicted” and get a loan for what I have into it, they for SOME reason want to give me FAIR (there is that word again) (I digress) as I was saying the bank wants to deal with FAIR market value (today’s current conditions).
          WHY should I be treated differently than the “public servant”?
          Who is serving who?

  13. Albert Einstein :
    not the current economic conditions that no one could have predicted.

    Wrong. Lot’s of folks predicted this. Economic cycles have been occuring since the invention of currency.

    But it’s much more fun to join in on the economic euphoria, especially for Jones and Bankhead who were playing with our money.

  14. Orange County and Fullerton City are about to face the worst financial crisis in 2012 and beyond with huge budget deficits. These politicans are only to protect their benefits at your expenses.
    Taxpayers are always the victims and bankrupt by the same crooks supposed to “Protect and Serve.”
    Recall turns out blessing in disguise. Demand transparency and financial disclosures. You have to include pension as spendings.

  15. It’s amazing to me that we’re standing at the edge looking into a bottomless black chasm of global economic collapse while half the country is still wearing party hats and throwing confetti.

    Special interest groups chanting their 1% trickle down mantra have looted the U.S. Treasury. And yet I still hear, on this very blog and in public debates, proponents of those policies which have pushed us to the brink of disaster.

    Take two dates, Jan 1, 2001 and Jan 1, 2009, and compare any economic indicator you wish on those dates. Federal deficit, unemployment, GDP, look at anything you wish.

    What becomes uncomfortably obvious is that the country went from a gold medal athlete in the prime of their life to a bedridden drug addict wasting away in an AIDS hospice. It was the special interest groups and their front men – Ken Lay, Jack Abramoff, Bernie Sanders, etc – who were shoving the needles into the ‘arms of America.’

    Regardless of the politics behind it, the formula used to bring this country to health in the ’90s could still work today – modest tax increases coupled with a radical pruning of the federal budget.

    The condition of state budgets are in just as bad condition, and for the same reason – drunken spending with no one minding the income.

    The party people don’t seem capable of recognizing the seriousness of the situation, judging from the debates heard on this blog and other locations, so it looks like we’re going to be dropping into the abyss soon. Not gonna be easy to listen to their shrieks of horror when they finally realize what’s happening.

  16. The problem is that the special interests have a stranglehold on the politicians. The politicians want to be reelected more than anything else and don’t care about doing the right thing.
    Welcome to California and the 2011 political mentality.

  17. “…Just remember it’s not a benefit provide(d) to Fullerton by some dirty politicians. ”

    Just remember, when the kitty runs dry I want to read what you have to say.
    Tough way to go, sadly. I feel for you (or who you present your online persona to be) and others that have your attitude. They will fall very, very hard.
    When you work all your life to expect such generous retirement, and the organization that provides funding for it runs out of money, you are in very serious trouble. Of course if you have provided for this inevitability you will survive.

    Good luck to you and your government workers; it’s going to be quite painful.

    1. I’m always curious when someone makes a claim like yours, Dr. Zillman. How would you propose to remove the contract between the state and local governments of California and their respective employees? States can’t declare bankruptcy, and the 11th Amendment doesn’t prevent a federal court from providing injunctive relief if a state or local government entity attempted to impair a legally binding contract.

      You can’t refuse to pay your taxes because you disagree with what the end use may be for some of those funds, so again, please share your insight as to how such legal obligations can be unwound in California.

          1. You should probably research something called the “stripping doctrine.” It is a well established practice that recognizes the sovereign immunity of a state under the 11th Amendment, but still provides for injunctive relief by the courts if the state is attempting to do something illegal or unconstitutional – such as impairing a legal contract with its employees.

            Check it out. You’ll be surprised and much better informed.

        1. Yes, I follow the news quite closely. Greece isn’t California, by a long stretch, and Jefferson County isn’t Fullerton or any other California city.

          It’s also wise to remember that places like Jefferson County contract with the Alabama Retirement System to provide pension benefits for their employees, and ARS doesn’t have any benefit payment shortfalls. In the worst case, Jefferson County will get an extended payment plan for their ARS obligations as a result of the Chapter 9 bankruptcy workout. In the meantime, Jefferson County residents will have to pay for the past corruption of their own elected officials through higher fees and taxes, since it was the illegal kickbacks and rigged bidding on their uncompleted sewer project that led to the multi-billion dollar losses that are now driving the county into the bankruptcy court for relief.

  18. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (a state department staffed by public employees), the average pension benefit for all CalPERS retirees (including those w/ less than 25 years in the system) is around $25,000 a year. That’s not even close to the private sector average, but still not the real problem.

    It’s the public employees who retired in 2008-09 with 25 years or more of service who will receive between $53,000 and $66,000 a year (double the current average). This amount will grow exponentially over the years to come as the percentage of retirees whose benefits were spiked from 2% to 2.7-3% in the late 90’s increases.

    That’s the problem.

    It’s the tens of thousands of public safety workers entering the retirement pool at 3% @ 50.

    That’s the problem.

    It’s the percentage of public workers receiving pension benefits topping $100,000 a year is projected to keep growing (78,000+ in just 5 years), in part because of increased benefits adopted in the past 15 years.

    That’s the problem.

    It will be impossible, even if the California economy was strong, to service such future pension obligations.

    That’s the problem.

