U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2008, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,248 posts, read 21,901,138 times
Reputation: 3587

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Niners fan View Post
I understand their frustration but we have to get past this notion of working for a company for 25 or 30 years and then being set for the rest of your life. My dad has cousins in Michigan that started in the auto plants at age 18 and retired at 48. They could live another 30 or 40 years. From a business standpoint a company just can't be competitive if they are paying for so many retirees.
I don't know about the auto companies but where I work, while you can "retire" at 30 years, you cannot draw a pension until you are 60. You can remain on the health plan but you have to pay premiums and co-pays. So it is not like they leave at 48 and get to do nothing until they die. Typically people that leave at 49 or 50 go to work somewhere else for another 10 or 15 years to get another pension.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-16-2008, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,964,569 times
Reputation: 3698
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
Yes but the pension is there for life. You can outlive your 401-K.

What rate of return does a pension typically get annualized?

What's a conservative estimate of a buy and hold portfolio of a 70/30 equity to bond mix?


Now which portfolio would you think you'd have a higher balance after 40yrs for instance? See what I mean?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2008, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
17,031 posts, read 27,561,032 times
Reputation: 16212
A former company did the same thing. I thought they said there would be no benefits for people hired after X date though. I dont think many fortune 500 companies will have this benefit in 10 years. Health care costs are costing companies way too much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2008, 05:14 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,248 posts, read 21,901,138 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oildog View Post
A former company did the same thing. I thought they said there would be no benefits for people hired after X date though. I dont think many fortune 500 companies will have this benefit in 10 years. Health care costs are costing companies way too much.
I think in 10 years we will have National Health like Canada, Austrailia and the UK have. It is going to happen and there will not even be much of a debate about it. Too many people are being cut off and denied by employers and private insurance companies leaving too few to support a system everybody uses. Already about 1/3 of the population is on "government insurance" either because they work for the government, are in the military or are on medicaid or medicare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2008, 07:34 PM
 
48,509 posts, read 86,173,019 times
Reputation: 18105
The auto makers are in contracts where they have to pay salries for like a year if they layoff. last I heard 1500 dollars per vehicle price is o pay medical insurnace. Just like everyhting it had to come to a end sometime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2008, 06:44 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 52,823,640 times
Reputation: 24677
I though a contract was a contract. If the companies contracted to provide health insurance as part of the pension they are obligated to do so. Just because they might have to cut dividends and executive salaries is no excuse to break a contract. Obligations are obligations and must be met or the entire system, which is based on contract and obligation, will brake down and business will effectively cease.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2008, 06:47 AM
 
19,098 posts, read 20,668,871 times
Reputation: 8384
Well, it may have been promised and contract... your options are this: Bankruptcy and you WILL lose pension and health benefits......... or No Bankruptcy and you will lose health benefits... what would you choose? Apparently you can complain all you want but the decision is pretty clear IMO...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2008, 06:54 AM
 
Location: Houston, TX
17,031 posts, read 27,561,032 times
Reputation: 16212
Agreed...unfortunately it will lower the standard of care. I know a number of Canadians who wish they had US healthcare as they are not satisfied with the government sponsored version. But what do you expect when a 'free' service is provided to all.

Save your money folks in case you get sick...you don't want to go to the charity hospital...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2008, 06:58 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 52,823,640 times
Reputation: 24677
So in order to save the stockholders, executives and bankers, it is better to bankrupt the retirees than meet the obligation to provide health care?

IMHO bankrupt the mess and sell the assets to someone that can keep their word.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2008, 07:18 AM
 
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
9,114 posts, read 15,964,569 times
Reputation: 3698
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
So in order to save the stockholders, executives and bankers, it is better to bankrupt the retirees than meet the obligation to provide health care?

IMHO bankrupt the mess and sell the assets to someone that can keep their word.
Are you that naive to believe every company except GM keeps their word?

Many, many companies make changes every day which hurts current and former employees.

What GM is doing is nothing new. Companies have been doing this for years.

Where's the savings of these employees from all the years making good money working at these companies? Didn't they save and live within their means?
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 > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 PM.

© 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