A group of about 50 students met yesterday evening and voted unanimously, after some vigorous debate, to occupy, hold and blockade Dutton Hall, which houses the campus’ financial aid services and the university cashier, and is thus the intake point of student fees.
The students, mixed with some faculty, staff and community members, voted to occupy the building, arguing that they had to stay on the offensive, and to continue to be visible at this moment when the students and public are paying most attention, and the media limelight is still on the university and its response to the pepper spraying incident from a week and a half ago.
Other students, however, questioned the move, arguing that if they inconvenience students it may serve to alienate the students from their cause. The more mainstream students were alienated last year when protests turned into the pulling of fire alarms and the disruption of classes.
However, Professor Nathan Brown argued forcefully for a two-week strategic blockage of Dutton Hall at all hours, where the students would control access to the building.
The students first occupied Dutton Hall around 1 pm, forcing the early shutdown of the financial aid offices and the cashier’s office, but other departments in Dutton remained open for business.
The students have three clear, and they believe achievable, demands. First, Chancellor Katehi’s immediate resignation.
Second, they want to see the UC Davis Police Department either disbanded or reformed.
And third, they are seeking a freeze in tuition rates.
Given the numbers at the time, it was unclear how this blockade would be a successful action, but they promised to return to Dutton Hall around 10 pm to occupy it overnight. By 11:30 pm, there were indeed several small tents set up in the lobby and the upstairs landing, and a number of students peacefully settling in for the night.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Staff arriving for work this morning were not allowed into the building. I don’t think the University will allow students to move their tents inside the building. Violations of fire codes (blocking the hallways with tents, etc.) I suspect that all Dutton Hall services will be shut down until at least the tents are removed.
I was skeptical but reports to me is that it is working. Dutton is redirecting classes and tutoring. The protesters are helping students find their classes and tutoring options. Someone from UCD fire came out and left.
I am not sure this will help their case. It is Sacramento they need to be lobbying. Although Chancellor thinks she doesn’t have power over police dept (only her Vice Chancellor Meyer) she truly does not have power over tuition.
Did any regents come to town yesterday? Was there a strike?
How much is this going to cost, and who is going to foot the bill?
[quote]I was skeptical but reports to me is that it is working. Dutton is redirecting classes and tutoring. The protesters are helping students find their classes and tutoring options. Someone from UCD fire came out and left. [/quote]
In other words the protesters are trampling on the rights of others, the rights of employees to get to work, the rights of students to use Dutton Hall and its services. I am supportive of the protests against privatization of the university, but not the method…
these people are taking full advantage of the aftermath of the pepper spraying incident, and as elaine put it: “trampling on the rights of others.”
I think this is just the beginning, what’s next? occupy the coffee house? shut that down? these kids are acting like spoiled little brats.
Being that this is a provocative move on the part of the activist trouble makers they quite possibly might have to be dealt with. From the posts I’ve seen on here most of you would be okay with the protesters being forcibly removed if they refuse to disband. So if they peacefully refuse to leave then cuffing them, pulling them apart from each other, dragging them away and arresting them and taking them to jail is okay as long as the police don’t use pepper spray? Now if the protesters decide to get violent then other more forceful means can be used? I mean that seemed to be the consensus all last week.
“I think this is just the beginning, what’s next? occupy the coffee house? shut that down? these kids are acting like spoiled little brats.”
This is why Katehi has to go. Her hands are tied and she can no longer make the hard decisions. These activist trouble makers will take full advantage of her and the situation until it totally spirals out of control.
Ms. Musser writes:
“In other words, the protesters are trampling on the rights of others…”
I reply, in other words, the administration is trampling on the rights of the students to receive an affordable education.
“Sometimes, the form of the law is such as to render impossible its effective violation — as a method to have it repealed. Sometimes, the grievances of people are more — extend more — to more than just the law, extend to a whole mode of arbitrary power, a whole mode of arbitrary exercise of arbitrary power.”
— Mario Savio
The educational cost per student for the UC system has increased greater than the inflation index for decades. I have read some good analyses that calculate the money contributed by students to exceed the UC’s real cost for instruction. However, the UC budget office reports:
[quote]“A sizable portion of the funding provided by the State has little or nothing to do with educating enrolled students, but rather supports organized research, public service, or financial aid, all of which are part of UC’s mission, but none of which should be included in a calculation of resources available for instructional programs.”[/quote]
So there you have it. It is the faculty-ego-boosting research business that inflates the cost of education for undergraduates. This is the dysfunctional competition of academics… see how many publications you can accumulate to grow your prestige and the prestige of your employer. Then leverage/market that prestige to grow your university empire and build more ego shrines.
