Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › How will unfunded “pensions” affect the local economy?
- This topic has 218 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by phaster.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 6, 2016 at 11:01 AM #793010January 10, 2016 at 2:21 AM #793091CA renterParticipant
[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
Newbie Pigg phaster is in the habit of posting multiple (mostly dated) links in effort to incite public “outrage” over contracts made long ago with current and former CA local government employees.[/quote]
For most paying attention that are not marxists, I think there is plenty of outrage.
At this point I’ve thrown in the hat – when my job dries up, I’m leaving California. The last thing I want to do is work until my death so some gd govt worker can retire in luxury meanwhile I’m living in poverty. Screw that….
public employee unions and california state govt are higly skilled in robbing/preying upon tax paying private sector workers in california.[/quote]
Voting with your feet is the best way. I already did although I’m still paying CA taxes on CA related income, and property taxes. I hate property taxes that I see no personal benefit from.
I don’t mind paying taxes. But taxes should be for services to citizens and the poor. Not golden pensions.[/quote]
If you own property, then you benefit from the services provided via property taxes. What would the value of your property be without a local school district? How much would it be worth without roads, sidewalks, streetlights, local parks, sanitation services, police and fire protection, etc.?
This is what’s so messed up about many people who oppose taxes. They have no idea how these tax payments end up benefiting them. Very often, they receive an even greater benefit than what they pay because public infrastructure, as a whole, is often worth far more than the sum of its parts.
We desperately need better financial, economic, and political education in our schools. There are far too many people walking around who think that they know what they’re talking about when they really have no clue.
January 10, 2016 at 3:12 AM #793090CA renterParticipant[quote=harvey][quote=temeculaguy]The trend is towards the elimination of the traditional pension, hopefully that makes you sleep better.[/quote]
That is the trend, and I’m optimistic that common sense will ultimately prevail.
Defined benefit pensions are a financial experiment that failed, but the effects still linger.
The OP was asking how much damage is left to be done.
The question is still relevant.[/quote]
Fifty years from now, do you honestly think they’ll be talking about the success of defined contribution pension plans? Which one do you think will be viewed more favorably, DB or DC pensions, once the DC debacle comes home to roost?
You’re dreaming if you think that DC pensions are superior in any way to DB pensions. I agree that some of the formulas are too generous (and have felt that way since the pension increase passed in CA), but DB pensions have been around a lot longer than DC pensions (since the Roman Empire, if not earlier), and they’ve done exceptionally well, all things considered.
The ONLY way DC pensions (private savings) have ever worked in all of known human history, was when family members were expected — even mandated, in some cases — to care for each other until death. I’m not opposed to that personally, but how do you think that’s going to go over with the general public in the U.S.?
If Americans are forced to take on the care of their sick and/or elderly relatives, I’d bet anything that they would be willing to pay a small tax on their income, over their lifetimes, that would give them relief from this obligation. Welcome to DB pension plans.
Your thoughts? How do you see DC pensions actually working, over the long term, in real life?
Something for you, and other critics of DB plans, to think about:
January 10, 2016 at 3:28 AM #793092CA renterParticipant[quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
Newbie Pigg phaster is in the habit of posting multiple (mostly dated) links in effort to incite public “outrage” over contracts made long ago with current and former CA local government employees.[/quote]
For most paying attention that are not marxists, I think there is plenty of outrage.
At this point I’ve thrown in the hat – when my job dries up, I’m leaving California. The last thing I want to do is work until my death so some gd govt worker can retire in luxury meanwhile I’m living in poverty. Screw that….
public employee unions and california state govt are higly skilled in robbing/preying upon tax paying private sector workers in california.[/quote]
And your employer, a government contractor, paramount? You think they’re not ripping off taxpayers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBGFZX6G2Q
https://www.usaspending.gov/transparency/Pages/SpendingMap.aspx
January 10, 2016 at 4:27 AM #793093CA renterParticipant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=phaster]
[snip irrelevant commentary and conjecture]
-snip-[/quote]
uhh, phaster, nice try but if you think this bleached whale “people-of-Walmart” couple you depicted here watching an implosion from their (polluted backyard?) in rural Nevada are representative of SD City and County retired workers, you need to see your eye doctor, pronto.
