I am not sure where these teachers are that are getting 3.3 million in pensions, but I am pretty sure there would not be a need for more teachers in this country if they were giving out 3.3 mill at the end of the rainbow. I sure as hell would have picked a different career path. Who exactly are you listening to? Rush?
Slow your roll. That data is from a direct quote of Gov. Christie in New Jersey. I highly recommend reading the entire speech if you get the chance... it's quite good:
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/02/chris_christies_speech_on_budg.html
Here is the relevant quote:
"One state retiree, 49 years old, paid, over the course of his entire career, a total of $124,000 towards his retirement pension and health benefits. What will we pay him? $3.3 million in pension payments over his life and nearly $500,000 for health care benefits -- a total of $3.8m on a $120,000 investment. Is that fair?"
One problem is that Christie may not have been referring to teachers, specifically, with that statement. It could have been any state employee/retiree. However, the very next segment of the speech is this:
"A retired teacher paid $62,000 towards her pension and nothing, yes nothing, for full family medical, dental and vision coverage over her entire career. What will we pay her? $1.4 million in pension benefits and another $215,000 in health care benefit premiums over her lifetime. Is it “fair” for all of us and our children to have to pay for this excess?"
The union-driven pension system is quite obviously unsustainable... that is, it's obvious IF you're paying attention. Accusing the OP of drawing his data from Rush Limbaugh indicates to me that you're not paying very close attention to the politics of this subject, so you should probably ditch the lame accusations...
My only heartburn comes when government steps in and tilts the playing field in favor of one side or the other. In the early days they would help the companies bust unions, now they lean more towards helping the unions bust companies.
^^This.