California Teachers' unfunded pension increases to $73.7 billion (Exeter: sales, 2014)

[SportyandMisty]

CalSTRS' unfunded pension obligation has increased to $73.7 billion as of June 30 2013, up $2.7 billion from the previous year, according to a just published pension fund report.

The funding gap means the $180.8 billion for the California State Teachers' Retirement System, is only 66.9% funded


http://www.pionline.com/article/2014...ise-27-billion


So... there are about 38 million people in California. Divide $73.7 Billion by 38 million people, and each man/woman/child in California owes just under $2,000.00 to CalSTRS. When a baby is born in California, it immediately inherits a debt of $2000 to CalSTRS.

A slightly better way to look at it is there are about 23.9 million adults eligible to vote in California, leaving out children & people who have lost their right to vote, and others who have not yet earned the right to vote. Let's divide the $73.7 Billion shortfall by 23.9 Million. Every eligible adult voter owes a little over $3,000 to CalSTRS.

An even better way to look at this is only about 35% of the people pay state income taxes in California; 65% pay no state income tax. 35% of the 23.9 Million eligible voters is 8.365 Million adult taxpayers.

Let's divide $73.7 Billion shortfall by 8.365 Million adult taxpayers. That's about $8,725 each tax-paying adult owes into the California State Teachers Retirement System.


Obviously, this problem, like a cancer, has been growing for years. To solve the current $73.7 Billion shortfall, do you think we should:

A) Require a 1-time payment of $8,725 from every tax-paying adult?
B) Require a 1-time payment of $3,000 from every eligible adult voter?
C) Require a 1-time payment of $2,000 from every California resident?
D) Just tax "the rich", where "rich" is defined to be anyone who makes more money than me?
E) Just "Kick the Can" down the road the way our gutless elected politicians have done for the past 40-some years?
E) Recognize that the $73.7 Billion shortfall is a result of CalSTRS, the California Teachers Association (CTA), and the California Federation of Teachers (CFT) using their considerable financial resources to bribe elected officials through campaign contributions to give outsized pensions to teachers. Thus, these pension contracts are invalid because of the bribery and hence should be broken.
F) Something else?


Now, once we've solved the existing $73.7 Billion pension hole, we need to do something going forward so the problem doesn't reapppear.

Do you think we should:

A) Raise taxes to continue to fund CalSTRS current pension system?
B) Say "enough is enough" and change all teachers to a 401-K style defined contribution system?
C) Say if teachers want defined benefit pensions, they must pay more for it?
D) Say 100% of retired teachers' pensions must come from deductions from currently working teacher's paychecks, just the way 100% of Social Security payments to private sector retirees comes from deductions from currently working private sector employees?
E) Something else?

[ExeterMedia]

Just get rid of CalPERs and CalSTRS, and all the pension programs that are constantly underfunded or causing municipalities to go bankrupt. Give them pennies on the dollars, in this case .67 cents to the dollar, and say "Sorry you got screwed." That's what happens in the private sector.

[aedubber]

Get rid of all the liberal freaks in power of the state , problem solved.

[GatsbyGatz]

California's policies could work... For a state with a population under 3 million. All signs point to California's inevitable financial downfall. There's little that can be done at this point.

[thelopez2]

Why don't 65% pay taxes? Are there other government pensions that are under funded, to address just the teachers seem a little unfair.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by thelopez2

Why don't 65% pay taxes? Are there other government pensions that are under funded, to address just the teachers seem a little unfair.

Everyone pays taxes in California.

Income tax is only one kind and the state has progressive brackets where lower income pays less and less tax -down to zero. Then there are certain people who have no income such as retired and disabled (unless either of those categories have investment income, which they would pay tax on). Also federal military pay is exempt.

But everyone who buys anything at a store pays sales tax. Property owners pay property tax - including personal property of certain kinds, like boats. Anyone who drives pays gas tax. Smokers pay tobacco tax. Etc.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

CalSTRS' unfunded pension obligation has increased to $73.7 billion as of June 30 2013, up $2.7 billion from the previous year, according to a just published pension fund report.

An even better way to look at this is only about 35% of the people pay state income taxes in California; 65% pay no state income tax. 35% of the 23.9 Million eligible voters is 8.365 Million adult taxpayers.

35% of the people pay state income tax - does not equal 35% of 23.9 million voters. 35% of 23.9 million voters = 8.365 million, which is far less than 35% of total state population [=13.3 million people]. which do you mean to assign the burden?

Lots of people vote who don't pay income tax. Such as the disabled and retired.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

Just get rid of CalPERs and CalSTRS, and all the pension programs that are constantly underfunded or causing municipalities to go bankrupt. Give them pennies on the dollars, in this case .67 cents to the dollar, and say "Sorry you got screwed." That's what happens in the private sector.

That's not going to happen in the real world.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by aedubber

Get rid of all the liberal freaks in power of the state , problem solved.

That's not going to happen in the real world. So what do we do?

[TheFlats]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

CalSTRS' unfunded pension obligation has increased to $73.7 billion as of June 30 2013, up $2.7 billion from the previous year, according to a just published pension fund report.

The funding gap means the $180.8 billion for the California State Teachers' Retirement System, is only 66.9% funded


http://www.pionline.com/article/2014...ise-27-billion


So... there are about 38 million people in California. Divide $73.7 Billion by 38 million people, and each man/woman/child in California owes just under $2,000.00 to CalSTRS. When a baby is born in California, it immediately inherits a debt of $2000 to CalSTRS.

This is a reactionary way of looking at it...a significant portion of the liability will be paid through increased contributions from the educators and their employers (the schools, which I understand are publicly funded). Taxpayers will certainly pay through transfers from the general fund but you can't just take the whole liability and divide it by # of taxpayers.


If we take away the retirement benefits and do not increase salaries we have just made being a Californian educator a less desirable job, attracting less qualified people. Is that the direction we want to go as a state?