A new estimate from Moody’s Investor Services triples national public pension debt from $766 million to $2.2 trillion, mainly because the major Wall Street bond-rating firm uses a lower forecast of pension fund investment earnings urged by critics.
In a reporting overhaul proposed last week to give investors a better way to compare pension funding, Moody’s uses an annual earnings forecast based on corporate bonds, 5.5 percent, much lower than the 7.5 to 8.25 percent forecast by pension funds.
Whether pension funds, which often expect to get two-thirds of their revenue from investments, can hit their earnings targets is at the center of the debate over whether public pensions are “sustainable” or will overwhelm state and local government budgets.
Sweeping cost-cutting pension reforms, which face lengthy legal challenges from unions, were approved by voters last month in San Jose and San Diego, where retirement costs are 20 percent or more of the city general fund and projected to continue growing.
In addition to a “lost decade” of low investment earnings, public pensions also are burdened by generous benefits. CalPERS famously said a trendsetting pension increase for state workers, SB 400 in 1999, would be paid for by earnings not taxpayers.
Now critics say unrealistic pension system forecasts hide massive long-term debt, easing pressure for urgently needed cost-cutting reforms such as lower pension benefits and higher payments into the pension fund from employers and employees.
The California Public Employees Retirement System, which lowered its forecast from 7.75 to 7.5 percent in March, says earnings over the last two decades hit the target and will do so again. Unions say alarmists exaggerate debt to weaken pension support.
What the Moody’s proposal, expected to be adopted after comment closes Aug. 31, adds to the debate is an informed view that tighter pension rules adopted by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board last month are inadequate for investors.
The Moody’s proposal not only gives major Wall Street support to the critics of pension fund earnings forecasts, perhaps moving them closer to the mainstream, but Moody’s also cites academic papers by the critics.
“Pension liabilities are widely acknowledged to be understated, and critics are particularly focused on the discount rate (same as earnings forecast: editor‘s note) as the primary reason for the understatement,” said the Moody’s proposal.
A footnote cites Alicia Munnell and others at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, Joe Nation at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and Robert Novy-Marx and Joshua Rauh at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Nation, a former Democratic assemblyman from San Rafael, led Stanford graduate students who issued a widely publicized report two years ago showing how a lower earnings forecast caused pension debt to balloon.
With a bond-based earnings forecast of 4.1 percent a year, instead of the 7.5 to 8 percent in use at the time, the debt or “unfunded liability” of the three state pension funds increased tenfold, soaring from the reported $55 billion to about $500 billion.
The use of the lower earnings forecast based on U.S. bonds, the Stanford students said, reflected the view of economists such as Novy-Marx and Rauh that risk-free bonds should properly be used to offset risk-free pension debt guaranteed by taxpayers.
An earlier critic of pension earnings forecasts, David Crane, was removed from the California State Teachers Retirement System board in 2006, reportedly for repeatedly questioning whether the earnings target can be hit.
Crane, an investment banker and adviser to former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, has continued to warn about the consequences of unrealistic earnings forecasts. He quoted legendary investor Warren Buffett in an op-ed article last month.
Another multi-billionaire from the financial world, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, made a memorable remark about lowering the earnings forecast for city pension funds, opposed by unions fearing higher costs could result in pension cuts.
“The actuary is supposedly going to lower the assumed reinvestment rate from an absolutely hysterical, laughable 8 percent to a totally indefensible 7 or 7.5 percent,” Bloomberg told the New York Times in May.
“If I can give you one piece of financial advice: If somebody offers you a guaranteed 7 percent on your money for the rest of your life, you take it and just make sure the guy’s name is not Madoff.”
Among several reasons listed by Moody’s for using a lower earnings forecast based on corporate bonds:
Higher forecasts used by pensions funds are not consistent with recent experience. The S&P 500 index grew at 4 percent a year during the last decade, and a third of pension assets are in “today’s low fixed-income yield environment.”
If pension systems had to borrow to meet obligations, “a high-grade corporate bond index is a reasonable proxy for government’s cost of financing portions of the pension liability with additional bonded debt.”
If pension systems wanted to get out of stocks and other risky and unpredictable investments, “high-grade bonds are an available investment that could be used in a low-risk strategy to ‘match-fund’ pension assets and liabilities.”
California pensions once were limited to bond-like investments with predictable earnings. Proposition 1 in 1966 allowed a quarter of investments to be in blue-chip stocks. Proposition 21 in 1984 lifted the lid, allowing any “prudent” investment.
Moody’s said its earnings forecast is similar to the Financial Accounting Standards Board requirement for the remaining private-sector pension funds. Many companies switched to 401(k) investment plans to avoid long-term pension debt.
The new rules for public pensions adopted by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board last month, after a lengthy process that began in 2006, use a “blended” earnings forecast.
Pension systems can use their earnings forecast to offset the cost of pensions promised in future decades. But if the projected assets fall short, the pension system must switch to a lower bond-based forecast for the remainder.
Moody’s said the new GASB rules do not take effect for all governments until 2015, but earlier adoption is encouraged.
“Once it is in effect, we believe differences in some key financial assumptions, such as determination of investment rates of return and discount rates, will persist across the public plan landscape,” said the Moody’s proposal.
The purpose of the new way of reporting by Moody‘s, which began treating pension debt much like bond debt last year, is to apply a standard method of looking at pension fund debt, giving investors a better comparison.
“Our proposed adjustments will improve the comparability and transparency of pension information across governments, enhancing our approach to rating state and local government debt,” Timothy Blake, Moody’s managing director, said in a news release.
Moody’s said inadequate pension funding has already contributed to the downgrading of some states. The new reporting method is not expected to result in more state downgrades, but some local government ratings might be lowered.
Reporter Ed Mendel covered the Capitol in Sacramento for nearly three decades, most recently for the San Diego Union-Tribune. More stories are at https://calpensions.com/ Posted 9 Jul 12
Calpensions 
July 9, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Same old deal—- of course Moody’s does not take into account current and recent new tiers and deltas and payment over time and etc etc etc…….just like de bunking the stanford college class report….zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Why do I always have to be the first guy commenting on these things? Can’t some of you trolls get up earlier? You don’t have jobs…..what’s the problem???
July 9, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Hey Ed,
Perhaps you just missed the Congressional vote last week—HR 4348.
That bill allowed corporations to use a 25 year investment return rate to set their future return rates. The New York Times wrote that would mean corporations will now be setting their future investment return rates at 7%.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/business/tweak-in-a-pension-rule-could-finance-roads-and-student-loans.html?_r=3&ref=pensionsandretirementplans
You wrote in the past about Congressman Devin Nune’s legislation that would force public pension funds to use investment return rates at those advocated by Rauh, etc. Well, Ed, you might be shocked to know that Nunes voted “yes” to using a 25 year average and increase the corporate return rate to 7%. In fact, Ed. so did 38 of his 51 co-sponsors, including such notables as Darrell Issa.
What if CALPERS set their rates using this new Congressionally approved rate for private corporations. Well, it would be 8.91%—that is their 25 year rate of return as of June 30, 2011. Yes, that’s right—8.91%, instead of the 7.75% they now use!!
So, Ed, why don’t you make your next column about the relevancy of using the Rauh, Crane, and Nation unreasonably low rate vs. the rate that all private corporations are now allowed to use, thanks to Congressional action that occurred last week?
July 9, 2012 at 6:18 pm
Well done, Paul. Too bad the anti-public employee crowd is never swayed by facts or reality.
July 9, 2012 at 7:29 pm
Paul, your entire premise is flawed. What this looks like is an ill-advised use of creative accounting with potentially dangerous consequences. But the reason I call your premise flawed is because you are confusing “average rates of return” with a “25 year average of interest rates”. There is a big difference.
Here is what is said in the article: “The measure would allow companies to calculate their pension contributions using a modified average of the interest rates that have prevailed over the last 25 years.”
If CalPERS were to do the same they would have to immediately raise the rates of the state, cities, counties, and special districts as they would effectively be using a discount rate of 7%.
“What if CALPERS set their rates using this new Congressionally approved rate for private corporations. Well, it would be 8.91%…”
– yet most CalPERS plans are still funded at less than 70%, and many less than 60%.
July 9, 2012 at 7:45 pm
All these systems are set up so they have to be able to pay out to everybody that is employed a 100 percent of their pay the day they start with the county/state. Barely 10 percent make it a entire 30 years so they have to fund that they all work 30 years. It is like buying a house and having the money to pay it off the next day. OCERS has over 8 billion in reserve that they are not even using and pay out 350 million a year but bring in around 550 million. There is no problem, true the returns are lower because of the crazy stock market, but when they economy is stable you wont even hear about pensions. OCERS is at around 75 percent funded now but with a healthy economy can go way over 100 percent funded as it was in the early 2000’s. I pay over 750 a month for my pension, it is very expensive and causes me very bad financial problems. It is funded 100 percent by the employees, it cost the taxpayer zero.