IMO, the graduate schools should be self-funding. The money coming from the state to the UC system should be used exclusively for student instruction and not support research in any way.
On a related note, a front page article in the Sacramento Business Journal says that profits at the UCD Medical Center have surged. The non-profit center saw a 71% increase in profit even with fewer patients served. What do you guess UCD is doing with the cash?… saving to pay for all the pension commitments… which takes us full-circle to the root cause of tuition increases. As is with the K-12 public schools, it is the adult jobs program versus the students… and the CTA and PEU ensures that the students loose.
[quote]I reply, in other words, the administration is trampling on the rights of the students to receive an affordable education.[/quote]
I don’t remember “affordable education” being a right. Enlighten me if I am wrong.
The University of California has two missions: research and teaching. Neither is of greater priority than the other. Seeing “how many publications you can accumulate” is what researchers do. Research output is part of their job; teaching is part of their job. Which is primary for that person depends on where they are in the system.
Building up “the prestige of your employer” is what brings students to the campus in the first place. Students of viticulture and enology come to UC Davis from all over the world because of the prestige of that department. That prestige is derived from the published work of the viticulturists and enologists there.
I think many people confuse the mission of UC with the mission of the state university (college) system.
[i]Students Protesters Vote to Occupy Dutton Hall[/i]
[i]However, Professor Nathan Brown argued forcefully for a two-week strategic blockage of Dutton Hall at all hours, where the students would control access to the building.[/i]
Maybe this article should have a different title. Based on the pictures and stories of the Occupy UCD movement, Nathan Brown seems to be the primary organizer and spokesperson. I wonder if he is prepared to give back some salary or benefits to help students have a lower tuition.
“The University of California has two missions: research and teaching. Neither is of greater priority than the other.”
It actually has three missions: research, teaching, and public service (region, state, nation, world). The mission statement for UC Davis can be found here: http://registrar.ucdavis.edu/ucdwebcatalog/mission.html
“I wonder if he is prepared to give back some salary or benefits to help students have a lower tuition.”
Please. He’s junior faculty in the English Department. He is not making the big bucks. It’s the high admin salaries that should be up for discussion.
There’s a story in the Sacramento Bee today about the Regents approving raises at yesterday’s meeting for a handful of administrators, including several at UC Davis between 9.9 and 29.1% for “retention” purposes.
Go students! Louder and more inconvenient! The Administration is clearly not hearing you yet!
[i]Please. He’s junior faculty in the English Department. He is not making the big bucks. It’s the high admin salaries that should be up for discussion. [/i]
This comments illustrates the problem very clearly. Its always somebody else that needs to make the sacrifice.
Adam, You clearly are not aware of the repeated sacrifices that staff, and junior faculty members have made over recent years and the additional sacrifices that they will be made to agree to in the next 5 years. No raises in take home pay, continual threats to employment through reorganization and cuts in budgets. At the same time, top executives are receiving raises, sometimes substantial raises. People are asking for this to stop – the raises to stop. How is this a sacrifice that “someone else needs to make?”
Something I’ve been trying to figure out: is the Brown group occupying Dutton separate from the quad encampment? Was their demand list just a reiteration of what the larger general assembly adopted? Or, is it a new set of demands?
An interesting “budget myths” article from the universityofcalifornia.edu web site:
[url]http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/budgetmyths.pdf[/url]
Ryan’s comments above seem to conflict with this quote from my link:
[i]”Salaries have been frozen for the 340 members of the senior management group, and bonuses or incentive payments have been canceled or deferred as well.”[/i]
Here is the link Ryan referenced: [url]http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/11/university-of-california-regents-ok-raises-for-several-executives.html[/url]
Says Yudof: “”I understand it’s not a great time, but we can’t really close down shop and say we’re not going to make any effort to retain our best people.”
Just a little bit tone-deaf IMO.
stevem: The encampment from the Quad went to Dutton for yesterday’s General Assembly, and when they decided to stay the night (and also for two weeks)in Dutton, several people volunteered to move their things from the Quad to Dutton.
Dear UCD Occupy Students blocking Dutton Hall:
Brilliant strategy. The Regents are slowly killing all of you with their fee hikes, so hit them back by tying up the UCD financial admin building. Totally apppropriate.
The Chancellor should resign, no question about it.
Interesting list of salary increases. The regents and Yudof have often been tone deaf in their timing of salary increases. Reminds me of the ‘have to meet other cities/universities wages” game.
