[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]
Pension managers DO “manage” pensions. At least here in San Diego, the pension is not funded – promised, but NOT funded sufficiently. This seems like the act of a debtor charging away debt and hoping to “somehow” come up with the money later.[/quote]

Exactly right. But you’ve changed your assertion. The debtor would be the city. Not the pension manager. People throughout the city assailed Mike Aguirre. Incuding some, as I recall, here on this blog. Among his most controversial targets were municipal employee pension deals, primarily the police pensions, made while Susan Golding and then Dick Murphy were mayor. Short version (and you are exactly right on this) was increased benefits in exchange for not funding those benefits. That’s much less a pension management problem than a city financing problem.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]
Pension managers DO “manage” pensions. At least here in San Diego, the pension is not funded – promised, but NOT funded sufficiently. This seems like the act of a debtor charging away debt and hoping to “somehow” come up with the money later.[/quote]

Exactly right. But you’ve changed your assertion. The debtor would be the city. Not the pension manager. People throughout the city assailed Mike Aguirre. Incuding some, as I recall, here on this blog. Among his most controversial targets were municipal employee pension deals, primarily the police pensions, made while Susan Golding and then Dick Murphy were mayor. Short version (and you are exactly right on this) was increased benefits in exchange for not funding those benefits. That’s much less a pension management problem than a city financing problem.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]
Pension managers DO “manage” pensions. At least here in San Diego, the pension is not funded – promised, but NOT funded sufficiently. This seems like the act of a debtor charging away debt and hoping to “somehow” come up with the money later.[/quote]

Exactly right. But you’ve changed your assertion. The debtor would be the city. Not the pension manager. People throughout the city assailed Mike Aguirre. Incuding some, as I recall, here on this blog. Among his most controversial targets were municipal employee pension deals, primarily the police pensions, made while Susan Golding and then Dick Murphy were mayor. Short version (and you are exactly right on this) was increased benefits in exchange for not funding those benefits. That’s much less a pension management problem than a city financing problem.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]
Pension managers DO “manage” pensions. At least here in San Diego, the pension is not funded – promised, but NOT funded sufficiently. This seems like the act of a debtor charging away debt and hoping to “somehow” come up with the money later.[/quote]

Exactly right. But you’ve changed your assertion. The debtor would be the city. Not the pension manager. People throughout the city assailed Mike Aguirre. Incuding some, as I recall, here on this blog. Among his most controversial targets were municipal employee pension deals, primarily the police pensions, made while Susan Golding and then Dick Murphy were mayor. Short version (and you are exactly right on this) was increased benefits in exchange for not funding those benefits. That’s much less a pension management problem than a city financing problem.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]Every time I post about public unions a host of you jump on the “killing the middle class” bandwagon, but it is clear the San Diego Pension Managers apart from violating State and Federal law by failing to fund their pensions when benefits were increased have gambled away the bulk of the money on bad investments.

[/quote]

Pension managers don’t fund the pensions. Employers do.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]Every time I post about public unions a host of you jump on the “killing the middle class” bandwagon, but it is clear the San Diego Pension Managers apart from violating State and Federal law by failing to fund their pensions when benefits were increased have gambled away the bulk of the money on bad investments.

[/quote]

Pension managers don’t fund the pensions. Employers do.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]Every time I post about public unions a host of you jump on the “killing the middle class” bandwagon, but it is clear the San Diego Pension Managers apart from violating State and Federal law by failing to fund their pensions when benefits were increased have gambled away the bulk of the money on bad investments.

[/quote]

Pension managers don’t fund the pensions. Employers do.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]Every time I post about public unions a host of you jump on the “killing the middle class” bandwagon, but it is clear the San Diego Pension Managers apart from violating State and Federal law by failing to fund their pensions when benefits were increased have gambled away the bulk of the money on bad investments.

[/quote]

Pension managers don’t fund the pensions. Employers do.

[SK in CV]

[quote=GH]Every time I post about public unions a host of you jump on the “killing the middle class” bandwagon, but it is clear the San Diego Pension Managers apart from violating State and Federal law by failing to fund their pensions when benefits were increased have gambled away the bulk of the money on bad investments.

[/quote]

Pension managers don’t fund the pensions. Employers do.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=Eugene]

And these people ridicule and vilify Obama because he expects the recession to end and he wants to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts.[/quote]

You meant to say wealth redistribution, right?[/quote]

Where exactly does normalized taxes end and “wealth redistribution” begin? 35%? 36% 37% 38%…please tell me when i’m getting warm.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=Eugene]

And these people ridicule and vilify Obama because he expects the recession to end and he wants to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts.[/quote]

You meant to say wealth redistribution, right?[/quote]

Where exactly does normalized taxes end and “wealth redistribution” begin? 35%? 36% 37% 38%…please tell me when i’m getting warm.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=Eugene]

And these people ridicule and vilify Obama because he expects the recession to end and he wants to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts.[/quote]

You meant to say wealth redistribution, right?[/quote]

Where exactly does normalized taxes end and “wealth redistribution” begin? 35%? 36% 37% 38%…please tell me when i’m getting warm.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=Eugene]

And these people ridicule and vilify Obama because he expects the recession to end and he wants to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts.[/quote]

You meant to say wealth redistribution, right?[/quote]

Where exactly does normalized taxes end and “wealth redistribution” begin? 35%? 36% 37% 38%…please tell me when i’m getting warm.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=Eugene]

And these people ridicule and vilify Obama because he expects the recession to end and he wants to roll back some of the Bush tax cuts.[/quote]

You meant to say wealth redistribution, right?[/quote]

Where exactly does normalized taxes end and “wealth redistribution” begin? 35%? 36% 37% 38%…please tell me when i’m getting warm.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Eugene]
Romney is quite credible and even electable.[/quote]

While not a big fan, i agree. Though probably more electable in a general than in Republican primaries. Same thing with T Paw.

[Author]

Posts