Do prosecutors have too much power?

[Lyion]

I see zero proof that the 'prison' lobby sells slave labor. I see a lot of strong opinions based on two words: Jack and Shit. Show me some valid stats regarding states with private prisons versus government run ones, and show me some detailed studies or facts that support what you are trying to say. If you are complaining solely about lobbying, well that's silly. You can regulate a private prison the same as a public one. The arguments against private prisons seem the same as the arguments against private schools. Both are inferior and cost more.

What I see is a state with a ton of government run prisons, and here's my stats:

California is spending 1,370 percent more money on prisons today compared to 1980 levels, says a report by the organization California Common Sense, quoted by NBC Bay Area. The study is the first time a group has looked at 30 years worth of data and crunched the numbers to show a long-term trend between state spending on prisons and on higher education, says the group's Mike Polyakov. California spent $592 million on corrections in 1980, compared with $9.2 billion in 2011.

Anyways, I could care less about private or public run prisons except for the fact anything the government runs seems to me to be far less efficient, far more expensive, and requires a union ensuring the tax payers are on the hook for tons of overtime and pensions.

Give me private over government run almost every time, since it's better for my tax dollars and usually better for the facility itself.

[Snero]

so I might be wrong here but your prosecutors are elected, right?

isn't that the problem? you turn a job into a popularity contest, and the one metric they can be judged on, convictions, becomes the most important thing.

imo make them public servants and a lot of this stuff would go away. I've never really understood elections for prosecutors and judges

[Lyion]

It's different from state to state, Snero. In my opinion the problem isn't the position or how a prosecutor is put into office, it's the laws and criminal justice codes as well as the lack of oversight.

If someone steals a muffin, they should be charged with theft. Not theft + the 12 other charges tacked on in an overlapping fashion. There's also the federal element on top of it. Changing prison structures or prosecutor elements won't change the fact the law is built in an overbearing manner to throw people to the wolves.

The other big problem is our idiotic war on drugs. Half the people in prisons are non violent drug users. Once thrown in prison they are screwed for life as it's very difficult to get any sort of decent employment with a felony on ones record.

[Menelvir]

The level at which prison systems operate within the greater judicial system is such that any distinction between state or federal government oversight and corporate involvement in said system is irrevocably blurred.

It's all intertwined and convoluted, and has been so for quite some time. I don't see that the consequences are that different in kind based on to whom the executives or managers are answerable, whether it's taxpayers or shareholders. Taxpayers are shareholders in a diluted form.

As long as there are hierarchical structures and more importantly, money, involved, an ideal system is precluded. Probably the best that can be done is to work to streamline the processes in place, limit bureaucratic expansion as much as possible, and punish violations and abuses of the system, as the case with the judge sending individuals to fill the institution for which he got financial kickbacks.

[Zanchief]

Why are you always on government pensions? Do American companies not offer pension plans for their employees?

[Reynaldo]

Government and State funded (schools for example) generally have one of those auto pay in pensions that basically works like you get a certain percentage of your last few years for the rest of your life after you retire, and up until you die.

Say for instance you work 30 years and the average salary of your last 5 years is 100k / year.

Your 30 years buys you something like 50% of your income as your pension until you die. So that person would make 50k / year until they die for doing nothing.

--------------

The typical non-government company offers investment plans like 401k so you can voluntarily save your money into that and pray that when you want to retire you'll have enough money between your investments and social security to live a decent lifestyle.

--------------

That's generally why everyone hates government pensions because if you start a government job at 18, and work 30 years, you're retiring by 50 and the government is dishing you money for the next 35/40 years for sitting on your butt.

The tradeoff of course is government jobs generally (don't jump on me you stat hounds!) don't pay as high as corporate America so it should all come out in the wash, but most people in corporate don't save money as well as they should.