July 9, 2012 at 8:47 pm
Moody’s is absolutely correct here. With Zero Interest Rate Policy (ZIRP) the pensions won’t come close to meeting their projected 8% ROI. No way. No how. And ZIRP has been confirmed by Bernanke to be with us through 2014. With our massive federal debt and the slow housing market – they can’t raise the interest rates. If the rates went to historical levels (5%-6%) today the debt service ALONE would cost the nation nearly a TRILLION dollars. heh. If the funds don’t hit that magical 8% over the projected period all future public pensioniers are totally screwed.
Moodys has fired a shot over the bow as a warning. Next come the big DOWNGRADES which will further wipe out pension fund values. Moody’s has nothing to gain by lying here. Moody’s is doing the financial markets a HUGE FAVOR by being truthful about the massive pension debtloads.
Once the projected pension ROI’s are revised down to 5% and the asset smoothing scam goes bye-bye watch the pension funds take a big, big dive.
If you folks expect to live another 20 years drawing a big fat public pension – I got a nice big piece of oceanfront property in Arizona that I’d love to sell ya!!! HAH! 😀
July 9, 2012 at 10:05 pm
Did you read this?
“The Wall Street credit agency said that according to its estimate, the total liabilities for fiscal 2010 were more than three times the amount reported by local governments”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/us-usa-municipals-moodys-idUSBRE86119220120702
In other words, you have been lied to for years.
The ones who promised you those future benefits and the ones who manage the money have lied to you.
The money simply doesn’t exist to fulfill those promises. heh.
And no way on God’s green earth can they tax people enough to make it so. heh. 😀
I would wish you luck – but if wishes were horses beggars would ride. heh. They might lie to you. I refuse to lie.
You people are in for the shock of you lives.
Thanks for the entertainment. 😀
July 9, 2012 at 11:18 pm
John Taylor– Move up to the head of the class— YOU are correct sir !
July 9, 2012 at 11:34 pm
how the hell do you get 3 x $776 million to equal $2 trillion??
July 10, 2012 at 12:28 am
Oh, Captain….
Haven’t you been commenting ad nauseam on these pages about how the public pensions use unrealistic rates of return? Why, yes, you have.
So, when Congress comes up with the new interest rate assumption for private plans—which happens to be within 1/2 % or so of most public pension plans—the best you can come up with is “But the reason I call your premise flawed is because you are confusing “average rates of return” with a “25 year average of interest rates”. There is a big difference”???
Well, no kidding, Captain. But, you miss the point entirely. The Congressional move to increase interest rates for private pension plans means that just merely earning the “average interest rate” over 25 years amounts to about 7%!
My point, which I will repeat, is that if CALPERS used their actual returns for that same period to set their assumed rate of return, it would be 8.91%. So, CALPERS, with an interest rate assumption of 7.75%, is actually understating their future returns because they–in reality–outearned the 25 year Congressional approved method of future interest rate assumption by a substantial amount.
As for Beelzebub, your side had a chance to convince GASB they should use the “riskless” rate. After intense study and discussion, they refused to do so. IE, your side lost. The fact that Moody’s is going to “rate” pension fund debt with the argument put forward by the losing side is meaningless….because pension funds will continue to use GASB’s method to make their calculations.
And, evidently, Mood’s was unaware of this Congressional legislation. Now, Moodys’ will have to explain why it will rate public pension funds with the following metric “Accrued actuarial liabilities will be adjusted based on a high-grade long-term corporate bond index discount rate (5.5% for 2010 and 2011)—when GASB has rejected their metric—-and now Congress has as well, for private pension plans!!!
July 10, 2012 at 12:43 am
One other thing. Fitch Ratings considered this very topic last year, and rejected the use of the corporate bond rate. They suggested using a rate of 7%—the same rate adopted by Congress one year later.
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110217006290/en/Fitch-Enhances-Analysis-U.S.-State-Local-Pensions
I suspect most folks will follow GASB, Fitch, the interest rated standard just approved by Congress—-rather than the outlier rate suggested by Moodys which is the result of the pesterings of cranks like Joe Nation, David Crane, and Joshua Rauh. Not, of course, that that will stop the cranks from using the Moodys flawed ratings to once again shriek about “pension reform”
July 10, 2012 at 12:43 am
Apparently you folks need a lesson in money management.
Ever heard this phrase before:
“Past performance is no guarantee of future returns”?
We live in a completely different economy today than we did when these outlandish retirement benefit plans were promised to you. They simply cannot get fulfilled. As naive Americans you have somehow swallowed the bait that if something is promised to you that it is good as gold. heh. You remind me of children who believe in the Fairy God Mother. heh. You really need to grow up in a bad way. You were lied to. Don’t blame the taxpayers when we refuse to carry you when the money runs out. Blame the ones who lied to you. Go after them. The public unions and the fraudulent money managers. Take your angst out on them. Don’t misdirect your anger onto us. We didn’t lie to you. They did. heh. 😀
July 10, 2012 at 12:44 am
OK, let’s see. A major Wall Street player closely associated with the 401/ 457 industry comes out with a new way to estimate how poorly pension plans m-i-g-h-t perform. With control of this information, could it be just a tad likely that the objective is to scare/ pressure public entities into adapting nothing but 401/ 457 s ? (Is there a detective in the house …?)
July 10, 2012 at 12:49 am
ZIRP is going to sink your boat, Paul. Sorry buddy. Them is the facts. And please don’t tell us that the laws says we must pay you.
Here’s another little axiom for you, Paul:
“It’s easier to change the law than it is to pay somebody with money that does not exist”. heh. 🙂
Take a dose of that.
It’s a shame that you are intent on impoverishing the younger generations (some born – some not) out of raw greed and selfishness. You folks remind me of the Romans in their heyday right before their empire got flushed. Those of you who are educated should be ashamed. But apparently you are beyond shame – which, of course, is part of the problem! 😀
July 10, 2012 at 1:01 am
“A major Wall Street player closely associated with the 401/ 457 industry comes out with a new way to estimate how poorly pension plans m-i-g-h-t perform”
You think Wall Street doesn’t have a HUGE hand in your pension funds. Look at who the pension fund money managers are. Current or former Wall Street thugs. heh. Wall Street sold you a bag full of worthless investments worth tens of billions that aren’t marked to market. They are valued at 2008’s price – not 2012’s. If they were assessed properly your investment holding values would fall by 30% overnight. heh. I am just amazed at how little you people know. Pathetic.
July 10, 2012 at 2:26 am
Oh Beelzebub,
I am certain that when CALPERS was funded at only a 50% ratio in 1980, you were confidently telling anybody who would listen that those dreaded government employees were going to get their retirements. And that the in light of stagflation, etc in the 1970’s, the coming years were going to be nothing like the good years of the 1950’s and 1960’s.
I am sure you are terribly disappointed by the fact that, despite that 50% funded ration then, 32 years later those darn public employees are still getting their retirement checks.
But, hey, look at the bright side. With the internet, you now get to share your wisdom about the future with a whole lot more people!
July 10, 2012 at 2:28 am
Correction—Beezelbub was telling anybody who would listen in 1980 that public employees would NOT get their retirements. Everything else…no correction….!
July 10, 2012 at 2:48 am
LOL PAUL— It is true— the beezyboob has been predicting doom as ocODDball since the early 90’s……..lol………
note–
he has cleaned up his racial remarks though since he was booted off another blog!
Maybe he is a slow learner???
July 10, 2012 at 3:34 am
Well maybe everybody should have a pension that is secure. Is that asking to much that people can pay their bills and not go on public assistance when they live out the last years of their life’s. 401ks do not work. They were never meant to be a only source of retirement and most people don’t know how to invest. They came about in the early 80’s and business loved them because now they can take people out of pension plans and put them in 401ks which cost them very little to run. My dad had a regular pension from Aerospace and he didn’t even pay for it. The pension envy comes about because suddenly all these aging people that are posting were probably working in high pay jobs in the 90-early 2000’s and would never take a 30-50 percent pay cut to work for the count/cityy. Some other people wanted to work for the common good and looked into the future that their was a secure pension even though they were not getting cars, bonuses and other perks of business. You are getting older and when you look at your 401k it is very scarey that you were really lied to that it would be a million dollars in 20 years.
July 10, 2012 at 3:37 am
Taxpayers should agree to contribute an amount (expressed as a % of pay) towards Public Sector Pensions that is the same as that typically afforded Private sector workers by their employers.
