U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Old 03-26-2019, 10:19 PM
Location: Arizona
3,571 posts, read 1,804,675 times
Reputation: 3136



Seems like Nebraska is on the top of the rankings more and more when it comes to good statistics.

Looks like America needs eight years of Mike Pence, after President Trump retires as commander and chief in hopefully 2025.

Seems like because of Mike Pence conservative policies that Indiana has the 2nd lowest debt as percent of gross-state product.

Other the other side of aisle.

Connecticut has unfunded liabilities of $32,805 per-resident, California at $29,137, Illinois $28,954, Oregon $28,431

The state that has the least unfunded liabilities per-capita of gross state product is Republican Nebraska followed former Mike Pence's Indiana
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 03-26-2019, 10:37 PM
2,011 posts, read 502,025 times
Reputation: 3089
The pension crisis is something not enough people are talking about. People are going to be unpleasantly surprised their "guaranteed" pensions start to take various haircuts. Many pensions are really just ponzi schemes. They would make Madoff proud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-28-2019, 02:39 PM
Location: Ohio
20,964 posts, read 14,843,375 times
Reputation: 17260
Originally Posted by heart84 View Post
Many pensions are really just ponzi schemes.
If they're public, then attack them.

That's the strategy being developed now. Have forensic accountants scrutinize the scheme, and if it was never viable on its face, then a judge can make alterations and stick it union members.

That wouldn't work for private pension plans. Well, I don't know. You could go [I]qui tam[/I].

Let's see, you'd have to wait until the private pension plan is taken over by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, then file [I]qui tam[/I] under the False Claims Act. I'd also seek an injunction to bar pension benefit payments to beneficiaries. That might be hard to do. Normally, complaints under the False Claims Act are sealed for 60 days, and if the government, in this case the PBGC, asks leave for an extension, the courts usually grant it.

I don't believe the pension beneficiaries have standing to intervene, but my guess is the court will hold off on the injunction until the PBGC answers the complaint, then you can slap the injunction on the beneficiaries.

No more pension checks. Sucks to be them, but they have no right to tax-payer money just because the MAFIA crafted a clever plan.

The only thing you have to prove for a Ponzi- or Ponzi-related scheme is that it wasn't viable on its face.

You don't have to prove anything else.

Interest rates or rate of return on investment? Not relevant.

Number of investors? Not relevant.

Intelligence or experience level of investors? Not relevant.

No one lost any money? Not relevant.

That's right.

100s have been convicted of running Ponzi-schemes even though not one single investor ever lost a dime.

For those who doubt, read and weep:

[I]No actual loss to the victims is required. [/I]See[I] [I]United States v. Pollack[/I],[/I] 534 F.2d 964, 971 (DC Circuit).

A pension plan structured as a Ponzi-scheme where no one has lost any money/benefits still is a Ponzi-scheme, and you can get a conviction.

The only thing that has to be proven is that the scheme wasn't viable:

[I]To sustain a conviction the government must prove the existence of a scheme; it is not required, however, to prove all details or all instances of allegedly illicit conduct.[/I] See[I], e.g.[/I], [I]United States v. Stull[/I], 743 F.2d 439, 442 n. 2 (6th Circuit 1984).

A true Ponzi-scheme requires continual new investors, but a Ponzi-related scheme does not, but it's still considered a Ponzi-scheme under the law.

Many of your government pension plans are true Ponzi-schemes because they were based on an ever-expanding government that would continually hire more and more government employees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top