Who is responsible for the pension crisis?

[Moonbeam]

People differ in their goals and ambitions. Those who want to make money pursue jobs that require one to provide for ones own future independently whereas those who seek security may pursue government jobs that pay much less over a lifetime but have retirement security. Generally, those who are risk reward oriented have big egos and lots of self confidence but also lots of stress which can make them not only feel superior to others, but look down on the slow plodder risk adverse types. They resent the notion of a government funded compensation to folk who serve at lower pay for a lifetime. They see takers taking from them, and not the higher earnings they may will ultimately have. This is natural because they focus mostly on their own needs and themselves and don't so much care about others. Short sighted venal and shallow would be one way to put it.

 

[MongGrel]

I have a small pension from a private company I may never see.

Do you mean SS when you refer to pensions to begin with, bit unclear on that.

 

[brianmanahan]

I have a small pension from a private company I may never see.

Do you mean SS when you refer to pensions to begin with, bit unclear on that.

if it's covered by PBGC you have a nearly %100 chance of receiving some sort of pension

 

[brianmanahan]

People differ in their goals and ambitions. Those who want to make money pursue jobs that require one to provide for ones own future independently whereas those who seek security may pursue government jobs that pay much less over a lifetime but have retirement security. Generally, those who are risk reward oriented have big egos and lots of self confidence but also lots of stress which can make them not only feel superior to others, but look down on the slow plodder risk adverse types. They resent the notion of a government funded compensation to folk who serve at lower pay for a lifetime. They see takers taking from them, and not the higher earnings they may will ultimately have. This is natural because they focus mostly on their own needs and themselves and don't so much care about others. Short sighted venal and shallow would be one way to put it.

by george, i agree with all of this

 

[Knowing]

The blame falls on the people who implemented defined benefit plans with assumptions like 6% annual growth and the fed cornholing savers with years of 0% interest rates.

The second won't be immediately visible until the next stock market correction when it becomes evident that all of the people who should have (and probably would have) been conservative were forced in to risky assets. Greater fools, the whole lot of them. There will be suicides (again), and again there will be no one responsible but a few more million and billionaires.

 

[poofyhairguy]

People differ in their goals and ambitions. Those who want to make money pursue jobs that require one to provide for ones own future independently whereas those who seek security may pursue government jobs that pay much less over a lifetime but have retirement security. Generally, those who are risk reward oriented have big egos and lots of self confidence but also lots of stress which can make them not only feel superior to others, but look down on the slow plodder risk adverse types. They resent the notion of a government funded compensation to folk who serve at lower pay for a lifetime. They see takers taking from them, and not the higher earnings they may will ultimately have. This is natural because they focus mostly on their own needs and themselves and don't so much care about others. Short sighted venal and shallow would be one way to put it.

These non risk takers got other benefits from that Government job throughout their career- high job security/stability, great medical benefits, and a ton of paid time off compared to the private sector. You make it sound like the only perk is a pension.

Secondly those people who didn't take risks didn't add as much value to society as the risk takers do, and there were rewarded accordingly. All the great innovations of our lifetime were risks.

I don't begrudge what the non-risk takers got in collective bargaining, just like I can understand why a risk taker has higher lifetime earnings.

But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept. They are paying the price for being ignorant about risk, the world can never be childproof like a new parents home is. To pretend otherwise is to believe in a system that doesn't motivate risk takers to take the risks needed to improve our lives.

Equality of outcome is a policy disaster. Humans need a carrot and a stick.

 

[nickqt]

These non risk takers got other benefits from that Government job throughout their career- high job security/stability, great medical benefits, and a ton of paid time off compared to the private sector. You make it sound like the only perk is a pension.

Secondly those people who didn't take risks didn't add as much value to society as the risk takers do, and there were rewarded accordingly. All the great innovations of our lifetime were risks.

I don't begrudge what the non-risk takers got in collective bargaining, just like I can understand why a risk taker has higher lifetime earnings.

But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept. They are paying the price for being ignorant about risk, the world can never be childproof like a new parents home is. To pretend otherwise is to believe in a system that doesn't motivate risk takers to take the risks needed to improve our lives.

Equality of outcome is a policy disaster. Humans need a carrot and a stick.

Ah, a FreeMarket™ worshiper.

People who worked for society rather than for themselves certainly did provide a lot to society, unlike the RiskTakers™ who generally took as much money out of society as they could.

Those damn selfish people who taught other people's children, fought other people's fires, and put on a uniform to defend their country. How dare we reward them for their underpaid efforts to society?

Besides, it's the RiskTakers™ on Wall St. who have given all of us so, so very much. They deserve so much more than union thug teachers.

Also, I realize y'all have to tie yourselves into knots on an hourly basis to defend your way of thinking, but within the span of a sentence you're confusing yourself.