Since Private sector workers typically get a 3% match into a 401K plan (in addition to the employer’s FICA tax contribution) and that should be the limit of Taxpayers obligation towards the funding of Public Sector pensions.
However, under the current DB pension structure afforded almost ALL Civil Servants, taxpayer contributions of 20% to 50+% (for safety workers) are needed to fully fund the promised pensions over the working careers of the workers … and with no limit on that obligation because adverse investment experience falls onto the shoulder of the taxpayers, not the workers.
This structure is abusive to taxpayers and must change …. starting with the Taxpayers refusing to continue the funding of Public Sector Plans with such incredibly rich formulas and provisions that these very high contribution percentages are necessary.
July 10, 2012 at 3:51 am
Quoting John Taylor:
Quote #1: …”All these systems are set up so they have to be able to pay out to everybody that is employed a 100 percent of their pay the day they start with the county/state.
Quote #2 …” It is funded 100 percent by the employees, it cost the taxpayer zero.”
Really ?????
Surely you must be on of the “Best & Brightest” Public Sector hires we Taxpayers keep hearing about.
July 10, 2012 at 3:56 am
“I am certain that when CALPERS was funded at only a 50% ratio in 1980, you were confidently telling anybody who would listen that those dreaded government employees were going to get their retirements”
You’re about as sharp as a butterknife, aren’t ya Paul? 1980 was an entirely different economic era. The economy was still growing albeit borrowing and credit was starting to fuel economic growth in lieu of good old honest productivity. Today the economy is dead in the water. It takes growth to fuel those pensions, buddy. No growth -and the pensions die. Plus, the unfunded liabilities of the pension skyrocketed after the public unions bribed the politicians to give away the store with deals like the 3%@50. For example, in 1998 the OCERS unfunded liability in Orange County was about $52M. The last assessment put it at $4.6B. In 1980 you didn’t have a huge baby boom population retiring like we have today, Paul. I guess you forgot about that. You’re comparing apples with oranges. You know I’m right. You’re just obfuscating some more. That’s really all you got left. Obfuscation.
Check was the CalPERS unfunded liability was in 1980 and compare that with the $500B unfunded liability today. Than extrapolate those numbers forward about 10 years. OUCH!
If I were an active public employee paying into a pension fund or a public pension retiree collecting a pension with 10 years of life left – I would be very scared.
It’s much easier to change the laws than to pay people with money that doesn’t exist. If they print money to keep the system afloat your pension won’t be worth squat.
July 10, 2012 at 3:58 am
“LOL PAUL— It is true— the beezyboob has been predicting doom as ocODDball since the early 90′s……..lol………”
Bend over for the LLMD, shoe shine boy. You know who your daddy is.
July 10, 2012 at 4:00 am
Tough Love in OC we fund 100 percent. I pay over 700 a month for my pension. All public employees pay a share depending on the formula that their agency has agreed upon. Nobody gets it for free I also have 2 college degrees and about to finish a master degree.
July 10, 2012 at 4:01 am
Paul Says: “My point, which I will repeat, is that if CALPERS used their actual returns for that same period to set their assumed rate of return, it would be 8.91%. So, CALPERS, with an interest rate assumption of 7.75%, is actually understating their future returns…”
And my point, still, is your argument is flawed. Did you even read the article you’re refrencing? BTW, how did CalPERS year ending June 30, 2012 benchmark to your 8.91% fantasy number. And who gets stuck paying the 30 or so billion that calpers either lost or didn’t earn over the past 12 months (loss + failure to earn the 7.75%)?
July 10, 2012 at 5:02 am
Real slow, now, Captain.
The argument you have made on these pages for the past year or so is the public pensions have their assumed rate too high. You and others point to the rate corporations use as a model public funds should use.
However, Congress (including public fund critics such as Nunes and Issa) have decided that corporate rate is too low. They have allowed corporations to use their interest rate return for 25 years, instead of the 2 years they were using.
Using 25 years raises the corporate assumed rate of return to 7%. That 7% is nearly what many public funds already use.
Now for the tricky part you don’t understand.
Public pension plans use the historical rate of return for the asset classes they invest in going forward to calculate, in large part, their future assumed rate of return. the other major part is their assumption for inflation.
Congress has now legislatively decided that the way to set returns is not using historical asset class returns for what private pensions invest in, along with inflation. Instead Congress has used the actual 25 year investment return for one asset class-to set the assumed rates of returns for private corporations.
Well, what if CALPERS decided to abandon their use of all asset classes and an inflation ratre–and instead just set their assumed rate on their actual 25 year return, then—you get 8.91%. But, they don’t do that. Instead of using what they actually made over 25 years–they stick to to the historical returns of their current asset allocation classes going forward and an inflation assumption—which in CALPERS case gets them to a 7.75% rate.
Oh, and as for CALPERS recent returns and their long term rate. Well, they won’t make 7.75% this year. Just as they didn’t in 2000 & 2001 in the tech meltdown, and in 2008 in the crash. Yet, even with those 3 negative years–and 2 others as well–they still managed 8.91% for 25 years.
Those who get “stuck paying for the loss” are the same ones who took about a 4 year contribution holiday and paid nothing of their required contributions to CALPERS at the end of the 1990’s.
July 10, 2012 at 5:24 am
well said Paul— the bunker prepper crowd out here hates the 30 yr return rate——and most of all loathes being reminded of the pension payment holiday era…
July 10, 2012 at 6:03 am
John Taylor, You initially said …”It is funded 100 percent by the employees, it cost the taxpayer zero.”
Which is clearly ridiculous.
Then you said …”..in OC we fund 100 percent.” If you mean 100% of the employEE share, that my be correct, but that is still a SMALL % (always less than 20%) of the TOTAL cost of funding your VERY generous pensions, with the Taxpayers funding the 80_% balance.
And forget the … ” investment earnings fund the pensions” …. that’s baloney as such earnings are derived from (and follow) the original contributions (80+% form the Taxpayers) and in the absence of the need for such large contributions, the investment earnings as well as the principal would have stayed in the Taxpayers’ pockets.
July 10, 2012 at 6:14 am
Paul, Passage of the bill to allow the 25 year period for determination of the interest rate for discounting Plan liabilities was the result of pressure from the few remaining large Corporate Plans and the consequences of continued use of the lower 2-year rate. Unlike Public Sector Plans, Private Sector Plans are subject to payout limitations/restrictions when the funding ratio drops below 80% and 60%. Below 80%, Plans with Lump sum payout provisions can only pay out half the pension in a Lump Sum. Below 60%, no lump sum payouts are allowed and Plan accruals end.
Under the 2-year period for interest rate determination, many Plans fell below the 80% (some below 60%) causing great distress for Plan participants and embarrassment for their Corporate employers.
The shift to the 25 year period was to accommodate Corporate employers and was politically motivated to not piss off Plan participants in an election year.
July 10, 2012 at 5:06 pm
The “30 year return rate” is a farce. The 10 year return rate gives us an accurate indication of where the modern economy is headed. The average annual ROI of the last 10 years has been about 3%. heh. That’s the true indicator of what to expect going forward. The ‘Obfuscators’ are hoping for another dot-com or real estate bubble to fuel more fake growth to feed their pensions!!! HAH! All the live rounds are spent. Now they’re firing blanks!!! HAH! The era upon us will be coined “The era of promises that couldn’t be kept”. HAH!
And all the little childlike public pensioniers will hold their breath, turn blue and stamp their feet “But you promised us. You promised us!!” It will be a sight to behold. Pull up a chair and enjoy the show! 😀
July 10, 2012 at 8:32 pm
TL, they are robbing the young. They do it willfully. They use selfish phrases like “You owe me”. Wild animals have more respect for the future of their young. Wild animals want their young to be prosperous and flourish and will sacrifice to make it happen. There is your difference between wild animals and the greedy public union clan. Bottom of the bucket. Uncivilized. I, me, my. To hell with the rest of them. Gimme, gimme, gimme. Pathetic.
July 10, 2012 at 8:59 pm
Did you notice that Paul did not address any of the facts that I submitted in the posts above??? This is what they do best. Obfuscate. And when called out they run and hide or change the topic of discussion completely. That is the prime indicator that they are not being honest. When they concede or capitulate they don’t do it openly. They just avoid the topic. That’s when you know you’ve got them.
Please keep this observation in mind as you watch these on-line debates and how to score them!!! 😀
July 10, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Hey Beez,
There aren’t any “facts” in your posts, just the spewiing of nonsensical rants.
