c*****r 发帖数: 8227 | 1 关键是这钱会用到哪里?
一言以蔽之:填退休金造成的州赤字的无底洞!“So any money allocated to
schools will merely backfill the teachers' pension fund.”
摘要:
1. 未必增收
As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top
earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the
revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate."
2. 只拿教育经费开刀
Mr. Brown has threatened to "trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his
initiative fails, but he'd make less than $100 million in other trims. How's
that for balance?
3. 问题的症结在于退休福利
Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion this
year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999. There's millions more to be found
in modifying current workers' pensions and retirees' cost-of-living
adjustments as nearly a dozen states have done. In Rhode Island such reforms
have cut the state's pension liability by half. Barring such reforms,
pension costs will continue to balloon and eat up all new revenues. The
California State Teachers' Retirement System has projected that it will need
between $3.5 billion to $10 billion annually over the next 30 years to stay
solvent. So any money allocated to schools will merely backfill the
teachers' pension fund.
全文:
The most important single vote in America next Tuesday, after the
Presidential race, is Governor Jerry Brown's attempt to stick Californians
with another giant tax increase. Mr. Brown and his labor allies say
Proposition 30 will fix the state's budget deficit and ward off education
cuts. But the real choice before voters is whether to issue Sacramento's
incorrigible spendthrifts another blank check.
Two years ago the Governor staged a bow to democracy by pledging that he
wouldn't raise taxes without a vote of the people. The truth is he couldn't
pick off enough Republicans in the legislature for a tax increase without
delivering significant pension reforms, which government unions won't allow.
Thus the last-ditch resort to the ballot box.
The Brown-union plan includes a "millionaire's tax" that kicks in at $250,
000, three new income brackets for high earners and an increase in the top
rate to 13.3% from 10.3% for individuals and many small business owners
making more than $1 million. This would give California the highest income
tax in the country, leaping over Hawaii's 11%. Oh, and by the way, these
higher rates would be retroactive to this year.
Mr. Brown's initiative would also increase the state sales tax by a quarter-
of-a-cent to 7.5%, though this is principally to foster the illusion of "
balance," to quote the Zen-master Governor. The sales tax would generate
only about $1 billion of the $6 billion in new revenue that the Legislative
Analyst's Office projects for the tax increase.
As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top
earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the
revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate."
No kidding.
Nearly everyone who has examined California's chronically unbalanced budget
has recommended flattening its steeply progressive tax code to create a more
stable revenue stream. Mr. Brown himself campaigned for President in 1992
as a flat-taxer. But Democrats in the legislature won't lower tax rates
because they love the revenue windfalls they get when times are good and
they can boost spending.
Then when markets crash, they can cry havoc and lobby for still-higher taxes
. That's what the teachers unions did as recently as 2008, claiming that
cuts that would have merely returned education spending to pre-bubble levels
would cripple schools. Caving to the union pressure, a handful of
Republican legislators in 2009 walked Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's plank
and voted for a $13 billion sales and income tax increase. Schools received
less money over the next two years anyway—while spending on entitlements
and union retirement benefits grew.
Democrats are now back at the same stand. Mr. Brown has threatened to "
trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his initiative fails, but he'd
make less than $100 million in other trims. How's that for balance?
Such "trigger cuts" could easily be re-configured with a modicum of
political will in Sacramento. Instead of slashing $500 million from higher
education, Democrats could kill their quixotic bullet train, which will cost
about $360 million this year alone in debt service, and chop $100 million
in tax credits to their Hollywood friends (who are bankrolling the tax
campaign).
Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion this
year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999. There's millions more to be found
in modifying current workers' pensions and retirees' cost-of-living
adjustments as nearly a dozen states have done. In Rhode Island such reforms
have cut the state's pension liability by half.
Barring such reforms, pension costs will continue to balloon and eat up all
new revenues. The California State Teachers' Retirement System has projected
that it will need between $3.5 billion to $10 billion annually over the
next 30 years to stay solvent. So any money allocated to schools will merely
backfill the teachers' pension fund.
Illinois's laboratory of kleptocracy provides an instructive lesson. In
January 2011 Democrats in Springfield raised the state's income tax by 67%
and corporate rate by 46%. Over the next eight months unemployment surged to
10.2% from 9.4%. So in December lawmakers handed out tax breaks to their
corporate friends who were threatening to flee to more business-friendly
states.
Springfield last year spent all $7 billion in new revenues on retirement
benefits and closed out the last fiscal year with another $8 billion deficit
. Lawmakers increased the cigarette tax in May to raise an additional $400
million for Medicaid. Meanwhile, Governor Pat Quinn is wondering why
lawmakers haven't moved on his pension reform plan.
The only way California can escape its recurring fiscal Frankenstorms is
through reform and economic growth. The former would stimulate the latter
while the Governor's tax initiative would squelch both. Raising taxes on
small business owners when one in five Californians is out of work or
employed part-time because he can't find a full-time job is the definition
of insanity.
Once more cash starts flowing to Sacramento, taxpayers can forget about
budget and regulatory reforms that the Governor has suggested are on his
agenda after the election. The only thing Democrats in Sacramento have
planned after November is more spending. |
M*******c 发帖数: 4371 | |
g*******1 发帖数: 488 | 3 support whom? lz or prop.30
【在 M*******c 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : Support
|
M*******c 发帖数: 4371 | 4 Of course
LZ
【在 g*******1 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : support whom? lz or prop.30
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 5 “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion
this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.”
我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。
top
the
his
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 关键是这钱会用到哪里? : 一言以蔽之:填退休金造成的州赤字的无底洞!“So any money allocated to : schools will merely backfill the teachers' pension fund.” : 摘要: : 1. 未必增收 : As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top : earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the : revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate." : 2. 只拿教育经费开刀 : Mr. Brown has threatened to "trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his
|
d**n 发帖数: 3172 | 6 手机上勉强看看,只动教育?这是恶什么谣言?你们都是应新埋名从Arizona 来的吧?