For the most part, we are fitter and trimmer than the Gen Y college-student set who comes back “home” for the holidays to work out at the gym we work out in all year-round!
And the only reason we can exist (or co-exist with a side gig) on our paltry city/county pensions is because our living expenses are relatively low in comparison to the “worker bee” currently raising a family. The COL is lowest for those older (WWII gen) members who retired prior to 2002 and thus purchased their current residences well below $100K.
Contrary to popular belief, SD city/county retirees don’t live lavish lifestyles on “golden pensions,” people …. NO, not even former sworn staff with more generous “Class C” retirements. We live in neighborhoods and houses most of you worker bees wouldn’t even bother getting off the freeway to look at in PAID FOR houses (or nearly so).[/quote]
Very true, BG. You can tell who gets all their news from the UT and Fox when they start talking about the “lavish” pensions. LOL!
And, Phaster, the CDO problem, along with any related derivatives, isn’t a result of what public employees are doing. That’s a problem that is created by the financial industry. Focus your righteous indignation in the right direction. “The Big Short” should have opened your eyes regarding the real perpetrators behind our economic collapse and the booms and busts that have caused most of the problems in the DB world.
If you’re really ticked off about taxpayers having to subsidize the lifestyles of others, then you should direct your anger squarely at Prop 13, as well — and that tax expenditure was never earned while pensions are deferred compensation for work already performed. Prop 13 is a HUGE tax subsidy, often to very wealthy people, which dwarfs California’s “pension crisis.” If we want to fix our fiscal house, we need to get rid of Prop 13 first (except for a single primary residence); then, we can see where we stand WRT other expenditures.
January 10, 2016 at 2:24 PM #793100AnonymousGuestWhataboutism
Soviet propagandists during the cold war were trained in a tactic that their western interlocutors nicknamed “whataboutism”. Any criticism of the Soviet Union (Afghanistan, martial law in Poland, imprisonment of dissidents, censorship) was met with a “What about…” (apartheid South Africa, jailed trade-unionists, the Contras in Nicaragua, and so forth).
January 10, 2016 at 7:49 PM #793110phasterParticipant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=phaster]
[snip irrelevant commentary and conjecture]
-snip-[/quote]
uhh, phaster, nice try but if you think this bleached whale “people-of-Walmart” couple you depicted here watching an implosion from their (polluted backyard?) in rural Nevada are representative of SD City and County retired workers, you need to see your eye doctor, pronto.
For the most part, we are fitter and trimmer than the Gen Y college-student set who comes back “home” for the holidays to work out at the gym we work out in all year-round!
[/quote]irrelevant commentary??
[quote=INTERNAL MONOLOGUE]the pot calling the kettle black, WTF???
so how to use a MADE UP B$ PHRASE “subconscious-psychological-interpretation(s)?” which struck IN A MOMENT OF boredom/divine-inspiration, while prioritizing the structure of a “rant”[/quote]
hate to take credit for something that I never intended so for now I’ll go along w/ your subconscious-psychological-interpretation that the couple is representative of SD City and County retired workers
truth is I selected the photo because it was the first non-military, civilian color image that came up when I typed the phrase “watching nuclear explosions” using google image search and never gave it a literal “second” thought!
https://www.google.com/search?q=watching+nuclear+explosions
my reason (as if anyone cares) was basically wanted to stay away from “scary” military nuke images because of headline news (at the time)
http://www.wired.com/2016/01/science-can-tell-if-north-koreas-test-was-really-an-h-bomb/
your post(s) in general indicate a lack of critical-thinking and this last post indicates you’re vein/insecure about appearance/self-image
to address the issue of “self-image” insecurity, found is a photo of a “fit and healthy” miss mushroom cloud w/ admirers so you can self-project a positive image of SD City and County retired workers,… happy?