July 10, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Beeze, I got what I was promised, and am not jumping up and down, and stamping my feet–Anyway, I would not engage in childish behavior, based on whether or not I got a pension. Look in the mirror Beez–that little kid stomping and screaming is you–and at your age, too.
July 10, 2012 at 11:17 pm
SeeSaw, Yes, you got what you were promise …. but that “promise” was excessive, 80-90% pay for (and still being paid for) by taxpayers.
July 10, 2012 at 11:40 pm
“There aren’t any “facts” in your posts, just the spewiing of nonsensical rants”
All facts. That’s why you consistently fail to specifically respond. Yur skeeerd to. heh. You know any dispute would result in a slapdown. The facts are on my side. Yur skeeerd to engage in an actual debate. heh. Cluck cluck cluck cluck cluck. heh. 😀
July 10, 2012 at 11:43 pm
Seesaw, the public pensioniers are robbing the young. You are loading massive amounts of debt on the kids (born and unborn) and forcing them to finance your sins. They will suffer due to your actions today. Their quality of life will take a hit. Animals don’t engage in such behavior. It is inexcusable for humans to behave in such a manner. I have never witnessed such selfishness and greed.
July 11, 2012 at 12:02 am
Not true TL. My pension is completely covered by the contributions that were made during my working career and the current investment earnings. If I live long enough to use up all the contributions, the taxpayers will indeed have to start kicking in again–and I will be among them. What is excessive is the amount (34%) of my pension check that goes to the cost of medical insurance premiums.
July 11, 2012 at 12:57 am
“My pension is completely covered by the contributions that were made during my working career and the current investment earnings”
I don’t believe that for a second.
Give us your ending pension formula, the % of contribution you paid into your pension, your ending salary, your monthly benefit. at what age you retired and your current age.
Let us do the math.
July 11, 2012 at 2:08 am
Quoting SeeSaw,….”Not true TL. My pension is completely covered by the contributions that were made during my working career and the current investment earnings.’
Now I know I can’t convince you how absurd that statement is, but
I know you only trust what CalPERS says. Ask them if what you stated is true, to reply in writing, and with the name of the person affirming that statement.
July 11, 2012 at 2:08 am
You have no business to the details of my pension. I am way lower than the 100+ club–so try if you want. I checked with my former employer on whether or not they have to pay anything for my pension, since I have been retired (I have stated this before) and was told, “No”. I then checked with CalPERS to see who pays the approx. 36% after my contributions are gone, and was told that the employer will have to kick in. My own account will cover 8-9 years–I am now in the 5th year, so you can do that math. I’m not one of those elite managers that gets a pension amount that is separate and above what is paid out by CalPERS.
July 11, 2012 at 3:13 am
SeeSaw, who is your employer?
““No”. I then checked with CalPERS to see who pays the approx. 36% after my contributions are gone, and was told that the employer will have to kick in.”
I think they mean the employer will have to “kick in” the 36% of your plan that is currently unfunded by 36%. That’s on top of the other contributions your “employer” has already contributed.
July 11, 2012 at 3:45 am
No. When we retire, we have an account with CalPERS that has been there, earning interest from the employer-employee donations that have been made during the course of our active career. The account is then drawn down to pay the current 36 cents in every benefit dollar, that the CalPERS investment earnings don’t cover. When I signed my papers at the CalPERS office, I was told that my account would be empty in 8-9 years–fact is, I had an option-choice to leave beneficiares the balance in my contribution-account, if I were to pass, before they were exhausted.
After my retirement, I called the CM to ask him to check with his finance administrator, whether or not there was any further liability on their part for my retirement–he responded with the, “No” answer. I later e-mailed CalPERS and asked them who paid the 36 cents (currently the difference between what the investments are now paying out and what the employer pays) after my own account is exhausted. They called me and anwered my question–my employer will start paying again–If I live that long. I worked for a municipality.
I did error in my previous post–the current numbers for my pension are: The CalPERS earnings pay 64 cents of every benefit dollar, and my contribution account pays the other 36 cents. There was no factor of 36%, so you can forget about all the snarky comments on how much it was underfunded, etc. All I can tell you, is that it was operated according to the rules of my employer and the rules of CalPERS.
July 11, 2012 at 3:54 am
Of course, I guess 36 cents is 36%. What the heck.
July 11, 2012 at 4:16 am
Quoting SeeSaw …”When we retire, we have an account with CalPERS that has been there, earning interest from the employer-employee donations that have been made during the course of our active career. The account is then drawn down to pay the current 36 cents in every benefit dollar, that the CalPERS investment earnings don’t cover. ”
Incredulous !
July 11, 2012 at 4:48 am
“You have no business to the details of my pension”
That’s fine. Just don’t put garbage up on the board without being willing to provide the numbers to prove your claim and then have the audacity to expect us to believe it. Do you think you’re conversing with a group of 3rd graders out here?
Most everything you claim is purely anecdotal. Why should I believe you?
July 11, 2012 at 4:49 am
paul Says:
July 10, 2012 at 5:02 am
Real slow, now, Captain.
“The argument you have made on these pages for the past year or so is the public pensions have their assumed rate too high.”
– (typing slowly) I’ve been commenting on the assumed rate of return being too high since 2008; I appreciate someone has noticed. But that is only one of CalPERS many problems. I’ve also been commenting on corruption at CalPERS, the composition of the corrupt and unqualified CalPERS Board, CalPERS selling Airtime at a discount of 30%, The pay to play scandal, the culture of CalPERS and “Fred’s Friends”, SB400, CalPERS advocacy for public employee unions, CalPERS use of their financial weight to manipulate and water down the GASB exposure draft that would have highlighted their outlier smoothing policies, and the ever increasing amount of risk CalPERS is piling on the backs of taxpayers in order to support both the ridiculous assumptions and pension formulas that are neither necessary or just. I’m sure if I took the time I could come up with another dozen or so items.
“However, Congress (including public fund critics such as Nunes and Issa) have decided that corporate rate is too low. They have allowed corporations to use their interest rate return for 25 years, instead of the 2 years they were using.”
– I already told you your argument is flawed, and this Red Herring is not relevant. Taxpayers aren’t on the hook for corporate pensions unless they need a bailout.
“Now for the tricky part you don’t understand.
Public pension plans use the historical rate of return for the asset classes they invest in going forward to calculate, in large part, their future assumed rate of return.”
– OK, you want to use a 25 average based on the “historical rate of return for the asset classes they invest in going forward to calculate, in large part, their future assumed rate of return”. While you are clearly cherry picking the time frame how are you going to do that when the weighted asset classes have drastically changed over the past 25 years? This isn’t the 80’s and CalPERS can’t make their number based on high interest/bond rates.
“Those who get “stuck paying for the loss” are the same ones who took about a 4 year contribution holiday and paid nothing of their required contributions to CALPERS at the end of the 1990′s.”
Paulie, municipalities never took a four year holiday. They paid exactly what CalPERS told them they needed to pay, and CalPERS is the plan administrator. The idea behind CalPERS promoting (selling) increased benefits was two part: CalPERS was super funded and the unions wanted the money because they considered it theirs, and (2) CalPERS promoted SB 400 telling cities they would pay little if anything for the next ten years if they increased pensions by 50%! What they really did is take what amounted to the taxpayer reserve fund (the super funded portion which was everything above 100% funding) and distribute it to employees in the form of increased benefits – in many cases retroactively!
Now cities are paying 200-300 percent above the regular CalPERS rate for 3@50 plans while, at the same time, unfunded pension liabilities are exploding!
July 11, 2012 at 5:02 am
I don’t have rocks in my head Beeze. Nobody gives the name of their employer and all of their personal pension data. You have been given a lot more information about my work career and my pension than most are willing to give. I am under no gun to prove anything to you or anyone else. In the meantime, the rest of you feel free to spout garbage about which you have absolutely no proof, while calling my real experience, “incredulous”.
July 11, 2012 at 5:34 am
“Nobody gives the name of their employer and all of their personal pension data”
Nobody asked for your employer’s name. Go read the request again.
Like I said….that’s fine. Just don’t make claims that you can’t back up. That’s all.You are always full of personal anecdotes which are, IMO, worthless on these boards. Anecdotes prove nothing.
I will ask you again…..why should I believe you?
“I am under no gun to prove anything to you or anyone else”
Of course you aren’t. But without the proof don’t expect anyone to buy your hogwash. Deal?
“In the meantime, the rest of you feel free to spout garbage about which you have absolutely no proof, while calling my real experience, “incredulous”.
My comments on the pension topic are all fact-based. That’s why Paul avoids them like the plague.
In fact none of you offer counterarguments to my facts. You know better. heh. 😀
July 11, 2012 at 5:46 am
What were you in your government job, Seesaw? A clerk typist?