  19. The 3%@50 is a true Ponzi scheme created by the RAGWUS thieves to steal all the money they can in least amout of time from the taxpayers.

    The PS RAGWUS members are the worst of these offenders, none of them have any shame for their behavior!! 🙂

    1. There’s nothing to be ashamed of, Donkey. The police officers and firefighters who received the [email protected] formula for their pension benefit have all performed many years of difficult and often dangerous public service on your behalf.

      There is no more reason for any of them to be ashamed of the benefits they receive than there is for you to be ashamed of taking advantage of Prop 13 for all these years.

      1. “dangerous public service”…..blah blah blah
        I would rather protect myself and have my grandchildren have a bright fiscal future.

        We just need to file bankruptcy and start over.

        Someone save us from these heroes who start retiring at 50, just pitiful.

        1. The trouble is that people like you generally can’t protect themselves in the real world. That’s why you have people like me to do the difficult work for you.

          Your grandchildren will do just fine, particularly after all of us old folks die off and leave them our property. You are planning to leave them all of your assets, aren’t you?

          1. “people like me”? You sound like someone who thinks like an elitist.
            Why would you say I cannot protect myself? How arrogant and smug of you….. you seem to assume I want to be protected or that I am scared…I am not, what is the worst that can happen to me; I die?
            I am not afraid of death, please spare me the drama…

      2. SKdog, there is plenty to be ashamed of for being a part of your PS RAGWUS feeding frenzy.

        You however, being a sociopathic trough feeder, have no conscience or feeling of guilt about your excessive greed and burden you would place upon the shakled taxpayers of our state, counties, and cities.

        So continue to spread the PS propaganda SK”Goebbels” and I will continue writing the truth. Then when the math catches up with your lying propaganda we will all know tha tI am on the right side of this argument! 😉

        1. Nice to see you roaming the internet with the same wild rants you’ve been posting for the last several years. I have noticed that your postings are slightly more sane and courteous under your DonWill alter ego, so I guess that is progress.

          I’m actually a very nice person and, although I have a highly developed sense of moral reasoning and duty, you’re correct that I have absolutely no guilt about the retirement benefits I earned by protecting people like you for well over three decades of service.

          Invoking the Nazi card most always indicates desperation in any political or economic discussion, but the paranoid style continues to be a sure fit for you it would seem.

          Give my regards to observer when you get together later this evening.

  20. Yes. 3%@50 was not the right decision in hindsight and some of the negative comments are warranted. But let’s give some credit to the officials at the City that nixed the enhanced benefit formula for the non-sworn employees a couple years ago. This was and has been happening for a number of years by Cities up and down the State before it came up for a vote. Good decision!!

  21. “…It will be impossible, even if the California economy was strong, to service such future pension obligations.”

    Correct. And the economy is in terrible shape, particularly when it comes to government “revenues.”

    The percentage of government workers receiving six-figure retirements is increasing exponentially.

    1. I keep hearing people asking what they should invest in. I’d say ‘survival goods.’ Stock up on food, shelter, and clothing because the infrastructure isn’t going to withstand the collapses.

        1. That’s what the Chief Steward on the Titanic said when told the ship was going down. I take it you’re one of those kooks who still thinks the world is flat. Moron!

  22. SkippingDog :
    I’m always curious when someone makes a claim like yours, Dr. Zillman. How would you propose to remove the contract between the state and local governments of California and their respective employees? States can’t declare bankruptcy, and the 11th Amendment doesn’t prevent a federal court from providing injunctive relief if a state or local government entity attempted to impair a legally binding contract.
    You can’t refuse to pay your taxes because you disagree with what the end use may be for some of those funds, so again, please share your insight as to how such legal obligations can be unwound in California.

    As an M.D./J.D, I can tell you that bankruptcy IS possible.
    Also, IF the Governor’s policy is actually implemented, that would be a good start. I have many friends currently employed in government jobs that are receiving regular pay increases! In this economy! Unfortunately “Reality Is” bankruptcy is more likely to happen sooner.

    1. Flashing unverifiable credentials as a “M.D./J.D.” without any description of the legal process that might lead to such an outcome is intellectually lazy at best.

      Come on, Doctor (or Counselor, if you prefer), tell me how this plays out in the legal system we have.

    2. I don’t care if you’re descended from Napoleon’s handmaiden. Post the case law, that will answer all, or at least go a long way toward it.

      1. Might be hard to do Nippy since we never thought the Titanic could sink, all I know is not everyone had a lifeboat because the crew thought like Skippy….

        1. That’s the amusing part of these discussions. The decline and complete fall of civilization as we know it always emerges as the predicted outcome of current events.

          You should read a well known book called “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.” It gives an excellent history of this strange, delusional approach to the world in which we live.

            1. I can actually do both simple and complex math through Calculus, though statistical analysis has always been my favorite.

              There is no “scam” associated with [email protected] in California. It was passed nearly unanimously by both the California Assembly and Senate, both for the original SB 400 legislation and later for legislation extending the benefit to 1937 Act Counties like Orange.

              All investment plans rely on compounded returns to make their goals, as do public pension programs. Those returns would have compounded at a higher rate if your elected officials had not given themselves a pension payment holiday for many years. That’s not my problem.

              I performed my part of the contractual agreement, so it’s neither greed nor avarice to suggest that you are responsible for yours. That includes making extra payments into the pension system, if necessary, to secure the benefits you and your representatives have legally agreed to provide.

