Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-14-2010, 07:34 AM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,855,247 times
Reputation: 9283

Advertisements

Work hard? To rip off the taxpayers... pensions are bygone days when reality actually happened... Pensions should be reduced and stripped away for the younger generations... you try to take advantage of taxpayers... too bad for you... didn't gamble? Excuse me? You could of taken bonds in your 401k but you didn't, you wanted maximum profit and went with stocks... there isn't much selection and obviously you know crap about it because these stock groups have to conform to federal guidelines... but you choose to risk it, nobody forced you and if you wanted something more secure than a 401k than you are just asking to screw taxpayers, hell no...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2010, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,326,934 times
Reputation: 2889
Pensions should have been put to rest with disco pants. They are based on a false premise of continued prosperity and put future generations on the hook for today's retirees. It's wrong and it needs to end.

The pensions will have to be renegotiated. I just don't see any other way around it, there simply isn't the money to pay them. And, any new hires should move immediately to 401K based retirement savings like the rest of the private sector world.

My brother in-law will be eligible for full pension benefits as a fireman in just 12 short years.... at age 50. How on earth were these pensions calculated that allow for full retirement benefits at 50? Do you see people in the private sector routinely retiring at 50? Nope, but you sure see a lot of public sector employees doing so. I believe our teachers get full bennies at age 54. Sure, that's sustainable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 07:48 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,481,831 times
Reputation: 27720
That's what public workers in Greece thought too.
Now they are living through their "austerity" measures and they don't like it one bit.

How long can the Fed print money to cover these mounting debts ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecovlke View Post
It looks like some of may be in for a fight. There's no money to continue the sweet deal of yearly raises into pensions guaranteed to some state retirees. Colorado is trying to plan for the future, but some retirees have filed legal action against the law they passed.

Battle Looms Over Huge Costs of Public Pensions - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Battle-Looms-Over-Huge-Costs-nytimes-252868470.html?x=0&mod=pf-retirement - broken link)

What should these states do? Continue to honor what they said they would pay and possibly bankrupt the state where no one has anything or default on the promise of raises to retirees' pensions?

Tough call, but why should I pay for a retiree's pension if we're out of money? Go back to work or rely on SS.
They should pay what they promised to pay, period. When you make an OFFER and somebody ACCEPTS and becomes an employee for CONSIDERATION, you have what is called a CONTRACT. You should PAY for it because YOU through your elected representatives agreed to pay it and the employee came to work for you as part of that offer. You OWE them what you promised them. As a voter in the state of Colorado, you are part of that "corporation" as a shareholder. A corporation cannot make promises to people and then bail out on them unless they file bankruptcy. If Colorado wants to file bankruptcy, so be it. Short of that they have to pay. If they want to change the rules for new hires going forward, they can but they cannot change them for existing employees and retirees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,481,831 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
They should pay what they promised to pay, period. When you make an OFFER and somebody ACCEPTS and becomes an employee for CONSIDERATION, you have what is called a CONTRACT. You should PAY for it because YOU through your elected representatives agreed to pay it and the employee came to work for you as part of that offer. You OWE them what you promised them. As a voter in the state of Colorado, you are part of that "corporation" as a shareholder. A corporation cannot make promises to people and then bail out on them unless they file bankruptcy. If Colorado wants to file bankruptcy, so be it. Short of that they have to pay. If they want to change the rules for new hires going forward, they can but they cannot change them for existing employees and retirees.
Sure they can. Private companies did when they switched people from defined benefit plans to cash balance plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:30 AM
 
24,406 posts, read 23,065,142 times
Reputation: 15016
I know in Pa they( the state house) voted in lucrative pension increases for teachers and state workers several years ago. That created a huge stink that is still going on.
It just has to be scaled back. I wouldn't take their pensions away, they've earned them. But I would cut them to levels that are manageable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,326,934 times
Reputation: 2889
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
They should pay what they promised to pay, period. When you make an OFFER and somebody ACCEPTS and becomes an employee for CONSIDERATION, you have what is called a CONTRACT. You should PAY for it because YOU through your elected representatives agreed to pay it and the employee came to work for you as part of that offer. You OWE them what you promised them. As a voter in the state of Colorado, you are part of that "corporation" as a shareholder. A corporation cannot make promises to people and then bail out on them unless they file bankruptcy. If Colorado wants to file bankruptcy, so be it. Short of that they have to pay. If they want to change the rules for new hires going forward, they can but they cannot change them for existing employees and retirees.
Okay, but the rules change when faced with bankruptcy.

Joe Shmoe has a $150K mortgage on his house. Through reckless spending, lack of planning for the future, he has no money in savings. Joe loses his job and no longer has the income to pay his mortgage, but he's obligated to pay it because he signed the CONTRACT. So, where should the money come from for him to continue paying his mortgage? He can't print money and the economy is in the sh***er and can't find a job. This is not really different from the states not being able to fulfill their debt obligations to pensioners either. There is NO MONEY.

Liberals seem to think that government money grows on trees. Well, with the way this administration continues to print and borrow it's really not surprising they think this way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
This is going to get ugly, real ugly.
Once one first one goes down..the rest will soon follow.
Private companies got out of the pension business.
At my company they went through transitions based on age/time in service until now they have no pension for new hires and just throw a bit more into the 401K.
From defined benefit plans to cash balance plans and now no plan.

The question is..why didn't governments follow the corporations in weaning off the pensions ?
Same with mine. New employees get no pension and a 100% 401k match to 6% of base pay. Employees that were there like me get a pension (amounts to about $60 a month for each year of service to 30 years) but we can also do the 401k for a 50% match to 5% of base pay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:41 AM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
Okay, but the rules change when faced with bankruptcy.

Joe Shmoe has a $150K mortgage on his house. Through reckless spending, lack of planning for the future, he has no money in savings. Joe loses his job and no longer has the income to pay his mortgage, but he's obligated to pay it because he signed the CONTRACT. So, where should the money come from for him to continue paying his mortgage? He can't print money and the economy is in the sh***er and can't find a job. This is not really different from the states not being able to fulfill their debt obligations to pensioners either. There is NO MONEY.

Liberals seem to think that government money grows on trees. Well, with the way this administration continues to print and borrow it's really not surprising they think this way.
Then he files bankruptcy and his assets are sold to satisfy his debts as much as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2010, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,326,934 times
Reputation: 2889
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
Then he files bankruptcy and his assets are sold to satisfy his debts as much as possible.
And what do bankrupt states do???
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:48 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top