Arnold hot to change 3 at 50... - City Beat - citybeat's Blog - Bakersfield.com

Jun 28, 2009 at 09:06 PM : Some would say this is...

Some would say this is an unfair benefit. However look at it this way. Public servants who put their lives on the line for strangers whom the've never met are well deserving of this bebefit.

Jun 29, 2009 at 02:06 AM : Local, state and...

Local, state and federal workers are paid professionals and should be treated as such. All people working in public service (Including elected officials) should have to go for a 401 or something of that nature just like everyone else. Why should they be guarantied full retirement while the people paying taxes and their wages are forced to plan for their own retirement. It’s especially annoying when they’re guarantied retirement while the age for drawing Social Security keeps going up and the benefits keep going down.

Jun 29, 2009 at 08:06 AM : That "putting...

That "putting their lives on the line" argument is a crock. Only certain lines of police work are dangerous. The Gang Unit, and city cops on patrol to their next volatile situation, THAT I can totally respect. Unlike the CHP, the wussiest cop job of all, yet they also get the 3 at 50.

It's more dangerous to work in a bank or a 7-11 than it is to pull over happy families, inspect trucks at the weigh stations, do background checks and close down freeways.

They've created the most enviable socialist utopia for themselves, and those who normally protest "socialism" are the first to defend THIS system of cradle-to-grave care.

Jun 29, 2009 at 09:06 AM : SwallowThat Gum, you...

SwallowThat Gum, you are completely void of any reality sir.. To call a CHP Officer job " the wussiest" tells me all I need to know about you and your comments.

Jun 29, 2009 at 02:06 PM : While I don't...

While I don't have a problem with police & fire having such a benefit, and to some extent corrections. Those jobs deserve it because it really is a young person's job.

That being said, any other state or government worker should not be afforded such a overgenerous benefit. When the majority of the population will have to work much longer to retire. They should have to come out of pocket (with a match from the state) to fund thier own retirement. It works in the private sector, it should work for the government. And that is the problem. Our government needs to be ran more like the private sector. More public workers should share in paying for thier benefits, just as in the private sector.

Jun 29, 2009 at 06:06 PM : I agree completely...

I agree completely Btowntv007.

There is also a profound moral hazard to providing such an unrealistic retirement benefit.

The hazard is corruption at all levels. An individual is far more likely to go along to get along in the face of corruption, when threatened with the loss of such cushy benefits.

An individual that takes full responsibility for retirement, and maintains full control of the funds, is far more likely to speak out. The removal of retirements benefits can’t be used as a threat. This is especially true if pay levels for a given skill set are truly in parity with the private sector.

Jul 13, 2009 at 08:07 PM : Police, sheriff,...

Police, sheriff, correctional officers, and CHP all need only a high school education. Teachers need five years and have to have 150 hours of professional development every five years to renew their credentials.

Give teachers what peace and correctional officers get, or reduce the police pay to match teachers'.

Jul 23, 2009 at 08:07 AM : Don’t let...

Don’t let the politicians divide the working class. They are like the owner of two dogs, throwing out table scrapes to watch them fight. They put private sector against public employees and nonunion verses union for their on gains. Don’t fall for it. There are plenty of substantial private retirement benefits and pension plans out there. If someone thinks getting a portion of a middle class income is lucrative, they need to go get a dictionary. We need to get rid of the political parties that support the corporate elitists and social program recipients. There needs to be a "Working Class Party".

Nov 6, 2009 at 12:11 PM : Press Release...

Press Release

October 26, 2009

Office of Public Affairs
(916) 795-3991
Pat Macht, Director, External Affairs
Contact: Brad Pacheco, Chief
pressroom@calpers.ca.gov

CalPERS Responds to Emerging Issues Via New Web Site

SACRAMENTO, CA – The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) has launched CalPERSResponds.com – a new Web site dedicated to educating its members, employers and stakeholders about emerging issues including pension security, investments and national health care reform.

The new Web site also serves as a platform for CalPERS social media presence on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

“There’s a lot of information and misinformation about CalPERS,” said Patricia K. Macht, CalPERS Director of External Affairs. “We hope this site will help separate the facts from fiction and provide some education, insight and clarity to these issues.”

CalPERS Responds.com is also home to Insight, a new video program that highlights conversations with CalPERS leaders on key issues.

In a recent interview, CalPERS Chief Investment Officer Joe Dear talked about the recovery of the investment portfolio and the importance of financial market reforms.

“We’ve moved up from the bottom in March 2009. At about $160 billion dollars to just above $200 billion dollars, which is a $40 billion dollar improvement in the portfolio,” said Dear. “We can’t forget the consequences of the failure of the regulatory system and its contribution to the devastating losses that all investors suffered. We need to strengthen the regulatory agencies and give them independence. We need regulators that have the skill that are empowered and motivated to protect the public interest. And secondly we need to close the gaps in the regulatory system. When these systems fail, it’s not just investors who suffer, its ordinary working men and women and their roles as taxpayers.

CalPERS also debunks the common myths associated with public pensions with facts, including:

The average CalPERS pension is about $25,000 per year. Half of CalPERS retirees receive $16,000 per year or less in benefits. Unlike the private sector, many CalPERS members do not receive Social Security, making their CalPERS pension their sole source of pension income, other than savings.
Only 1 percent of the nearly half million CalPERS retirees receive annual pensions of $100,000 or more. Many are retired non-unionized or specialized skilled employees or other high wage earners who worked 30 years or more. Many served in high-level management positions.
The downturn in the markets is the cause of greater employer contributions. Even if changes to pension formulas did not exist, CalPERS would need more contributions from employers, due to market losses over the past year.
CalPERS spends about $5.7 billion a year to provide health care. Costs have risen in the last few years and our economic recession is amplifying the impact on the health care marketplace. Since 2003, health premiums have risen by more than 60 percent. National health care reform can bring about systemic changes that make health care affordable for our employers and our members.

“Retirees need to know that the security of their benefit checks is without question,” added Dear in his Insight interview. “Our assets are more than sufficient to make those payments and that we’re positioned for long term growth. And our ability to earn the seven and three quarter’s percent over the long-term, is without question going to be done.”

CalPERS is the largest public pension fund in the U.S. It administers retirement benefits for more than 1.6 million active and retired State, public school, and local public agency employees and their families on behalf of 2,600 California public employers, and health benefits for nearly 1.3 million members.

###

Dated: 10-26-2009