This article begins my new series of Bloopers, Outtakes and Gaffes which have either been deleted from Room 8, or were too embarrassing even to post here in the first place.
Room Eight is closed to new posts. The existing archive will remain up for the immediate future.
If you were a Room Eight writer and would like access to an export of your content, please contact the editor.
This site is not affiliated with or collaborating with any other news or opinion site.
This article begins my new series of Bloopers, Outtakes and Gaffes which have either been deleted from Room 8, or were too embarrassing even to post here in the first place.
Ron Lieber had a recent New York Times column that continues to avoid talking about what no one wants to talk about. According to Lieber “the big picture question…remains one that is more moral than economic. Decades ago, we made promises to government workers. Now, depending on your view, those promises have turned out to be too generous…Whatever your view, we now face a choice: Should all taxpayers (including the retired workers themselves) pay a lot more in taxes and accept large cuts in government services to pay for the promises to government employees? Or should we break the promises (by a little — or more than a little) because they have turned out to cost too much?”
The unsaid is this. In many cases, public employees are not due the pensions that were promised “decades ago” when they were hired. They are due pensions that were retroactively enhanced in deals with politicians in exchange for political support, with costs to others that were deferred, hidden, and fraudulently misrepresented. And taxpayers often didn’t fully fund the promises workers were made to begin with. The beneficiaries are past taxpayers, today’s seniors, who also left other debts and who now enjoy special tax breaks as retirees.
Following up on part 487 of my series on the race to fill Anthony Weiner’s vacanct congressional seat, I should note I’ve gotten some pushback from left wing friends about my blasting Would-be Congresswoman Liz Holtzman (D-70s) for blaming Israel and the Jews for pushing us into the Iraq War.
Azi is capable of better; in summing up the potential Democratic candidates for Weiner’s seat, he fails to mention David Weprin, even though it seems clear he's the Weprin who actually wants it. His mention of Holtzman calls her out as a leftie, but mentions impeaching Dubya, when he should be mentioning Israel.
City Hall News is reporting that Queens Democratic Leader and Congressman Joe Crowley is seriously considering giving the Democratic nomination for Anthony Weiner to Former City Comptroller Elizabeth Holtzman, who once represented the district’s ancestral seat in Congress, as the sort of elder stateswoman who could win the seat without posing a serious threat of trying to hold it after reapportionment.
Bloomie should just write us a check for the CityTime money.
Domestic Partner says the "Brooklyn Native" sandwich at Shelsky's is better than sex (and she's had the best).
This is the piece; the piece.
As provactive as a red flag, don't you think?
It is easy to celebrate political victories. After all, they are generally years in the making; and sometimes they come after many a defeat, pushback and setback. Those who focus on the glamour of politics -the only game in town- often miss the forest from the trees. After all the celebrating, comes the harsh reality:”it (really) aint over till the fat lady sings”.
There is a question about New York’s pensions I’ve been asking for years, but no one has been able to answer. Most objective analyses will tell you that the New York State pension system, which also includes all the local governments outside New York City, is in the hole, and residents of the rest of the state will face diminished services and higher taxes for years as a result. But those same analyses will also tell you that the New York State pension system is nonetheless one of the least underfunded among all public employee pension funds in the U.S. Comparative analyses of local government pension funds are rare, because there are so many and most are small. But according to those I have seen, which analyze large local pension funds along with the states, the separate City of New York pensions funds are among the most underfunded in the U.S. New York City residents, already faced with a higher overall tax burden and service cuts, will suffer even more as a result.
Why the difference? Why is the New York City Teachers Retirement System so much worse off than the New York State Teacher’s Retirement System, the New York City police and fire pension plans so much worse off than the New York State police and fire pension plans, etc.? How long has this been true? Are the benefits that much different? Has New York City never gotten out of the hole it got in after the Lindsay pension deals in the 1960s? Why didn’t various Comptrollers, actuaries and Control Boards require better of funding of the city’s plan in the years since? And if the city has been in the hole all along, how come the state legislature continues to impose pension enrichments on the city that are greater than or equal to those for the local governments in the rest of the state and the state government?