              It’s just business.

              1. SKdog, no it is not just “business.” What the RAGWUS has created is a legal Ponzi scheme that allows its members to steal large uncalled for pensions from the hard work of the private taxpayers.
                You see the inner workings of your crooked organization as just, but to the private taxpayer it is in fact tyranny and just a way to steal using a backdoor system of politicians, unions and RAGWUS members dues stolen from the private sector. 🙂

  23. I don’t think this is “Reality Is”, there are no 🙂
    ……anyway, there is no convincing this one of the inevitable implosion that is going to happen when the pension Tsunami finally hits shore…..reminds me of the musicians on the Titanic.
    Perhaps Skippy can tell us “less informed” how this will play out,,, what will happen Skippy, will they raise taxes to cover this windfall of debt?

    1. Dr. Zillman claimed to have the legal insight on this matter, so I continue to await his incisive analysis of the problem and a discussion of which legal theories he believes would support your position.

      In the meantime, Fullerton and every other government in California will continue to make their required payments to CalPERS on behalf of their current and past employees. To do otherwise would suggest that no contract with the government as a party is to be trusted, which then leads us to a discussion of which vendors, contractors, and suppliers should also have their government payments cut off.

      To more directly answer your question, this will play out with a series of benefit reductions for future government employees, higher costs for current employees, fewer government services, higher fees for things like building permits and other fee based government services, and an overall decline in the services available from your state and local government until people get to the point where they recognize their obligation to pay increased taxes for the services they’ve already received.

      The same thing will happen at the national level when we begin to address our national debt. There’s really no other way to do it.

      1. I don’t get the “obligation” to pay more taxes…cut the services, furlough and IOU like there is no tomorrow, go ahead.
        Here’s a start and only a start of where we need to go:

        http://www.governing.com/columns/public-money/California-Throws-Down-the-Gauntlet-for-Pension-Reform.html?utm_source=related&utm_medium=direct&utm_campaign=California-Throws-Down-the-Gauntlet-for-Pension-Reform

        Even so, we still cannot bail out enough water that is sinking our ship with all the illegals flooding this state and having babies that we get to support with free health care, WIC, etc.

        1. You may be happy living in a third-world level state, but most sane people will by then have understood the need for increased taxes.

          BTW, if you get rid of “all the illegals” who’s going to mow your lawn, cook your food, or clean your diaper when you get really old and senile?

          1. Look Skippy, I gave you too much credit, do the math, I cannot afford to support you and the illegals, you pick.

            P.S. citizens mow my lawn, don’t descend into stereotypes, it makes you less attractive.

            1. Attractiveness seems to be in the eye of the beholder, and it does appear that you’ve been the one who inserted the stereotype canard of “illegals flooding” into our conversation.

              The other name for the babies to which you uncharitably refer is American citizens.

          2. You don’t mow your own lawn? You don’t cook for yourself? You have no family member that would step up (as I did for an elderly parent with physical issues) to act as a caretaker for you if you become unable to care for yourself?

        2. Girard Miller is a very smart guy and makes some excellent points, but the existing debt will still need to be paid. It won’t magically disappear.

  24. As one consolation, remember that business cycles come and go at regular intervals. As J.P. Morgan himself said when asked to give his analysis of market events: “Markets go up; markets go down.”

    Our current economic difficulties will eventually ease and reverse themselves, just as happened scores of previous times in our history.

    1. SKdog, you are a fool of the first order. The cost of the 3%@50 pensions is gong to swamp the public pesion systems of this state in a very short time and the markets are not going to save your obscene pension you crook!! 🙂

      1. My wife has said the same thing, but I think she has a much better case than you do, Donk. You’d better hope the markets make their returns because, if they don’t, it will eventually be coming out of your pocket.

        Come to think of it, that would give me some psychic satisfaction….

                1. don’t, don’t do business with me, don’t pull me over and I will not call you…..you are free to go 🙂

                1. There is nothing sacred about generations yet to be born incurring debt.
                  The constitution is being misinterpreted Skippy, maybe you should enforce the 14Th amendment and defend us from all enemies foreign and domestic.
                  The 14th amendment was applicable to slaves and their children not all the illegals that rob us blind.

                2. We are still paying the debt incurred by the generations that preceded us, so there’s nothing new or unusual about the intergenerational equity argument now that hasn’t been hashed out many times before.

                  As to your claim that the Constitution is being misinterpreted, I suppose we’ll both just have to wait for our legislature and courts to figure out what the current application of the 14th amendment is for children born to undocumented residents in our country.

                  I doubt any Supreme Court will attempt to remove our existing understanding of what birth citizenship means.

          1. Again with the apocalyptic predictions? Grandmother was right, but she wasn’t talking about the 8th largest economy in the entire world.

                1. Well, the primary reason we can’t balance our budget in California is because our tax base relies primarily on the state income tax, rather than on property taxes as is the norm in most states.

                  When we collectively passed Prop 13 in 1978, we shifted the tax revenue stream to income and sales taxes, which are among the first to decline during a period of economic slowdown. The real estate bubble compounded our problem when it popped, resulting in reassessments that reduced property tax revenue as well as reduced property taxes resulting from a decrease in the previous sale price of the property.

                  So there you have it. We have reduced property values that produce fewer property tax revenues, reductions in reported income because of the Great Recession and its impact on unemployment, and therefore a reduction in our primary revenue source: income taxes.