SODA: You are sooooo right. That’s exactly the approach used by staff when “negotiating” with the Davis CC: give ’em the high salaries benefits and retirements, or they might go work for …. Woodland? Dixon? Yuba City? Ya, right. Wanna do that? Good ridence.
I say eliminate all state money going to the state universities and instead give vouchers to in-state college students to spend on any in-state college or trade school tuition… and a reduced amount to spend on out-of-state tuition. Let’s ramp up competition and allow the students to make their own education value decision. Put the purchasing power in the students’ hands instead of the spending power in the schools’ hands.
This is so sad the students are wasting the best opportunity in generations to make significant reform but instead act like a mob. I was on campus yesterday observing when they decided to go to Dutton. Why? Rhey did it in solidarity with Santa Cruz students who had occupied their own financial aid office. Now they want to hold the building for two weeks. To what end? This is no way to run a revolution.
What is terrible about this is that its thinking small. In the wake of the pepper spray and Katehi perp walk these students occupy the moral high ground. Now they are going to give it back by needlessly disrupting an office that serves students and can only tangentially be tied to the cost of college.
I want to suggest a smarter approach, one that builds on recent events. An action will strengthen their position among many groups of Californians and actually might make a difference. The students should march from Davis to Sacramento. They should invite Sac St. to join them. They should invite students throughout California to join them. Students who cannot come to Sacramento should march on their local legislators offices. Many community colleges, state colleges and UC campuses are in districts where the legislators have signed Grover Norquist’s no tax pledge. The students should demand that these legislators renounce that pledge. In districts where the legislators do support more money for education the demand should be to get rid of the 2/3 rule for raising taxes, the choke hold of the rich against the poor in California.
A major problem for post secondary education in California is that funding from the state has dried up. By taking their cause non-violently to the legislature Occupy UC Davis will show everyone that they understand what really needs to be done to fix things, they will build their cause instead of diminishing it by occupying Dutton Hall.
Toad: While I can’t argue with you on this point, the students see things differently and put the blame not on the legislative cuts but administrative spending priorities, believing – perhaps inaccurately – that there is sufficient money but it is being misallocated.
Yes that may be true as well. Notice that I did not say they should abandon other demands, but, strategically, occupying Dutton is thinking small and wastes their window of opportunity created by the pepper. Marching on the capitol they could make university governance an issue as well. My point is they could create a framework for protest that people throughout the state could relate to and participate in. Maybe they disagree with me on my call to action but occupying buildings is a loser. It was a loser in the 60’s and it will be a loser now. I challenge anyone to show me how occupying buildings has ever shown itself to be a productive tactic. It is thinking too small. All the students throughout California are looking to Davis to lead right now. Occupy UC Davis needs to think both strategically and big. Dutton is niether.
[i]Adam, You clearly are not aware of the repeated sacrifices that staff, and junior faculty members have made over recent years and the additional sacrifices that they will be made to agree to in the next 5 years. No raises in take home pay, continual threats to employment through reorganization and cuts in budgets. At the same time, top executives are receiving raises, sometimes substantial raises. People are asking for this to stop – the raises to stop. How is this a sacrifice that “someone else needs to make?” [/i]
Ryan, your rant makes the point better than I can. Despite the rhetoric, there have been consolidations and cut backs administratively, and there have been raises for some. The same is true for the teaching professionals – some cuts and flat compensation, but raises and increases for some, especially when recruiting to replace someone (BTW, no one should be complaining about compensation that hasn’t increased). The problem with Ryan and K. Smith’s approach, is there is always someone making more or less than you. Within the professor ranks, some make more than others, and the ones making less think that the others should be the ones accepting cuts. Some professors make more than some administrators. In the end, for CA and the US, everyone is going to have to give. The students are going to pay more, and state, federal and municipal employees are going to make less. The rich will pay more taxes, but you can’t tax the rich enough to balance the books.
Toad – I agree with your comments. The opportunity for students is to forget the pepper spray, and focus the public’s attention on the tuition hikes. Taking over an office building at UCD will do nothing to convince administrators to cut pay for themselves. It will do even less to get the public to focus on their effort. Except for the media reporting, no one knows what is happening at Dutton because they can’t see it.
This effort needs to be peaceful, and focus in Sacramento, include as many students as possible, and exclude the Nathan Brown’s of the world. If he has something to rant about, it should not cloud the student’s message regarding tuition.
