Jackson Jambalaya

Maybe this time when/if a discussion of PERS takes place while the body is in session it will include SLRP and Highway Patrol. PERS is, after all, a multi-headed creature.

If they touch the pension without killing SLRP, Katy bar the door

Clinton Rebel
Highsaw or Fisher?

What about the MPACT Program - I tryed to register my child and the website statedand I quote "The Mississippi Prepaid Affordable College Tuition Plan is undergoing an actuarial audit. 2012 enrollment has been temporarily deferred." Sounds like they are about to go bellyup! Maybe I need to cancel my other 2 MPACT contracts! When is their next Board meeting?

Haley handed up reform of PERS on a silver platter for Phil and he is too weak to take action. Until we address the retroactive benefits and the board leadership coming from the retirees PERS will remain in trouble. I have never been so disappointed in the republicans for caving to the pressure.

Truth be told, SLRP and highway patrol are a rounding error in the problem.

Haley handed up reform of PERS on a silver platter for Phil and he is too weak to take action.

What "silver platter" legislation did Reeves have introduced in the Senate this past session to fix PERS?

4:52; What are 'retroactive benefits'? Haley did nothing other than ignore the entire situation for seven years and seven months.

4:54; You seem to be indicating that SLRP and Highway Patrol are insignificant in the PERS total picture. Hogwash. You remind me of the Metro area legislators who say their per diem doesn't really amount to much and needn't be fiddled with.

Since when has shadow suddenly been a supporter of rehabbing PERS?

You need to worry about your own vacillations Kangaroot, not my knowledge or opinions. Anything that's broken ought to be tended to, including PERS. I've always been an advocate of a sound state retirement system; however, I do not ascribe (as you do) to the mediocre, half-assed assault some would launch only on bits and pieces of the problem and lobbing incendiary devices from the peanut gallery suggesting the entire program be incised and scrapped.

I've always maintained to phase it out.

The idea of a pension supported by the taxpayer ad infinitum is ludicrous.

No vacillation here. Go read through the history of my position.

Recently, I've pondered a novel idea. Why not take the "promised" pension payments and convert them to tax credits? They could be applied currently or in the future. Relief would be applied to the current tax base and politicians might start to wake up when their funding is suddenly dried up because of this tax abatement idea.

Your idea SFX? Bitch about SLRP? That is sooooooo old. Once again you are late to the game.

The facts clearly illustrate a failed experiment. Time to come up with a new approach.

I'm not at all 'late to the game'. Although I joined the discussion here on this board late, and will always bow and defer to your prominence, I've been familiar with and outspoken regarding this situation (and other cripple pieces of state government) for decades, as have many others.

Mine is not a 'shoot from the hip' position based on emotion, offering zero productive suggestion, as is yours. It's simply idiotic and totally out of the mainstream of reasonable thought to suggest the system be totally scrapped. You might not be familiar with public service careers and the legally binding contract that requires the payment of a pension, once earned, to those people who serve those careers. What other idiotic suggestions do you have for the board today?

As usual Shadowfax, yogurt show your lack of knowledge of the issue. Retroactive benefits re what the legislature passed, unconstitutionally, to give benefits based on a different rate than paid in.

And on SLRP,if you look at the math, I am correct. It is a rounding error on the problem.

6:02 so the defense of Phil is "well, Tate didn't do it"

I've consistently maintained that existing benefits "must" remain. My recommended changes are from this point forward. Public servants continue to "kick their can" on PERS down the road - delaying the inevitable.

I don't think you understand what I am proposing. I apologize for using "big ideas" in a discussion with you. I will simplify it if need be.

Shadow, I've seen nothing come from your utterances other than "bitching". I've seen no alternative to the current situation. I've seen no recommendation for a future program. Your comments smack of the saame-old same-old from similar people who are public servants already receiving PERS.

Put up something close to an idea or find a different epithet to toss my way.

In the scheme of things, it appears that PERS is selfishly holding this state's future hostage by NOT dealing with the situation. (and you thought it was the Republicans?)

Was PERS mismanaged? Then who needs to go to jail?

The state needs to pay what it promised it would. If that takes raises taxes and not getting re-elected, so be it.

"fiscal responsibility" I think its called?

I wish state employees would wise up and hire a lobbying group.

12:49
In many pension over reaches (and I don't know the situation here) politicians promise huge benefits to labor groups in order to get their vote.

PERS is a failed program. Nothing illegal has ever been claimed on this blog. State employees should wise up and maybe think about how to save their government jobs after the voters decide to do away with them.

I believe "fiscal responsibility" refers to funding programs that are fiscally responsible with respect to the taxpayer, not freeloaders.

If that takes raises taxes and not getting re-elected, so be it.

EVERYBODY gets a haircut Skippy. Your thinking that state employees are somehow immune is part of the problem. Keep adhering to that posture and I guarantee you won't like the solution that results.

To suggest that any review of the system must include SLRP and Highway Patrol is not 'bitching'. When you set aside sacred cows,or ignore it when others do that, establishes both you and them as unable and unwilling to carry out a thorough problem solving journey.

Sorry, Root, but when you go in for a physical, you agree to a head to toe checkup, not just the digital.

SLRP is obvious, but it is a pittance compared to PERS.

Try again.

I'm thinking your strawman discussion about state troopers is a dodge to avoid the real issue - PERS.

Again what is your idea? If none, how about address the idea presented previously? Oh, I forgot, you want to avoid that discussion at all costs.

Honest question - are you or will you be collecting PERS?

I'd hate to think my current pension and future final retirement would depend on the PERS system. How about yours? My interest is due to the fact that I'm a citizen taxpayer, not simply a hooter from the nose-bleed section. My solution is simple. Tweak the system to correct current deficiencies. If that requires an increase in the percentage kicked in by employees (no doubt) then enact that. If it includes continued increases in employer contributions (just as any tax is increased to pay for services) then enact it. Quit farting around the peripherie of the issues and stop with the sacred cows. The very stooges who implemented SLRP are the ones who must solve the problem. That, in itself, is part of the problem. All we need now is Charlie Capps to further F it up even more than previously.

The State Employees I know are not the scourge of the earth as you and a few others seem to think. They're your family, your neighbors, your church members and others you know who simply have toiled in the low-pay trenches for decades. Now you advocate sliding a greased broomstick up their collective ass. You're a hoot.

Yawn (triple)

You do a great job of taking any stance on PERS sfax, and you dodged the question.

Yes or no will suffice.

If I didn't answer your question, perhaps you posed it poorly. As always, you throw around peripheral questions that have nothing to do with the conversation or the issue at hand. You always seem angry, clueless and without productive suggestions. Just sorta bitchy.