                  Public employee salaries and benefits lagged the general state economy on their way up over the last two decades, and they will lag the overall economy during our current decline. When the economy eventually picks up, as it inevitably will, public employee salary and benefits will lag again and we will repeat the process.

        1. What the heck is “psychic” satisfaction? Have you been to a fortune teller? Is that who is reassuring you?

          I think you meant to say “psychological” satisfaction.

                1. Funny video. I guess the old Chief got a different training curriculum than I did. They didn’t make me a mind reader – only a careful observer.

    2. Yes and hopefully we will be smart enough to quit electing old-burned out government employees who vote away our wealth to their union campaign financiers.

  25. The RAGWUS has worked 24/7 to build 3%@50 and has convinced its members that they all deserve these obscene pensions and benefits. They have become members of a cult of greed and have lost their sense of reality and are devoid of any ability to use reason or logic! 😉

    1. Oohhhhhh, I love it when you start calling us things like “members of a cult of greed.” We’re just collecting the benefits you (through your elected representatives) entered into a contract with us to provide, in exchange for our work on your behalf.

      It would seem that any “cult of greed” would be comprised of those who would attempt to duck their legal obligations after receiving the benefits provided by my work.

        1. I was told not to call….but no mention of a refund for opting out…..the night’s early and the dawn will come, I have faith 🙂

      1. This is where you are lost SKdog, the RAGWUS owns the elected officials, and you know this to be true. You however will look past the truth and make the false claim that the “representitives” are actually looking out for the private sector citizens as they give your RAGWUS everything they cry for at all times.

        Most of the representitives are put in place with the money and power your thieving RAGWUS wields, and it is not in the best intrests of the private sector taxpayers. 🙂

  26. Where did Dr. Zillman go? I was really looking forward to his legal analysis of how to unwind vested pension obligations….

    ….crickets….

  27. SkippingDog :We are still paying the debt incurred by the generations that preceded us, so there’s nothing new or unusual about the intergenerational equity argument now that hasn’t been hashed out many times before.
    As to your claim that the Constitution is being misinterpreted, I suppose we’ll both just have to wait for our legislature and courts to figure out what the current application of the 14th amendment is for children born to undocumented residents in our country.
    I doubt any Supreme Court will attempt to remove our existing understanding of what birth citizenship means.

    side stepping the 14th? What do YOU think it means?
    Across the tablet of time things have been legal and not legal…slavery, abortion, but those things have always been right or wrong.

    What is YOUR interpretation of the 14th amendment given it was added for the purpose to grant the children of slaves birthright and there is no slavery today unless you count public unfunded pensions….

    1. The 14th Amendment doesn’t stand in isolation. Every time the Constitution has been amended, it has in effect created an entirely new document that must be read as a whole, according to long established precepts of jurisprudence.

      Therefore, the legislative purpose that you refer to is of limited impact because the ratified amendment altered the entire compact, as did all of the subsequent amendments.

      For the last hundred or more years, the 14th Amendment has been applied under an “incorporation doctrine” that presumes the entire Constitution to have been created and ratified to protect and expand individual rights, rather than to limit them. The law moves slowly, but the recent decision upholding the 2nd Amendment as protecting a personal right to bear arms is a perfect example of the incorporation doctrine in action.

      The 14th Amendment also prevents states from restricting rights protected under the national Constitution, which is why efforts to control immigration like those in Arizona and elsewhere are misguided and will also likely prove unconstitutional.

      Finally, the 14th Amendment protects our right to both procedural and substantive due process in all of our interactions with the government – state or federal. That’s also why it would work along with the “contracts clause” of Article 1 to prevent a state – say California – from taking personal property – such as a vested pension – in violation of a contract and without due process of law.

      1. The 14th Amendment does not protect a tyrannical RAGWUS that has taken control of the political process.

        Your RAGWUS has used tyranny to steal from the private sector taxpayers and hidden behind a badge of cowardice proclaiming you are heroes.

        Heroes wear dog-tags, not badges!! 🙂

          1. Some wear both, but for the ones that do, few seem to rise above the incest and inbreded stench that your cult has evolved and bred.

            There are a few good people that dwell in your circles SKdog, but not enough to keep it from beating homeless people to death, or shooting teenage girls in the middle of a park. No man that has worn “dog-tags” would ever done to Ashley MacDonald what Parker and Randle did to her! 🙂

        1. Never claimed to be. Every site has its own key words to prompt a moderator review. Now that my comment has posted, you can read it and figure out what they might be.

            1. It undoubtedly appears that way to someone who has never bothered to study the Constitution, just as advanced technology would appear to be magic to someone in a primitive society.

              1. For once I agree with you. Do you say a prayer for the gods to carry your words over the wires before each computer session?

  28. SkippingDog :Well, the primary reason we can’t balance our budget in California is because our tax base relies primarily on the state income tax, rather than on property taxes as is the norm in most states.
    When we collectively passed Prop 13 in 1978, we shifted the tax revenue stream to income and sales taxes, which are among the first to decline during a period of economic slowdown. The real estate bubble compounded our problem when it popped, resulting in reassessments that reduced property tax revenue as well as reduced property taxes resulting from a decrease in the previous sale price of the property.
    So there you have it. We have reduced property values that produce fewer property tax revenues, reductions in reported income because of the Great Recession and its impact on unemployment, and therefore a reduction in our primary revenue source: income taxes.
    Public employee salaries and benefits lagged the general state economy on their way up over the last two decades, and they will lag the overall economy during our current decline. When the economy eventually picks up, as it inevitably will, public employee salary and benefits will lag again and we will repeat the process.