since you mentioned it, my second thought is the couple is gazing east-ward (possibly standing in California??? and looking toward Nevada??? the only way to know for sure which state(s), is to locate/match the specific “land-scape” shown)
[quote=INTERNAL MONOLOGUE]to see if (bearishgurl’s) subconscious-psychological-interpretation about the photo has any basis in reality lets try a simple experiment
GIVEN she first suggested the photo is representative of SD City and County retired workers AND is set in (polluted backyard?) in the state of Nevada [SO AS stated the couple is located “somewhere” in the state of Nevada AND in the real world that indicates they would have to be facing West-ward (toward the state of California)]
so with the photo on an iPad/iPhone, go out side (on a sunny day) and hold the device arms length away looking first to the east, then toward the west AND see first hand which orientation makes common sense (hint, note the shadows!)[/quote]
I deduced general direction(s) by noting the right side of the image is illuminated (thinking where the sun is in the sky – to the “south”) AND the shadows fall on the people/blast-cloud on the left hand side, so this indicates “north” (given the spherical geometry of the earth)
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=629
[quote=INTERNAL MONOLOGUE]should I acknowledge anything I post about psychoanalytics is PURE B$ because I’ve never taken a psych class or read a psych book BUT did watch pixar’s “inside out” which might count as sorta something…
what about noting other observations about the photo that suggest the image was photoshopped???
nah, should close out and move on…[/quote]
WRT this tangent, “Gedankenexperiment” tells me your transference-interpretation of a photo which you described/interpreted as bleached whale “people-of-Walmart” couple watching an implosion from their (polluted backyard?) in rural Nevada is PURE B$ to mask self-image insecurities and a simple SCIENCE experiment in the real world can be done to confirm the diagnosis
now back to the serious topic at hand since this is an economics message board where it clearly states at the bottom of the page… In God we trust. Everyone Else Bring Data!
BUT before looking at data, it might be useful to recall lessons taught in middle school, specifically the topic about “compound interest” and basic money management skills (which is key to surviving/thriving day to day in the modern day world)
if you have a mortgage, then perhaps you might have heard that you can pay off a loan much faster, by “annually” making an extra — 13th — mortgage payment,… what an extra mortgage payment does is directly reduces the principal balance on the loan by the amount of the payment (and the observed effect is exponentially decreasing the payback period)
NOW lets (re)examine ACTUAL “historic” published documents/text (i.e. Data!)
City pensioners get ’13th check’ bonus
More than $6.1 million has been distributed to retired San Diego city employees in the form of a “13th check” — beyond their usual 12 monthly payments — making this year’s holiday bonus the largest such payout in the history of the three-decade-old practice.
But it’s become a source of conflict as the city’s pension system faces a $2 billion shortfall in promised payments, which remains a taxpayer burden and has led to budget crises in the past at City Hall.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/dec/18/13th-check/
Though SDCERS investments were earning well above the 8 percent rate of return estimated by the system actuaries, under normal conditions investments surpluses are required to make up for below-average returns in other years to achieve the average rate of return. Therefore, unless the actuaries’ estimates are grossly incorrect, in the long run true “surplus earnings” are impossible. The use of surplus earnings for the purposes other than maintaining the pension system, such as to expand existing benefits should be viewed as a loan from the system THAT WILL REQUIRE REPAYMENT IN THE FUTURE.
The concept of surplus earnings is easily misunderstood, so sometimes these earnings are used inappropriately.
page 286
Handbook of Frauds, Scams, and Swindles: Failures of Ethics in Leadership edited by Serge Matulich, David M. Currie
anyone able to grasp the power/implications of “compound interest” then reading the published reports should be very disturbed at the mis-management/incompetence/corruption since the PRIMARY CAUSE as to why the “magnitude” of the SD public pension “unfunded” problem exists is due to a simple math concept that was suppose to be learned in middle school…
as-reported for the past three decades the “surplus earnings” (aka 13th payment) was diverted to Gubment-Pensioner(s) every holiday season INSTEAD OF being used for the original goal of trying to make sure the long term average return of the portfolio was achieved (about about 8% as per actuaries’ design-estimates)
if anyone is able to think critically about “compound interest” then they will see that making an annual extra mortgage payment and making an extra payment to Gubment-Pensioner(s) every holiday are two side of the same coin; one side allows a mortgage debt to be paid “down” much sooner, the other side makes the debt to pile “up” exponentially over decades!