[Zanchief]

You do know those people pay into those pensions right? Things seem to work pretty similar here and it seems most people who hate them, don't understand them. Here it's 70% for 30 years service min retirement age is 55 though. So yes if you start working at 25 you can retire at 55 with 70% of the average of your 5 best years salary for the rest of your life. And you pay into that pension every year and government equals your contributions so it's a solvent system provided the government doesn't ransack pension surplus as was the case both in Canada and the US. If you understand how it works there is no abuse and all this gloom about future entitlement shortfalls based on inaccurate models is hogwash.

[Lyion]

/tangent on

Except you aren't 'paying' into pensions generally in the US. It's a perk. Workers pay into 401ks and IRAs. If you have a COLA from a private company, you might be paying into that. Government pension plans generally require no contribution. It sounds like your plans likewise require no contribution. The really bad side is most government programs base retirement off of your total average salary of the last 5 years, so if you end up getting a huge amount of overtime your 70% retirement could actually be higher than ones base pay. Likewise, people here can retire at 50 or younger with 30 years service at more than their base pay. Then they live another 35 years being paid more than what they were earning their final year having made basically zero contributions, at higher base pay than their civilian counterparts, which is not a feasible system.

I'm all for pensions, but I think the U.S. needs to slash the federal ones and ensure there are fair contributions and a higher mandatory retirement age. Those pensions were a big draw back when one made much less working for the Government than they did in the private sector. Now, the reverse is true. Government employees both make more and have huge pensions, which is just silly.

[Reynaldo]

To be fair, when i was working for colleges they did have "teacher retirement" which worked exactly like we've been discussing above. 2% per year of service, last 5 average etc.

But I was paying in a similar sum like it would have been with a 401k. Something like 160-200 a month out of my salary. It still pales in comparison to the amount you'd be able to draw out at retirement though. Something like 180k put in, 1.5 million paid out, God willing you live long enough to take advantage of it.

My dad was a postal service engineer and also stacked military retirement on top of that and he's pulling in around to 60 / year for the rest of his life, so it's definitely awesome for him/us.

[Zanchief]

Ok i'll address Lyion who's wrong about everything. Now I don't know exactly how it works over there, but it seems like it's pretty similar to here, and I'm not 100% sure your wrong about all this (only like 95%), but since you're often wrong about other things I'll assume this is the product of listening to too much rightwing talk radio.

Federal employes pay into their pensions. They pay a lot of money into it. There is a huge reserve that is set aside based on these contributions. The way it works here that is pretty fucked up is the government is supposed to match those payments, which they do in a wink wink type of way, like I got your back. Then spend that money on other services. Then when the plan isn't solvent they fail to mention its because the government hasn't paid into the pension plan like they said they would. So you're 100% wrong about that. I can't imagine things are different in the US. Actually I'm sure they aren't since I remember hearing Clinton dipped in the pension reserves while he was president (just like Chrétien did here). So yea...

Next, overtime has NO bearing on your average salary. That's just completely absurd. It's your average annual rate of pay. This is just...wow...to even beleive this speaks to you state of mind on the issue.

Minimum age stuff, well I don't know how that works. Not the way it is here though.

So in conclusion, if you're going to keep bringing this stuff up Lyion, you really need to educate yourself.

[Reynaldo]

I don't understand why the government would pay anything in at all or match anything? They're paying 100% of your retirement anyway, it doesn't really seem like it matters what they do until that time. It's not like it "runs out" if you use above what you + the government paid into it like a private retirement investment would.

[Zanchief]

Well in the case of certain unions the pension plans become a investment group and are 100% solvent on their own. They take their pension contributions and the contributions matched by the government and the pension board just invests and pays out the money irrespective of the government. This system can't work now, because the government can't pay out what they already owe us (because they're broke). Now they say we can't pay you even though the reason it doesn't work is because they haven't held up their part of the bargain.

Read up on the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan. They owned MLSE (which owns the Leafs and Raptors) up until this year. The solvency of the system has nothing to do with abuse and entitlements, it has to do with the government not honoring it's part of the bargain.

[Spazz]

Those pensions were a big draw back when one made much less working for the Government than they did in the private sector. Now, the reverse is true.