    If you figure between the high property values here in the golden state and the tax base the property taxes are on the high side compared to most states, forget the fact that mello roos has been tack on a lot of the homes built after 1989 and we are paying more than our “fair” share.

    1. Mello Roos is a temporary tax that pays for the infrastructure of new developments. It does nothing to pay for the ongoing expenses of older developed areas.

      1. I cannot imagine what would happen if we did paise property taxes in a depressed market like this…not a good idea, I’m afraid people would start moving away despite the great weather…

    2. It also costs more to live in California than it does in most states, even with our declining real estate values. We can get into a long “chicken and egg” discussion about that, I suppose, but salary structures inside and outside of government use cost of living as part of their equity comparisons.

    3. “Public employee salaries and benefits lagged the general state economy on their way up over the last two decades,”

      That is just the usual propaganda. An out right lie. And of course no mention of pension and health benefits.

      Typical bullshit.

      1. I understand why you’d like to think such a thing, Fred, but it’s neither a lie nor “bullshit.” Public sector raises were difficult to come by in the 1970’s, during which they never kept up with the high levels of inflation. In the 80’s and well into the 90’s, California had a series of Republican Governors who were openly antagonistic toward any increase in public compensation levels. Pete Wilson used to call Mayors and County Supervisors personally to lobby them when they contemplated a significant increase in salaries or benefits.

        That’s how and why there was such a sustained effort by public employees to develop political clout within the legislature and, later, in the elections of our Governors. By the time Gray Davis was elected, there was a high level of pent up frustration and demand for improved benefits, which is part of the reason the [email protected] legislation was passed.

        You can dislike history, but it’s still history.

            1. It’s not so bad. Donkey posts there as DonWills something or another, so you could open a fake-name account and do the same.

              I think Rex the Wonder Dog posts as Nathan Gill or something like that. Don’t know if observer or Mensarino ever post there. If observer does, he’s toned it down a lot.

                1. I don’t know if it’s illegal or not, but there seems to be a lot of fake accounts there. Don’t think I’ve seen anyone I could identify as Old Cop, but he might be lurking there like I do.

      1. NO, I am a student of history, it was my minor @ UCLA and history gives insight into your cabals downfall! The RAGWUS will be distroyed, one way or another my trough feeding firend! 😉

        1. I just love it when you get yourself all puffed up and start making grandiose statements like Mussolini. I can picture you standing in front of your screen with your arms folded, nodding your head in earnest.

              1. SKdog, the exsistance of the RAGWUS is all one needs to know. Robert Rizzo is a living breathing fact as to the greed and fraud committed by the RAGWUS members, as are the $100,000 pensions of the PS feeders. 😉

                1. Robert Rizzo is an opportunistic criminal who is not representative of most public servants. His pension has already been severely cut back by CalPERS, and he will likely be convicted of several crimes and sent to prison.

                  Don’t confuse him, or other criminals, with the people who serve honorably for decades.

  29. SkippingDog :
    Funny video. I guess the old Chief got a different training curriculum than I did. They didn’t make me a mind reader – only a careful observer.

    And a piss poor analyst!

      1. If you were such a careful observer you’d be able to spot the earth changes that signal a dramatic change in climate. I take it you’re a global warming denier. Earthquakes and tsunamis be damned, those rates of return will be a-okay. Right?

        And if you were such a keen observer of the world economic situation you’d see that the indicators are toward global economic meltdown. Bankruptcy because of pensions? Fuggitt-abouttit!

        And if you were such a beacon of intelligence you’d recognize that the social unrest that is sweeping across the entire planet is symptomatic of a change in consciousness, not merely scruffy kids having fun camping on public property.

        Sometimes an intellect can be a hindrance to comprehending what’s going on around oneself. Don’t you agree?

  30. SkippingDog :
    Robert Rizzo is an opportunistic criminal who is not representative of most public servants.
    Don’t confuse him, or other criminals, with the people who serve honorably for decades.

    The only difference between Rizzo and McKinley is Rizzo got caught.

    1. If you don’t like McKinley, recall him from office. Rizzo was an appointed official who effectively looted his own organization for himself. There’s no real comparison between them.

        1. Nobody is looting, Donkey. Repeating your slanderous claim doesn’t magically turn it into the truth.

          When we find examples like Bell of Vernon, you can honestly apply your looting claim. Otherwise, it doesn’t fit at all.

      1. There is every comparison between them. They were trusted to oversee the welfare of the organizations they ran. They both used their positions of trust to enrich themselves and their cronies. And they both are Republican crooks who claim to be Christian, God-fearing men. They are exactly alike.

  31. SkippingDog :
    We have reduced property values that produce fewer property tax revenues, reductions in reported income because of the Great Recession and its impact on unemployment, and therefore a reduction in our primary revenue source: income taxes.

    To be clear, it’s reduced assessments. Market values if anything should be higher since the smaller tax hit makes them more attractive, and that’s pretty much what has happened.

    On balance I think Prop. 13 is preferable to unconstrained property tax increases, it benefits everyone in the housing market, but especially buyers/owners who stay put, which is the way it ought to be.

