Recent comments in /f/nyc

STARWARSQ70L t1_jbx77wk wrote

Except your missing the part that 1) many of those ppl went into the career knowing that would be the future so the job chosen paid more thru the length of it so they could afford that cost at the end.

In this situation city workers took the job with a contractual promise that the health care was free which was why they were ok with taken less money for the duration of there career. You can't compare the example you gave. They literally waited till these ppl done worked there 20 30 years to then tear up contracts made to them. What job you rushing into when you over 50 to now supplement these changes.

  1. The ppl that are paying what you talk about still end up with more control over there Healthcare decisions. In this plan you talking about pre authorizations for many aspects of Healthcare with a heavy incentive for the city to say no.

So now you get surprised with suddenly have to pay after you already old and retired and you get stuck getting lesser care with no other true options. The money you would of had you took less off because you were contractually told something completely different.

2

quetedigo t1_jbvsht5 wrote

as someone who’s lived in both, I can tell u imo SF is pretty shitty nowadays. If you’re looking for exciting city living, SF isn’t really it. SF is ruled by obnoxious tech bros so there’s little diversity, income disparities are more glaring and the housing/homelessness crisis is outta control, there’s very few museums, the trains don’t run 24/7, etc… the main positive of SF is proximity to redwoods/nature/pacific ocean.

again just imo but that’s what u asked for right?

0