Guaranteed pensions for everyone have been dead for sometime.
Many do not deserve them, particularily when they don't pay enough into them over the years. Who wants to be stuck with a manager who doesn't leave because of a pension only?

there are other checks and balances that should be in place in dealing with a poor manager. Don not punish the majority for a minor issue. I do not believe in the shot gun approach to discipline. You take care of the dead weight through the process and not use it as an excuse.

It was tried for 100 years!
Each person with a guaranteed pension coming protects the back of all the others!
There has to be an incentive where you do not get it unless you perform some specifics, not just have adjectives said about you in reviews. Bonuses work fairly well if not too large...if they are some will kill to get them.
Pensions were used mainly to obtain people who would work for half salary all their life to continue getting it after they retire. Not very imaginative people!

I would like to know if you have any first hand experience or knowledge in regards to a defined benefit or "pension." If you do please share withn therest of us. Otherwise, it just appears that you have formed an opinion based on half truths and fictions or either you are completely misinformed about the employees of Fayette County and the services they provide daily to the citizens of Fayette.

Those kinds of pensions are DEAD.
That is what I'm telling you!
If they don't work for industry, they don't work for government employees!
Even the Civil Service abandoned them for 401ks, etc.

I understand that you feel pensions are dead. But I'm asking you for your opinion as to why you feel they are dead. Private industry and government are two different animals. If you don't believe it then do the comparisons yourself. All I keep hearing is that Delta and other big private industry leaders are going away from pensions but no one is saying why. It's about the profit margin! Look at all the benefits an employee of Delta enjoys and the salary ranges.

Last time I checked Fayette County wasn't in business to make a profit. The county is in business to provide services. These services cost money and to provide the best service, "where quality is a lifestyle", for the citizens you must have the best employee you can. Having a great benefits packagge helps to ensure quality employees.

choke and gag, I agree with $. Government and the private sector are not different with respect to managing their budget's and cost's. Georgia as well as other states are looking at the rising cost of retirees and are pursing ways to reduce that burden.

-------------------------------------------
Conservatism – apply it directly to the forehead.

Yes government and the private sector both have to manage their budgets and the major part of that is minimizing costs. But the two can not be compared side by side with respect to goals and final outcomes of those goals. Private industry can not begin to address the many facets of a government. Government has so many directions to consider and most industries only have one goal to attain.

It’s not an issue of comparisons between private and government sectors. What it comes down to, is there is only so much money in state and or county budgets. As retirement and health care cost rise they crowd out other programs in the budget. Eventually, the budgets require more funding i.e., increased taxes or ways are sought to minimize, through reduce sending, the impact of these costs.

-------------------------------------------
Conservatism – apply it directly to the forehead.

Legit question. What's wrong with a transportable 401K plan for the county employees? If it's good enough for the private sector then why is it not good enough for our government employees?

Many county employees will not work long enough at the county to gain a pension and with a 401K they could take their monies with them if a job change is required. Plus, as a county employee subject to political volatility I'd like to know that I could carry my contributions with me when I'd get forced out by some elected political hack and his/her cronies.

Thanks in advance... Git.

**** GIT REAL TOUGH ON CRIME ****

"That man was Griffin Judicial Circuit District Attorney Scott Ballard".

CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

Wonderful point. No one ver said it is not good enough but what it does is add a measure of security in a time that the markets are so unstable. There are many out there that would prefer a defined benefit over the up and down game of the market.

Employees not working long enough to benefit from a pension solves some of the nay sayers problems. But, that is one of the goals of a pension. Retention of trained employees is a must. It cost money, time, and assets to train new employees. And then you have the lag time to get that individual to the performance and experience level of the trained employee that left. This is a hard task and has a drain on the budget and the system. If you are constantly having to train a new bunch of entry level employees then you either have to put off something else or have a position to ensure those tasks are also getting completed.

In private industry if a company sees a need, that is monetarily balanced, they fill the need. We don't have that benefit in local government. Once we see the need we must present why we have the need, do a cost analysis, and justify the position. At that point it is up to elected officials to determine if the budget can sustain the need or if the need has to be absorbed into the current staffing numbers. I'm sorry for the run on and I'm sure you realize this. I just want to ensure that everyone that has a chance to read this has the same information.

Also, not all employees within the government are subject to the will of an elected official as far as their employment status is concerned. Once the need for a required minimum staffing in an area is determined, say 5 employees in the Elections Office, then it is really unlikely that the Commission will vote to reduce the staffing.

Thanks alot for your reply and I hope I expressed my opinion in a manner that didn't offend you. You make a valid and informed point but it differs a bit from mine.

All I'll say is that pensions are out dated and an unsustainable method of fuding retirement plans. History has proved that they ultimately to not work. Look a Social Security. Look at all the corporations that are crippled from having to continuously fund retiree benefits. Pensions are utltimately a pyramid scheme that doesn't work. The only reason it works for government is that if they need more money they are able to forcibly take it via additional tax revenues.