How big of a pension would you have received for such a skill in the private sector?
Do you think a private employer would have paid you more for your skill than you received from Uncle Sugar? heh.
Do you think a private sector employer would subsidize your medical insurance in retirement?
Government jobs are work-fare, Seesaw.
I’ve personally watched how slow government workers move in their offices. It’s like watching the sloth exhibit at the zoo.
July 11, 2012 at 6:07 am
Another poster did ask who was my employer. Who cares–you asked a lot of questions that I am not going to answer. I’m the one with the pension–you are the one who is whining. I could care less whether you believe me or not. I am more important for these boards than you are. I have actual experience on a subject, about which you know nothing–you just spout your garbage and accuse me of making up anecdotes. You are a joke!
July 11, 2012 at 6:53 am
SeeSaw, I asked the question.
“Captain Says:
July 11, 2012 at 3:13 am
SeeSaw, who is your employer?
You said: ““No”. I then checked with CalPERS to see who pays the approx. 36% after my contributions are gone, and was told that the employer will have to kick in.””
The employer CalPERS speaks of IS the taxpayers.
July 11, 2012 at 7:57 am
No. The employer CalPERS speaks of is the actual entity where I went to work every day. Do you see a line item for CalPERS on your property tax bill? I happen to be a taxpayer myself–you are not special in that regard.
July 11, 2012 at 8:27 am
SeeSaw, thank you for responding.
July 11, 2012 at 12:13 pm
July 20th is almost here, and if you’re a General Motors retiree you know that means your pension plan decision time is almost up. You’ve likely heard there are risks involved, but are you aware of what those risks are? It’s been recommended since the June 1 announcement that you seek the advice of an experienced financial planner while making your pension plan decision. If you’ve yet to act on that, don’t worry – there is still time. This video was created to help retirees better understand the pension plan choices: http://youtu.be/32ZRne7AoTQ. Face July 20th with confidence; let a financial planner help you make the right pension choice.
July 11, 2012 at 3:38 pm
beezyboob/ocODDball–
Isn’t your last post a bit man spirited and condescending? Even for someone as limited as you?
Ted
July 11, 2012 at 3:44 pm
Heh ! ™
July 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm
“Isn’t your last post a bit man spirited and condescending?”
‘Man spirted? No. It’s meant for both genders.
Condescending? For you any written word that truthfully describes the damage public pensions has caused the large majority of our society is ‘condescending’. Anything you write I take with a massive dose of salt. heh.
July 11, 2012 at 4:13 pm
Well, another one bites the dust. This time San Bernardino.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/07/san-bernardino-files-for-bankruptcy-protection.html
Getting a little too close to home, eh ballfans??? heh. Coming to a theater near you soon! heh.
City workers are going to get screwed first. Then it will spread like wildfire.
Bring it on. It’s way overdue.
heh. 😀
July 11, 2012 at 4:34 pm
You see, San Bernardino is a PERFECT example of what happens when you pay your government workers much higher salaries and retirement benefits than the ones in the private sector who pay the freight. Eventually it goes BOOM because you don’t have enough worker bees servicing the drones. I guess you people who fight for your pension ‘rights’ are too dumb to understand that you are orchestrating your own demise. heh. And now that the governor is on the verge of signing AB 1081 – the California Sanctuary State Act – and more indigent illegals swarm in from Mexico and neighboring states – it will only get worse.
For me this is all entertainment. I’ve been warning you now for years. I’ve been trying to do you a favor and be your friend by telling you the truth – even though I’m constantly attacked for such neighborliness. So now the chickens are coming home to roost and I sit back with my decaf and say “I told ya so”. heh.
Somebody should form a pool and let us all guess where the next shoe will drop. heh.
If you think this will stop with San Bernardino you’ve got a screw loose. Get out the phillips and tighten her down! heh. 😀
July 11, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Looks like all the pro-pension board clowns are taking the day off today. heh.
I guess they got a San Bernardino bone stuck in their throats. heh.
The walls are closing in. Another nail got hammered into the pension coffin today.
Take heed to my axiom: It’ s easier to file bankruptcy, to change the laws or to even change the Constitution itself than it is to pay people with money that doesn’t exist.
Go ask the San Bernardino City Manager if you doubt what I say. heh.
You did it to yourselves. You own greed did you in. Go rent “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre” (1948) directed by John Huston and and starring Humphrey Bogart. Go see if you can find yourselves in that movie!! HAH! 😀
July 11, 2012 at 6:31 pm
Beeze, the SB episode is another fallout, due to the abolishment of Redevelopment–many more will follow. What did the Governor think was going to happen when he abolished this faction of state/local government that has existed for close to 50 years. He made instant paupers of all of these cities. Now the whole state is going to reap the fallout, due to the rise in unemployment.
You are right that the two cities in question were too generous when the funds were flowing. That was not the fault of the workers who now will suffer. (Stockton gave lifetime medical coverage if an employee had worked for six months. That is ridiculous–I had to work full-time for 25 years to get the stipend that I get for my medical coverage–My spouse and I pay over $1500/mo., out of my pension, for medical insurance premiums–that is above and beyond what I get from the employer–ha–that’s some lifetime-coverage.)
July 11, 2012 at 7:18 pm
“Beeze, the SB episode is another fallout, due to the abolishment of Redevelopment–many more will follow”
I expected you to comeback with this or similar hogwash.
The city managers themselves say that SB cannot afford the high labor cost of government employees with an emphasis on public safety. Now their backs are up against the wall and they have no other feasible option other than bankruptcy.
LA is not far behind in line, Seesaw.
Again, you’re personal anecdotes have ZERO board value for me. I won’t even give them consideration because you offer NO proof to your claims. I suggest you keep your personal stories to yourself unless you are willing to reveal substantiation. Otherwise, IMO you tarnish your own credibility.
SB is one of MANY that will be forced into bankruptcy due to the greedy public unions and their little sycophants.
Eventually whoever you worked for will do the same and then you will get a taste of the bitter medicine too. 😉
July 11, 2012 at 7:26 pm
I am fine and will continue to be so. I am sad for those who are losing their jobs.
I’m just dying over the fact that I have no credibility with you. How will I ever survive……………………….
July 11, 2012 at 8:01 pm
Poll these boards and ask the posters how many find your comments credible.
Teddy and his sock puppets don’t count. 😀
It won’t only be people losing jobs. We are talking forced pension haircuts, seesaw. You might not like my opinions – but they are rarely wrong. I am doing you a big favor by being honest and truthful. If you choose to stick your head in the sand – that is your choice. I hope the view down there is nice. 😀
July 11, 2012 at 9:13 pm
Where’s Ted today?
Did SB take some of the wind out of his sails?
Is he a former SB city employee by chance??? 😀
Maybe he’s on the phone with the SB city manager asking for leniency.
HAH! 😀
July 11, 2012 at 10:51 pm
I doubt it, but it wouldn’t affect him, anyway. There won’t be any already-retired former employees who will lose anything. I am not in a ditch either–my former employer operates very lean, and it will not be claiming bankruptcy–again, if it did, I would not lose my pension. CalPERS has its members protected–don’t you remember Vallejo. Stockton is not going after pensions either. Any City that would try to go after their former employee’s pensions is just asking for trouble.
July 11, 2012 at 11:31 pm
I’m still here——Beezyboob- I only respond when I want to.
1. Seesaw is and has been credible out here for years.
2. YOU on the other hand have been booted AND had to do the name change Mr.oc ODDball…..
3. Read your posts…they are excessive, usually wrong, mean, sometimes filled with racialy hate language, child like, etc…
sorry little buddy——- ™
July 12, 2012 at 12:22 am
Look who came out of the woodwork!
Oh, so Mr. Obfuscation says seesaw is credible??? Thanks for clearing that up for us! 😀
I have never used ‘racial hate language’ making you a bald-faced liar.
No comment on the latest default in San Bernardino, eh meathead?
heh. Didn’t think so. 😀
July 12, 2012 at 12:30 am
“I am not in a ditch either–my former employer operates very lean, and it will not be claiming bankruptcy–again, if it did, I would not lose my pension”
If wishes were horses beggars would ride. Eventually they have to go after pensions which is the biggest part of the problem. They are not going to fire half the workforce to save your pension. Your pension will be one of the first to sacrifice – not the last. Read carefully: IT IS EASIER TO CHANGE LAWS OR TO EVEN CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION THAN IT IS TO PAY PEOPLE WITH MONEY THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
“CalPERS has its members protected–don’t you remember Vallejo”
Vallejo was a basic nothing burger. The game is changing now with large municipalities going under. Pension will take a huge hit to restore solvency to the system. You aren’t looking at this objectively since you are in the middle of the game. We are on the outside looking in. You are on the inside looking out. BIG DIFFERENCE. You are a victim of fuzzy thinking.
“Any City that would try to go after their former employee’s pensions is just asking for trouble”
Not when the money runs out. All the rules change overnight. Watch and learn.
July 12, 2012 at 12:59 am
Beezy? You never used racial hate speech? Well– you know what— you were booted from that other blog for the speech you used re our President and frankly since then you’ve behaved pretty well so I won’t dredge all of that unpleasantness up.
Carry on troll ! Good job !! ™ heh
July 12, 2012 at 1:02 am
Cal Pers– 239 bil strong…..hmmmm…lets see….at current burn rates—with no further contributions from anyone and a 0 return….it might sputter in 2045?
Have a super day slave troll– and type now!
July 12, 2012 at 2:06 am
Beez, the money in CalPERS does not go to pay salaries of active workers. Even if a City can’t make its payroll, it can’t go to CalPERS and take any of that money. The bankruptcies that are occuring have more to do with the abolishment of Redevelopment than they do with the pensions. I’m not denying that they were to free with their funds, but you would not be reading these stories, if Redevelopment had not been rescinded by the Governor and the Legislature. They are going to have to answer to their constituents for that–I hope they are reading my post right now.
July 12, 2012 at 2:17 am
“Beezy? You never used racial hate speech?”
I have never used racial hate speech you libelous fabricator. People like you live on the bottom of the scum bucket. You crawl out of the woodwork and do your dirty work by falsly villifying others. Bottom feeder.
July 12, 2012 at 2:24 am
“The bankruptcies that are occuring have more to do with the abolishment of Redevelopment than they do with the pensions”
That statement only illustrates your ignorance. Even the city managers themselves attribute the bankruptcies to labor costs. This is why you have no credibility with me. You know nothing of what you speak on these matters. You’re like one of those wind up toys that dance on the floor and chatter nonsense. For me it’s laughable and I acknowledge it’s good for a laugh.
“They are going to have to answer to their constituents for that–I hope they are reading my post right now”
The dems clearly run this state. That is not even debatable. And they have run the state right into the ground and destroyed it’s solvency. The public unions and their sychphants have robbed the children. Something animals don’t even do. We know where the blame lies. Not even a debatable topic with regard to who’s accountable. Even an attempt to debate it would add to your lack of credibility.
Finally, read this again:
IT IS MUCH EASIER TO CHANGE THE LAWS OR TO EVEN CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION THAN IT IS TO PAY PEOPLE WITH MONEY THAT DOES NOT EXIST.
Smoke some of that. 😀
July 12, 2012 at 2:40 am
Let me repeat–the CalPERS money is not going anywhere, except to pay annuitants.
July 12, 2012 at 3:42 am
You’ve already proven to me that your comments cannot be taken seriously. Sorry. When you make claims that you refuse to support with proven facts I just can’t take you seriously.
July 12, 2012 at 4:26 am
I’ll give you one more chance to restore my hope in you, seesaw. I asked you these questions in a previous post. Here they are again:
“What were you in your government job, Seesaw? A clerk typist?
How big of a pension would you have received for such a skill in the private sector?
Do you think a private employer would have paid you more for your skill than you received from Uncle Sugar? heh.
Do you think a private sector employer would subsidize your medical insurance in retirement?”
Since you made claims about your personal pension and financial status – it’s only fitting that you should honestly answer these questions for the sake of transparency. Naturally, you don’t have to be transparent. That’s your choice. But it’s a necessary step to restore some of my fundamental confidence in your submissions.
July 12, 2012 at 4:35 am
Beezyboob– you know what you said — many of us here read it……..it’s all still in the archives little fella……
July 12, 2012 at 4:57 am
You’re a libelous slimebucket to claim that I engaged in ‘racial hate speech’. I have already proven your statement to be blatantly false and defamatory from many different angles. For you to continue to spew this vicious and false vitriol is not a very smart move.
July 12, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Mr. Beezyboob-
YOU have proven something?
What?
July 12, 2012 at 1:39 pm
Not sure what you’re talking about little buddy.
Hey, on another note— how come we don’t see you on the cal watchdog site anymore?
July 12, 2012 at 10:20 pm
Can anyone point me to an annuity that gives 7.5% rate of return?
July 12, 2012 at 10:22 pm
How did dumping redevelopment agencies cause the meltdown? These agencies are separate entities and have separate funds, right? Or, were those cities using their redevelopment agencies to support their city’s general fund, inappropriately?
July 12, 2012 at 10:51 pm
CC, don’t confuse seesaw with the facts about the relationship between the cities and redevelopment. She’ll blow a gasket. And then Ted the fabricator will pile on.
And, no. There is no annuity that provides a 7.5% ROI. The pension hogs just dream these numbers up and plug them into the gamed formula to keep the ponzi in operation for another day.
July 12, 2012 at 11:20 pm
CC— Yes I can point you to that annuity— well almpost— Many big box type REITS pay 7-8% with a principle surity— I have several of them…..
July 13, 2012 at 2:15 am
“Many big box type REITS pay 7-8% with a principle surity— I have several of them…..”
Name them.
July 13, 2012 at 3:44 am
Ted, Some Reits pay 7% … but ALL have downside risk ….. Your broker is BS-en you.
July 13, 2012 at 6:17 am
TL, come on. They tell you they fully self-fund their pensions with their contributions. They tell you that unfunded pension liabilities don’t matter. They tell you that the state is solvent. They tell you that big pensions are good because they stimulate the economy! HAH! 😀
And now Teddy tells you that he has several reits with ROI’s of 7%-8% and you bite on that???? HAH! 😀
Why do you think he refuses to name them?
July 13, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Beezy— Cole has several Reits that offer this for instance……..although from your single wide with your dial up you may not be able to se them…..
lol ™
July 13, 2012 at 3:03 pm
TL– Of course there are downside risks! Your money isn’t liquid for a period and there are substantial penalties for early exit.
July 13, 2012 at 3:05 pm
and look at Pershing, Aviva and Lincoln…..
July 13, 2012 at 3:10 pm
“Cole has several Reits that offer this for instance……..although from your single wide with your dial up you may not be able to se them…..”
Name them or stfu
July 13, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Beezyboob-
Ya know little fella, the comment you made above…”why do you think he refuses to name them…” is typical of you. I don’t check this blog every 10 minutes like you do. I get out here as often as I can but I have a job and life that demand more from me that your trailer existence,
I know that before Rush you are still throwing up. And that after Rush you need to warm up the old tube set for Hannity and Medved and that after that you have to start thinking about heating up that TV dinner before your evening of Fox News ™ if the TV is working. And then perhaps review your prepper safety supplies for the bug out bag. That’s a long day for ya little buddy I know but you can see that its easy for you to get out here.
I’ll do better.
Ted
July 13, 2012 at 3:34 pm
Here’s a perspective —
http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/28/pf/expert/retirement_investment_return.moneymag/index.htm
Discuss–
July 13, 2012 at 3:59 pm
I didn’t ask you for a magazine article. I told you to name the Cole Funds that you’re referring to or to stfu. Naturally, you balk. I am going to start calling you Teddy “balker” Steele from now on!!! HAH! 😀 You talk a good came. But rarely do you produce. You got a 2hp brain pushing a 10 ton mouth.
BTW, I don’t listen to Rush or Hannity. All my thoughts are independent thoughts, unlike yours. Now the word is that the government crooks in San Bernardino cooked the books and are looking at criminal prosecution! HAH! How many other cities are cookin’ the books and pumping up their bottom line with money that doesn’t exist??? HAH! You pension pigs are in the surprise of your lives. D-Day is getting closer and closer. Hunker down, fat boy!!! HAH! 😀
July 13, 2012 at 5:03 pm
I named the funds little sleeper—–
to be specific— although now 6.5 %, try the cole fund Credit Property Trust 3 (3767 et seq) lol you poor troll.
and in terms of El Rushbo and Hannity and you
TRUTH HURTS HUH ? OR SHOULD I SAY HEH? ™
Type NOW slave troll !! Hurry !!!!
July 13, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Go all in, fatboy. In fact, triple down on Cole Property Trust III !!!!!
HAH!