So we need to make sure everyone in society is getting paid less and retires broke or works to death cuz thats the american dream ?

[Lyion]

Zanchief, many state and federal employees contribute nothing to their retirement. It's solely an entitlement. I can't speak for Canada, and you obviously can't speak for America even though you try and come across as clueless. Instead of saying I'm wrong do two seconds of research on google. Actually go read about what Scott Walker proposed in Wisconsin or what retired New York cops make on retirement.

Spazz, what we need to do is ensure federal and state unions do not politicize and use those bargaining sessions for gaining more funds and power in a closed loop cycle with very little accountability. A great case in point are the Chicago Teachers. I'm sure Zan's retirement and pension system as well as his pay is probably fair. However, take a meander at their retirement and benefits, as well as their base pay which is far higher than their non government counterparts.

If a group wants to unionize in the private sector and fight for pensions, better benefits, and better working conditions, I'm all for that. What I'm not for are government unions having higher pay, less accountability, and cadillac pensions funded by the taxpayers and agreed to by politicians who could care less about the costs and are solely trying to lobby for more power. I chuckle that people are angered that Microsoft might lobby, but are fine with Calpers spending 10s of millions on political candidates and causes.

[Spazz]

Im never going to understand republicans and unions. How dare people try to barter to be paid above serf level. God damn government employees should be happy with what they are given . Your politics ARE the problem bro. Im gonna go away for a bit because as of late Ive become a very angry person and I really just want to yell and fight.

[Zanchief]

Zanchief, many state and federal employees contribute nothing to their retirement. It's solely an entitlement.

This is not true. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Zanchief]

What I'm not for are government unions having higher pay, less accountability, and cadillac pensions funded by the taxpayers and agreed to by politicians who could care less about the costs and are solely trying to lobby for more power. I chuckle that people are angered that Microsoft might lobby, but are fine with Calpers spending 10s of millions on political candidates and causes.

This is just nonsense. In the age Scott Walker, you are really going to tell me that politicians are just bending over to unions because they’re all part of the same process so why not high five each other, and we can all just agree to get huge amounts of money! That’s not the way it works. Public sector has just as much right to bargain collectively as the private sector does.

All your information about the Federal government is just third hand nonsense. I’m a country away from you and I can tell you have no first hand knowledge and just buy these water cooler horror stories about government abuse that are completely unsubstantiated.

[Tikker]

.

[Lyion]

401Ks are basically the company contributing 3-15k a year to retirement. If one works for a company for 30 years even with the best rate of return, then they still aren't contributing anything near what they would with a fixed COLA or pension plan based on averages.

I know you bleeding heart types fail at basic math in your desires to empower everyone, but if nothing is coming out of ones paycheck for a future defined benefit, you are not paying for it. This is the case for a shit ton of government workers. It was the crux of the fight in Wisconsin where teachers who work 180 or so days a year contributed nothing from their check to either their health care or retirement.

I have no problem with an annuity or defined private pension plan. I think many companies rip off employees and do not properly provide retirement options. However, I also have no problem with Scott Walker in Wisconsin making the the Wisconsin Teachers Union who previously contributed nothing to their pensions or health insurance and work only 8 months of the year have to pay 6%.

[Zanchief]

What does the amount of days a teacher works matter anyway? Everyone knows a teacher works only 10 months a year (really if you want to be all mathematical about it) and doesn't get any vacation benefits like most people do. All your points are peppered with typical right wing rhetoric. It's like straight out of the mouth of some fat radio commentator, no misconceptions or facutal errors removed.

Every source I found on the internet says Wisconsin teachers pay into their pension. Ask Brinstar since I'm pretty sure his mother was a teacher in Wisconsin. I'm sure he can tell you you're a moron if you'd like to continue to harp on these points.