总共缺十几billion,prop30大概能有六七B,还有怎么办?我给你几个关键词,8.3
billion cut Jerry brown google 看看都砍在什么地方。本来是十几个B,准备动
pension,legal cost 太大,而且根本没有胜算。还有什么收不到钱,根本不值一驳。
你们动pension我没意见,不要搞乱社会,我孩子没学上就行,等你们大乱大治了,咱
家孩都摊上大乱了,大治都毕业了。
★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Mitbbs Lite 7.56 |
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 7 你说的翻一倍应该是baby boomer退休人数大幅增加所致,而不是个人退休金额越来越高
码
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion : this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.” : 我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。 : : top : the : his
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 8 pension 不论如何改革都是个庞氏骗局,越到后期窟窿越大,没治。
但要是没有退休保障,没有股权没有花红奖金的公务员还有人去干么?
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion : this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.” : 我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。 : : top : the : his
|
c*****r 发帖数: 8227 | 9 关键是这钱会用到哪里?
一言以蔽之:填退休金造成的州赤字的无底洞!“So any money allocated to
schools will merely backfill the teachers' pension fund.”
摘要:
1. 未必增收
As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top
earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the
revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate."
2. 只拿教育经费开刀
Mr. Brown has threatened to "trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his
initiative fails, but he'd make less than $100 million in other trims. How's
that for balance?
3. 问题的症结在于退休福利
Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion this
year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999. There's millions more to be found
in modifying current workers' pensions and retirees' cost-of-living
adjustments as nearly a dozen states have done. In Rhode Island such reforms
have cut the state's pension liability by half. Barring such reforms,
pension costs will continue to balloon and eat up all new revenues. The
California State Teachers' Retirement System has projected that it will need
between $3.5 billion to $10 billion annually over the next 30 years to stay
solvent. So any money allocated to schools will merely backfill the
teachers' pension fund.
全文:
The most important single vote in America next Tuesday, after the
Presidential race, is Governor Jerry Brown's attempt to stick Californians
with another giant tax increase. Mr. Brown and his labor allies say
Proposition 30 will fix the state's budget deficit and ward off education
cuts. But the real choice before voters is whether to issue Sacramento's
incorrigible spendthrifts another blank check.
Two years ago the Governor staged a bow to democracy by pledging that he
wouldn't raise taxes without a vote of the people. The truth is he couldn't
pick off enough Republicans in the legislature for a tax increase without
delivering significant pension reforms, which government unions won't allow.
Thus the last-ditch resort to the ballot box.
The Brown-union plan includes a "millionaire's tax" that kicks in at $250,
000, three new income brackets for high earners and an increase in the top
rate to 13.3% from 10.3% for individuals and many small business owners
making more than $1 million. This would give California the highest income
tax in the country, leaping over Hawaii's 11%. Oh, and by the way, these
higher rates would be retroactive to this year.
Mr. Brown's initiative would also increase the state sales tax by a quarter-
of-a-cent to 7.5%, though this is principally to foster the illusion of "
balance," to quote the Zen-master Governor. The sales tax would generate
only about $1 billion of the $6 billion in new revenue that the Legislative
Analyst's Office projects for the tax increase.
As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top
earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the
revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate."
No kidding.
Nearly everyone who has examined California's chronically unbalanced budget
has recommended flattening its steeply progressive tax code to create a more
stable revenue stream. Mr. Brown himself campaigned for President in 1992
as a flat-taxer. But Democrats in the legislature won't lower tax rates
because they love the revenue windfalls they get when times are good and
they can boost spending.
Then when markets crash, they can cry havoc and lobby for still-higher taxes
. That's what the teachers unions did as recently as 2008, claiming that
cuts that would have merely returned education spending to pre-bubble levels
would cripple schools. Caving to the union pressure, a handful of
Republican legislators in 2009 walked Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's plank
and voted for a $13 billion sales and income tax increase. Schools received
less money over the next two years anyway—while spending on entitlements
and union retirement benefits grew.
Democrats are now back at the same stand. Mr. Brown has threatened to "
trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his initiative fails, but he'd
make less than $100 million in other trims. How's that for balance?
Such "trigger cuts" could easily be re-configured with a modicum of
political will in Sacramento. Instead of slashing $500 million from higher
education, Democrats could kill their quixotic bullet train, which will cost
about $360 million this year alone in debt service, and chop $100 million
in tax credits to their Hollywood friends (who are bankrolling the tax
campaign).
Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion this
year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999. There's millions more to be found
in modifying current workers' pensions and retirees' cost-of-living
adjustments as nearly a dozen states have done. In Rhode Island such reforms
have cut the state's pension liability by half.
Barring such reforms, pension costs will continue to balloon and eat up all
new revenues. The California State Teachers' Retirement System has projected
that it will need between $3.5 billion to $10 billion annually over the
next 30 years to stay solvent. So any money allocated to schools will merely
backfill the teachers' pension fund.
Illinois's laboratory of kleptocracy provides an instructive lesson. In
January 2011 Democrats in Springfield raised the state's income tax by 67%
and corporate rate by 46%. Over the next eight months unemployment surged to
10.2% from 9.4%. So in December lawmakers handed out tax breaks to their
corporate friends who were threatening to flee to more business-friendly
states.
Springfield last year spent all $7 billion in new revenues on retirement
benefits and closed out the last fiscal year with another $8 billion deficit
. Lawmakers increased the cigarette tax in May to raise an additional $400
million for Medicaid. Meanwhile, Governor Pat Quinn is wondering why
lawmakers haven't moved on his pension reform plan.
The only way California can escape its recurring fiscal Frankenstorms is
through reform and economic growth. The former would stimulate the latter
while the Governor's tax initiative would squelch both. Raising taxes on
small business owners when one in five Californians is out of work or
employed part-time because he can't find a full-time job is the definition
of insanity.
Once more cash starts flowing to Sacramento, taxpayers can forget about
budget and regulatory reforms that the Governor has suggested are on his
agenda after the election. The only thing Democrats in Sacramento have
planned after November is more spending. |
M*******c 发帖数: 4371 | |
|
|
g*******1 发帖数: 488 | 11 support whom? lz or prop.30
【在 M*******c 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : Support
|
M*******c 发帖数: 4371 | 12 Of course
LZ
【在 g*******1 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : support whom? lz or prop.30
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 13 “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion
this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.”
我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。
top
the
his
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 关键是这钱会用到哪里? : 一言以蔽之:填退休金造成的州赤字的无底洞!“So any money allocated to : schools will merely backfill the teachers' pension fund.” : 摘要: : 1. 未必增收 : As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top : earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the : revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate." : 2. 只拿教育经费开刀 : Mr. Brown has threatened to "trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his
|
d**n 发帖数: 3172 | 14 手机上勉强看看,只动教育?这是恶什么谣言?你们都是应新埋名从Arizona 来的吧?