    The constraints that ballot initiatives have imposed on budget decisions, now that’s a toughie.

    1. Good points, nipsey. Thanks for providing clarification of my post.

      My point was not only about reduced assessments on continuously owned property, but the assessment change upon sale, particularly when we have homes in OC that were formerly sold for $600k-$800k now reselling or short selling for more like $300K-$400k, effectively reducing the property tax revenue produced by 50% on that parcel.

    2. I have no idea what you are saying…market values “should” be higher? How does that work? Are you saying the assessments are not based on comparables…actual sales or actual value so the prices should go up as a result simply because the tax rate is based on a unrealistic assessment? Please clarify.

      If the prices are such a screaming good deal and much lower than antiscipated….. (but the pensions remain the same?) then who wins here?
      I thought I read something about cost of living earlier, would you consider adjusting your pension to reflect the lower cost of housing?

      1. My cost of housing hasn’t changed. My mortgage is still the same as it was years ago and I still have to make the payments.

        Are you now suggesting that because the value of my property has fallen I should be willing to reduce my pension benefit as well, even though my payment obligations are the same as they’ve always been?

        Nipsy was describing the consequences of the real estate bubble bursting, but those of us in homes with outstanding mortgages have sunk costs, much like the pension obligations the state and cities have for retired or vested employees.

        The decline in real estate values will work its way through the system, and probably lower the overall cost of living in California, at least for housing. That will then be factored into the future compensation plans for both government and private employers. In the meantime, old debts remain old debts that must be paid, whether they are mortgages or pensions.

        1. Consider that the housing issue isn’t a win/win for taxpayers….if it was, WHY are so many losing their homes.
          They may not have a pension.

          Also what about the earlier topic of the 14th amendment? You are quick to point out the babies are U.S. citizens BUT who pays for them?
          Are you willing to reduce your pension to cover the costs to keep hospitals open or do you want the taxpayer to foot the bill for this also…how “charitable” are YOU?
          We could call it PPPP; pension provision paternity portion ? or whatever you like, I’m open to even splitting the costs.

          http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14172601/ns/nightly_news/t/dallas-hospital-cares-illegal-immigrants/

          1. I pay taxes just like you do, so whatever costs we incur for our smallest new citizens will continued to be shared by all of us who support the institutions they use. They will eventually grow up, get jobs, pay their taxes and pay into Social Security that the rest of us will use as we enter the winter of our lives.

            There’s really no other moral choice. Would you deny these babies the medical care they need to stay alive just because their parents may have entered our country unlawfully? The babies aren’t the criminals, however you parse it.

            1. …….never said the babies were “unlawful” ……

              Let’s get personal Skippy;

              Would you press charges if someone broke into your house and took your belongings to sell to feed their baby?

              1. Of course, but it wouldn’t be the baby getting charged with a crime, nor would the baby get abandoned when the burglar was arrested.

                I fully agree that there’s no easy answer to the immigration problem, and I don’t claim to have one either. I do know that there’s no possible way to arrest and deport 20 million or more people, so we have to figure out how everyone assimilates into that approaching society – not only the immigrants but you and I as well.

                What would you suggest otherwise? Shoot them?

                1. Why would you arrest them, they just want “a better life” for their baby?

                  Now that you have had the parents arrested for simply wanting to feed their baby YOU have made the baby a victim when the poor child did nothing wrong.

                  Is that moral?

                2. You know fully well that entering the country illegally in search of employment, or even to have a baby for that matter, is nothing like breaking into someone’s private home.

                  Until you figure out a way to fence off the physical boundaries of our country completely, people will always find their way in. That’s why the comments on blogs like this are so amusing when people claim “the American Dream is gone” or similar nonsense. People looking from the outside in still recognize the fact that we remain the land of opportunity, and people on the outside will continue to do what they can to take part in that, for their children if not for themselves.

                  Unless you think there will suddenly be support for using lethal force on someone trying to enter our country without the proper documents or process, we’re going to have to work out the problem on our own. We don’t live on an island.

            2. Oh, Brother. What a humanitarian.

              Why don’t you just admit that you got your gravy train at our expense because your union bought off some idiots like Jones and Bankhead.

              And please do yourself a favor and quit talking about moral choices. It’s comical.

              1. Isn’t the whole discussion we’re having about moral choices, Joe? You believe intergenerational debt is immoral, and you may even feel the same way about taxation in general as far as I can tell from your posts.

                My union didn’t “buy off” anyone, anymore than the FFFF does by exercising their right to petition our government to act in what we believe is our own interest. Until we have public financing of elections, our politicians will always need contributions to run for competitive offices, and the people and groups who supply those funds will always want something in return. That’s been the same since our government began, and in those days of “spoils system” politics, the return one received for political support was a government job that often involved the ability to collect some bribes or graft as part of the deal. Read the case of Marbury vs. Madison for a look at how things were done in those days.

                My pension benefits are nothing more than deferred compensation I earned during 32 years of law enforcement service by completing my obligations under the employment contract I had with the government agency I served.

                Just because you don’t like the salaries and benefits that have been legally contracted with me and others by your own elected representatives doesn’t make them illegal, immoral, or unenforceable. It’s just like any other business.

                1. What laws should we enforce officer, clearly the immigration law does not warrant your respect.
                  Let me know so I can be “moral”.

