Quote:
Originally Posted by TWAK
I find it kind of dumb that somebody would leave based on how bloated a state bureaucracy is, but most of this stuff is what usually happens in California threads. It's more for the CE anyway...
|
It is not some abstract made up thing, it is quite real: this is an older article (last i saw it was up to 28% of the ENTIRE LA city budget goes to retirees). This is why the infrastucture sucks, why there are so many homeless etc despite high taxes, a huge population and great deal of wealth (well, aside from the absolutely atrocious city and state mgmt/budgetary mgmt by politicians - and I am a liberal).
Paying for public retirees has never cost L.A. taxpayers more. And that's after pension reform
Retirement benefits now eat up 20% of city’s general fund revenue. Touted cost controls won't have real impact for decades.
https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-me-pension-squeeze/
Quote:
Yet the numbers tell a story jarringly at odds with the political rhetoric, a Times analysis found. Today, Los Angeles taxpayers are underwriting retirement benefits that are among the nation’s most generous — at a cost that has never been higher.
The city’s general fund payments for pensions and retiree healthcare reached $1.04 billion last year, eating up more than 20% of operating revenue — compared with less than 5% in 2002.
|