总共缺十几billion,prop30大概能有六七B,还有怎么办?我给你几个关键词,8.3
billion cut Jerry brown google 看看都砍在什么地方。本来是十几个B,准备动
pension,legal cost 太大,而且根本没有胜算。还有什么收不到钱,根本不值一驳。
你们动pension我没意见,不要搞乱社会,我孩子没学上就行,等你们大乱大治了,咱
家孩都摊上大乱了,大治都毕业了。
★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Mitbbs Lite 7.56 |
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 15 你说的翻一倍应该是baby boomer退休人数大幅增加所致,而不是个人退休金额越来越高
码
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion : this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.” : 我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。 : : top : the : his
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 16 pension 不论如何改革都是个庞氏骗局,越到后期窟窿越大,没治。
但要是没有退休保障,没有股权没有花红奖金的公务员还有人去干么?
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : “Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion : this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999.” : 我老的猫斗说按现在的速度,退休福利每 7.5年翻一倍,板上遭到了者明爱地取笑。 : : top : the : his
|
c*****r 发帖数: 8227 | 17 放心,即便把教师的pension端掉,他们的薪水也有足够的吸引力!
如果能把教师工会端掉,才能引入竞争,我们的孩子的教育才真正有希望。
【在 d**n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 手机上勉强看看,只动教育?这是恶什么谣言?你们都是应新埋名从Arizona 来的吧? : 总共缺十几billion,prop30大概能有六七B,还有怎么办?我给你几个关键词,8.3 : billion cut Jerry brown google 看看都砍在什么地方。本来是十几个B,准备动 : pension,legal cost 太大,而且根本没有胜算。还有什么收不到钱,根本不值一驳。 : 你们动pension我没意见,不要搞乱社会,我孩子没学上就行,等你们大乱大治了,咱 : 家孩都摊上大乱了,大治都毕业了。 : ★ Sent from iPhone App: iReader Mitbbs Lite 7.56
|
p*******g 发帖数: 178 | 18 工会是毒瘤是吸血鬼
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 放心,即便把教师的pension端掉,他们的薪水也有足够的吸引力! : 如果能把教师工会端掉,才能引入竞争,我们的孩子的教育才真正有希望。
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 19 来,说说看教师的薪水有多少?好让大家评评理:)
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 放心,即便把教师的pension端掉,他们的薪水也有足够的吸引力! : 如果能把教师工会端掉,才能引入竞争,我们的孩子的教育才真正有希望。
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 20 对了,另外大家对这个pension这么痛恨,那些公务员
究竟退休后能拿多少pension?
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 来,说说看教师的薪水有多少?好让大家评评理:)
|
|
|
d**p 发帖数: 510 | |
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | |
i******s 发帖数: 8734 | 23 考,很多行业即没有退休保障,又没有股权没有花红奖金的, 不是照样有大把的人在
干吗?
你以为都象硅公硅婆似的。
【在 n***b 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : pension 不论如何改革都是个庞氏骗局,越到后期窟窿越大,没治。 : 但要是没有退休保障,没有股权没有花红奖金的公务员还有人去干么?
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 24 拿不了多少,也就是退休前最高工资,(比如一般人都是最后一年加上积攒了半辈子的
vacation 和老板最后一年给你的N多overtime) 乘以 80%, 然后给到你配偶死而已。
多呼哉?
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 对了,另外大家对这个pension这么痛恨,那些公务员 : 究竟退休后能拿多少pension?
|
j*****3 发帖数: 654 | 25 一心只为了pension混教师队伍的,能是好老师吗?
倒是有些真心喜欢孩子的老师,因为教育系统一切都是论资派队,没有优胜劣汰奖勤罚
懒寒了心,还有政府左一个右一个往教材里塞乱七八糟的东西,老师教什么,没有足够
的自主性,私生活还被全方位监视,一个不谨慎私下里说句政治不正确的话就被挑事儿
开除,真是有事业心有能力的,哪个愿意忍这些一忍几十年?剩下的可不就是混退休的
了吗,这些混日子的能教出什么好来?
现在教师的社会地位降低,教师工会的形象变差,不能只怪社会和家长吧。 |
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 26 这是真的?现在还有给到退休前最高工资?而且现在哪个系统能攒半辈子vacation?
overtime是随便说给就给的?
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 拿不了多少,也就是退休前最高工资,(比如一般人都是最后一年加上积攒了半辈子的 : vacation 和老板最后一年给你的N多overtime) 乘以 80%, 然后给到你配偶死而已。 : 多呼哉?
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 27 给你几个有名有姓的。
第一个数字是base, 后面是七七八八,最后一行是total.
不过这里面有一个人我老辗转知道他还拿了军队一份完整pension,那军队给的钱是在最
后数字之外的。
Hillsborough Constantouros, Anthony City Manager
City Manager
$227,934 $0 $155,257 $23,596 $62,926 $0 $5,698 $12,173
$487,583
Redwood City Cavallero, Stephen J Battalion Chief
Fire
$127,589 $23,073 $256,005 $16,043 $49,740 $10,672 $2,552
$482 $486,156
Palo Alto Denson, Kenneth Police Lieut-Adv
Police
$195,169 $0 $212,739 $17,816 $51,134 $0 $0 $845 $477
,703
San Ramon Valley Fire Protection Dist. Collins, Bryan Assistant Chief
Emergency Operations
$196,040 $0 $101,295 $31,058 $159,272 $0 $0 $4,353 $
492,017
Alameda County Ahern, Gregory James Sheriff
Sheriff's-Administration
$267,871 $0 $22,192 $25,772 $165,329 $0 $44,050 $63
$525,277
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 这是真的?现在还有给到退休前最高工资?而且现在哪个系统能攒半辈子vacation? : overtime是随便说给就给的?
|
c*****r 发帖数: 8227 | 28 信手拈来。。。
注意喔,老师一年有三个月不用上班的。。。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 来,说说看教师的薪水有多少?好让大家评评理:)
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 29 不是抬杠哈,您老光挑最高的看好像不太合理哈,哪个社会哪个行业都有蠹虫哈。
我老纯属好奇的google了一下CalPERS的2011 report
http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/about/pubs/comprehensive-ann
第23页:
The PERF paid $14.2 billion in retirement benefits to
528,343 annuitants during the 2010-11 fiscal year, compared
to $13.0 billion paid to 505,862 annuitants during the
2009-10 fiscal year. Benefit payments increased primarily
due to an increase in the number of retirees and the
average benefit amount, including cost-of-living
adjustments (COLA).
