NJ State Judge Rules Against Christie's Underfunding of State Pensions in Fiscal 2015 Budget

One day before Christie releases his 2016 budget. The same judge ruled that the 2014 underfunding was an emergency measure, but 2015 is not.

http://www.app.com/story/news/politics/new-jersey/2015/02/23/judge-rules-christie-pensions/23901131/

It is not like more will be spent. The cuts will just come out of somewhere else.

And Crisco is calling the judge a 'liberal activist'.
What else is new?

tomcat said:

And Crisco is calling the judge a 'liberal activist'.
What else is new?

Appointed by the liberal activist Governor Christie Todd Whitman.

She was.

Since the administration is a appealing the ruling, it could be some time, if ever, before the pension system sees this money.

As a NJ pensioner, I'm tickled and reassured that there is a god.

Christie, meet the judge.

joan_crystal said:

Since the administration is a appealing the ruling, it could be some time, if ever, before the pension system sees this money.

The idea is to delay the clock until after the Iowa and N.H. primaries.

jerseyjack said:

joan_crystal said:

Since the administration is a appealing the ruling, it could be some time, if ever, before the pension system sees this money.

The idea is to delay the clock until after the Iowa and N.H. primaries.

Actually, to delay after the presidential run, provided by some miracle he's nominated.

Ideally, until his term of governor is over. He'll do what responsible Republican politicians generally do - dump it on the successor.

GL2 said:

As a NJ pensioner, I'm tickled and reassured that there is a god.

Christie, meet the judge.

The person who will see a program cut to pay for this will not be so happy.

Don't libertarians believe in contracts?

And it's okay to gore an ox so long as it is not your ox.

I can't balance my budget or pay for other things by taking money from my neighbors.

GL2 said:

Don't libertarians believe in contracts?

Do liberal statists want actions that will increase inequality by shifting spending from programs for the poor to large pensions for the pretty well off?

Steve said:

And it's okay to gore an ox so long as it is not your ox.

It's about contracts. We agree to put in X and you agree to put in X. And teachers never fail to put in X. Don't like the arrangement. Change it legally. That's how it works here in America.

GL2 said:

I can't balance my budget or pay for other things by taking money from my neighbors.

You, like everyone else make decisions everyday on where you will spend your pretty much fixed pot of money. If it is spent in one place it can not be spent in another.

ram said:

GL2 said:

Don't libertarians believe in contracts?

Do liberal statists want actions that will increase inequality by shifting spending from programs for the poor to large pensions for the pretty well off?

Why isn't it your obligation to take care of them? Why is it my responsibility? Why isn't it anyone else's problem?

A-Rod showed up for spring training. He's owed 60 million according to the contract he signed. Why aren't the Yankees calling the contract unfair?

You continue to look at one part of a budget and assign blame to other commitments you've made. Christie made his bed (as other govs have done before him ) and now must lie in it.

The Yanks are stuck with a contract they offered. They will look at other ways they can save money because they offered the contract (foolishly or not) and must abide by it.

GL2 said:

ram said:

GL2 said:

Don't libertarians believe in contracts?

Do liberal statists want actions that will increase inequality by shifting spending from programs for the poor to large pensions for the pretty well off?

Why isn't it your obligation to take care of them? Why is it my responsibility? Why isn't it anyone else's problem?

Your response seems to accept the premise of his objection.

"Large pensions for the pretty well off" is a deceptive argument.

Living up to the contract regarding the pension, is part of the compensation for that public employee who is teaching your child, or protecting your person or your home, or taking care of a poor child - right now, today.

In other words, don't accept a premise that is just a dishonest objection.

I see your point. Geez, this gets old after a while.

Complain about cops or firefighters or other union workers. Problem is that everyone went to school; many have kids in schools; all experts on contracts, tenure, and teaching in general.

Ever hear a complaint about how a fire was extinguished?

GL2 said:

I see your point. Geez, this gets old after a while.

That's okay. You're trying to respond to every piece of sh*t that gets thrown against the wall. It's hard to keep up with it all. ;-)

So Christie didn't fcuk up by robbing Peter to pay Paul. It's Peter's fault.

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/12/nj_public_worker_pensions_not_so_generous_after_all_study_says.html

The f*ck up was previous governors and legislators who realized that they could become popular by doing things that would only become affordable after they were out of office.

ram said:

The f*ck up was previous governors and legislators who realized that they could become popular by doing things that would only become affordable after they were out of office.

Which is what Christie is trying to do (not meet CURRENT obligations) in order to burnish his image, to run for President.

In other words, not a great defense of The Great One (NJ Edition).

ram said:

The f*ck up was previous governors and legislators who realized that they could become popular by doing things that would only become affordable after they were out of office.

OK, so Christie's blameless, contracts can be invalidated because - in retrospect - they look generous, and firefighters, cops, and teachers are greedy. Got it. Does this philosophy extend to other budget choices? Or just pensions?

25 years in my State civil service job. Lucky if I can retire with a $30 K pension and no other benefits. Real generous!!! That's the majority of us, not the small minority that gamed the system. (That's if I get anything at all)

When zz's boss is in a squeeze, does he/she take part of zz's compensation to balance the books?