If we are going to take pension reform seriously, does it make more sense to attack the lowest wage earners rather than the highest paid public employee pensions in California?
I contend we need to look at the highest paid politicians who overburdened our pension obligations by far—and are the ones who voted for those pension plans in the first place—that ought to be altered first. But doesn’t the word “obligation” mean anything?
If The Acorn opinion section does ...
Oops! An active online subscription is required to access this content.
Please login below or Subscribe today!