做个最简单的算数:
14.2 B / 528,343 = 26876.48
每个人每年平均才27k,恐怕都不够这里大佬随便拔根毛的,难道这个报告是假的?
还是我老看错了?
disclaimer: 我老不是这个系统的,也不认识这个系统的人。只是在这里看好像
大家都对公务员非常切齿痛恨感到好奇。望解惑。
173
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 给你几个有名有姓的。 : 第一个数字是base, 后面是七七八八,最后一行是total. : 不过这里面有一个人我老辗转知道他还拿了军队一份完整pension,那军队给的钱是在最 : 后数字之外的。 : Hillsborough Constantouros, Anthony City Manager : City Manager : $227,934 $0 $155,257 $23,596 $62,926 $0 $5,698 $12,173 : $487,583 : Redwood City Cavallero, Stephen J Battalion Chief : Fire
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 30 感觉这个数据跟0bama给的类似哈,不是说高工资的没有,
可是看我老前面的link,这些个都是top 10%的,就跟这
版上大家都说贫困线300K,可是也架不住先富1M开外啊,
几个sigma以外的数据用来做代表性数据好像在哪里都不
合理合法吧。
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 信手拈来。。。 : 注意喔,老师一年有三个月不用上班的。。。
|
|
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 31 keyword: COLA.
This cola is not your 25 cents coca cola.
It is a real cola that no 401K plan, however high your balance might be,
could possibly give you.
至于你的问题,答案就是两点
1:一般来说你的benefit 是根据你服务年限的。拿到完整的一般需要30年。这个50多
万退休人员里面,很多是服务了只有几年然后又去其他地方工作的,所以平均就好像不
是很多。
还有就是 2:
70年代退休多年的老人,虽然有多年的cola 仍不足100%抵销通胀,所以就少了。
实际如果按最近2012年退休,工作满30年的话,平均数额应该不止5w.然后按cola每年
调整,给到你配偶死。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 不是抬杠哈,您老光挑最高的看好像不太合理哈,哪个社会哪个行业都有蠹虫哈。 : 我老纯属好奇的google了一下CalPERS的2011 report : http://www.calpers.ca.gov/eip-docs/about/pubs/comprehensive-ann : 第23页: : The PERF paid $14.2 billion in retirement benefits to : 528,343 annuitants during the 2010-11 fiscal year, compared : to $13.0 billion paid to 505,862 annuitants during the : 2009-10 fiscal year. Benefit payments increased primarily : due to an increase in the number of retirees and the : average benefit amount, including cost-of-living
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 32 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次
还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设
5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也
不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下
http://www.401kcalculator.org/
Annual Salary: 300K
Percent Contribution: 10%
Employer Match: 0%
Current age: 35
Current 401K balance: 0
Retirement age: 65
Annual rate of return: 8%
Expected annual salary increase: 0%
Employer max (match ends at this % of salary): 0%
The balance of your 401K in 30 years will be $3,398,496
这里已经用了两个非常underestimate的假设:
1. Employer match: 0% - 没有那个公司不match吧
2. Expected annual salary increase: 0% - 30年一分钱工钱不涨
就这样65岁的时候您老的401K尽资产已经两倍于别人30年拿到手的总和,而且
您老401K在65岁以后的30年里还在持续产生新的资本。
当然这个比较不是非常科学,因为相当于用一个现在的数据和将来数据比较,
但是通胀数据不知道,没法合理估计将来pension能拿多少钱哈,如果按现在
的消费水平和5w的pension同比投射到30年后将来,我老觉得公务员的生活水
平还是比不上归工的。
话说回来,如果大家都觉得公务员比归工舒服,挣得多,为什么不都去当公务
员呢?为什么都要拿着归工的高工资,反到去骂别人福利好哪?不理解。
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : keyword: COLA. : This cola is not your 25 cents coca cola. : It is a real cola that no 401K plan, however high your balance might be, : could possibly give you. : 至于你的问题,答案就是两点 : 1:一般来说你的benefit 是根据你服务年限的。拿到完整的一般需要30年。这个50多 : 万退休人员里面,很多是服务了只有几年然后又去其他地方工作的,所以平均就好像不 : 是很多。 : 还有就是 2: : 70年代退休多年的老人,虽然有多年的cola 仍不足100%抵销通胀,所以就少了。
|
w******y 发帖数: 8040 | 33 401K average annual return 8% 这个假设太扯淡了
08年的时候很多老头老太太的401K腰斩甚至膝斩了
不过这都不是重点
重点是pension存在过, 就应该可以消失掉
正如private sector的pension基本都消失了
public union是一个社会畸胎, 顽固的强迫
纳税人给它们提供pension
这是强盗的逻辑
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次 : 还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设 : 5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也 : 不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下 : http://www.401kcalculator.org/ : Annual Salary: 300K : Percent Contribution: 10% : Employer Match: 0% : Current age: 35 : Current 401K balance: 0
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 34 这么比。
A: 2012/1/1年退休,1982开始工作,工作了30年。退休之前一年年薪 6w多。政府工作
,10点上班,午饭时间购物,下午三天接孩子。无压力。每天照顾孩子功课。锻炼,瑜
伽,经常请假看医生,看牙医,或者单位组织锻炼旅游。 好现在退休金厘定为5w. 跟
通胀上涨。从现在到死拿到手的总额是, 2012 dollar*35年*5w = 175w.
B: 1982开始工作。2012/1/1退休,从1982年每年投入401K到达法律上限,然后再假设
你勇猛无比的全额投入了SP500,承担了巨大的风险之后,最后总额大概(没有精确计
算SP500de起伏,按平均算, 近30年SP500平均年回报7.7%)最后你的钱大概是90w左右
。而你还有管理这90w的责任,保值增值,谈何容易?如果你按照书里说的,一般债券
一半股票云云,那最后手里只有60-70w.
