[JayCT]

Originally Posted by beach43ofus

How will CT keep all the promises to pensioners on the old plan, w/o bankrupting the state? Is it even possible, w/o heavy tax hikes?

I read your earlierpost explaining how newer pensioners got a less lucrative deal, but can CT survive the bubble until those on these newer more affordable ones kick in.

I gave you the link to the state’s plan. Go back and read it. I’m not giving it again.

I am not an expert in pension financing and neither are you. We can only go by what multiple experts say who have access to the data well beyond our comprehension and beyond the comprehension of biased think tanks with agendas to push or media anxious to find clickbait.

Given that four expert agencies whose job it is to analyze and understand this data have given upgraded credit ratings to our state to me says a lot. It may not to you but judging from all of your past posts here nothing I or anyone here can say is going to change your mind or opinion. You and biased think tanks have one opinion, i and financial experts have a different one. That’s your problem so let’s end this BS already and move on. Jay

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

In many states, they run like Ponzi schemes, with actuaries estimating absurd rates of return to make funds appear solvent.

Most also do a miserable job accounting for increased life expectancy. People forget that the US median life includes those dying young, so if you look at the expectancy for those say, 45-55 years old now, it is several years longer than it would be just based on their birth year at birth.

I wouldn't say that a pension is a Ponzi scam or any other retirement. The concept of the retirement plan Wetherbee public or private is simply investing funds and something that yields a given percentage and compounds of time. Occasionally they would be adjustments to avoid bad amounts of bad Investments but a fiduciary should ensure that.

Also keep in mind things like working while on a system or being on forms of disability can also have a significant impact on paying pensions out. Retirement is a very sensitive subject and to some people it might be better to wait and get more rather than be early but that's a very personal decision it depends about how their finances are being managed.

There are other forms of controls that can be implemented like limiting or eliminating the amount of a cost-of-living increase for retirees, increasing would members pay, limiting some form of benefits and so forth. Of course this is all up to negotiation process is but it's not totally impossible.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by mdovell

I wouldn't say that a pension is a Ponzi scam or any other retirement.

Use of unrealistic ROIs is the PONZI scheme, where we keep having to increase funding to overcome the unrealistic assumptions.

Many use ROI rates they have never, ever experienced.

[mdovell]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

Use of unrealistic ROIs is the PONZI scheme, where we keep having to increase funding to overcome the unrealistic assumptions.

Many use ROI rates they have never, ever experienced.

I wouldn't say it's a Ponzi scam because you have to invest Pension funds into something. Anybody that wants performance is going to have to put Pension funds in some form of a real investment maybe it's a read or stock or a mutual fund. Sure the safe thing might be a money market but inflation would eat away at that and wouldn't perform at all.

If you want to directly invest in Investments like stocks you can go ahead and do that but your risk is pretty high. I do both. My own stock picks have done okay but the managed Fund in my Roth IRA has done quite well to say the least and has outperformed in about three-quarters of my stock picks.

I think you might be confusing Social Security with a pension fund. Social Security funds fun Social Security. Pension funds are actively invested in the market. Take a look at Calpers
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalPERS

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by mdovell

I wouldn't say it's a Ponzi scam because you have to invest Pension funds into something.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalPERS

Taxpayers are the victims, as the predictable shortfall to over projecting ROI are future shortfalls, to justify future tax hikes.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

Use of unrealistic ROIs is the PONZI scheme, where we keep having to increase funding to overcome the unrealistic assumptions.

Many use ROI rates they have never, ever experienced.

I think what people don’t realize is that up until 1979 Connecticut’s pension system was a “pay as you go” plan meaning the state just paid pensions directly without an investment fund to support it. No wonder the state such a poorly funded plan. It takes decades to build a fund. Jay

https://cea.org/treasurer-details-st...er-retirement/

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by JayCT

I think what people don’t realize is that up until 1979 Connecticut’s pension system was a “pay as you go” plan meaning the state just paid pensions directly without an investment fund to support it. No wonder the state such a poorly funded plan. It takes decades to build a fund. Jay

https://cea.org/treasurer-details-st...er-retirement/

I didn't know that. I imagine that in the past, there were relatively few retirees collecting at any given time, and most likely many of the retirees didn't collect for that long. That was true of social security in its earlier decades also. I think the average person collected for maybe 5 years.

I question at this point whether what the unions traded to get these pensions was such a good deal. The lack of portability is a big drawback to pensions, and in order to really optimize the value of them, you have to start with a job in your 20s and stick with it to retirement. My brother has a New York State pension, but he started with the job at 43, and in order to get a decent pension amount, he will have to work until he is 73.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

Use of unrealistic ROIs is the PONZI scheme, where we keep having to increase funding to overcome the unrealistic assumptions.

Many use ROI rates they have never, ever experienced.

Can you provide examples of this ? I'm not aware of this being an issue in the CT pension system.