Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)

30. The first one is problemattic as well

Reply to KeepItReal (Original post)

Thu May 28, 2015, 06:29 AM

May 2015

Unless you are also going to increase revenues by taxation for State and Local Governments. While some local governments are blessed with large wealthy populations, most aren't. And if there is a problem caused by a corporation in a specific area, the local government will likely be on the hook for cleaning it up - while it's nice to see that settlement money going to individuals, it basically straps local governments even further.

Bryant

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We need 2 new laws in the United States of America: [View all] KeepItReal May 2015 OP

Man, seems like everybody likes to take public sector workers' pensions nowadays... Recursion May 2015 #1

I was thinking just that. Chan790 May 2015 #2

I'm very specific to cops. Don't go overboard looking for RW BS. KeepItReal May 2015 #4

You posted the "RW BS". Chan790 May 2015 #5

Deflection from my point that police need to have consequences for department misdeeds KeepItReal May 2015 #7

You're ignoring the two problems with it. Chan790 May 2015 #12

Again my point is to create a deterrent KeepItReal May 2015 #14

Your deterrent proposal is worse than useless if it's illegal. Chan790 May 2015 #16

Police *ARE* screened and trained already KeepItReal May 2015 #22

Agreed Sherman A1 May 2015 #27

That's the whole point. KeepItReal May 2015 #3

It feeds the lie that public pensions don't belong to the pensioners. They do. Recursion May 2015 #8

You keep generalizing. I'm being very specific to POLICE. KeepItReal May 2015 #10

Yes, you are that fortunate Recursion May 2015 #11

24 Years ago the cops beat the hell outta Rodney King on video and were aquitted KeepItReal May 2015 #18

Try using the concept of math... Oktober May 2015 #28

There are 30,000 Police force units and we are a republic and this must be handled CK_John May 2015 #20

His point is that the pensions belong to the pensioners, and NOT the department Scootaloo May 2015 #25

sounds like a strong disincentive to ever cooperate with any investigation fishwax May 2015 #6

What about it being more of a disincentive to mistreat citizens in the first place? KeepItReal May 2015 #9

I think it's more likely to work the way I said fishwax May 2015 #13

Pressure has to come from the TOP KeepItReal May 2015 #15

I agree that pressure from the top is a good thing fishwax May 2015 #17

I said POLICE PENSIONS. KeepItReal May 2015 #19

I know. I don't see going after police pensions as a way to bring pressure from the top fishwax May 2015 #21

Who do you think is the top in police circles? KeepItReal May 2015 #23

administrators, others in the legal system but outside of the police force (DA's) fishwax May 2015 #24

DA's ideally are the check and balance for police. But they don't act that way. KeepItReal May 2015 #26

Illegal, unethical and would immediately make things even worse.. Oktober May 2015 #29

The first one is problemattic as well el_bryanto May 2015 #30

Replace #2 with... Any police officer whose actions cause the department to settle a civil suit is Taitertots May 2015 #31

so one bad apple, everyone's pension is reduced . . . got it DrDan May 2015 #32

There must be perfection and zero faults... Oktober May 2015 #33