(bearishgurl) since you have taken the blue pill – its apparent you believe whatever you want to believe!
for all other(s) who dared take the red pill, the BOTTOM LINE seems to be as long as the “surplus earnings” (aka 13th payment) is siphoned off every holiday season for Gubment-Pensioner(s) INSTEAD OF being used to maintain the pension system designed target return rate, the SD pension system as currently structured/operated AND using nothing more than “honest” common sense and middle school math tells us, that the un-funded DEBT issue will basically ALWAYS grow!
http://www.doughroller.net/investing/power-of-compounding-interest/
January 10, 2016 at 8:20 PM #793113bearishgurlParticipantUhhhhh, phaster, may I ask what you DO for a living?
Inquiring minds would be interested to know.
January 10, 2016 at 8:31 PM #793114paramountParticipant[quote=CA renter]
If you own property, then you benefit from the services provided via property taxes. What would the value of your property be without a local school district? How much would it be worth without roads, sidewalks, streetlights, local parks, sanitation services, police and fire protection, etc.?
This is what’s so messed up about many people who oppose taxes. They have no idea how these tax payments end up benefiting them. [/quote]
I don’t know anyone who opposes paying their ‘fair’ share of taxes, that’s not the issue here.
January 10, 2016 at 8:39 PM #793111phasterParticipant[quote=CA renter][quote=harvey][quote=temeculaguy]The trend is towards the elimination of the traditional pension, hopefully that makes you sleep better.[/quote]
That is the trend, and I’m optimistic that common sense will ultimately prevail.
Defined benefit pensions are a financial experiment that failed, but the effects still linger.
The OP was asking how much damage is left to be done.
The question is still relevant.[/quote]
Fifty years from now, do you honestly think they’ll be talking about the success of defined contribution pension plans? Which one do you think will be viewed more favorably, DB or DC pensions, once the DC debacle comes home to roost?
You’re dreaming if you think that DC pensions are superior in any way to DB pensions. I agree that some of the formulas are too generous (and have felt that way since the pension increase passed in CA), but DB pensions have been around a lot longer than DC pensions (since the Roman Empire, if not earlier), and they’ve done exceptionally well, all things considered.
[/quote]
Déjà vu
[quote=phaster]
September 8, 2014 – 8:59am.[quote=CA renter]Many have defined benefits, and DB plans were the norm a few decades ago…you know, when the middle class and the economy were at their strongest.[/quote]
That era back in the 1950’s and 1960’s was IMHO an anomaly in world history, because the USA was the only super power in terms of military and manufacturing.
Consider that Japan and Germany back then had no manufacturing base, so DB were a way to instill worker loyalty (or said another way, DB came about because of a good economy, DB for the “middle class” didn’t create a good economy).
[/quote][quote=phaster]
October 2, 2014 – 8:18pm.[quote=CA renter]
You’re also clearly ignorant about the differences between DB and DC pensions. DC plans have higher administrative costs and lower returns; DC plans have access to fewer investment options; DC plans don’t pool longevity risk; DC plans have lower contribution limits than DB plans (for employer and employee); and DB plans can remain in higher-yielding and more diversified investments and can better manage the ups and downs of the market over time because they are continuously funded by the contributions of current employees and their employers, and benefits are staggered well into the future (pooled investment risks over time and number of people).[/quote]News reports about CalPERS and the SD pension board, leads me to believe idiots who over estimate their own management abilities AND have no basic understanding of math or the investing paradox, are at the helm.
Given your logic since CalPERS and SD have “professional” managers, elected board(s) to provide oversight and access to diversified investments, then why haven’t they beat the market benchmarks (i.e. the index of the DJ30 or S&P500)?
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/djia
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/spx
IMHO its because of the “investing paradox.”
Simply stated a disciplined small/individual investor can beat market averages over long periods of time, because their trades fly under the radar and are “un-noticed” by the market.
However when the portfolio is in the BILLIONS (as is the case w/ SD), or the HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS (as is the case w/ CalPERS), any trade they make I’d argue is the market (so a different investment style is needed).
[quote=phaster]
[quote=livinincali]
The one benefit of defined benefit contribution plans, retention, isn’t worth the risks, the frauds, the vote buying, and everything else it enables. That’s the bottom line. The rewards (reduced training costs retention, etc.) don’t outweigh the risks and therefore they should be scrapped..[/quote]Agree! And after doing some research, seems the best way forward is to follow the example set by the Thrift Saving Plan (a federal government 401K style program, that can’t be corrupted/mismanaged like what happend at CalPERS or as what is happening with the SD pension program)
https://www.tsp.gov/investmentfunds/fundsoverview/comparisonMatrix.shtml
[/quote]The Thrift Savings Plan, used by millions of federal workers, is like a 401(k), except it’s a lot cheaper. Last year it charged an average expense ratio of a mere 0.03%. That means just $3 in fees for $10,000 in savings, or $30 for a $100,000 portfolio.
John Turner, an economist and director of the Pension Policy Center and a former federal worker himself, said “Unless they’re advanced investors, I think they should leave their funds in the TSP because it’s simple and it’s easy enough that most investors can do it and do it well”
http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/01/retirement/federal-workers-leaving-thrift-savings-plans/
[/quote]
[quote=CA renter]
December 14, 2014 – 5:09pm.Don’t be a a useful idiot. If you’re not being paid, you should definitely demand payment from [Strike]the Privatization Movement[/Strike] [CalPERS] for your services. They expect to reap great rewards from the work of people like yourself; make sure to get your piece of the pie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
[/quote][quote=CA renter]
November 21, 2015 – 3:18am.I have yet to see Jerry Brown “calling bullshit” on CalPERS. Please include a quote (a real one, not one of your “edited” ones), and cite your source.
[/quote][quote=REUTERS]
…Governor Jerry Brown, a proponent of a sharper reduction in the expected rate of return, was quick to criticize the move, arguing the pension fund should move faster to cut risk from its portfolio.“I am deeply disappointed that the CalPERS Board reversed course and adopted an irresponsible plan that will only keep the system dependent on unrealistic investment returns,” Brown said in a statement on Wednesday. “This approach will expose the fund to an unacceptable level of risk in the coming years.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/19/california-calpers-policy-idUSL1N13E02Y20151119
[/quote]translate.google.com: (CalPERS = bull$hit)
January 10, 2016 at 9:05 PM #793116bearishgurlParticipantUh, the Federal TSP plan is technically a “457 plan.”
January 10, 2016 at 9:46 PM #793115bearishgurlParticipant[quote=phaster][quote=livinincali]The one benefit of defined benefit contribution plans, retention, isn’t worth the risks, the frauds, the vote buying, and everything else it enables. That’s the bottom line. The rewards (reduced training costs retention, etc.) don’t outweigh the risks and therefore they should be scrapped..[/quote]Agree! And after doing some research, seems the best way forward is to follow the example set by the Thrift Saving Plan (a federal government 401K style program, that can’t be corrupted/mismanaged like what happend at CalPERS or as what is happening with the SD pension program)
https://www.tsp.gov/investmentfunds/fund…
“The Thrift Savings Plan, used by millions of federal workers, is like a 401(k), except it’s a lot cheaper. Last year it charged an average expense ratio of a mere 0.03%. That means just $3 in fees for $10,000 in savings, or $30 for a $100,000 portfolio.
John Turner, an economist and director of the Pension Policy Center and a former federal worker himself, said “Unless they’re advanced investors, I think they should leave their funds in the TSP because it’s simple and it’s easy enough that most investors can do it and do it well”
http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/01/retireme…
[/quote]W-a-a-a-ay back in the day, I was a payroll clerk employed by the Dept the Defense and can tell you with certainty that the TSP was the best plan in existence to supplement the DB plans for CSRS or FERS members (at that time). Any Federal employee who retires today (or in recent years) and elects to transfer their ENTIRE TSP investment to another vehicle upon retirement is a fool.
