Home › Forums › Other › My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs
- This topic has 369 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 14, 2012 at 1:49 PM #745728June 14, 2012 at 1:57 PM #745729
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=sdrealtor]
SK
I’m beginning to think you could be a bit bi-polar. Re-read the quoted passage and you will see the 17% was your figure and no one elses. You also attributed my comment that “many public companies are merely shells” (they are and that is indisputable) to Harvey. Time to up the meds.[/quote]The 17% was originally harvey’s number. I said 20-30%, he called me out on it. I provided a link to an article that I think said 30% (as did another poster). I used the 17% because it’s lower, no need to reargue that point.[/quote]
I’m beginning to think sdr is starting his “imbibement hour” too early in the business day :=0
June 14, 2012 at 2:02 PM #745730SK in CV
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]
I’m beginning to think sdr is starting his “imbibement hour” too early in the business day :=0[/quote]Hi BG 🙂 didn’t think anyone else was still watching this train wreck.
I’d rather give sdr the benefit of the doubt. I screwed up and misattributed something. I’m not even sure I addressed the point he was making. 11-12 pages in….these things can get pretty confusing.
June 14, 2012 at 2:07 PM #745732sdrealtor
ParticipantGet yourself a nice glass of wine. It may not help but it cant hurt. Wish I had time for one. Business is taking off again.
June 14, 2012 at 2:18 PM #745737Participant[img_assist|nid=16324|title=It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|desc=,B>It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|link=node|align=left|width=720|height=960]
June 14, 2012 at 2:19 PM #745738Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
I’m beginning to think sdr is starting his “imbibement hour” too early in the business day :=0[/quote]Hi BG 🙂 didn’t think anyone else was still watching this train wreck.
I’d rather give sdr the benefit of the doubt. I screwed up and misattributed something. I’m not even sure I addressed the point he was making. 11-12 pages in….these things can get pretty confusing.[/quote]
Well, its not easy keeping it all straight from several days ago when we have pri_dk in here muddying the waters hourly beginning with his lament of public DB plans, then moving over to lament private DB plans, then waffling back and forth.
If he would have begun that “legislation-drafting session” with his co-lamenters, sdr and nsr (of which I had suggested to them weeks ago), we wouldn’t still be discussing this issue here ad nauseum. They would all be BUSY BEES doing their part to “make a difference.” :=]
http://piggington.com/otcontest_to_guess_the_occupant_of_beautiful_new_building_in_rsf
June 14, 2012 at 2:25 PM #745739Participant[quote=sdrealtor][img_assist|nid=16324|title=It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|desc=,B>It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|link=node|align=left|width=720|height=960][/quote]
Ironic that I just scheduled my fall “crushing season” NoCal mini-cation yesterday 🙂
June 14, 2012 at 2:58 PM #745740Anonymous
GuestNice vino!
The 17% number was mine….but it’s an irrelevant detail…derived from a misinterpretation of an aside comment that was not precisely worded and then incorrectly attributed…why are we dwelling on it?
The fact that GM has significant legacy healthcare costs is undisputed.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gm+legacy+costs
Anyway…
SK is right about the framing:
[quote]Yet a decade ago, most of the public employee retirement plans in CA were over funded. There was more than enough in the plans to cover all future obligations. The assertion isn’t necessarily wrong that we’re currently paying for employees that retired 20 years ago, but more accurately, we’re paying for recent investment losses, and insufficient funding over the last 5 years.[/quote]
And after umpteen pages he finally joins the scrimmage! Welcome to the game, dude!
So why weren’t the pensions funded – who agreed to it? Did the unions know that the pensions weren’t being funded? (I can’t believe that they don’t watch this stuff – or maybe they don’t care because they don’t have to?) And who should bear the cost of these “mistakes?”
It happens that the underfunding of pensions during the boom coincided with significant public-sector raises. That’s how San Jose cops ended up making so much. Did they effectively divert the pension contributions to cover the raises?
(I know people who stopped contributing to their 401Ks during the boom also. “My retirement fund is doing great, I can cut my 401K contributions and spend the money now!”)