90 vs 175, 可以负担的起全额投满401K的悲催归公 vs 一天工作3个小时不到的政府大
妈。
优劣立判。有木共赌
这还是说的一个最最普通,只能拿到平均的一个小喽罗的退休待遇
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次 : 还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设 : 5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也 : 不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下 : http://www.401kcalculator.org/ : Annual Salary: 300K : Percent Contribution: 10% : Employer Match: 0% : Current age: 35 : Current 401K balance: 0
|
B***t 发帖数: 115 | 35
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次 : 还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设 : 5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也 : 不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下 : http://www.401kcalculator.org/ : Annual Salary: 300K : Percent Contribution: 10% : Employer Match: 0% : Current age: 35 : Current 401K balance: 0
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 36 老头老太08年腰斩的那些太激进了吧,不然正常按年纪
调整allocation的话顶多down 20%了不起了,再说到10
年末基本都涨回来了。
pension消不消失跟我们这里说的没关系。大家一直在
说pension如何好如何好可是我不理解它究竟哪里好了。
当然我老个人赞成pension消失,可是要pension消失,
就必然要大幅提高公务员工资,到时候这里恐怕要闹得
更厉害了。不给他(她)们(不是它们)提供pension,
就得给人家提供同比薪酬啊,凭啥一样的人人家就要比
归工少挣那么多呢?人家也一样有老婆孩子要养活啊,
也一样有房子要供着,也一样憧憬向往幸福美丽的生活
啊。
【在 w******y 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 401K average annual return 8% 这个假设太扯淡了 : 08年的时候很多老头老太太的401K腰斩甚至膝斩了 : 不过这都不是重点 : 重点是pension存在过, 就应该可以消失掉 : 正如private sector的pension基本都消失了 : public union是一个社会畸胎, 顽固的强迫 : 纳税人给它们提供pension : 这是强盗的逻辑
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 37 童工同仇,各尽所能,平均分配,赞!
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 老头老太08年腰斩的那些太激进了吧,不然正常按年纪 : 调整allocation的话顶多down 20%了不起了,再说到10 : 年末基本都涨回来了。 : pension消不消失跟我们这里说的没关系。大家一直在 : 说pension如何好如何好可是我不理解它究竟哪里好了。 : 当然我老个人赞成pension消失,可是要pension消失, : 就必然要大幅提高公务员工资,到时候这里恐怕要闹得 : 更厉害了。不给他(她)们(不是它们)提供pension, : 就得给人家提供同比薪酬啊,凭啥一样的人人家就要比 : 归工少挣那么多呢?人家也一样有老婆孩子要养活啊,
|
a**n 发帖数: 2431 | 38 这话说得
漠漠也有家要养阿
漠漠也向往美好生活啊
也要同酬?
有本事也作归公阿
你还别笑编程序简单
我还就不信那些dmv拿10多万的能学出来
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 老头老太08年腰斩的那些太激进了吧,不然正常按年纪 : 调整allocation的话顶多down 20%了不起了,再说到10 : 年末基本都涨回来了。 : pension消不消失跟我们这里说的没关系。大家一直在 : 说pension如何好如何好可是我不理解它究竟哪里好了。 : 当然我老个人赞成pension消失,可是要pension消失, : 就必然要大幅提高公务员工资,到时候这里恐怕要闹得 : 更厉害了。不给他(她)们(不是它们)提供pension, : 就得给人家提供同比薪酬啊,凭啥一样的人人家就要比 : 归工少挣那么多呢?人家也一样有老婆孩子要养活啊,
|
w******y 发帖数: 8040 | 39 如果public union没有了
一切由市场调节
那时候公务员的工资大幅上涨,
至少我个人可以接受
hehe, 不过我真不觉得市场化后,
它们工资会上涨
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 老头老太08年腰斩的那些太激进了吧,不然正常按年纪 : 调整allocation的话顶多down 20%了不起了,再说到10 : 年末基本都涨回来了。 : pension消不消失跟我们这里说的没关系。大家一直在 : 说pension如何好如何好可是我不理解它究竟哪里好了。 : 当然我老个人赞成pension消失,可是要pension消失, : 就必然要大幅提高公务员工资,到时候这里恐怕要闹得 : 更厉害了。不给他(她)们(不是它们)提供pension, : 就得给人家提供同比薪酬啊,凭啥一样的人人家就要比 : 归工少挣那么多呢?人家也一样有老婆孩子要养活啊,
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 40 磨磨不需要考CBEST,不需要实习18个月考核teaching Credential, 不需要考subject
test
【在 a**n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 这话说得 : 漠漠也有家要养阿 : 漠漠也向往美好生活啊 : 也要同酬? : 有本事也作归公阿 : 你还别笑编程序简单 : 我还就不信那些dmv拿10多万的能学出来
|
|
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 41 不是同酬啊,我老哪里说了同酬了?是“同比薪酬”,
比如您老挣30w,不能让人家只挣5w吧?当然我老没有
统计数据支持具体该给人家多少,但是我老觉得如果
贫困线是30w,给人家10w应该是合理的吧,假设pension
改401k,不然人家连放401k的余粮都没有,那你怎么
说服人家把pension砍掉?这里都是精英,不能总是跟
红脖一样只会屁股决定脑袋吧。
【在 a**n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 这话说得 : 漠漠也有家要养阿 : 漠漠也向往美好生活啊 : 也要同酬? : 有本事也作归公阿 : 你还别笑编程序简单 : 我还就不信那些dmv拿10多万的能学出来
|
B***t 发帖数: 115 | 42 Exactly. 看看各种工作需要什么样的教育,能力,工作强度,时间。如果某些公务员
的工作只需要高中学历,按部就班,没有压力挑战的话,为什么要和归公同样的待遇?
警察之类的公务员当然可以拿高工资。
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 童工同仇,各尽所能,平均分配,赞!
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 43 again,不是同酬,是“同比薪酬”,中间有个“比”字,
是比例的意思。我老赞成能者多劳,多劳多得,我老自己
也是PhD,自己也是程序猿,也希望自己能多挣点,但是
不希望自己的幸福是单单建立在别人的痛苦上,既砍了人
家的pension,又不给人涨工资。
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 童工同仇,各尽所能,平均分配,赞!
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 44 无论你怎么说。
根据我老上面的计算,一个体制内退休金总量是一个归公的两倍
优渥至此,归公们就算高尚的想帮他们撑,也是力不从心的。简单算术而已。 已经超
过普通归公的capacity了。下面录像,你点击之后只需听一句话即可。
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xvz8tg
【在 n***b 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 磨磨不需要考CBEST,不需要实习18个月考核teaching Credential, 不需要考subject : test
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 45 我老的中文很难理解吗?为什么大家都一致想到“同样的待遇”上去了?
