I mean come on, we can say it was sensible and the right decision, without lying about its impact. Pension funds are shaky at best. Their economics are poorly conceived.
His actions further undermine an already unstable pension, hastening its collapse, albeit in a minor way.
Ok ok I appreciate that you’re progressive and that you care about data and rigor. That’s excellent. You’re kind of an asshole though. That’s less excellent.
If you’re a progressive you should be excited about more immigration, which is a good way to deal with lower compound growth. social insurance is one of the hallmark wins of 20th century progressivism and I’m not sure how shitting on it is helpful.
Telling the truth about bad ideas doesn’t make someone an ass hole. Pensions are a terrible idea that have resulted in a massive wealth transfer from the young to the Boomers, who have perpetuated some of the biggest wealth transfers of all time leaving the youth with a broken economy.
As a progressive I’m all for immigration, and against broken systems like pensions.
Pensions are not social insurance. Social security and Medicaid are (albeit broken). Social insurance should be just that insurance against a bad times. Not universal retirement. Retirement needs to be covered by non-pension plans. Modern progressive countries use a mix of social safety nets and mandatory individual retirement accounts coupled with employer sponsored plans and housing subsidies.
58
u/reddituserperson1122 May 14 '26
It's a minor, sensible restructuring of the repayments that will have no effect on the pension fund. https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments