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.
I believe public pensions should not be put at risk in the Stock market or any other private sector involvement. It should be set up where current payments are covered by current income. This would eliminate the risk of a market crash destroying the futures of people that never wanted to "invest in the market" or anywhere else beyond a long term savings account in a local bank. Public employees generally accept lower wages in return for health insurance, job security and a decent pension. Their employers with the problem pension systems have simply been cheating.
The stock market has never returned less than the returns on a program such as social security over the working lifespan of any given person in this country. Your plan would do nothing but guarantee retirees less money than they would have otherwise. A diversified portfolio in the market has proven to give the highest rate of return on income (even assuming a person retired in a year such as 2008) than any other investment vehicle. Do you have any actual numbers to back up what you are saying?
A lot of public service employees are going to get a rude awakening when they go to retire. These states need to do what Florida did, require employee contributions to the state pension plan.
Across the nation, cities and states are watching Detroit's largest-ever municipal bankruptcy filing with great trepidation. Years of underfunded retirement promises to public sector workers, which helped lay Detroit low, could plunge them into a similar and terrifying financial hole.
A CNBC.com analysis of more than 120 of the nation's largest state and local pension plans finds they face a wide range of burdens as their aging workforces near retirement.
It just hasn't been public service employees either Carterstamp, I knew several people whose company/corporation they spent lifetimes with either downsized or went out of business whose pensions were affected, this happened quite a few years ago too.
I know of one woman who worked for K-Mart many years, she was basically cheated from a great portion of her retirement. IBM did the same thing, at least that's what a former IBM employee told me.
The stock market has never returned less than the returns on a program such as social security over the working lifespan of any given person in this country. Your plan would do nothing but guarantee retirees less money than they would have otherwise. A diversified portfolio in the market has proven to give the highest rate of return on income (even assuming a person retired in a year such as 2008) than any other investment vehicle. Do you have any actual numbers to back up what you are saying?
the problem is stock market returns are too volatile for the shorter time frames.
Think about a police officer who retires after 20 years. Well the overall rate of return from the market cannot be applied to that relatively small sample.
CDs and Munis would be the wisest investments for pensions.
And pensions is not something the Fed can "bail out" because pension is an ongoing event.
Sure, plop some money in the account today but that won't fix your funding problem.
You'll be back in the same situation in 1-3-5-10 years if you don't fix your funding.
of course not. The greedy unions would never put their money where their mouth is.
Then they will end up with nothing like what's happened in cities all over the US.
Granted they are small cities but soon enough the same problem will hit the big cities.
Detroit's outcome regarding pensions is being watched closely.
Then they will end up with nothing like what's happened in cities all over the US.
Granted they are small cities but soon enough the same problem will hit the big cities.
Detroit's outcome regarding pensions is being watched closely.
I hope the majority is sane and understand Krugman is a stubborn fool.
Prichard, AL was the canary in the coal mine nearly 3 years ago.
Nobody paid attention.
If you don't have the money no court action, no law is going to do any good.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/23/bu...anted=all&_r=0
This struggling small city on the outskirts of Mobile was warned for years that if it did nothing, its pension fund would run out of money by 2009. Right on schedule, its fund ran dry.
Then Prichard did something that pension experts say they have never seen before: it stopped sending monthly pension checks to its 150 retired workers, breaking a state law requiring it to pay its promised retirement benefits in full.
I then looked to see what happened. 1.5 years later there was a deal struck.
The pensions got reduced 66%. Those people are getting their pensions now but only 1/3 of what they got before.
Current employees there are in limbo as far as pensions..no promises or guarantees. Prichard's collapsed pension plan detailed in international academic journal | al.com
I hope the majority is sane and understand Krugman is a stubborn fool.
A lesson must be learned from Detroit.
Part of the Detroit lesson would be to not give tax breaks to large corporations and companies who want to set up in yours and my communities, and try balancing their books on local citizens and voters.
In my community, the village gave companies/corporations tax incentives for putting their businesses here. Did property taxes for citizens go down? Did property taxes for citizens become frozen? They did not.
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.