【在 B***t 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : Exactly. 看看各种工作需要什么样的教育,能力,工作强度,时间。如果某些公务员 : 的工作只需要高中学历,按部就班,没有压力挑战的话,为什么要和归公同样的待遇? : 警察之类的公务员当然可以拿高工资。
|
m*******i 发帖数: 8711 | 46 no one said to remove their retirement benefit. The current pension system
is unattainable |
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 47 我一直不看好pension这种庞氏骗局,现在的公务员队伍里混着一大群吃干饭的草包,
早就该雷掉,剩下的能人我不反对他们拿高薪,比如我侄子以前在Lowell high school
的物
理老师是物理phd,教得很好
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 无论你怎么说。 : 根据我老上面的计算,一个体制内退休金总量是一个归公的两倍 : 优渥至此,归公们就算高尚的想帮他们撑,也是力不从心的。简单算术而已。 已经超 : 过普通归公的capacity了。下面录像,你点击之后只需听一句话即可。 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=xvz8tg
|
w******y 发帖数: 8040 | 48 有union在,
教得好的老师和教得差的没区别
school
【在 n***b 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 我一直不看好pension这种庞氏骗局,现在的公务员队伍里混着一大群吃干饭的草包, : 早就该雷掉,剩下的能人我不反对他们拿高薪,比如我侄子以前在Lowell high school : 的物 : 理老师是物理phd,教得很好
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 49 教得好不好是看个人passion,跟union 无关
【在 w******y 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 有union在, : 教得好的老师和教得差的没区别 : : school
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 50 支持,我觉得真要干的是第一是精简政府机构,第二是取缔工会。pension这种东西
实在不应该是大家攻击的第一目标,何况现在的状况也只是少数蠹虫钻漏洞和空子,
以至于公众形象太差,实际支出并不见得有多高。
school
【在 n***b 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 我一直不看好pension这种庞氏骗局,现在的公务员队伍里混着一大群吃干饭的草包, : 早就该雷掉,剩下的能人我不反对他们拿高薪,比如我侄子以前在Lowell high school : 的物 : 理老师是物理phd,教得很好
|
|
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 51 警察消防的pension也tmd鬼扯,在职时的高薪已经compensate他们的work risk了,退
休后凭啥还用高薪作为计算的base
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 支持,我觉得真要干的是第一是精简政府机构,第二是取缔工会。pension这种东西 : 实在不应该是大家攻击的第一目标,何况现在的状况也只是少数蠹虫钻漏洞和空子, : 以至于公众形象太差,实际支出并不见得有多高。 : : school
|
a**n 发帖数: 2431 | 52 r u saying "unsustainable" ?
【在 m*******i 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : no one said to remove their retirement benefit. The current pension system : is unattainable
|
a**n 发帖数: 2431 | 53 pls look at the data
the pension cost is simply UNSUSTAINABLE
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 支持,我觉得真要干的是第一是精简政府机构,第二是取缔工会。pension这种东西 : 实在不应该是大家攻击的第一目标,何况现在的状况也只是少数蠹虫钻漏洞和空子, : 以至于公众形象太差,实际支出并不见得有多高。 : : school
|
B***t 发帖数: 115 | 54 Then let the market decides. I am Ok with whatever salary they can get, just
like I admire how much Engineers in Google/Facebook earn. With public
union, there is no competition of public work.
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 我老的中文很难理解吗?为什么大家都一致想到“同样的待遇”上去了?
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 55 啥data,给个link?为啥不sustainable?
我老的每个数据,都有link backup,没啥,research做多了
的习惯。也希望大家同样给个reference,这样我老错也能知
道错哪儿了,:-)
【在 a**n 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : pls look at the data : the pension cost is simply UNSUSTAINABLE
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 56 对呀,这样就跟我老说得没啥两样了,咱都是自称精英的,总得知道最基本的
“又想马儿跑,又要马儿不吃草”是行不通的。要取缔pension,就得在其他方
面补偿,否则,pension就是人家生存权的一部分。
just
【在 B***t 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : Then let the market decides. I am Ok with whatever salary they can get, just : like I admire how much Engineers in Google/Facebook earn. With public : union, there is no competition of public work.
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 57 不理解“unattinable“,如果说的是”unsustainable“,请问为何认为现在的
系统不可持续?
还是在我老刚才贴的CalPERS 2011 report里,23页,2011总支出 14.2B,employee
+ employer contribution 3.6 B + 7.5 B = 11.1 B,investment income 241.8 B
- 201.6 B = 30.2 B. 尽增长 30.2 B + 11.1 B - 14.2 B = 27.1 B.
盼解惑。
【在 m*******i 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : no one said to remove their retirement benefit. The current pension system : is unattainable
|
f*****i 发帖数: 3558 | 58 ft 什么时候30万真成了贫困线或者平均线。。。什么时候有401k就多少都有match的
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 感觉这个数据跟0bama给的类似哈,不是说高工资的没有, : 可是看我老前面的link,这些个都是top 10%的,就跟这 : 版上大家都说贫困线300K,可是也架不住先富1M开外啊, : 几个sigma以外的数据用来做代表性数据好像在哪里都不 : 合理合法吧。
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 59 大牛我老再多说两句。
大牛为何不把Calpers豪赌,2007-09 一役书掉 1/3的壮观展现一下?
为何不把calpers 整5年前(2007年10月) 库平267B,笑傲鄙视欧亚各国退休基金的佳话
拿出来翻翻? 岂不比现在这241B还要微风八面? 那时候领退休金的只有45w人哦。
否则岂不是断章取义,混淆视听?跟巧言令色欺瞒百姓的贪官有何区别?