Occupying Dutton Hall seems to be wasting a media attention opportunity, as well as possibly seriously messing up some students who need financial aid issues fixed right now. Reading the thoughts above, walking to Sacramento sounds like an idea that could start something. The goal should be getting California voters to be willing to reject the 2/3 vote requirement for tax raises, so that it would be possibly to reasonably tax people in function of their wealth and the services we as Californians would like – including education. A petition could put that on the ballot once again, hopefully with a better outcome. I’d also like a way for the publicity to culminate in national acceptance of taxing the wealthy at closer to historic levels given the huge wealth imbalance fed by salary disparities worse than any I know of in Europe, Canada, or Mexico. (This is fairly new: the U.S. was mostly middle class when I was a kid 40 years ago.) All this said, I recognize I’m not at the encampment voicing these opinions, and have the privilege of a full time job keeping me busy.
I agree. Walk to Sacramento!
Yes, the U.S. Government Ought to Own the Banks Now
[url]http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/11/yes-the-us-government-ought-to-own-the-banks-now.html[/url]
Despite Angry Protests, UC Regents Raise Administrators’ Salaries
[url]http://www.baycitizen.org/education/story/protesters-demand-uc-regents-raises/[/url]
“Mark G. Yudof, the university system president and a regent, said the raises were necessary to attract and retain talented employees.”
I think Mark Yudof & company may be doing a terrific job of creating some political unity that did not exist before. Just wondering what necessary thing(s) that the UC Regents could do to attract and retain talented students.
[i]”The goal should be getting California voters to be willing to reject the 2/3 vote requirement for tax raises, so that it would be possibly to reasonably tax people in function of their wealth and the services we as Californians would like – including education.”[/i]
Of the 50 states, California has a higher tax burden currently than all but 5 states ([url]http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/113173/states-pay-most-least-taxes-247wallst[/url]). If we raise taxes even higher, most possible tax rate increases* will result in either a lower standard of living for ordinary residents or will result in money leaving California and hence lower revenues to the state’s coffers. It’s fine to stand up on your little soap box and call for other people to pay more. But you should at least know your plan will harm our state soon enough.
I know that it is a Democratic/union talking point right now to say we need to get rid of the 2/3rds requirement to raise tax rates. What the public employees who are pushing this are not saying is that everyone but those public employees pushing a tax hike would be worse off for it. Higher taxes on residential real estate or higher sales taxes or higher income taxes on the middle class would largely be a transfer of wealth from the middle and working classes to the privileged classes who run and profit from state government or who are living high off the public teet with great pensions and gold-plated medical plans. It would sadly mean even more power for the greediest unions in our state, like the California Teachers Association and the California Professional Firefighters Association. [quote]6. California
Taxes paid by residents as pct. of income: 10.6%
Total state and local taxes collected: $354 billion
Pct. of total taxes paid by residents: 82.5%
Pct. of total taxes paid by non-residents: 17.5%
California is exceptional in many ways when it comes to taxing its residents. The state has the highest statewide sales tax in the country, currently 8.25%. It also has the highest tax on gas, charging 46.6 cents per gallon. The state collects among the lowest amount of taxes from non-residents and business out of all the states. But with the lowest credit rating in the nation, according to S&P, an ongoing budget problem, and a $10.8 billion deficit, one of the biggest in the country, the state may want to change its approach.[/quote] *The one significant exception, which may have popular support, would be to re-value commercial properties for tax purposes at a market rate (which I think should be based on the property’s gross rents). That would increase the state’s revenues, because the properties cannot be relocated out of state.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-wambaugh-uc-davis-police-20111127,0,1853351.story
Joe Wambaugh almost has it right. If he knew the students were chanting “f the police” he would have nailed it.
____________
At least with majority rule the state could address its structural deficit, and of course I disagree about the effect such balancing would have upon the tax burden of California’s citizens. But the important point is that if the people feel they are over taxed they could vote out those that tax them. As it is a minority of the legislature can prevent the majority from raising taxes a sort of no taxation with representation policy. People say that California is ungovernable but I disagree, it is only so because of the 2/3 rule. To reform California we should start by getting rid of it and then see if any further reforms are needed. My guess is that closing the structural deficit will be easier than you think if you break the choke hold of the 2/3 rule.
Toad: I don’t agree that Wambaugh nailed it. in fact, i think he completely wiffed in a fundamental way. Yes this is not the civil rights movement or Vietnam, and yes the protest at UC Davis, traditionally one of the least active UCs was pathetic, but on the other hand, I really believe that between the economy and rising tuition we are seeing what very well be the end of the American Dream. The person who posted that we have no right to an affordable education misses the point – it’s not that there is a right involved, it is that our society is largely premised upon it.