“We continue to have concerns about Cole Property Trust III in 2010 and 2011, year to date. To this day, public records reflect that Cole is far from covering its dividends with funds coming from operations. In its third quarter report for 2011, Cole Credit Property Trust III reported total revenues for $81,414,000 and operating expenses for $52,079,000; leaving a net income of $10,491,000. Nevertheless, Cole paid dividends to its shareholders of $46,755,845 or $36 million in excess of its net income. In other words, Cole Credit Property Trust III continues to pay most of its dividends with loans or proceeds from new investor’s money”
http://www.reitattorneys.com/2011/12/be-wary-of-sales-pitch-used-by-financial-advisors-selling-non-traded-reits.html
July 13, 2012 at 6:28 pm
You’re the board clown. You truly are. 😀
July 13, 2012 at 7:31 pm
Ok little buddy !
You know best !
I got in Cole 2 — made 15k and got out.
Did I do ok? LOL
They have been saying this stuff about Cole since 04—–
doom clowns like you……..
LMAO !
Type now troll !! Hurry !!!
July 13, 2012 at 8:01 pm
“I got in Cole 2 — made 15k and got out”
Sure ya did, Mr. Fabricator
And I’m Clark Kent. 😉
July 13, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Beezyboob— Should I give the money back?
July 13, 2012 at 10:34 pm
There is no doubt that some 30-year periods in US history have had 7 or even 10% return rates on a typical portfolio of stocks and bonds. But sometimes only 3% has occurred to. There is a lot of random variability.
The point is to model this variability accurately for the huge pension pools with lots of people paying in for years and years. Given Moody’s major screwups (rating all sorts of Wall Street junk Aaa, their highest ratings) in the past few years, their opinion is no better than what you’d get from a Ouija Board.
I do think it likely that public pension systems face either cutting benefits for existing retirees, or more severe medicine, like sovereign default. Because I don’t think public pension managers did their job either, and allowed overly high benefits given the contributions.
On yet another hand, $2 trillion is comparable to what Wall Street got outright (not paid back yet) in the 2008-2009 crisis… part from the Federal Reserve. I fail to see why Wall Street gets bailed out and pension systems do not, but my preference would be to claw back Wall Street $, not make a double bailout.
And it wouldn’t surprise me if LIBOR cost non-bank investors trillions.
July 13, 2012 at 10:46 pm
spension– I agreed to your first 2 graphs then ya lost me.
But I won’t beat a dead horse today!
Shalom !
July 13, 2012 at 11:38 pm
spension, it will be a cold day in hell when they “claw back” Wall Street. If you have been paying attention for the last 5 years you would already understand that.
On the other hand, pension funds are raw meat and merely collateral for the bankers.
There’s no reason for Moody’s to lie about the $2T in pension unfunded liabilities. They gain nothing from lying about that. In fact, their statement could potentially hurt Moody’s. It is merely a warning that if something is not done soon the entire dam could come down.
The bankers are king. You’ve already seen what they have been able to get away with in these last 5 years. They are immune from punishment. That’s not right….but it is factual. LIBOR is only the latest scandal of dozens.
Whatever’s left of the pension money is going to get scarfed up by the bankers. The same thing will happen in America that happened in Russia pre-Peristroika. If you know anything about history you would see that playing out right now before your very eyes.
People like Teddy will get caught holding the empty bag. Regardless of what you saw in the movie “Wall Street” greed is not good and has it’s karmic consequences. You cannot rob the young without a payback.
July 14, 2012 at 3:39 am
CalSTRS posts a 1.8% ROI at the end of the 2011-12 fiscal year. Far below forecasted rates and far below what is required to keep the fund solvent. heh.
The house of cards is falling apart. The vulture bankers will end up picking what meat is left on the pension bone!!! Watch. HAH! 😀
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/13/4629912/calstrs-posts-anemic-annual-profit.html
July 14, 2012 at 4:35 am
Beezyboob– You remain a constant dull drum beat of dull-normal.
July 14, 2012 at 5:01 am
I hope the kids that you are robbing today freeze your pension checks when you’re a feeble old man and you spend you last days living under a freeway bridge. Now that would be karmic justice in motion.
July 14, 2012 at 5:15 am
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
July 14, 2012 at 5:34 am
Sleep, old man, sleep.
Follow the example of your tiny brain. It’s been asleep for years! 🙂
July 14, 2012 at 5:45 am
I’m not saying Moody’s lies, I’m saying they cannot even tell. Their Aaa ratings of CDO junk proves that.
July 14, 2012 at 6:23 am
You’re not catching on here. They benefited from the aaa cdo ratings. What gain was it for them to report the $2T unfunded liability?
July 14, 2012 at 2:13 pm
Oh, I catch on fine. You’re saying no-one paid for this report? Really? And could any of us ever tell who did pay? We do know that Moody=unreliable, the cdo ratings proved it.
July 14, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Well said spension———– Only a fool relies on Moody at this point—-
lol….and beezyboob aka ocODDball heh!
July 14, 2012 at 3:51 pm
Calpers 234.4 bil
July 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm
“You’re saying no-one paid for this report? Really? And could any of us ever tell who did pay?”
Wall Street profits off public pension management. If you did your research you would know that. Who exactly would pay Moody’s (a Wall Street entity) to publish bogus information on the public pension unfunded liabilities? Stop with the tin foil. Use the logical part of your brain.
“We do know that Moody=unreliable, the cdo ratings proved it”
Of course we do. But there was a logical reason for that. They profited off it.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Your assertions are contradictory. Stay consistent. Otherwise you taint your own credibility.
Who exactly would pay Moody’s for a trumped up report? Not the banks who profit off the public pensions, obviously. You don’t have to name names. Just give me a generalized idea. Otherwise I will discard the premise of your comment completely. I will give you a chance to retain my interest in your position.
July 14, 2012 at 4:26 pm
Beezyboob— you ALWAYS cite biased sources with conflicts– so in this case maybe YOU need to stay consistent…. lol heh ™
(remember REITWRECKS? LOL ya think they have a bias??? LOL)
What’s is it like for you to be the board whack job?
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
July 14, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Your comments are not even worth a response, Teddy. It’s like trying to converse with a schizophrenic off his meds. Your thoughts are disorganized, inconsistent and wildly distorted.
Spension seems like a good, intelligent and rational fellow with some interesting thoughts. I just need him to fill in a couple missing parts for me. It appear that he does not have any major biases and is willing to see warts on the noses of all involved. And that’s a good thing. I hope Spension returns for more enlightening discussion.
As for you, Teddy. Go take a seat on the sidelines. Come back every once in awhile to give us a laugh and some break away entertainment. But leave the real discussions to the mature adults on the board.
But we appreciate your patronage and the entertainment value that you offer.
July 14, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Hmmm Beezyboob—- Darn, I must have hit a nerve……the piggie squeels ! LOL heh ™
July 14, 2012 at 6:15 pm
Fatboy calling me ‘piggie’ is sort of like a two-bit streetwalker calling Mother Teresa a ‘whore’.
Just more evidence of a man with troubled and untreated thoughts.
July 14, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Hope you return soon, spension, so we can continue our discussion. I always have an open mind and you may enlighten me. Why knows? But if you don’t return it will force me to wonder about you and your motives.
July 14, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Pooled pension systems are capable of substantially less overhead (trading fees, accounting fees, etc) per $ invested, compared to DC plans. CalSTRS and UCRS are at the 0.15%/year level, comparable Vanguard, although I think CalPERS is at the 0.5%/year level, a bit higher. Many 401(k) and 403(b) systems are up at the 1-2% system.
So the US investment industry benefits financially from the destruction of large pooled pension systems.
Additionally, large pooled pension representatives have often (not always) argued hard for transparency, good accounting, and social justice. CalPERS fought hard against South African investments and went after Enron.
The politics is pretty easy on this… most in the money industry would like to see all pooled pension systems liquidated and the assets redirected to DC plans… higher profits and less power calling for good accounting and social justice.
Surely those political interest have Moody’s bought and paid for, just as they did for the CDOs.
July 14, 2012 at 6:28 pm
I meant: *many* (but not all) 401(k) and 403(b) systems are up at the 1-2% overhead level.
July 14, 2012 at 6:44 pm
LOL “why knows”?
Nice comment beezyboob—– about says it all !
July 14, 2012 at 7:15 pm
At least I am successful in keeping fatboy focused on me and off the topic at hand to preclude him from continuing to make an ass of himself on the subject of pensions. I am looking out for ya, fatboy. Just because somebody dumps on ya doesn’t necessarily mean he’s your enemy…and just because somebody pulls you out of the dump doesn’t necessarily mean he’s your friend! HAH! 😀
Now to you Spension. What you omitted is that the pension funds are holding literally $trillions$ in investments that have not been marked to market or reassessed in value after the great collapse of 2008-09. Out of greed, the pension managers bought those toxic assets from the puppet masters on Wall Street. If they were forced to ‘liquidate’ those investments (as you say) today those assets would automatically reset to today’s values and the stock market would literally fall off the cliff with the pension funds essentially collapsing in value. Both the pension managers and Wall Street know the pension fund hold preposterouly overvalued investments. So your theory that Moody’s wants the pension funds to ‘liquidate’ and transfer those assets into DC funds so they can make a little extra profit off margins makes no sense. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite of your face! Sorry, the premise of your argument is absurd and anyone with a financial background can detect it’s flawed reasoning. Back up and try again.
