login about faq

My concern doesn't involve a private-sector pension. That is completely voluntary on the company's part. But the situation is different with government employees. Is it wrong for the taxpayers to support someone for the rest of their lives after they retire? In my mind, if you do nothing, you should get paid nothing. I say there shouldn't be any pensions with respect to government employees. I understand some of them work very hard in their jobs, but to receive taxpayer money while you're no longer working for the government seems wrong to me. As was predicted, the "pension problem" is now a growing crisis among retirees, as it is becoming more and more unsustainable.

asked May 21 '12 at 12:06

Collin1's gravatar image


edited May 21 '12 at 15:36

Greg%20Perkins's gravatar image

Greg Perkins ♦♦

In principle there is nothing wrong with it. However, practically, it is probably not a good idea to start piling on benefits to government employees, especially if it is a benefit which no longer exists in the private sector. If they want pension insurance, I'd suggest they buy that with their salary and keep government employees compensated strictly with currency, nothing else and nothing that lasts past their time of employment.

(May 23 '12 at 00:25) PhilosoScience PhilosoScience's gravatar image

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Share This Page:



Asked: May 21 '12 at 12:06

Seen: 777 times

Last updated: May 23 '12 at 00:25