Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

The rest of the story

March 1, 2014

Dear editor: As happens in the Times Observer from time to time we lose the end of an AP article with important facts to help the reader form their opinion with balanced information: “City labor......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(3)

MTOMTO

Mar-04-14 3:52 PM

They should not be able to have it both ways, as in investing in higher risk instruments without realizing the impact of the risk if the market drops.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MTOMTO

Mar-04-14 3:49 PM

To me, the main issue is that the value of the pension fund is guaranteed (by tax dollars). If the fund takes a loss, our tax dollars make up the difference. The funds reaped great benefit when the market was up. After the market correction, the loss was made up from tax dollars. They are taking the best of both situations at the expense of the taxpayers, most of which do not have guarantees on their retirement plans.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck1

Mar-04-14 10:57 AM

The public employees "fair share" is in reality always tax payer’s money. The privet sectors retirement comes from them and their wage benefits, Not taxpayers! We don't have the luxury of politicians buying our votes, And our wages from a well that won’t dry up or move away.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 3 of 3 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web