‘Nuff said.
January 10, 2016 at 9:46 PM #793117AnonymousGuest[quote=CA renter]Your thoughts? How do you see DC pensions actually working, over the long term, in real life?[/quote]
Here’s my plan, see if you can follow along:
– People save for their own retirement.
– When they retire, they live off their savings.
– If their savings isn’t adequate for the lifestyle they would like to have, they adjust their lifestyle.
Here’s the part that may be especially difficult for you:
– Retiree’s don’t take governments to court, demanding more money forcing existing public services to be cut or eliminated because the retirees failed to plan properly decades prior.
It’s complicated, I know. Hard to follow without all the compensation formulas, spiking, guaranteed returns, “13th payments” and the long list of other shenanigans. It’s really hard to get one’s head around the idea that people just save their own money and that’s what they get and they don’t get to ask for more later.
You see, “DC pension” that you describe as some bogeyman is just a savings account.
But all of the Piggs, save two, have been able to grasp it. Maybe someday you will also.
January 10, 2016 at 10:05 PM #793118bearishgurlParticipant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Your thoughts? How do you see DC pensions actually working, over the long term, in real life?[/quote]
Here’s my plan, see if you can follow along:
– People save for their own retirement.
– When they retire, they live off their savings.
– If their savings isn’t adequate for the lifestyle they would like to have, they adjust their lifestyle.
Here’s the part that may be especially difficult for you:
– Retiree’s don’t take governments to court, demanding more money forcing existing public services to be cut or eliminated because the retirees failed to plan properly decades prior.
It’s complicated, I know. Hard to follow without all the compensation formulas, spiking, guaranteed returns, “13th payments” and the long list of other shenanigans. It’s really hard to get one’s head around the idea that people just save their own money and that’s what they get and they don’t get to ask for more later.
You see, “DC pension” that you describe as some bogeyman is just a savings account.
But all of the Piggs, save two, have been able to grasp it. Maybe someday you will also.[/quote]
harvey (aka pri_dk), if you think there are only TWO Piggs who grasp this concept, you need to put on your thinking cap. Let me clue you in, here. There are several more Piggs here who are currently working FT (for the gubment) under the premise that they will eventually be due a pension under a “defined benefit plan.”
I’m truly sorry for you that YOU DIDN’T CHOOSE to attempt to “qualify” for one of these eligible positions in line for a(n eventual) DB plan upon retirement. However, that decision was YOUR CHOICE! You COULD have elected to “jump thru the proper hoops” in attempt to get hired … alas but you didn’t! Thusly, you have NO RIGHT at this late date to condemn those persons who have served their qualified (faithful) service so as to earn their current pensions.
January 10, 2016 at 10:42 PM #793119bearishgurlParticipant[quote=paramount][quote=CA renter]
If you own property, then you benefit from the services provided via property taxes. What would the value of your property be without a local school district? How much would it be worth without roads, sidewalks, streetlights, local parks, sanitation services, police and fire protection, etc.?
This is what’s so messed up about many people who oppose taxes. They have no idea how these tax payments end up benefiting them. [/quote]
I don’t know anyone who opposes paying their ‘fair’ share of taxes, that’s not the issue here.[/quote]The reason you don’t “know anyone” opposed to paying their “fair share” of taxes, paramount is perhaps because the neighborhoods you have been living in have been built in the last 15 years or so.
Try living with a neighbor on one side who pays ~$800 year in property tax, a neighbor on the other side who pays ~$400 year in property tax and another neighbor directly across the street who pays ~$650 year in property tax while you cough up ~$4400 year in property tax.
It is disheartening, to say the least. Such are the effects of Prop 13 and its progeny, Prop 58.
The sheer “inequality” of Prop 13 (and its progeny) are VERY MUCH “the issue here.”
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.