Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems the government was the only one NOT to follow their own laws about employee pension funds.
Why am I not surprised ?
Back in the day the private pensions weren't required to dilligently fund. It was until sometime circa 1990ish that they had to fund for retiree medical benefits.
Those changes were brought about after companies were unable to provide people their promised benefits and retirees were screwed by it.
Gee, and here we have people arguing the govt. should not accrue liabilities and just pay later and carry enormous unfunded pension liabilities....because nothing could ever go wrong doing that.
Wierd how when you start posting facts it kills a lot of threads around here.
I'd love to see some of the posters come back and defend their position of unfunded pensions or once in a while maybe even admit they learned something.
Too much correspondence relies on it being hand carried . The best they could do is make those who want hand delivered mail at their mail boxes pay a subscription rate and all others would go to the post office to pick up their mail. They could have a back up system by phone message or email alerting people that their mail was going to be "deleted" if not pick up with a certain time frame. I can see the day when you go to post office with a card an PIN # and an automated system gives you your mail or instead of dropping letters in a box you feed documents in reader and a recipient can access the document through their computer. The same way I pay my gas bill with a check. I don't even have to fill out my check.
Yep. Let's see what huffington post has to say...a good source so that some of the "business savy" posters around here don't dismiss the article as being right wing.
U.S. Munis' $2 Trillion In Unfunded Pensions May Cause Some Public Workers To Lose Benefits
According to that formula, the nation’s largest 126 public pensions have liabilities with a present value (meaning they were discounted at their assumed rate) in 2010 of $3.5 trillion. The amount of assets they held was $2.7 trillion in 2010, leaving a shortfall of $800 billion.
Some economists, however, have come up with a $4 trillion shortfall. They have pointed out that for most state and local plans, promised pension benefits are protected by constitutional, statutory, or common law guarantees. (See related article, “Navigating the Legal Landscape for Public Pension Reform.”) By definition, this ought to make them riskless obligations to the pensioners. Thus, the appropriate valuation methodology should discount promised benefits using the risk-free interest rate, usually calculated as the yield on long-term U.S. Treasuries.
Every single private company has to fund their retiree health and pension benefitsas they are incurred, so I'm thinking that you probably aren't in a position to make any comments about business savy. (If I've confused you, much of this is required under FAS 106 etc. as set by this organization)
So, basically, what you are saying is that you want to HIDE the losses in an unfunded future pension liability rather than accrue them like the the federal govt. REQUIRES BY LAW of every private company.
What could possibly go wrong you may ask?
Well gee, Illinois has about a 90 billion hole in their public pension fund...their debt rating has been cut so they can't just borrow to plug the gap and so now they are looking at legislation to CUT PENSION BENEFITS to the retirees because they didn't fund it in the first place and now don't have the money.
And here you come strolling by making fun of the "geniuses" and their "business savy" without a freaking clue what you are talking about. I'll share your *wisdom* with my father in law whose facing a pension cut at nearly age 80 due to this.
I mean, dear god...do you charge things on your credit card because you think that way it's free? Mindboggling.
Uh yes I know that. Do you understand the difference of funding benefits as they are incurred vs funding benefits based speculation about the far future.
Funding benefits as the are incurred =/= funding benefits 75 years in advance genius. Let me tell you what this means...The post office is having to fund retirement benefits for future employees who aren't born yet. I wonder how much you are in a possition to make comments.
Uh yes I know that. Do you understand the difference of funding benefits as they are incurred vs funding benefits based speculation about the far future.
Funding benefits as the are incurred =/= funding benefits 75 years in advance genius. Let me tell you what this means...The post office is having to fund retirement benefits for future employees who aren't born yet. I wonder how much you are in a possition to make comments.
Aw, aren't you adorable...ok, I will tutor you for free.
1) The benefit funding for 75 years is ONLY for the medical retiree benefits and is a 10-year phased in requirement.
2) The postmaster general themselves pointed to decreased mail volume as the main culprit.
3) You wonder how I'm in a position to make comments after constantly educating you as to the facts and that I knew what FAS106 was without having to google it? Really?
4) It's still a pre-funding AS ALL PRIVATE COMPANIES ARE REQUIRED TO DO.
5) Yes, I am a genius. Thanks for noticing! And no, I do not mean relative to you. (But only by the 140 definition and not the 180 definition....awe....so sad. )
6) Noticing you never commented on the states proposing cuts to public pensions they can't afford. Hmmmmm.....so you want to give people pensions the US public is unlikely to be able to pay. Well, that's sure fair.
Aw, aren't you adorable...ok, I will tutor you for free.
1) The benefit funding for 75 years is ONLY for the medical retiree benefits and is a 10-year phased in requirement.
So private companies must fund benefits for employees that aren't born yet.
2) The postmaster general themselves pointed to decreased mail volume as the main culprit.
3) You wonder how I'm in a position to make comments after constantly educating you as to the facts and that I knew what FAS106 was without having to google it? Really?
Like you educated me about the estate tax where it took me two pages for you to finally accept that it was phased out for a year
4) It's still a pre-funding AS ALL PRIVATE COMPANIES ARE REQUIRED TO DO.
Really private companies are required to plan for speculative employees that are not born yet?
5) Yes, I am a genius. Thanks for noticing! And no, I do not mean relative to you. (But only by the 140 definition and not the 180 definition....awe....so sad. )
fail
6) Noticing you never commented on the states proposing cuts to public pensions they can't afford. Hmmmmm.....so you want to give people pensions the US public is unlikely to be able to pay. Well, that's sure fair.
Don't feel bad that almost no one with respond to your information but me, they don't want to hear bad news about how the govt is going bankrupt and that no....people won't always just lend them more money.
These are likely the same people with credit card debt greater than half their annual income. (I would have said net income but that would just confuse them.)
I'm a raging social liberal but when it comes to fiscal stuff....I'm conservative and intolerant of the uneducated running around with scissors in one hand and another pair jammed up their nose point first.
8billion a year to convert the post office pay-go system over 10 years to the NORMAL actuarially sound FAS methodology.
Their shortfall was 16billion this year but hey, if you want to argue with the post offices own numbers then be my guest!
They are not being forced to be more funded that private companies are and it's only 1/2 of the post offices losses this year.
The point you wanted to avoid however is how government pensions and healthcare benefits are being retroactively defaulted on.
What kind of person accepts a system where retirees can be ROBBED after the fact because you didn't fund their pensions? Are you freaking Gordon Gecko? Are you anti-union and public worker? Dear god...make the government FUND thier pensions and retiree medical instead of empty promises.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
Well, that's sure fair. 