But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept.

 

[LegendKiller]

Funding of pensions comes from employee contributions, government payments into a pension fund, and the stock market. Often times during a budget crunch a government entity may skip payments and write an IOU of sorts. Throw in a mismanaged stock market fund and you have trouble... which will cost the taxpayer.

My wife is a teacher and she will receive a pension. We live in Tennessee and public pensions are funded at 92%. Illinois on the other hand is around 44% funded. These employees were promised the moon and probably never gave a second though to their wonderful pension plans and how they would be funded. The taxpayers will ultimately need to cough up more money or the benefits have to be cut (which is typically against state law).

Don't forget the fact that a lot of pensions are offered contribution free. Add in unrealistic returns, actuarial screw-ups, and good ole politician over-promising, and you get where we are now.

Blaming it on "mismanagement" of the stock market fund is missing 90% of the problem.

 

[LegendKiller]

Ah, a FreeMarket™ worshiper.

People who worked for society rather than for themselves certainly did provide a lot to society, unlike the RiskTakers™ who generally took as much money out of society as they could.

Those damn selfish people who taught other people's children, fought other people's fires, and put on a uniform to defend their country. How dare we reward them for their underpaid efforts to society?

Besides, it's the RiskTakers™ on Wall St. who have given all of us so, so very much. They deserve so much more than union thug teachers.

Also, I realize y'all have to tie yourselves into knots on an hourly basis to defend your way of thinking, but within the span of a sentence you're confusing yourself.

Depend on what you think is underpayment is. Can somebody who retires at 50 and make 90% of their last year's take home for the next 20-30 years, plus survivor benefits that may last longer, plus medical, be considered "underpaid"?

Those pension contributions ARE payment and they are OVERPAYMENT. If a fireman starts work at 20, works till 50, then retires and lives to 80, he has spent an equivalent period in retirement as working. How do you think that works out when he didn't put a dime of after-tax (or even pre-tax) money in?

What happens for people higher up?

That's a lot of money, more than the vast majority of America makes, and more than the "middle class" makes since they don't have those pensions.

They may protect us, but the notion they can retire BEFORE the people who actually pay for that retirement is idiotic.

 

[MongGrel]

A 401K wasn't a pension to begin with I'd always thought.

News to me.

 

[fskimospy]

The blame falls on the people who implemented defined benefit plans with assumptions like 6% annual growth and the fed cornholing savers with years of 0% interest rates.

The second won't be immediately visible until the next stock market correction when it becomes evident that all of the people who should have (and probably would have) been conservative were forced in to risky assets. Greater fools, the whole lot of them. There will be suicides (again), and again there will be no one responsible but a few more million and billionaires.

Unlikely. Interest income represents an extremely small percentage of income for all Americans other than the ultra rich, even in times of relatively high rates. (Even before the crash the percentage of yearly income reported as interest income for all but the top earners was around 1%. Maybe less)

There is only one group of people that higher fed rates helps, the ultra rich with a lot of interest income.

 

[nickqt]

Depend on what you think is underpayment is. Can somebody who retires at 50 and make 90% of their last year's take home for the next 20-30 years, plus survivor benefits that may last longer, plus medical, be considered "underpaid"?

Those pension contributions ARE payment and they are OVERPAYMENT. If a fireman starts work at 20, works till 50, then retires and lives to 80, he has spent an equivalent period in retirement as working. How do you think that works out when he didn't put a dime of after-tax (or even pre-tax) money in?

What happens for people higher up?

That's a lot of money, more than the vast majority of America makes, and more than the "middle class" makes since they don't have those pensions.

They may protect us, but the notion they can retire BEFORE the people who actually pay for that retirement is idiotic.

First, what percentage of pensioners retire after exactly 20 years? Teachers, firemen, soldiers, etc. Because assuming that every teacher or firefighter starts at 20 and then quits at 40 isn't particularly realistic.

Second, while teaching may not be extremely hard on the body, manual labor jobs are rough on the body. You can't assume that they aren't run down more than some RiskTaker™ hero who sat in an office for 30 years. Wear and tear doesn't get you any extra pension benefits, but you better believe it costs you more in healthcare costs.

Public service should be rewarded. It doesn't mean that someone should be able to work exactly 20 years and make $100k in pension payments afterwards. Besides, the people who get those pensions are usually executives who've already cooked the books for themselves, their friends, and their friends' children. Not some UnionThug™ 4th grade teacher.

 

[MongGrel]

These non risk takers got other benefits from that Government job throughout their career- high job security/stability, great medical benefits, and a ton of paid time off compared to the private sector. You make it sound like the only perk is a pension.

Secondly those people who didn't take risks didn't add as much value to society as the risk takers do, and there were rewarded accordingly. All the great innovations of our lifetime were risks.

