All debts should be equal
New city budget. New cuts, but not to taxes. The brave new world of municipal (provincial) (federal) administration. Probably been added to the curriculum at that fancy school of public administration (paid for with tax dollars).
I have no problem with modest increases in the tax bill. Inflation exists. We sometimes get new programs or toys (this is not a thumb’s up to that arena, however). There is one undertone that raises the hair on my neck and arms, though. The mayor is “looking at corrective measures for the pension fund”.
How is it that bank (or bond) debt is sacrosanct? Untouchable. Why should the debt incurred toward a pension fund be any less valid? I don’t care that “the markets didn’t return as much as we hoped”. In almost every case, the shortfall in pension funds comes from erosion to the foundations. If the employer doesn’t contribute his portion, because “we had other, more politically pleasing” priorities, why should the employee be expected to swallow the loss?
It isn’t just a sin of government. The local paper mill has an amazing shortfall. Again, on the part of the employer. The worker contributed faithfully, with nary a missed injection of funds. After all, it’s the law (a wise law). How is it that companies are exempted from the rules?
Yes, I’m much more interested in the state of my future income than I was three decades ago. I have high hopes for my investment. For now, the provincial government is holding up its corner of the load, even though the gap between what is and what should have been is wide. My defined benefits are as real as any contracted loan with a large bank. Keep that in mind, oh mindless ones.