                2. I respect the immigration laws completely, but I was never a federal officer and immigration is clearly a federal matter. It’s not even a criminal matter unless the person has been deported as an undesirable. It’s a civil violation only.

                  Go ahead and criminalize it if you can. Can you imagine how high your taxes will be when you have 20 million undocumented aliens in our jails and prisons for immigration violations? What will that say about our respect for an individual’s “inalienable rights” that are given by God or nature and only protected by our Constitution and laws?

                3. BTW, anonymous, I fully understand your frustration. I’ve dealt with hundreds of undocumented aliens, some of them violent criminals, but most of them crime victims themselves.

                  Our challenge is to remain true to the ideals we claim to support in our Constitution and find a legal, moral, but most of all practical way to deal with a situation that we have created ourselves over nearly a half-century of lax immigration enforcement.

                  If you really want to end something like illegal immigration, you’ll need to eventually support something like a national identification system (“Your papers, please”) and harsh criminal sanctions for anyone who hires an undocumented person at their business – including heavy fines and long prison sentences. Then, you will have removed the jobs magnet for undocumented aliens…. You will have also altered the basic structure of freedom in our country, but you can’t have it both ways.

              2. By the way, Joe – I was brought up to respect and admire people who supported humanitarian causes, so I’ll take your comment as a compliment, even though you clearly didn’t intend it to be so.

                1. For someone who calls himself “The Fullerton Harpoon” that was pretty weak. Come on, if you’re really trying for insults you can certainly do better than that.

      2. What I am saying is taht a proprtionally reduced tax rate means that, all else being equal, it’s less costly to own a home which makes home buying more attractive, and this tends to inflate prices over what we’d expect to see if Prop. 13 weren’t in place. Look at a place like Texas, the situation is reversed. The state is very dependent on property tax since there is no state income tax, and the high ta rates tends to suppress prices. You can buy gorgeous homes for (relative) peanuts even in nice Houston suburbs.

        I have no idea what else you are saying, I don’t have a pension.

  32. SkippingDog :You know fully well that entering the country illegally in search of employment, or even to have a baby for that matter, is nothing like breaking into someone’s private home.
    Until you figure out a way to fence off the physical boundaries of our country completely, people will always find their way in. That’s why the comments on blogs like this are so amusing when people claim “the American Dream is gone” or similar nonsense. People looking from the outside in still recognize the fact that we remain the land of opportunity, and people on the outside will continue to do what they can to take part in that, for their children if not for themselves.
    Unless you think there will suddenly be support for using lethal force on someone trying to enter our country without the proper documents or process, we’re going to have to work out the problem on our own. We don’t live on an island.

    I know no such thing…your selective morality is just that.
    Be careful talking about being moral when it is your life that is being violated and not your neighbor’s.

    I have been personally violated by those seeking “a better life”.

    An ENTIRE family that came here with the intent (premeditation) to steal, they stole on many levels…from the old people you refer to as “needing them to change their diapers”;
    the illegal told the old person in the “winter of her life” that she needed $$$$$ for a fake operation or her relative would die, the moral old lady fell for the con.

    The illegal children went on to have babies and not pay a dime for their hospital stay, ….signed up for WIC and every other taxpayer funded rip off to get that better life they wanted…while taking $$$ under the table.

    This family alone has reeked havoc on the taxpayers, if they just broke into some one’s home that would be mild monetarily in comparison.

    Real morality is following ALL laws not the ones that YOU decide are moral.

    1. Those are crimes. Nothing makes them acceptable, but they are not the same thing as having a baby in the U.S. without documentation.

      1. o.k. I’ll split hairs with you, is having the baby ON PURPOSE (with financial means to pay the hospital, but lying about those means) and signing up for services like WIC for the baby while not declaring income a crime?
        This is happening over and over again because we let it.
        These women had the babies to anchor themselves here.

        1. If the family has other income and makes a fraudulent claim for WIC benefits or other services, the person making the claim should certainly have to face the consequences of their act.

          Now, what do you do with the baby while mom is off in jail?

  33. SkippingDog :I respect the immigration laws completely, but I was never a federal officer and immigration is clearly a federal matter. It’s not even a criminal matter unless the person has been deported as an undesirable. It’s a civil violation only.
    Go ahead and criminalize it if you can. Can you imagine how high your taxes will be when you have 20 million undocumented aliens in our jails and prisons for immigration violations? What will that say about our respect for an individual’s “inalienable rights” that are given by God or nature and only protected by our Constitution and laws?

    What about protecting us against ALL enemies, foriegn and domestic?

        1. It’s an oath to support and defend both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution, and to faithfully execute the duties of their office, which is to enforce STATE laws.

          Immigration is an element of foreign relations, since foreign governments are involved as well, and is therefore a federal obligation. That’s how our system of dual sovereignty works.

          1. Not true at all. Local police can and do enfore federal law all the time and all over America.

            What the PS RAGWUS feeders in California have done is to refuse to enforce immigration laws at any level and further you have created policies in direct violation of federal law that in fact encourage illegal immigrants to move here, work here, and use legal citizens saftey nets!

            You have no morals, integrity nor honor for the Constitution of the U.S or the Constitution of our state. 🙂

            1. Unless they are cross-sworn as federal officers they have no authority to enforce any federal law, Donk. Federal officers don’t have any authority to enforce state laws either.