[quote]The person who posted that we have no right to an affordable education misses the point – it’s not that there is a right involved, it is that our society is largely premised upon it.[/quote]
You are missing the point of my comment, which was a reply to another comment. My point being, we do not have a basic right to affordable education. Whether or not our society is premised upon it does not make it a right. Besides, there is still plenty of affordable education. There are still community colleges and the state system.
The american dream involves having an opportunity to succeed regardless of social class, economic status, or birth right. However, a fundamental part of the american dream has always been self reliance and determination, which seems to be lost on the “what are you going to do for me” generation.
Rich: [i]”*The one significant exception, which may have popular support, would be to re-value commercial properties for tax purposes at a market rate (which I think should be based on the property’s gross rents). That would increase the state’s revenues, because the properties cannot be relocated out of state.”[/i]
Sigh… again…
Taxes are simply a business expense.
Raise taxes on business and it will have the following impact…
– Higher costs for rents, products and services
– More existing businesses go under
– Fewer new business start-ups
– Fewer jobs.
Raising taxes in any shape or form is a non-starter. The state has had a give-away-to-the-store-to-the-unions spending problem from the decades of Democrat rule. Our fiscal problems are all on the expense and liability end of the balance sheet. We didn’t have a balanced budget even when the economy was humming creating artificial wealth from the housing bubble.
Cut the spending. Raising taxes will not solve any long term problems and it will create many more.
dgrundler wrote:
‘…which seems to be lost on the “what are you going to do for me” generation’
There doesn’t seem to be very many young people posting on this blog, but no shortage of “Been There, Done That” or “We Walked Uphill Both Ways to School” posts from the over-the-hill generation.
I would suggest actually talking to those spoiled brats many of you are referring to. It turns out that many are really smart, well spoken, actually know history, not as materialistic as the media has them portrayed, and some even respect their elders, despite the callous dismissal by those very elders.
Note – many small businesses in CA are on property tax payment plans with their county. Others too far behind are being foreclosed on by banks because the county always sits in first lien position and the banks want to act on the collateral before the county does.
The supply/vacancy rate of commercial property in California is very high.
If you want to increase property tax revenue, consider business tax reductions and incentives to lure more business to the state to buy up the existing inventory.
Many of these student protesters are also protesting their parents’ loss of income contributing to their financial woes… but since most of them are not business majors, they don’t get the connection with less money from mom and dad and 12% unemployment in this screwed up state.
[quote]I would suggest actually talking to those spoiled brats many of you are referring to. It turns out that many are really smart, well spoken, actually know history, not as materialistic as the media has them portrayed, and some even respect their elders, despite the callous dismissal by those very elders.[/quote]
Why do you assume that I have not? Of course, many of them are smart. It takes some level of intelligence to get into the UC system. Of course many of them embody the wonderful qualities that you suggest. It is just my experience that an increasing number do not. If you don’t see that society is shifting to a point where a majority of youth feel “entitled,” then you need to open your eyes.
“Yes, the U.S. Government Ought to Own the Banks Now”
Right, because we all know how well the US Govt is with money.
dgrundler wrote:
“Why do you assume that I have not?”
My experience has shown that the more people you talk to, the less likely you are to find differences. It always amazes me how similar people can be, across generations and cultures.
dgrundler wrote:
“If you don’t see that society is shifting to a point where a majority of youth feel “entitled,” then you need to open your eyes.”
And I would suggest that if you’d like to blame societies ills on the youth, my experience shows you are giving accrediting them more influence than they actually have.
“There are still community colleges and the state system.”
Maybe. But the community colleges are no longer as affordable or accesible as they once were and neither is CSU. At a time when we are more reliant than ever on a highly educated and trained workforce is a time when we are shutting off access to the means of education.
Grundler, ” If you don’t see that society is shifting to a point where a majority of youth feel “entitled,” then you need to open your eyes.”
This is not my experience. I’m been a staff researcher in a UCD lab for several years, and the undergrads and grad students that I have met are in general quite a bit more hard-working than 30 years ago. We had it relatively easy back then; goof off in high school and still get into a good college, cheap tuition and living expenses in college (minimum wage has fallen way behind inflation, tuition and fees has increased much faster than inflation); graduate and easily get a decent job that pays decently. Generally the college kids today have to put up with a much more regimented and disciplined life from early teen years onward; but I have not many complainers. I don’t blame them for being dismayed and angry when they realize they may not enjoy a material lifestyle comparable to their parents generation (even if they work hard); much of their pay will go to taxes to finance the debt racked up by their parents and grandparents generation.
