Comment by callmeed | Hacker News Reader

Comment by callmeed | Hacker News Reader

(Disclaimer: I have multiple rental properties in CA)

I've noticed Prop 13 becoming the quite the scapegoat for the woes of various California cities lately. I'm not convinced.

The state has a huge pension liability looming over it–most of which grew after Prop 13 was passed. How did they think they were going to pay for it? Example: San Jose's fire chief makes close to $400K/year in pay + benefits. Guess what? When he retires, he's gonna keep getting paid 90% of his peak salary until he dies.[0] Meanwhile, I'm paying $1,400/month out of pocket for my family's health insurance and have to spend time managing my own retirement plan.

No one exemplifies Parkinson's Law [1] better than the government. If you let property tax increase without limits, they will grow spending accordingly and it will hurt cities like San Jose even worse during recessions and times of declining home values.

Finally I'm not convinced Prop 13 inflates housing costs or that repealing it would lower them. If rentseekers have to pay more taxes, won't they pass that cost along in the form of higher rents?

[0] http://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2014/san-jose/curt...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law

I see quite a long list of large compensation (> $200k) numbers there, including for regular "police officers". It seems that by just going to work for the government, these guys have achieved a level of secure material wealth (equivalent to pulling money out yearly from a HUGE retirement savings) that most of us here think we need a near-unicorn IPO to achieve.

I'm happy for these guys, that they're able to live in what I'm sure is an upper middle class lifestyle even in San Jose. It's not that I want their standard of living to be lower for sure. But this draws attention to the facts for the rest of us that aren't put on a pedestal by society and government. I'm well compensated, and I know plenty of other people who are well compensated, but unless I stay in the top 5% of my profession I don't expect to be pulling home $200k+ per year during retirement.

What does 'benefits' mean here? Also looking at that link, it's $152k base, which doesn't seem unreasonable for a 'deputy chief', and $77k overtime, which also seems reasonable if he's putting in the hours.

According to the FAQ, medical benefits and some retirement contributions.

Here's a retired SJ police chief. $230K/year pension.

http://transparentcalifornia.com/pensions/2014/san-jose-poli...

I find it ironic you're criticizing the pay of a man who leads the people who would happily save you from your burning properties if they were on fire.

Would they still be happy putting fires out if they were paid a little less? What is the optimal pay for public safety employees?

How is that at all ironic?

Appeal to emotion isn't a justification for such a lavish retirement income.

How is it ironic? How many people were saved from burning buildings in your city last year?

The truth is, technology and building codes in the US–and especially California–have significantly reduced the loss of life and property due to fires. That's a great thing. Unfortunately, fire department budgets have increased at the same time. Partly due to pensions, partly due to the fact that cutting a fire budget is political suicide.

Have you noticed how 30-foot, $1 million+ fire engines show up to minor traffic accidents and first aid calls? There's a reason (they need to look busy).

Fun fact: 8% of calls to fire departments are false alarms and 64% are for non-fire medical support.

"Have you noticed how 30-foot, $1 million+ fire engines show up to minor traffic accidents and first aid calls? There's a reason (they need to look busy)."

(Disclaimer: I am a volunteer firefighter in California)

They do that because they can't be caught without the engine if they get an actual fire call. They would leave directly from the accident/medical/CatInTree in the engine and go directly to the fire.

That's why you see them drive to the grocery store in the fire truck. You can't wait for them to go back to the firehouse to get the engine ...

Would you criticize his pay if it was 1 million, or 100 million. His job is the same.

It's also a job far far overcompensated if you are saying job risk is what should determine pay. By your reckoning, soliders and construction workers should be the ones with the highest compensation. See http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-dangerous-jobs/

Lifetime cost of living increases, raises and medical coverage for you and your family for life, and that on top of any additional public safety job pension you get makes it really sad that police and fire who are supposed to be protecting and improving society are instead bankrupting it and making it worse by preventing funds from being used for much needed infrastructure improvements.

Using that logic we should be paying him a billion dollars a year, my family's lives are worth it!

Red herring. If Chief is paid too much, then make a stink. Convert your outrage into action.

When you use the example of free loaders to justify kicking the working stiffs in the teeth, you're just being cheap.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com