▲ 1208 ▼ Alabama ranked at the near bottom of best States to live in (discuss.online) submitted 1 week ago by VetOfTheSeas@discuss.online to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 46 points 1 week ago (2 children) How could he possibly afford that!? It's like suddenly there's more money and it's getting distributed /s permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 55 points 1 week ago* (2 children) It's not even more money yet. This is just the same city funds being redistributed to areas where it can be useful. Meaning ANY Mayor could have done this, they chose not to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago This is just the same city funds being redistributed to areas where it can be useful. You're mad! Mad, I say! It'll never work! permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 week ago (1 child) Welllll one of the ways he did it was by delaying pension fund payments. So it's not all roses. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago That pension system is nuts btw. These savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the city’s pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion “contribution cliff” created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does not—and cannot—affect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the City’s ability to meet those commitments. Source: https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments permalink fedilink source parent [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 8 points 1 week ago how could he afford that?! NO you shouldn’t look at the for-profit businesses making healthy revenue!!! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 55 points 1 week ago* (2 children) It's not even more money yet. This is just the same city funds being redistributed to areas where it can be useful. Meaning ANY Mayor could have done this, they chose not to. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago This is just the same city funds being redistributed to areas where it can be useful. You're mad! Mad, I say! It'll never work! permalink fedilink source parent [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 week ago (1 child) Welllll one of the ways he did it was by delaying pension fund payments. So it's not all roses. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago That pension system is nuts btw. These savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the city’s pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion “contribution cliff” created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does not—and cannot—affect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the City’s ability to meet those commitments. Source: https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments permalink fedilink source parent
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago This is just the same city funds being redistributed to areas where it can be useful. You're mad! Mad, I say! It'll never work! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 week ago (1 child) Welllll one of the ways he did it was by delaying pension fund payments. So it's not all roses. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago That pension system is nuts btw. These savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the city’s pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion “contribution cliff” created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does not—and cannot—affect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the City’s ability to meet those commitments. Source: https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago That pension system is nuts btw. These savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the city’s pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion “contribution cliff” created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does not—and cannot—affect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the City’s ability to meet those commitments. Source: https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 8 points 1 week ago how could he afford that?! NO you shouldn’t look at the for-profit businesses making healthy revenue!!! permalink fedilink source parent