So who pays for the shortfall? More importantly, why do we have a system where there even can be a shortfall? Why is it so hard to even calculate the amount of shortfall?
Why is the government even in the investment management business? An investment plan where only 15% are allowed to participate?
Why is it so complicated?
All of this mess goes away if you simply pay people (and fund their individual 401Ks) for the period that services were provided.
June 14, 2012 at 4:25 PM #745746ParticipantActually great vino! They only make about 200 cs/year of this and the only place you can get it is direct from the tasting room in Rutherford. You have to know to ask for it as it isnt even mentioned on their website let alone for sale on it or distributed anywhere else.
June 14, 2012 at 4:40 PM #745751Participant[quote=harvey]Nice vino!
The 17% number was mine….but it’s an irrelevant detail…derived from a misinterpretation of an aside comment that was not precisely worded and then incorrectly attributed…why are we dwelling on it?
The fact that GM has significant legacy healthcare costs is undisputed.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gm+legacy+costs
Anyway…
SK is right about the framing:
[quote]Yet a decade ago, most of the public employee retirement plans in CA were over funded. There was more than enough in the plans to cover all future obligations. The assertion isn’t necessarily wrong that we’re currently paying for employees that retired 20 years ago, but more accurately, we’re paying for recent investment losses, and insufficient funding over the last 5 years.[/quote]
And after umpteen pages he finally joins the scrimmage! Welcome to the game, dude!
So why weren’t the pensions funded – who agreed to it? Did the unions know that the pensions weren’t being funded? (I can’t believe that they don’t watch this stuff – or maybe they don’t care because they don’t have to?) And who should bear the cost of these “mistakes?”
It happens that the underfunding of pensions during the boom coincided with significant public-sector raises. That’s how San Jose cops ended up making so much. Did they effectively divert the pension contributions to cover the raises?
(I know people who stopped contributing to their 401Ks during the boom also. “My retirement fund is doing great, I can cut my 401K contributions and spend the money now!”)
So who pays for the shortfall? More importantly, why do we have a system where there even can be a shortfall? Why is it so hard to even calculate the amount of shortfall?
Why is the government even in the investment management business? An investment plan where only 15% are allowed to participate?
Why is it so complicated?
All of this mess goes away if you simply pay people (and fund their individual 401Ks) for the period that services were provided.[/quote]
They were not underfunded during the boom. From around 1990 through the middle of the last decade, most calpers plans were either very close to fully funded, fully funded, or over funded. It wasn’t until the market crashed did they become underfunded due to fund losses, and having nothing to do with insufficient funding from employees or sponsors.
This is it for me tonight, I’m off to my son’s graduation in nor cal.
June 14, 2012 at 5:43 PM #745753Guest[quote=SK in CV]They were not underfunded during the boom. From around 1990 through the middle of the last decade, most calpers plans were either very close to fully funded, fully funded, or over funded. It wasn’t until the market crashed did they become underfunded due to fund losses, and having nothing to do with insufficient funding from employees or sponsors.
This is it for me tonight, I’m off to my son’s graduation in nor cal.[/quote]
The use of the term “funding” is unclear to me here. Are we talking about making the required contributions? (I thought you were.)
There were a several posts from CA Renter where she claimed that employers/the state did not contribute to the funds during the “good” years. Her sources are always a bit sketch, but there were some citations. She was very insistent that the shortfall was due to the fact that employers were not making required contributions. The posts are probably toward the end of this thread, if you care:
http://piggington.com/more_public_pension_loony_tunes_now_providence_ri_is_in_trouble?page=2
It sounds like you are saying that required contributions were always made (which is what my research also shows), and that the shortfall is only due to failure to meet expected investment returns.
If this is true, seems to me that the claim that the public-sector enjoys “government-backstopped investment returns” is spot on. Privatized gains, socialized losses.
Have a safe trip. Congratulations on your son’s graduation.
June 14, 2012 at 7:54 PM #745761
CoronitaParticipant[quote=sdrealtor][img_assist|nid=16324|title=It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|desc=,B>It must be Five O’clock P.M. Somewhere|link=node|align=left|width=720|height=960][/quote]
I see something very disturbing in this picture.
