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.
Of course it's about money. You complain the government is not bailing out pension companies. How will the government quarantee people get 100% benefits without money?
Sorry, you better go read the whole thread... did you flunk reading comprehension? I bet you did.
No , just right is right. Obama is the socialist. A working man who puts into his penson should reap the benefits. Sorry you can't comprehend that. It is not welfare.
That is ok. God will provide and sort out what is righteous. A promise is important to God and so is a man's word. The world is corrupt and many people in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan
How is requiring tax payers to subsidize PRIVATE pension plans not socialist, exactly?
Care to answer?
No, retirement investment isn't welfare - it's also not guaranteed to produce a return. Sorry you can't comprehend that.
Sorry, you better go read the whole thread... did you flunk reading comprehension? I bet you did.
I have read it. Trying to get personal is just another form of deflection. You have spent 18 pages to complain about the government allowing private companies to cut benefits. You have been explained many times that if the government did what you demand they do, it would result in a bailout. I have personally asked you four times where the money would come from if the government guaranteed the benefits, and you won't answer. Why? Because you realized it would have to come from the tax-payer, which is a bail out.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 12-22-2014 at 07:43 AM..
No, retirement investment isn't welfare - it's also not guaranteed to produce a return. Sorry you can't comprehend that.
the law said it was guaranteed. It is not grandfathered in to protect those who are now getting a pension. Does that fact make any difference to you?
A 401K is not guaranteed. A pension is. Not anymore. Too many undocumented workers took the Union members jobs and the membership cannot support the pension fund. That is the fact. It has nothing to do with poor return on investments.
A friend read the letter he received from his union . He is from NJ and will be getting a cut on his pension even though he is an old retired black man who is not able bodied to work. He has been getting a pension for @ 5 years or so with 25 years in. Reasons stated for the cut. Not enough workers to fund the payouts.
I am in Florida . This does not affect me but I believe this is outrageous because for years the unions were not protected from the huge influx of illegals taking jobs from union workers because they worked cheaper.
There was a building boom in NJ and no one should have had a pension cut and they are still building in NJ.
Since 2009 NJ has had the more gains in illegals than any other state .
I have read it. Trying to get personal is just another form of deflection. You have spent 18 pages to complain about the government allowing private companies to cut benefits. You have been explained many times that if the government did what you demand they do, it would result in a bailout. I have personally asked you four times where the money would come from if the government guaranteed the benefits, and you won't answer.
Nope, wrong again. no bailout. this is why I am angry> They will get the cut and live with it. The government will destroy all unions and the working man will again have lower wages and welfare. After all the middle class is getting destroyed for reasons unknown to us. Unless they are this stupid with legislation over the years.
the law said it was guaranteed. It is not grandfathered in to protect those who are now getting a pension. Does that fact make any difference to you?
No, it doesn't make any difference regarding whether forcing taxpayers to subsidize a private pension fund is socialist or not. Why would it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova
A 401K is not guaranteed. A pension is. Not anymore. Too many undocumented workers took the Union members jobs and the membership cannot support the pension fund. That is the fact. It has nothing to do with poor return on investments.
Guaranteed by whom? The employer, correct? NOT the Fed Gov.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova
A friend read the letter he received from his union . He is from NJ and will be getting a cut on his pension even though he is an old retired black man who is not able bodied to work. He has been getting a pension for @ 5 years or so with 25 years in. Reasons stated for the cut. Not enough workers to fund the payouts.
I am in Florida . This does not affect me but I believe this is outrageous because for years the unions were not protected from the huge influx of illegals taking jobs from union workers because they worked cheaper.
There was a building boom in NJ and no one should have had a pension cut and they are still building in NJ.
Since 2009 NJ has had the more gains in illegals than any other state .
This is a sad scenario for your friend, I agree. That doesn't mean that the taxpayers should be on the hook to make your buddy "whole" regarding his pension.
They made a false promise they couldn't keep. Period.
By "they" you mean the employers, yes?
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.
