Comments on: California’s Deficit http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/ Ed Ring's EcoWorld Posts Sun, 5 Jul 2009 01:50:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Employees Retirement System http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/comment-page-1/#comment-91220 Employees Retirement System Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:35:15 +0000 http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/#comment-91220 <strong>Employees Retirement System...</strong> Thanks for this post!... Employees Retirement System…

Thanks for this post!…

]]> By: Ed Ring http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/comment-page-1/#comment-79203 Ed Ring Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:26:50 +0000 http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/#comment-79203 Daniel - it's easy to demonize the free market, but the private sector taxes are what funds public entities. And while there are a few thousand arguably overpaid top executives in the private sector in California (for example), there are 16 million private sector workers in California. It is the 16 million we're concerned about, and lowering salaries and benefits for a relative handful of overpaid private sector top executives would only be a drop in the bucket towards making the 16 million better off. What you have to ask yourself is what level of taxpayer funded health and retirement security would California's economy support for 20 million people, which would be the 16 million private sector workers and the 3.7 million public sector workers? Figure that out, calibrate it somehow in a manner similar to social security where how much you make and how long you work influences the level of your benefit - and then give every worker in California the same deal. That's all I'm trying to advocate. I agree with you on principle, but I don't think it is economically feasible to give 20 million people a deal as sweet as the privileged public sector workers currently enjoy. Remember also the private sector must not only pay taxes to support the public sector, they also must compete on the global market. The fact that the public sector is immune from the forces of globalization should be cause for their unions to be strictly regulated, instead of the current situation, where they dominate election financing and exert nearly absolute control over state, county and municipal governments. Daniel - it’s easy to demonize the free market, but the private sector taxes are what funds public entities. And while there are a few thousand arguably overpaid top executives in the private sector in California (for example), there are 16 million private sector workers in California. It is the 16 million we’re concerned about, and lowering salaries and benefits for a relative handful of overpaid private sector top executives would only be a drop in the bucket towards making the 16 million better off.

What you have to ask yourself is what level of taxpayer funded health and retirement security would California’s economy support for 20 million people, which would be the 16 million private sector workers and the 3.7 million public sector workers? Figure that out, calibrate it somehow in a manner similar to social security where how much you make and how long you work influences the level of your benefit - and then give every worker in California the same deal.

That’s all I’m trying to advocate. I agree with you on principle, but I don’t think it is economically feasible to give 20 million people a deal as sweet as the privileged public sector workers currently enjoy.

Remember also the private sector must not only pay taxes to support the public sector, they also must compete on the global market. The fact that the public sector is immune from the forces of globalization should be cause for their unions to be strictly regulated, instead of the current situation, where they dominate election financing and exert nearly absolute control over state, county and municipal governments.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/comment-page-1/#comment-79137 Daniel Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:14:22 +0000 http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/01/10/californias-deficit/#comment-79137 What about private fund managers, private CEOs, private Managers reaping millions and underpaying their private staff? That's free market for you. Why not the other way around? Let's say, private workers getting the same benefits as public wokers. Wouldn't everyone be uch happier? What about private fund managers, private CEOs, private Managers reaping millions and underpaying their private staff?

That’s free market for you.

Why not the other way around? Let’s say, private workers getting the same benefits as public wokers. Wouldn’t everyone be uch happier?

]]>