实际上如果不是户部以江山社稷,子孙后代为筹码,化鼎铸币,Calpers主力已经被歼
灭一次了。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 不理解“unattinable“,如果说的是”unsustainable“,请问为何认为现在的 : 系统不可持续? : 还是在我老刚才贴的CalPERS 2011 report里,23页,2011总支出 14.2B,employee : + employer contribution 3.6 B + 7.5 B = 11.1 B,investment income 241.8 B : - 201.6 B = 30.2 B. 尽增长 30.2 B + 11.1 B - 14.2 B = 27.1 B. : 盼解惑。
|
b**f 发帖数: 240 | 60 既然你老的data那么牛那么全,就把龟公30万base,连拿30年,和3.3m的401k也拿出来
看看。随便你的,或你同事朋友的,我老就想瞻仰一下。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 不理解“unattinable“,如果说的是”unsustainable“,请问为何认为现在的 : 系统不可持续? : 还是在我老刚才贴的CalPERS 2011 report里,23页,2011总支出 14.2B,employee : + employer contribution 3.6 B + 7.5 B = 11.1 B,investment income 241.8 B : - 201.6 B = 30.2 B. 尽增长 30.2 B + 11.1 B - 14.2 B = 27.1 B. : 盼解惑。
|
|
|
b**f 发帖数: 240 | 61 硅工只是private sector 一小部分,怎末也算top 10%,public sector干什么的都有
,不好这么比吧。就像不能拿真正的贫困线(不是30万那个)来比一样。要比要拿
public private平均值,我好像记得就平均薪水来说public sector就要高,更不要提
pension了。
另外小声问一句,3.3m的401k是按年薪30万的10%算得吗?你能放那么多吗。我那系统
的硅工也牛过,不过按您随便给的那几个数,我们以后可以不叫硅工了。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次 : 还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设 : 5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也 : 不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下 : http://www.401kcalculator.org/ : Annual Salary: 300K : Percent Contribution: 10% : Employer Match: 0% : Current age: 35 : Current 401K balance: 0
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 62 好吧,我被打败了,原来30万真的不是贫困线:)
我老的初衷只是不明白为什么这里天天说30万贫困线,但是又回头对人家拿的
刚够温饱的pension耿耿于怀,切齿痛恨。我没有说公立系统的福利不好哈,
据我老所知,大部分人还是想削尖脑袋钻到公立系统里面的,毕竟全加州平均
的median income从来就不高,以wiki数据为例
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_Sta
2009年加州household median才$58,931,这样公立系统pension确实值得妒忌,
但我老也一直以为只是我等升斗小民斤斤计较,而不是贫困线30万人群嫉妒的
对象。所以才困惑,才提问。提问的初衷从来就不是广大劳苦大众,如果这个
对象群体因为讨论而大幅改变的话,当我从来没说过:)
【在 f*****i 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : ft 什么时候30万真成了贫困线或者平均线。。。什么时候有401k就多少都有match的
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 63 sorry,我老对时事政治不太关心,所以这些都不知道,我老也不是绿卡公民啥的,
也木有投票权,只是看最近大家讨论热烈,而又很多不明白,所以发问,大牛见笑
了:)(您老才是大牛,我老差远了)
虽然还木有看过这些个数据(输掉1/3啥的),但是我老窃以为,2007-2009输掉1/3
的基金不要太多吧,但是到2010末基本不都回来了么?回头我老再研究研究再来请
教。
佳话
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 大牛我老再多说两句。 : 大牛为何不把Calpers豪赌,2007-09 一役书掉 1/3的壮观展现一下? : 为何不把calpers 整5年前(2007年10月) 库平267B,笑傲鄙视欧亚各国退休基金的佳话 : 拿出来翻翻? 岂不比现在这241B还要微风八面? 那时候领退休金的只有45w人哦。 : 否则岂不是断章取义,混淆视听?跟巧言令色欺瞒百姓的贪官有何区别? : 实际上如果不是户部以江山社稷,子孙后代为筹码,化鼎铸币,Calpers主力已经被歼 : 灭一次了。
|
x*z 发帖数: 1010 | 64 冤枉啊,不是随便给的几个数,30万贫困线不是这里公认的么?如果不是,那您说说
究竟该用多少计算合适?
【在 b**f 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 硅工只是private sector 一小部分,怎末也算top 10%,public sector干什么的都有 : ,不好这么比吧。就像不能拿真正的贫困线(不是30万那个)来比一样。要比要拿 : public private平均值,我好像记得就平均薪水来说public sector就要高,更不要提 : pension了。 : 另外小声问一句,3.3m的401k是按年薪30万的10%算得吗?你能放那么多吗。我那系统 : 的硅工也牛过,不过按您随便给的那几个数,我们以后可以不叫硅工了。
|
j***u 发帖数: 3917 | 65
——————————怎么可能?
CA的教师工资低是公认的。
【在 c*****r 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 放心,即便把教师的pension端掉,他们的薪水也有足够的吸引力! : 如果能把教师工会端掉,才能引入竞争,我们的孩子的教育才真正有希望。
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 66 那要看在哪个城市,在弯曲绝对算是底的, 看SF学区的老师薪资就知道了,
【在 j***u 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : : ——————————怎么可能? : CA的教师工资低是公认的。
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 67 大牛隐藏的深阿。 我老没事,帮你捧场。
Here is another keyword: The R in calpeRs.
Here R means retirement---implying this fund is not an all-in-option-no-
hedge-gambling-fund. It doesn't suppose to 书掉 1/3 in a few months.
前贴已经解释了:基本回来的根本原因,是因为宝源宝泉铸币所致。实属侥幸。还有部
分原因是 there were/are contributions coming in during recent years.
而书钱的过程,可以定性为好勇斗狠,贪婪无度,公器私用,追涨杀跌所致。反正赢了
是他们的,书了由加州全体归公承担。 何乐不为?
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : sorry,我老对时事政治不太关心,所以这些都不知道,我老也不是绿卡公民啥的, : 也木有投票权,只是看最近大家讨论热烈,而又很多不明白,所以发问,大牛见笑 : 了:)(您老才是大牛,我老差远了) : 虽然还木有看过这些个数据(输掉1/3啥的),但是我老窃以为,2007-2009输掉1/3 : 的基金不要太多吧,但是到2010末基本不都回来了么?回头我老再研究研究再来请 : 教。 : : 佳话
|
b**f 发帖数: 240 | 68 您老不是硅工吗?有没有401k呀。要没有的话还说自己的401k比别人的pension好有点
自虐啊。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 冤枉啊,不是随便给的几个数,30万贫困线不是这里公认的么?如果不是,那您说说 : 究竟该用多少计算合适?
|
z******a 发帖数: 5381 | 69 一个老师+一个比较资深的政府雇员的家庭,每年工作日在180-190左右,无压力生活
其中退休金福利价值每人每年等值5w. 两人10w. 两人工资收入15w. 总额折合 25w,不
过按15w 扣税。任何政客重点打击的25w以上的,都打击不到他们。人家也永远不用担
心amt.
