The " Rally for Hoosiers" is hoping for 25,000 people to descend on the capitol. Like their protests inside the Statehouse for the past few weeks, many say they will continue to demand union rights and protection for the middle class.
[. . .]
With street construction, and tens of thousands of visitors in town for the Big Ten tournament, some of the labor unions are hoping for downtown gridlock. That's an actual goal. They want supporters filling up downtown parking garages.
In a flier they stated "this will help us jam things up downtown. If we can take up as many parking spaces as possible people will complain. This will impact businesses, and the Chamber causing them to tell their friends in the General Assembly to do whatever it takes to keep these people from tying up the town like this."
Are these people delusional? Somebody actually thinks causing a massive traffic jam and irritating thousands of Big Ten basketball fans is going to win them support? Businesses are going to complain to the Chamber, which will then beg legislators to make the
Comments
You nailed it Harl.
But a Keogh plan also is tax deferred, correct?
AJ
Yes Andrew, contributions are tax deferred, your point?
So Zank chose the "freedom" of being his own boss, and doesn't like the difference in benefits? And now he's upset other people chose something different and got things he didn't?
Sounds like whining to me.
BTW
Now tell me Zank, how am I a leech, exactly? You still haven
People rarely are "their own boss". Some people have one boss. The self-employed have MANY.
A leech is someone who insists that a contract be honored. Tim isn't a leech. For instance, if you sign a listing with him, and he finds a buyer for you, I'm sure Tim would be nice enough to allow you to void that listing contract you signed, so that you can sell the house directly to the buyer, and avoid paying the 7% commission that bogs down the economy as much as a 7% sales tax would.
Harl, do you hold that opinion of all salespeople or just the ones that sell real estate?
Aren't you leaching off the government for your tax deferred contributions? because while you are not paying taxes on that income until you retire, ostensibly other taxpayers are picking up your tab. Instead, you could not be a leach and give the federal government its taxes due now and not accept the subsidy from them.
AJ
Again, I got a 401k, so I am leaching off the government using your definition.
Not at all Andrew, tax deferred retirement accts. are available to everyone, therefore it's a level playing field, no "leeching", even on your part!
Nice try though.
State government jobs - and all those leaching benefits - are available to everyone as well, if you are willing to apply and take one of those jobs.
AJ
"I can
Michael, I don't know where you work, so yes, technically I don't know if you personally are in fact "leeching" off of anyone. It was an assumption on my part, given your proclivity to cheerlead for any and all things government sponsored.
If you are not a public sector union worker, then in this particular instance you would not be considered a leech. I apologize.
Can your life go on as before now?
And you've proven my point, Tim Zank. You're selfish and self-involved -
that's what I find funny. Why all the vitriol aimed at public sector workers and their good benefits. Why not exert comparable anger at the private sector to restore benefits/pensions that have been cut or better yet, add those kinds of perks to jobs that today have none. instead of dragging all of us down to a lowest common denominator, why not lift up everyone so that all workers, public and private, will benefit from an enhanced quality of life?
AJ
"Harl, do you hold that opinion of all salespeople or just the ones that sell real estate?"
No. It has nothing to do with occupation.
Some people think all contracts should be honored. Sounds reasonable.
Some people thnk no contracts are inviolate. I can respect that.
You seem to think that contracts should be opened up when you have something to gain, and untouchable when you have something to lose. That's stinkin' thinkin'.
Andrew, you say: "Why not exert comparable anger at the private sector to restore benefits/pensions that have been cut or better yet, add those kinds of perks to jobs that today have none."
Why do you think those benefits/pensions & perqs no longer exist in the private sector? Because the companies can't print money. They couldn't and obviously can't afford to offer them and still operate. That's the whole point.
That's why there is "anger" at the public employees in public unions who not only have better wages, better insurance, and better retirement, the money to pay for all of it comes from us that make less and have fewer benefits. It's like Robinhood in reverse for gods sake.
Do you think the company you work for can afford to pay 100% of your health premiums, and fund 94% of your lifetime pension? Why would you think the government can afford to, the government is in fiscal shambles.
Bullshit.
Companies don't need to print money. The GOP has been giving it to them in increasing quantities for years. If anyone has been "Robinhood in reverse," it's been the GOP giving tax breaks to companies.
Why don't you think companies can't "afford" to pay such good benefits? Look at some of the obscene profits by private corporations; heck, my employer, Gannett, even with all the tough times, is doing double digit profit margins. It's just never enough.
Your shilling for filthy rich people, Tim. It's not becoming of you.
AJ
"Why do you think those benefits/pensions & perqs no longer exist in the private sector?"
Good question. Where did YOU get the silly idea that they no longer exist in the private sector?
Benefits such as pensions, vacations, healthcare, etc are what I call tax deferred or payment in kind. Workers take a reduction in salary in exchange for a higher pension, more weeks vacation starting some time in the future, etc. Having worked and seen people who were to receive five weeks vacation after working 25 years, to be told the max is now 4 weeks is in my opinion wrong. Instead of making a promise to give a person 5 weeks vacation if they stayed 25 years, I would have just asked for more money up front.
When ever I have analyzed a new position, I look at wage, bonus, benefits, affect of differen taxes (sales, income, local and federal) and cost of living. After 30 years I have come to the conclusion it is best just to take more money upfront and no promise of a future benefit such as healthcare in retirement, pension, vacation etc. These can change.
The problem with government pensions and benefits is that the elected representatives have no idean how to calculate the present value cost. Just look at Social Security. In 1937 when it began the tax rate should have been at least 8%, but it was just 2%. Medicare should have been at least 75, but it was not even 1%. Police and fire pensions prior to 1977 were paid out of current revenues and their costs were never accrued on a yearly basis which just meant that future taxpayers who never benefits from these services had to pay. The property tax reform transferred all these local liabilities prior to 1977 to the State. I have no idea how the state of Indiana is going to make good on them do you? In simple terms teacher, police and fire pensions are nothing more than ponzi schemes, no different than Social Security and Medicare.
People who are in unions should realize this. There are two options, layoff a lot of employees in order to reduce costs or lower the cost of keeping these workers by reducing benefits in order to keep all working. Companies do this all the time, but it is a new task for government.
When the taxpayer's income falls and there benefit costs increase, so must government costs fall. If teachers do not like, quit teaching and find a job in the private sector. If police do not like their benefits, change occupation. The same goes for all workers. Good luck!