I don't begrudge what the non-risk takers got in collective bargaining, just like I can understand why a risk taker has higher lifetime earnings.


But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept. They are paying the price for being ignorant about risk, the world can never be childproof like a new parents home is. To pretend otherwise is to believe in a system that doesn't motivate risk takers to take the risks needed to improve our lives.

Equality of outcome is a policy disaster. Humans need a carrot and a stick.

Ah, so I take it you mean the people that were busting their asses off on a daily basis shouldn't be pissed off at wall street for fucking them up the ass a few years ago and shipping jobs out of the country ?

I'm 53, my back hurts like hell, and wish I was retired.

And have been making highly technical parts most of my life.

 

[Moonbeam]

These non risk takers got other benefits from that Government job throughout their career- high job security/stability, great medical benefits, and a ton of paid time off compared to the private sector. You make it sound like the only perk is a pension.

Secondly those people who didn't take risks didn't add as much value to society as the risk takers do, and there were rewarded accordingly. All the great innovations of our lifetime were risks.

I don't begrudge what the non-risk takers got in collective bargaining, just like I can understand why a risk taker has higher lifetime earnings.

But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept. They are paying the price for being ignorant about risk, the world can never be childproof like a new parents home is. To pretend otherwise is to believe in a system that doesn't motivate risk takers to take the risks needed to improve our lives.

Equality of outcome is a policy disaster. Humans need a carrot and a stick.

I think my point was that risk takers are short sighted, blinded by ego. You would be nowhere if the state didn't have workers fixing the roads, the Post Office delivering ads etc., and the military defending your ass. If everybody was an entrepreneur, we'd all starve. Nobody is going to do a service job if they get nothing for it. A lot of people have government jobs not for the perks that are real, but because of the retirement.

 

[Moonbeam]

Ah, so I take it you mean the people that were busting their asses off on a daily basis shouldn't be pissed off at wall street for fucking them up the ass a few years ago and shipping jobs out of the country ?

Forgive his self importance. He is indoctrinated and full of self hate. He needs his delusions of grandeur.

 

[MongGrel]

These non risk takers got other benefits from that Government job throughout their career- high job security/stability, great medical benefits, and a ton of paid time off compared to the private sector. You make it sound like the only perk is a pension.

Secondly those people who didn't take risks didn't add as much value to society as the risk takers do, and there were rewarded accordingly. All the great innovations of our lifetime were risks.

I don't begrudge what the non-risk takers got in collective bargaining, just like I can understand why a risk taker has higher lifetime earnings.


But no one in this life has the choice to be completely shielded from risk, and all those non risk takers took a risk that the promises could be kept. They are paying the price for being ignorant about risk, the world can never be childproof like a new parents home is. To pretend otherwise is to believe in a system that doesn't motivate risk takers to take the risks needed to improve our lives.

Equality of outcome is a policy disaster. Humans need a carrot and a stick.

 

[LegendKiller]

First, what percentage of pensioners retire after exactly 20 years? Teachers, firemen, soldiers, etc. Because assuming that every teacher or firefighter starts at 20 and then quits at 40 isn't particularly realistic.

Second, while teaching may not be extremely hard on the body, manual labor jobs are rough on the body. You can't assume that they aren't run down more than some RiskTaker™ hero who sat in an office for 30 years. Wear and tear doesn't get you any extra pension benefits, but you better believe it costs you more in healthcare costs.

Public service should be rewarded. It doesn't mean that someone should be able to work exactly 20 years and make $100k in pension payments afterwards. Besides, the people who get those pensions are usually executives who've already cooked the books for themselves, their friends, and their friends' children. Not some UnionThug™ 4th grade teacher.

Public service shouldn't be rewarded with better contracts and living than the people who support them and have to work. Public service is a more stable job, that stability shouldn't be doubled down upon by additional riches. I'm willing to give some "hazard" pay, but not much more than the average worker.

This is the key differential, the average "public" worker makes *FAR* more than the equiv private worker. You cannot keep that up, it is simply unsustainable. Period.

 

[LegendKiller]

Ah, so I take it you mean the people that were busting their asses off on a daily basis shouldn't be pissed off at wall street for fucking them up the ass a few years ago and shipping jobs out of the country ?

I'm 53, my back hurts like hell, and wish I was retired.

And have been making highly technical parts most of my life.

We fucked ourselves up the ass. We bought into the idiocy of "trickle down" and it keeps going. Look at "carried interest", same shit, different day, people hear about it. They hear about Mitt's tax rate, and they don't give a shit.

People seem to forget that *WE* are the government. One way or another, a much better educated voter cannot be overruled by money.

 

[Thebobo]

A good pension is a sign of a first class civilized country. If we fail to take care of our elderly, we can all go fuck ourselves.