跟归公两人总共30w,按30w扣税的贫困县,实际回报非常接近
但是体制内的生活,工作强度,对技能的要求,比如跟asan周旋的技能的要求,都不可
同日而语了
所以证明
1: 30w贫困县是没问题的
2: 体制内的回报太优渥了,归公xmjdh 绝对是应该的
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,我被打败了,原来30万真的不是贫困线:) : 我老的初衷只是不明白为什么这里天天说30万贫困线,但是又回头对人家拿的 : 刚够温饱的pension耿耿于怀,切齿痛恨。我没有说公立系统的福利不好哈, : 据我老所知,大部分人还是想削尖脑袋钻到公立系统里面的,毕竟全加州平均 : 的median income从来就不高,以wiki数据为例 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_Sta : 2009年加州household median才$58,931,这样公立系统pension确实值得妒忌, : 但我老也一直以为只是我等升斗小民斤斤计较,而不是贫困线30万人群嫉妒的 : 对象。所以才困惑,才提问。提问的初衷从来就不是广大劳苦大众,如果这个 : 对象群体因为讨论而大幅改变的话,当我从来没说过:)
|
n***b 发帖数: 5914 | 70 you are assuming all these government employees continue to live another 30
years after retirement
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 一个老师+一个比较资深的政府雇员的家庭,每年工作日在180-190左右,无压力生活 : 其中退休金福利价值每人每年等值5w. 两人10w. 两人工资收入15w. 总额折合 25w,不 : 过按15w 扣税。任何政客重点打击的25w以上的,都打击不到他们。人家也永远不用担 : 心amt. : 跟归公两人总共30w,按30w扣税的贫困县,实际回报非常接近 : 但是体制内的生活,工作强度,对技能的要求,比如跟asan周旋的技能的要求,都不可 : 同日而语了 : 所以证明 : 1: 30w贫困县是没问题的 : 2: 体制内的回报太优渥了,归公xmjdh 绝对是应该的
|
|
|
k*********t 发帖数: 2999 | 71 用5W单收入和30万双收入比?呵呵,果然是做research的。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 好吧,虽然您老说的大部份没看懂,尤其是那句英文哈(我老反复看了3/4次 : 还是没看懂,英文太烂了,低头)。但我们就用那个5w做参考数据吧,假设 : 5w每年(服务满30年),从65拿起,拿30年,不算通胀,就是1.5M,好像也 : 不是很多啊。随便找了个401K calculator,按版上300K贫困线随便算了一下 : http://www.401kcalculator.org/ : Annual Salary: 300K : Percent Contribution: 10% : Employer Match: 0% : Current age: 35 : Current 401K balance: 0
|
k*********t 发帖数: 2999 | 72 其实就和私立学校老师比就行了。没有养老金教得还更好。
【在 z******a 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 一个老师+一个比较资深的政府雇员的家庭,每年工作日在180-190左右,无压力生活 : 其中退休金福利价值每人每年等值5w. 两人10w. 两人工资收入15w. 总额折合 25w,不 : 过按15w 扣税。任何政客重点打击的25w以上的,都打击不到他们。人家也永远不用担 : 心amt. : 跟归公两人总共30w,按30w扣税的贫困县,实际回报非常接近 : 但是体制内的生活,工作强度,对技能的要求,比如跟asan周旋的技能的要求,都不可 : 同日而语了 : 所以证明 : 1: 30w贫困县是没问题的 : 2: 体制内的回报太优渥了,归公xmjdh 绝对是应该的
|
j*****3 发帖数: 654 | 73 这不是嫉妒的问题,这是你老一直在谈的公平的问题,为什么private sector就是401K
风险自负,public sector就一定得有旱涝保收的pension?
而且最关键的,private sector的401k是雇主自愿的,没有法律规定公司一定要提供
401k,但是市场机制决定了没有401K留不住人才,所以公司自愿提供各种福利,这就说
明pension不是必须的,pension对公司的竞争力甚至是有害的,为什么几大汽车破产重
组以后,工会主动同意比较不那么优惠的term?如果工会死抱着以前的待遇要求不放,
结果必然是大家一起沉船。皮之不存,毛之焉附?公司都玩完了,工人的福利从哪里出
??
转回头来看public sector的pension,付钱的人是你我他,当我们不愿意也无力负担
pension的时候,为什么不能说NO?为什么还被要挟着绑架着年复一年地付下去?就是
因为工会和政客吃准了我们不敢让加州破产,吃准了还能从我们身上榨出更多的血汗钱
,好像汽车工会要等到公司真破产了才能觉悟,除非你我他tax payer坚定地说NO,加
州工会死也不会主动松开嘴里的肥肉。
还有你老前面说的归公30w,就不能让别人低于5w,I'm sorry but that's total BS
in a market economy。除非你老说我们现在改走社会主义了,否则开多少工资不是政
客、工会、还有你老这样富于同情人的人士啪啪脑袋就能决定的。
一家公司的工资开得太高,利润下滑会影响其竞争力;开得太低,人才外流也会影响其
竞争力,说到底是供需关系决定一切,不尊重市场运行的内在规律,用行政命令的方式
强行提高工资和福利,其结果只能是要么裁员要么破产,跟良好的初衷事与愿违。在没
有垄断和行业壁垒的情况下,一种工资水平存在就是合理。政府和立法机构真正应该做
的是打破垄断和壁垒,促进行业内竞争,而不是micro management跑去强制人家公司开
多少工资福利给员工,it won't work。
【在 x*z 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 冤枉啊,不是随便给的几个数,30万贫困线不是这里公认的么?如果不是,那您说说 : 究竟该用多少计算合适?
|
d****u 发帖数: 272 | 74 Well said
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 7.5
【在 j*****3 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png) : 一心只为了pension混教师队伍的,能是好老师吗? : 倒是有些真心喜欢孩子的老师,因为教育系统一切都是论资派队,没有优胜劣汰奖勤罚 : 懒寒了心,还有政府左一个右一个往教材里塞乱七八糟的东西,老师教什么,没有足够 : 的自主性,私生活还被全方位监视,一个不谨慎私下里说句政治不正确的话就被挑事儿 : 开除,真是有事业心有能力的,哪个愿意忍这些一忍几十年?剩下的可不就是混退休的 : 了吗,这些混日子的能教出什么好来? : 现在教师的社会地位降低,教师工会的形象变差,不能只怪社会和家长吧。
|