I think earlier post-WW2 generations felt equally entitled to affordable education costs, good jobs if work hard, etc.; these expectations were met so there were much fewer complaints.
[quote]And I would suggest that if you’d like to blame societies ills on the youth, my experience shows you are giving accrediting them more influence than they actually have.[/quote]
civil discourse, you have a bad habit of putting words in other people’s mouth. I didn’t blame anything on the youth. I simply gave you my observation of what I perceive to be their mindset, without touching on blame. If I were to point a finger at who is to blame for what I would perceive to be a problem with today’s youth, that finger would be pointed squarely at the parents of my generation and the parents a little older than me.
jimt, the only thing I can say to you is that your observations are not even close to what I have seen and experienced. My one caveat is that maybe undergrads working in your lab and grad students at UC Davis might have a little bit stronger work ethic than today’s youth in general.
[i]”This is not my experience. I’m been a staff researcher in a UCD lab for several years, and the undergrads and grad students that I have met are in general quite a bit more hard-working than 30 years ago.”[/i]
I will have to think about this one. I get the point, but there is certainly something different in terms of their expectations for entitlements and their ability to launch. I think back and I had to study as hard, but also had to work to earn my own pocket money… and also had to do many house chores.
I have a few theories.
One is the “chickification” of society. Childhood development should be the progression of mother’s child, father’s child and then adult. Women are much more dominant now with respect to the family economy and the running of the household. The kind of tough love of a dominant father is lacking. I see kids coddled and pampered much later in life. They are protected from many of life’s struggles. My own kids suffer some of this, and my wife and I agree that some mistakes were made with respect to her conceding, and me taking, control of our kids’ direction and discipline in our house. Most mothers are not “tiger moms”.
Another is the changes caused by technology and media-powered pop culture… the instant gratification expectation. I agree that they are smarter, but also seem less able to set long-term goals and focus. They are also more material and more image-conscience. I talk to a lot of kids that tell me “they don’t know what they want to do”. They are risk-averse for working because they don’t want to pick a job or career that turns out not being fun or impressive enough. I don’t see this so much as a poor worth ethic, but more a resistance for doing certain types of work.
The problem with this resistance to doing certain types of work is that they don’t develop an appreciation for bottom-up achievement. They want to start somewhere in the middle of the ladder toward prosperity. They would prefer to do nothing – or keep going to school – instead of taking an entry-level job and working their way up to higher-paying more satisfying work.
Lastly, we are experiencing a global wage leveling. We are in a period where costs and wages should be resetting after the hyper inflation of economic enthusiasm that was now known to be artificial. While private-sector wages and benefits have fallen, public-sector wages and benefits have not. Also, commodity prices have continued to inflate due to high energy costs. These sticky public-sector wages and prices, combined with the drop in private-sector wages and jobs are impacting the access to education. So what are the strategies to improve these things:
-More jobs and higher private sector wages
-Lower public-sector employee costs
-Reduce the cost of energy
Know any politicians doing these things?
Governor Brown tonite was shown on the news presenting his state employee pension reform proposal; it looked pretty good.
–raise retirement age from 55 to 67
–employees to pay into half of retirement benefits (matching)
–base retirement pay on last 3 years of work instead of last 1 year (eliminates ‘spiking”?)
–more! (I’ve forgotton exactly what)
The 3 first on the list above should reduce state costs for retirement to about 1/4 the current: With median life expectancy of about 85 years; raising retirement age reduces payout period from 30 years to 18 years; 60% of current payout period. Employee pay-in of half reduces costs by 50%. Eliminating spiking maybe saves another 10%.
So cost of proposed plan relative to current plan is ~0.6*0.5*0.9 = 0.27, or 27% of current state costs.
I thought Jerry Browns proposal was great; too bad this hasn’t been the pension policy in the past; we would likely not be in such a deep fiscal mess.
Interesting that this was proposed by a democrat, not a republican.
More evidence that for the last 30 years or so, not much difference in actual fiscal policies between democrats and republicans; the historical record shows fiscal policies of two parties are comparable; only difference is the timbre of the noises coming out of the politicians mouths; which curiously many people continue to take seriously. Unlike the usual rhetorical noises; Brown’s plan is a practical proposal for specific action.
Rifkin, would be good to see your analysis/take on Brown’s proposal.