First Circuit Court:The government has no obligation to honor its pension promises

Many states have a bloated pension programs for public employees, it has to change or taxes have to go up.
That’s what happens when you kick the can down the road for decades.

But you can’t cut people’s pensions... People planned their fucking life around this shit. How many people would have never taken a government job if it wasn’t for the pension?

Many of these people made less money for their entire career than they would have in the private sector with the understanding that they would have secure benefits IN RETURN.

Absolutely disgusting; when a government is no longer required to honor a contract, who is?This is the sure sign of a society in decline.
 
Last edited:
They should release some criminals right in front of the people's homes who are responsible for this decision.

Sorry you didn't pay for it, so......



That can be step one. However, if things don't improve after that, we need to call France and see if they can dust off the guillotines for us.
 
That can be step one. However, if things don't improve after that, we need to call France and see if they can dust off the guillotines for us.
too gallic. Americans prefer short rope and high objects.
 
No surprise. Pensions need to be Defined Contribution, not Defined Benefit. It is insane for the company or govt to take on such risk and obligation.
 
Pensions are a thing of the past. Should eliminate them entirely.

This is so obvious it is not even funny. Companies and govt can contribute to a retirement account owned and managed by the employee. This is called a Defined Contribution pension plan.
 
What?? Murkans are finding out they cant have 0 taxes and nice things at the same time???

Who woulda thunk it?????
 
They provided service in good faith and it's the State that is not honoring their obligation.

hiya Teppodama,

the state cannot meet its obligations because;

1) the state promised pensions, but did not raise enough revenue to back up those promises.

2) taxpayers want support their police and firefighters, on one hand, but on the other do not want taxes raised to point where these pension agreements can be fulfilled.
its a problem; Rhode Island already has really high property taxes.

3) lots and lots of these folks are marching into retirement at the same time. its them baby boomers, getting in line for their benefits - as they'll be doing for the next decade or so.

the greed of the public sector unions landed Rhode Island in this mess.

it starts in 1977, when the General Assembly gave the city's unions a controlling number of seats on the city's Retirement Board.

in 1989, the board granted compounded cost-of-living adjustments of 5 and 6 percent for all present and future public safety retirees and 3 percent for non-uniformed workers.

this is why we cannot have nice things.

the union members should take a cut - unless the citizens of Rhode Island would rather see their school funding cut, medicaid cut, and their roads and bridges in a state of disrepair, just so the pensioners can make out great.

back in 2014, Providence had 37 retirees bringing in over 100K per year in pensions. over eight thousand dollars per month, most of them firefighters.

that is crazy.

- IGIT
 
Don't create a pension system and then 20 years down the line tell them it's invalid. That's pretty ridiculous coming from the government. What's next? Will they tell us Bonds aren't backed anymore.

They should honor those Pension employees and move future employees to 401k like what most states are doing.
 
Back
Top