Heck, I love my wife's TRS teacher's retirement. Guaranteed monies for the rest of her and my lives. We're going to get a lot more out of it than we ever put into it. Even with that said, it still doesn't make economic sense. And I ask? Why do government employees deserve better than the ones actually creating the wealth and revenues in this country?

P.S. Please don't start saying that I hate police, firefighters, and teachers. It would be a wasted breath.

**** GIT REAL TOUGH ON CRIME ****

"That man was Griffin Judicial Circuit District Attorney Scott Ballard".

CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

but what it does is add a measure of security in a time that the markets are so unstable.

So, can I assume that you feel that investing retirement monies back into the government coffers is a better investment than investing long term in the markets?

Don't we already have 50 plus years of historical statistics that show the performance of the investments placed in the markets vs. those that were invested in government [Social Security]? As for me and my investments..... I'll choose Wall Street over Uncle Sam any day.

Please tell me that you're not bidding to administer the counties pension fund. Otherwise... why would someone defend it so heartedly unless they were the recipient of it?

**** GIT REAL TOUGH ON CRIME ****

"That man was Griffin Judicial Circuit District Attorney Scott Ballard".

CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

First of all, I would never say that just because you have a different view on pensions you are a public safety and education opponent. To me the two really don't go hand in hand.

As far as Social Security goes I believe that a major part of the problem is the many hands that find themselves into the pot using the money for other other means. I feel that if the account is managed properly the end result is better. When I put my money into an account and watch it grow it is a process that starts off slowly and then gains momentum as the balance grows. If the government has the same thing then their statring amounts are higher thus the money grows at a much faster rate than any one individuals account can grow.

Doesn't Uncle Sam invest the same way we do? The difference is the hands that have access to the money for reappropriation.

If you are asking if I stand to be a recipient of a county defined benifit program the answer is yes. I am a county employee and I have been for quite some time. I have no plans on leaving the county and unless my health fails me, I will be an employee for the county for quite some time more.

By the way, I also live in the county and have since before I became and employee. I too would be affected by any tax increase but I also realize the value of getting what I pay for.

First of all, I would never say that just because you have a different view on pensions you are a public safety and education opponent.

Thank you. Others would.

When I put my money into an account and watch it grow it is a process that starts off slowly and then gains momentum as the balance grows.

Agreed. I just prefer Market Incomes vs. Treasury or Bond Rates. Plus I desire to control my retirement future.

If the government has the same thing then their starting amounts are higher thus the money grows at a much faster rate than any one individuals account can grow.

I disagree. Example: Let's say we sample a year where the government grows the fund by 6% on say 40 million dollars in assets. Then the same year my market based funds grow at a conservative 10% then I win. So the amount of monies they start with are irrelevant to who gets the larger return. Sooo.... If you get a defined pension of, let's say, $3500 per month I stand the chance of having a pension that is much higher if I start early and I'm consistent. Plus...I'm in control. Now let's say your pension fund makes a return of 25% percent over the next 15 years. What does that do for your pension? Here...let me help with that one.... you get the same $3500 per month.

Doesn't Uncle Sam invest the same way we do?

Eric... Come on... You are smarter than that. Uncle Sam NEVER invests. He only spends and consumes. Show me the bank vault that holds all the investments that we pay into Social Security. IT AIN'T THERE! Again.. I trust keeping my investments under my control rather than my intoxicated, free spending uncle's.

The difference is the hands that have access to the money for reappropriation.

"THE HANDS" that have access to my retirement monies are what scare the hell out of me. Hi. I'm from the government. I'm here to help you. Nice stash of cash you have there son. Here, let me hold that for you. Trust Me.

If you are asking if I stand to be a recipient of a county defined benifit program the answer is yes.

I understand your concerns for your future and your thoughtful positions.

I am a county employee

Thanks for the job you do and your longevity in your position. Good people are to be valued. Unless your one of those whose job is to hold the shovel up all day. Not you of course.

By the way,..... I too would be affected by any tax increase but I also realize the value of getting what I pay for.

I'm willing to pay for value too. However and respectfully, there are very few instances where government actually returns a proper value or return for the investments made.

Hey! Great conversation. To quote my Liberal friend who likes to spin around in the air and blow up bad guys I say:

Cheers

**** GIT REAL TOUGH ON CRIME ****

"That man was Griffin Judicial Circuit District Attorney Scott Ballard".

CLICK HERE FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

Of Course, you know you make very valid and substantiated points. I quess my greatest concern is the uncertainty of it all. Thanks for your insight and your appreciation of the jobs we all do. By the way, I don't lean on a shovel. (HA!HA!) I play checkers!