Gov. Brown: Courts *Must* Let California Slash its Public-Sector Pensions (camps, living in)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by fluffythewondercat

Moonbeam likes to sound sensibly conservative on occasion but never backs it up. It's nothing but talk-talk.

Are you kidding? Brown inherited an insolvent, unmanageable mess when he became governor in 2010.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

You need to write on a whiteboard 100 times the following:

"It is NOT the job of the Federal Government to plan for or pay for my retirement."

... although it would be entirely within the philosophical purpose of government to do so.

Prior to the neolithic age, when homosapiens emerged from clan-living in caves, all were sharing the welfare of each others' lives. As we learned to control and store crops and agricultural output our clans began expanding in size to groups that exceeded our natural biological design ... which design (residing in our brains' neo-cortical structures) begins to dissociate others after our societies grow beyond 150 individuals.

When we lived in groups smaller than 150 individuals, we humans were effortlessly egalitarian. Surpassing 150 members was the genesis of heirarchical governance ... the purpose of which became to legislate to benefit all in the expanding tribe that which no longer came naturally.

We are social animals. It has always been the philosophical purpose of governance to serve society's members now we are no longer at egalitarian sizing. It is NOT the philosophical purpose of government to abandon any individuals to favor the few in leadership or economic control.

I realize that those in control of governance and economics do NOT subscribe to the truths of social anthropological science. But, in answer to your declaration, again: yes, it IS entirely within the theoretical purvue of government's role to plan and provide for each individual's retirement and health care.

Aren't you glad you brought that up now?

[tickyul]

Yeah, I predict ANY rollbacks in CA-bennies will be fought both literally and in the courts!

[Bill the Butcher]

I think his words would carry more weight if he weren't retiring from office in the next year.

[checkup]

Originally Posted by Bill the Butcher

I think his words would carry more weight if he weren't retiring from office in the next year.

How so? It seems like Brown is trying to avoid setting up his successor for fiscal disaster...like he was in 2010. He won't have any further stake in the matter. So if anything, his words (and actions of stashing away $5B) carry even more weight

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by checkup

How so? It seems like Brown is trying to avoid setting up his successor for fiscal disaster...like he was in 2010. He won't have any further stake in the matter. So if anything, his words (and actions of stashing away $5B) carry even more weight

With who?

[LuvSouthOC]

[quote=SportyandMisty;50688126]

Originally Posted by Elliott_CA

Many financial planning experts agree that the private 401(k) system is, and has been, a disaster. There's a large segment of older workers who are heading into retirement without enough assets to live on. (Why 401k Isn't Working)

My 401K turned into an 801K -- it has doubled with the run-up in the stock market. 401Ks are great.



... because the Federal Government is such a paragon of effectiveness and efficiency, of course...

You need to write on a whiteboard 100 times the following:

"It is NOT the job of the Federal Government to plan for or pay for my retirement."

^This!

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

... although it would be entirely within the philosophical purpose of government to do so.

Prior to the neolithic age, when homosapiens emerged from clan-living in caves, all were sharing the welfare of each others' lives. As we learned to control and store crops and agricultural output our clans began expanding in size to groups that exceeded our natural biological design ... which design (residing in our brains' neo-cortical structures) begins to dissociate others after our societies grow beyond 150 individuals.

When we lived in groups smaller than 150 individuals, we humans were effortlessly egalitarian. Surpassing 150 members was the genesis of heirarchical governance ... the purpose of which became to legislate to benefit all in the expanding tribe that which no longer came naturally.

We are social animals. It has always been the philosophical purpose of governance to serve society's members now we are no longer at egalitarian sizing. It is NOT the philosophical purpose of government to abandon any individuals to favor the few in leadership or economic control.

I realize that those in control of governance and economics do NOT subscribe to the truths of social anthropological science. But, in answer to your declaration, again: yes, it IS entirely within the theoretical purvue of government's role to plan and provide for each individual's retirement and health care.

Aren't you glad you brought that up now?

Not under our constitution it is not.

[TheseGoTo11]

Originally Posted by Finper

The general public is scum, and there is a reason everyone from cops to postal workers despise the public. They think they should get services for cheap LOL!!!!!


I knew it!!!!

We think public sector workers should be paid with cash, not unsustainable future promises and lifetime employment guarantees. Why should we pay massive taxes just to finance someone else's retirement?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

Not under our constitution it is not.

Didn't refer to the US constitution. Referred to the philosophy of government. In any case, even in our constitution a supporting foundational principal is expressed:

The purpose of our Federal Government, as found in the Preamble of the Constitution, is to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

You can argue the limits of "promoting the general welfare" 'till you are blue in the face ... but providing for citizens' survival - including when they are no longer capable of working on behalf of themselves and the state, certainly falls conceptually within that constitutional statement.

Going much further on this tangent will certainly be considered off topic. If anyone cares to ponder more they can google "purpose of government" or similar phrases and dive into the views from ancient Greeks to Lao Tzu and Confucious.

Political philosophy, as distinct from the study of political and administrative organization, is more theoretical and normative than descriptive. It is inevitably related to general philosophy and is itself a subject of cultural anthropology, sociology, and the sociology of knowledge. As a normative discipline it is thus concerned with what ought, on various assumptions, to be and how this purpose can be promoted, rather than with a description of facts—although any realistic political theory is necessarily related to these facts.