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING USING MICROSOFT INTERNET EXPLORER?
No wonder you have so many damn computer issues….
And (2)… For god sake, get yourself a wireless keyboard and mouse so you don’t have all those cables running all over your table. I’ll send you one if you don’t have time to get it…
June 14, 2012 at 8:42 PM #745768ParticipantWhat browser should I use? Old habits die hard.
Mouse and keyboard are wireless. Those cables are attached to a 4 outlet USB port (camera, iPod, card reader for MLS card and video chat camera).
June 14, 2012 at 10:16 PM #745779an
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]What browser should I use? Old habits die hard.
Mouse and keyboard are wireless. Those cables are attached to a 4 outlet USB port (camera, iPod, card reader for MLS card and video chat camera).[/quote]
Try Google Chrome, but don’t fret too much about it. IE isn’t all that bad if it serve your needs well. It doesn’t for me, that’s why I’m using Chrome. I used to use Firefox. None of the browsers are perfect though. IE still load up the fastest and use the least memory. Firefox loads up slow and use a lot of memory. Chrome loads up faster, but also use a lot of memory, relative to IE.June 15, 2012 at 12:56 AM #745790CA renter
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=SK in CV]They were not underfunded during the boom. From around 1990 through the middle of the last decade, most calpers plans were either very close to fully funded, fully funded, or over funded. It wasn’t until the market crashed did they become underfunded due to fund losses, and having nothing to do with insufficient funding from employees or sponsors.
This is it for me tonight, I’m off to my son’s graduation in nor cal.[/quote]
The use of the term “funding” is unclear to me here. Are we talking about making the required contributions? (I thought you were.)
There were a several posts from CA Renter where she claimed that employers/the state did not contribute to the funds during the “good” years. Her sources are always a bit sketch, but there were some citations. She was very insistent that the shortfall was due to the fact that employers were not making required contributions. The posts are probably toward the end of this thread, if you care:
http://piggington.com/more_public_pension_loony_tunes_now_providence_ri_is_in_trouble?page=2
It sounds like you are saying that required contributions were always made (which is what my research also shows), and that the shortfall is only due to failure to meet expected investment returns.
If this is true, seems to me that the claim that the public-sector enjoys “government-backstopped investment returns” is spot on. Privatized gains, socialized losses.
Have a safe trip. Congratulations on your son’s graduation.[/quote]
SK is exactly right. The pension funds, in general, were not underfunded during the boom.
You are confusing “funding status” with “pension contributions.” They are two separate things.
My sources were never “sketch.” I said that pension contributions were NOT BEING MADE by many, many employers (that’s “taxpayers” to you, Pri). Some public employers didn’t pay **anything** toward their pension funds for many years! Why? Because they were **over-funded**!
Google “pension holiday” and see what you come up with. Look in your own backyard — San Diego wasn’t making contributions to their pension funds, either. That’s what got them into such hot water WRT the pension funds.
If you didn’t even know what a “pension holiday” was, how could you logically debate Gov. Brown’s plan? He specifically bans pension holidays in his second point.
Did the unions fight the “pension holidays”? You bet they did!
Couple the lack of contributions with the market crashes, and it’s easy to see why the pension funds are having problems. Did union members have anything to do with the pension holidays or the asset allocations? No! This is why public sector workers are sick and tired of being scapegoated for the financial woes in this country. They are NOT the problem.
Pri, you’ve called both SK and me liars, and failed to point to a single post where I lied (and I have yet to see SK lie in any of his posts).
You claim that you’ve researched this topic, but state that your “research” shows that contributions were always made. There is no f’ing way you’ve done any research at all on this topic if you’re claiming that contributions have always been made. So, not only do you change the debate, make personal attacks, intentionally twist other people’s words, and intentionally quote them out of context when you’re losing an argument; YOU are a bald-faced liar. You’ve done no such research, and your ignorance on this topic (and others, including your understanding of socialism) has been highlighted over and over, again.
Just stop.
Either do some research and come to the table with REAL facts and logic, or stop baiting everyone you disagree with.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.