U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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 01-16-2017, 12:19 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,723,738 times
Reputation: 32304

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by QUEMQUAHT View Post
These fat California pensions are about to go away. It's just a matter of how long you can pretend to have funding years after you have used up everything you have saved in the vaults. Or maybe how many government and social services you will be giving up in order to fund the pensions.

How a pension deal went wrong and cost California taxpayers billions - Los Angeles Times

California

California's Pension Funding Crisis Just Got Worse | Fortune.com

Too many people in high positions in government have ignored some basic universal laws of balance. I would hate to see the conditions of their personal checkbook accounts if they can't figure out how to balance the future needs of their state constituents with the need for ongoing fiscal responsibility. Too many folks out there either have their heads buried in the sand or they have taken up participation in the "underground booming economies" to the point where they are no longer needing to be worrying about their pensions any more.
Good links. I had already read the first one when it came out. Both links talk about the potential funding problems of California pensions, but neither one supports your contention that they are "about to go away". Your use of the word "about" implies that it will happen before very long. New hires are already subject to less generous formulas, but that won't take effect until the new hires start to retire decades from now.

As for "using up everything you have saved in the vaults", CalPERS has billions and billions of dollars "in the vaults". If those reserves are ever used up, and it's possible eventually, there will be an enormous crisis, but that is not around the corner, as you imply.

There is a real problem with public pensions, but exaggerations such as the one you engaged in don't lend to a rational discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2017, 02:05 PM
 
3,340 posts, read 3,042,920 times
Reputation: 4868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
Again, Silicon Valley. The cost of living is so high for just routine expenses compared to the rest of the country that the $65k just goes right through - aside from higher SS amounts and more savings from fixed percentage savings, it's essentially financial diarrhea.
When exactly have you lived in Northern California? For someone who has lived in the Bay Area for a long time, certain costs may not be as high. It is very much dependent upon the person and their particular costs and situation. When I moved to Nashville four and a half years ago I had to pay 30% more in rent in Nashville than I did in San Francisco. Some things were cheaper and other things were more expensive. If I made that say move today I would be paying 50% more in rent in Tennessee than I was paying in San Francisco. The whole conversation is moot if we're talking about somebody moving there now but we aren't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2017, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Central IL
15,200 posts, read 8,504,300 times
Reputation: 35575
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasperhobbs View Post
Show me where I can buy a reasonably priced McMansion that can be paid for with a $17 an hour job?
"reasonably priced McMansion" is an oxymoron! No one DESERVES a behemoth mansion...and very few people even need one. Square feet per family member has maxed out and is now dropping - no need for a family of 4 to have 3,000 sq.ft. on 1/2 acre - get reasonable with the space needed and also realize that granite and stainless steel are wants, not needs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2017, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,426,347 times
Reputation: 15678
Quote:
Originally Posted by N.Cal View Post
When I moved to Nashville four and a half years ago I had to pay 30% more in rent in Nashville than I did in San Francisco... If I made that say move today I would be paying 50% more in rent in Tennessee than I was paying in San Francisco...
Wow! I had no idea Nashville was so expensive. If you don't mind, can you put some dollar numbers to the rents in the two locations?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2017, 08:10 PM
 
249 posts, read 196,821 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeh63 View Post
"reasonably priced McMansion" is an oxymoron! No one DESERVES a behemoth mansion...and very few people even need one. Square feet per family member has maxed out and is now dropping - no need for a family of 4 to have 3,000 sq.ft. on 1/2 acre - get reasonable with the space needed and also realize that granite and stainless steel are wants, not needs.
You're right no one needs a 3000 sq ft house, 1/2 acre lot, granite or stainless steel, but if one can afford it why does anyone care where they spend their money?
I understand this thread is about poor retirees but your assertion of what is a reasonable house for a family of four is an overreach. What is wrong with getting wants and not just settling for needs? Again, assuming one can afford it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2017, 08:39 PM
 
3,340 posts, read 3,042,920 times
Reputation: 4868
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Wow! I had no idea Nashville was so expensive. If you don't mind, can you put some dollar numbers to the rents in the two locations?
SF $850/mo (The rent was only raised three times in 19 years.)