              When you think about it a little, you wouldn’t really want state officers to be cross sworn as federal officers. There are two separate constitutions and sets of law to contend with, and there’s always the old maxim that a man can’t serve two masters.

              Would you prefer that all law enforcement officers were federal agents?

  34. SkippingDog :BTW, anonymous, I fully understand your frustration. I’ve dealt with hundreds of undocumented aliens, some of them violent criminals, but most of them crime victims themselves.
    Our challenge is to remain true to the ideals we claim to support in our Constitution and find a legal, moral, but most of all practical way to deal with a situation that we have created ourselves over nearly a half-century of lax immigration enforcement.
    If you really want to end something like illegal immigration, you’ll need to eventually support something like a national identification system (“Your papers, please”) and harsh criminal sanctions for anyone who hires an undocumented person at their business – including heavy fines and long prison sentences. Then, you will have removed the jobs magnet for undocumented aliens…. You will have also altered the basic structure of freedom in our country, but you can’t have it both ways.

    Can’t have it both ways…bull, interpret, ratify, whatever, the 14th amendment that is the legal loophole that is making our nation a laughing stock…when you can come here and have a baby and be therefore entitled to all the benefits that this country has to offer, why not?
    You cannot do that in Mexico or other nations.

    I have no problem showing my papers, or drivers licence, I lived in Arizona when SB1070 went into effect and it was not a problem.
    I had a background check ran on me because I was in a parking lot when a silent alarm went off in a commercial building nearby..not a problem.

    We are so far gone now as a nation with the cost of this that even if we start now I’m not sure we can recover.

    As far as the “moral” issue you are skewed on this, it is not immoral to provide for one’s own family or to provide for a country’s citizen’s first. We are a sovereign nation and we have EVERY right to be and to dictate with a heavy hand who comes into our nation or our personal homes…..unless you just want a one world government of course. If that is your personal philosophy perhaps you should sell your home and live communally. Don’t lock your doors, that would be being a hypocrite.

    1. I understand your anger and frustration, but please tell me how we accomplish your goals without compromising our basic freedoms.

      1. 1)E-verify; enforce and penalise business.

        2)Border security, troops at the border; bring them home and deploy them there, if did not let (I think it was 6) of the 911 hijackers overstay their visas, we may have had a different outcome.
        Build the wall NOW.

        3) Ratify the 14Th amendment so that at least one parent has to be a U.S. citizen for a child to receive citizenship.

        4) Pursue welfare fraud and make it only available to those who can produce documentation that proves they are U.S.citizens.

        …that’s a start

        1. BTW, you’ll need to militarize the Canadian border as well, since that’s where the 9/11 hijackers crossed over into the U.S.

          I’m sure there are hoards of Canadians just waiting for an opportunity to sneak into the U.S. and take advantage of our superior medical system and government services.

  35. I’m sure that’s a fine start. Check in from time to time and let us know how amending the U.S. Constitution is going.

    There will also need to be a lot more federal agents hired by ICE to track down every person who overstays a visa, but I’m sure you’re willing to pay higher taxes for that.

    You’ll probably also need to add an additional amendment to the U.S. Constitution to require proof of citizenship for public assistance, since the “equal protection” provision has long been held to apply to everyone within U.S. jurisdiction and not just citizens.

    What you want is simply unrealistic, but that’s the great thing about our country. You can speak freely and try to create political support for even the most unrealistic ideas.

    1. Nope, I’m not willing to pay more taxes any more than you are willing to take a cut in your benefits, might as well stay on the track to implode financially, like I said earlier, we may have taken on too much water already,
      realistically speaking.
      We may have to contemplate sending out those IOU’s eventually or just print some more money.

      Canada….now that’s a thought.

      1. What if everyone in the US started streaming across the border to Mexico in search of a better life? How ironic would that be?

        1. The cartels would most likely shoot us on site (If they were in a good mood and decided not to behead us)…. if we did not get shaken down first.

          A couple of my Hispanic friends said they have been shaken down by those who represented themselves as officers , one was bold enough not to give any money when he asked how much he had on him…he said he told the officer to take him to the judge or let him go….

  36. I misspoke a few times about 3% at 50.

    The trend is putting all sworn on the 3% at 55 system, not the 2% at 55 system. Civilians are going to the 2% at 55 system.

    This only applies to new employees, not existing employees, and it will take most cities several years to start that system.

  37. Reality is, the 2% at 55 formula was in affect, in most public entities, long before SB400. My municipality, that had enhanced, from 2% at 55, to 3% at 60, in 2001, has now amended back to 2% at 60–lower than where it was, prior to the upgrade. Its not as if the various public entities, are doing nothing, to deal with their own problems, of unsustainable pensions.

  38. Anonymous, I haven’t read your link, but I have read on other news items, about dozens of headless bodies, turning up in various places in MX. Its a drug war, that is worse than the US Mafia.

  39. Didn’t know where else to put this, but here is a cop Fullerton could use!

    The expression “a deer in headlights” became a reality for one Michigan police officer this week.

    A scared deer stood frozen in the middle of a busy Michigan highway for 30 minutes until a sheriff took matters into his own hands, reports KVUE.

    The policeman lifted the animal to safety by moving it to the side of the road, and then waited until it calmed down and ran away into the woods, notes CNN.

    The deer was thought to be in a state of shock from an earlier accident, explains 9 News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.