[Spazz]

ALso seriously do you know how hard a teachers job is or are you just running off at the fuckin mouth again with the republican rhetoric? RaH fuckin teachers and blue collar guys who make shit not wanting to be paid 10 bucks an hour BAD. Private prisons and corporations GOOD. Fuckin stupid.

[Lyion]

This took almost 3 secs to find.

The average Milwaukee public-school teacher salary is $56,500, but with benefits the total package is $100,005, according to the manager of financial planning for Milwaukee public schools. When I showed these figures to a friend, she asked me a simple question: "How can fringe benefits be nearly as much as salary?" The answers can be found by unpacking the numbers in the district's budget for this fiscal year:

•State Pension. Teachers belong to the Wisconsin state pension plan. That plan requires a 6.8% employer contribution and 6.2% from the employee. However, according to the collective-bargaining agreement in place since 1996, the district pays the employees' share as well, for a total of 13%.

•Teachers' Supplemental Pension. In addition to the state pension, Milwaukee public-school teachers receive an additional pension under a 1982 collective-bargaining agreement. The district contributes an additional 4.2% of teacher salaries to cover this second pension. Teachers contribute nothing.

Anyways, I'm out on this discussion since you guys are going angry liberal code pink mode on me. Maybe you'll get lucky and Mindia will join in and the conversation can resume in a fashion you prefer.

[brinstar]

It's solely an entitlement.

holy shit, how fucking programmed are you? do you just BUY all your opinions from reason.com?

calling these benefits "entitlements" implies that people are getting something for nothing, which is fucked up and destructive because it's part of the total compensation package

look dude, you don't take a job (gov or otherwise) because it pays X every week/month/year/whatever, you take a job because it pays X wage, has Y benefits, and Z retirement plan. X plus Y plus Z equals the total amount you are paid in exchange for your time and labor. libertublicans like the masters upon whose strings you happily dangle just LOVE the idea of getting their little toadies to call Z "entitlements" because it twists public opinion into thinking all workers are greedy drains on society, giving the execs cover to clamp down on what are actually part of workers' wages so they can take home bigger bonuses. the idea that workers somehow don't deserve Z when Z was an original condition of their employment is as fucked up as saying they don't deserve X.

it's a big fuckin scam and you're shilling for the scammers - but whatever, keep cheerleading while your randian fuckwad heroes drive the middle class into the fuckin ocean

[Zanchief]

•State Pension. Teachers belong to the Wisconsin state pension plan. That plan requires a 6.8% employer contribution and 6.2% from the employee. However, according to the collective-bargaining agreement in place since 1996, the district pays the employees' share as well, for a total of 13%.

Well then they're paying into it. You act like it's a fund that receives no influx of funds and is just a massive whole where money comes out of. In this case their is a mechanism in which money enters into the plan. I still don't believe you though, since the tone of that quote, even the small snippet you found, reeks of right wing hogwash (a friend of mine asked me...wtf does this how to do with anything). The mere fact that the employer is paying for the employees percentage (which I don't even understand since the employer would be paying the salary that the pension deductions would be coming from so this just seems like maybe they got a raise by the amount of the pension deductions so this rightwing nut job is calling it something else) means that what you saying is crap. Every pension operates this way. CBA determines how much the employees pay and how much the employer pays. Since it's all coming from the salary this is all part of the net package. This is pretty basic stuff here Lyion.

It's funny you keep calling it entitlements though, because it seems you are the one that feels entitle to it, and your having a hissy fit because you don't have it. Like the kid in the playground that throws dirt on the kid with the new shirt that everyone likes. If I can't have it, know one will. Sounds like you're the one with the entitlement issue.

[Reynaldo]

I don't really see it as a political issue. I just think it's common sense / logic issue.

I think if any of us could start over at 18, we'd all take government jobs with that kind of guaranteed future, unless you're making 6 digits by 30 and making good investments.

I guess the political angle would be how the numbers come out at the long haul like Tikker says. Is the money the govt is making off your pay-ins making more money than they're dishing out over the long term. Would be interesting to see a trailing 30 years of stats and see what the balance is on that.