Nash $1,210 in 2012. Same 700 sq ft apt now would cost probably $1,700 maybe $1,800, which is why I bought a house three years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2017, 10:26 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,190 posts, read 6,301,958 times
Reputation: 9808
Quote:
Originally Posted by N.Cal View Post
SF $850/mo (The rent was only raised three times in 19 years.)

Nash $1,210 in 2012. Same 700 sq ft apt now would cost probably $1,700 maybe $1,800, which is why I bought a house three years ago.
It must be rent controlled?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2017, 05:35 AM
 
29,764 posts, read 34,848,700 times
Reputation: 11675
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmarlin20 View Post
You're right no one needs a 3000 sq ft house, 1/2 acre lot, granite or stainless steel, but if one can afford it why does anyone care where they spend their money?
I understand this thread is about poor retirees but your assertion of what is a reasonable house for a family of four is an overreach. What is wrong with getting wants and not just settling for needs? Again, assuming one can afford it.
Bada Bing!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2017, 05:47 AM
 
29,764 posts, read 34,848,700 times
Reputation: 11675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
Good links. I had already read the first one when it came out. Both links talk about the potential funding problems of California pensions, but neither one supports your contention that they are "about to go away". Your use of the word "about" implies that it will happen before very long. New hires are already subject to less generous formulas, but that won't take effect until the new hires start to retire decades from now.

As for "using up everything you have saved in the vaults", CalPERS has billions and billions of dollars "in the vaults". If those reserves are ever used up, and it's possible eventually, there will be an enormous crisis, but that is not around the corner, as you imply.

There is a real problem with public pensions, but exaggerations such as the one you engaged in don't lend to a rational discussion.
https://www.calpers.ca.gov/

Scroll down to the bottom of the link. Only 25% of Caliper pension benefit payouts come from employer contributions. 62% comes from return on investments and the remaining 13 percent comes from employee contributions. Try removing that 62% invested from the economy and watch the collateral economic damage. Apply that thought to the many pension fund investments across the county and you realize how dependent America is on pension investment funds to fund the economy and oh yeah I say LOL all those with 401K investments who profit from that invested money.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-in...0GX0VQ20140902

Quote:
The world's 300 biggest pension funds saw their combined assets rise 6.2 percent to $14.9 trillion in 2013, research from Pensions & Investments and Towers Watson showed.
The pace of growth in assets under management had slowed slightly, however, at 6.2 percent from 9.8 percent in 2012.
North American funds remained the largest region for AuM, at 41.4 percent of the total, with the 126 U.S. funds in the list accounting for 36 percent. Japan has the second largest share, at 13 percent, with the Netherlands third with 7 percent and Norway and Canada next, both with more than 6 percent.
Your point about reform already occurring is right on target as what folks are complaining about is already not available to new hires.

Last edited by TuborgP; 01-17-2017 at 06:03 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2017, 05:59 AM
 
29,764 posts, read 34,848,700 times
Reputation: 11675
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUEMQUAHT View Post
These fat California pensions are about to go away. It's just a matter of how long you can pretend to have funding years after you have used up everything you have saved in the vaults. Or maybe how many government and social services you will be giving up in order to fund the pensions.

How a pension deal went wrong and cost California taxpayers billions - Los Angeles Times

California

California's Pension Funding Crisis Just Got Worse | Fortune.com

Too many people in high positions in government have ignored some basic universal laws of balance. I would hate to see the conditions of their personal checkbook accounts if they can't figure out how to balance the future needs of their state constituents with the need for ongoing fiscal responsibility. Too many folks out there either have their heads buried in the sand or they have taken up participation in the "underground booming economies" to the point where they are no longer needing to be worrying about their pensions any more.
Following are basic facts and data about Calipers pension fund so you can do your own analysis and projections without needing to worry about the objectivity of the analysis:

https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/form...t-a-glance.pdf
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.


Reply
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
Message:

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, 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