No S.S., no medicare, no pension, no love. Yes, we can all go fuck ourselves over our selfishness.



Obviously a little exaggerated there, but I think it should be clear to all of us that we continuously have a "mine, not yours" attitude that is going to bite the younger generation in the ass when they get too old to work but not too old to retire.

Agree with you. And it wont be long before these young people are old

 

[LegendKiller]

And to add to that, I once had a conversation on FB with a friend from HS. She talked about how great American Girl dolls were.

I pointed out the hypocrisy of "American Girl" dolls made in China while paying the price premium of a doll made in America by skilled craftsmen.

First she started off by saying I didn't purchase American Made anyway. I pointed out my Ariens snowblower, which had fewer bells and whistles but was 100% USA made, at a more expensive price than the more feature rich. I pointed out all of my hand tools (Craftsman, USA), my mostly Amish made furniture...etc. Then I became a pretentious prick. Then I became an American hating asshole after she brought up her husband being a serviceman and how dare I question her dedication to this country. Nevermind he had lost two jobs to offshoring. All the while her favorite place to shop is Wal Mart.

It's pathetic. All to save a few bucks and keep the iphone and data plan.

 

[unokitty]

Wall Street Fees Wipe Out $2.5 Billion in New York City Pension Gains

Even in the heart of the financial world, public pension funds can’t seem to get a good deal. An analysis conducted by New York’s chief fiscal officer found that the city’s public pension funds have lost $2.5 billion to Wall Street fees, the New York Times reports.

In the past decade, the chunk of pension assets invested in standard-issue stocks and bonds saw above-average returns, totaling $2 billion. But those gains were almost entirely wiped out by management fees, said Comptroller Scott Stringer, leaving pensions just $40 million above what they would have pulled in on the broader market.

In the smaller slice of assets invested in more sophisticated products, however, fees gobbled up $2.5 billion, the analysis found. Though these pricier, more esoteric investments are often justified by higher expected returns, the report finds the costs weren’t worth it.

New York’s five public pension funds hold the nest eggs of more than 700,000 public employees. At $160 billion, the funds make up the fourth-largest public pension system in the country.

The analysis was the first of its kind conducted by the city to factor in fees. “It’s shocking to realize that fees have not only wiped out any benefit to the funds, but have in fact cost taxpayers billions of dollars in lost return,” Stringer told the Times.

Who to blame?
A. Wall Street that made 2 billion + dollars in fees off of government pension funds.
B. Government officials that gave the contracts to Wall Street.
C. New York City employees that trusted the government.
D. All of the above

I'm going with answer D.

Uno

 

[LegendKiller]

Wall Street Fees Wipe Out $2.5 Billion in New York City Pension Gains
Who to blame?
A. Wall Street that made 2 billion + dollars in fees off of government pension funds.
B. Government officials that gave the contracts to Wall Street.
C. New York City employees that trusted the government.
D. All of the above

I'm going with answer D.

Uno

This has already been addressed by me. The funds met their return targets, returns above that were largely eaten up, which seems a little high, but then you don't know what type of investment profile there was, how much was managed...etc.

 

[MongGrel]

On a side note, I saw something last nite where Rick Scott (Skeletor) in FL managed to get something passed to where you cannot even say "Global Warming" in a public forum or they will fine and suspend you.

This country is just fucked in general, too many dickheads in high places.

 

[Jhhnn]

Depend on what you think is underpayment is. Can somebody who retires at 50 and make 90% of their last year's take home for the next 20-30 years, plus survivor benefits that may last longer, plus medical, be considered "underpaid"?

Those pension contributions ARE payment and they are OVERPAYMENT. If a fireman starts work at 20, works till 50, then retires and lives to 80, he has spent an equivalent period in retirement as working. How do you think that works out when he didn't put a dime of after-tax (or even pre-tax) money in?

What happens for people higher up?

That's a lot of money, more than the vast majority of America makes, and more than the "middle class" makes since they don't have those pensions.

They may protect us, but the notion they can retire BEFORE the people who actually pay for that retirement is idiotic.

Pensions have always worked in a pay it forward fashion. All the years I worked my contributions to the pension fund helped pay the pensions of those who came before me. SS works the same way. So do Medicare & the ACA. Anything that removes workers from the pension pool threatens solvency of the fund.

Promising too much & mismanagement are another story entirely. Wall St will, of course, gleefully help mismanage anything from pensions to the Greek Govt for the right cut of the action.

 

[fskimospy]

On a side note, I saw something last nite where Rick Scott (Skeletor) in FL managed to get something passed to where you cannot even say "Global Warming" in a public forum or they will fine and suspend you.

This country is just fucked in general, too many dickheads in high places.

Rick Scott is not skeletor. He is clearly Bat Boy.