July 14, 2012 at 7:34 pm
Btw, fatboy. Stay focused on me. I got your back.
HAH! 😀
July 14, 2012 at 8:23 pm
Spension, here is the problem, sir.
Take CalSTRS for instance. That fund was valued at about $150B earlier this year. However, the outflows (pension disbursements) are currently about 2x’s the inflows (contributions) – and as I documented above (w/ proof source) – the ROI for Fiscal 2011-12 was 1.8%. The net loss was about $10B. Now do a excel spread sheet. With ZIRP (Zero Interest Rate Policy) currently in place and confirmed in place until the end of 2014 we are in for MORE OF THE SAME while MORE PUBLIC RETIREES JOIN THE ROLLS. Low interest rates are here to stay – otherwise the greater economy collapses. The losses will only accelerate. CalSTRS value is now at about $142B. As this continues the fund will be depleted to ZERO by 2023. But it will collapse much sooner than that as the value erodes and confidence in the system is blown from of the water.
So arguing about Moody’s does nothing to solve the problem, spension. It is a diversion. You need to examine the numbers and do the math. Get out your excel spreadsheet and extrapolate. Look for yourself. If you don’t know how to do an excel spreadsheet let me know. I will do a quick one for you.
The writing is on the wall, sir. I think we are on the same side here. I do not want to spend time quiveling over Moody’s – although it is trying to warn you of pending disaster.
I wish you well. Let’s work together to stop these scoundrels from financially raping future generations.
July 14, 2012 at 8:58 pm
I don’t think the bulk of the people in the public pension business (or even on Wall Street) are scoundrels and all but maybe 1 or 2 are not rapists. Sorry, I don’t like those exaggerations.
I do think the fluctuations in market conditions were neglected by most of the public pension fund managers. There are always some who get it and tried to do the right thing. But the pressure from politicians and some union leaders (BTW, a whole lot of public employees who get high pensions are not unionized at all) elevated the pension managers who were ignorant of the consequences of a protracted down-market period.
And so all sorts of mistakes were made… on the right side of the political spectrum, Pete Wilson tried to raid pension funds when they had enjoyed up years in the 1980’s. On the left, pension benefits were increased after the up years of the 1990’s. In fact, any 10 or 20 years of performance should never be used to raid or adjust anything. The securities markets are only reliable on the 50-100 year time scale.
Pensioners have quite valid contracts and it is understandable that they want those contracts honored. That is not scoundrelism or rape, just the good old USA… a written contract is a written contract, and US States are legal entities that don’t easily declare anything close to bankruptcy.
The Wall Street managers wanted their $10 million bonus contracts honored after they drove the US economy into the ditch in 2008, and the US Taxpayer did it for them.
And it is entirely possible that markets will recover and this will look like a bad dream. It is also already happening that younger workers pay more for less benefits… and they subsidize the older workers richer benefits. Personally I do think reduction of public pensions in an orderly way (very progressive… pensions over $200K/year get severely reduced, $100-$200K moderately reduced, $50K-$100 K reduced a little, and <$50K not touched, for example) prior to more cataclysmic initiatives, sovereign default, etc would be the way to go.
But it would have to be voluntary or initiated from the pensioners side. If not, sovereign default may be the only way out, if markets never recover.
July 14, 2012 at 9:40 pm
“Sorry, I don’t like those exaggerations”
It takes a village to destroy our children’s future. Those who arranged the scam and those who participated in the scam are all responsible for lowering the quality of life of future generations by imposing their enormous debts on the kids. It is inexcusable. No excuses. “I was just following orders” didn’t cut it in 1945 and won’t cut it in 2012…2013….2014……etc….
“But the pressure from politicians and some union leaders (BTW, a whole lot of public employees who get high pensions are not unionized at all) elevated the pension managers who were ignorant of the consequences of a protracted down-market period”
There you go again. Playing the apologist for those who were willfully ignorant of the actions. The ones who pulled the purse strings and purchased poisoned investments and by doing so attempted to artificially raise ROI, knowing full well the risks involved, should have, at best, been fired. Any investment manager who does not understand the consequences of balancing risk and reward needs to find another profession. Stop making excuses for them and finger-pointing. That’s what children do. Grow up.
“In fact, any 10 or 20 years of performance should never be used to raid or adjust anything. The securities markets are only reliable on the 50-100 year time scale”
What an absolutely crazy concept. In 50-100 years without major adjustments the entire economy could likely implode. And we are, in fact, on that direct course as I type. To maintain a ‘hands off’ policy on such a vulnerable part of our existence for a 50-100 year period are the sentiments of a very naive person IMO. Either that or a madman.
“The Wall Street managers wanted their $10 million bonus contracts honored after they drove the US economy into the ditch in 2008, and the US Taxpayer did it for them”
Yes we did. Under the iron fist of the government. Polls showed that the American citizens were opposed by a 80%-20% margin. But we don’t have ‘consent of the governed’ any longer in America. And it wasn’t just with bonuses. It was with TARP too. This is what happens when fascism (the merger of government and corporate powers) begins to emerge.
“And it is entirely possible that markets will recover and this will look like a bad dream”
As George Carlin once told us about dreams “You have to be asleep to believe it”. The only way the markets rose this high is due to bailouts, billion dollar interest free loans and quantitative easing. All that supposedly has to be paid back (but we know it never will). It will just accumulate until the lid gets blown off the pressure cooker. You should be smart enough to recognize that.
“It is also already happening that younger workers pay more for less benefits… and they subsidize the older workers richer benefits”
And once the younger people recognize what was done to them (financially raped) it is my opinion that they will fight back and very possibly freeze the pension benefits going to the offenders. One day the young people will be in charge. Then what? heh.
July 14, 2012 at 9:58 pm
“But it would have to be voluntary or initiated from the pensioners side. If not, sovereign default may be the only way out, if markets never recover”
No. I disagree. Odds are 2 to 1 that it will be disorderly and chaotic. Once the children become adults and realize that they were chosen to pay for the sins of their forefathers – the pensions could get involuntarily frozen. Look at how the laws and even the US Constitution are being thwarted and circumvented today. Our children will learn from our example and it will come back to haunt us. That’s my prediction. And we will deserve it, Btw.
Smoke some of that.
July 14, 2012 at 10:54 pm
Spension–Without exaggerations— beezyboob has, ah….well……..nothing!
What he tries to pass off as content is always rehashed nonsense from the years he has been at his dull-normal psycho rant……..the blogs whack job……..
July 14, 2012 at 11:05 pm
I do LOVE his predictions though— so far–
0 for 9 !!! ™
July 15, 2012 at 2:05 am
The fatboy fabricator can’t keep up with me. All he’s good for are insults that always miss the target. I run circles around him on these boards and it makes him angry. heh. It’s like a special olympics boy trying to maintain a pace with a London gold medalist. Frustration grows and anger is the inevitable result. Watch him closely. Not one cogent point on topic. All wasted vented hot air. Don’t get in the game, fatboy. I would just make you look silly. Stand on the sidelines and shout. heh. If I have time between matches I’ll come over and give you my autograph! HAH! 😀
July 15, 2012 at 3:44 am
LOL ok little fella!
Now you’re having delusions of adequacy ! ™
July 15, 2012 at 4:59 am
Well, by 1945 the US had run up huge debt for WWII and bequeathed it to younger generations. That was OK… debt is not uniformly bad. Debt to just pay pensions ain’t good though. I think debt for broad benefits to society (ilke, say, the Interstate Highway system or Rural Electrification or fast internet for all) is actually beneficial.
I don’t apologize for the innumeracy of politicians and the political process. Numbers just don’t drive them and it, sadly. Numbers and numbers people are disrespected. Call it an apology if you want, I just see it as the unvarnished truth.
Actually I think the only politically acceptable way to run defined pension systems is to require employers and employees to contribute a fixed percentage, say, 10% and 5%, and never change that. It is politically unacceptable to get up to the 20-30% contributions now being made, say, for California Safety.
Then benefits should be set extremely conservatively, say, 1% per service year no earlier than age 62, and not raised nor contributions lowered unless there is a surplus for 50 straight years.
July 15, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Oh, ok…
July 15, 2012 at 4:28 pm
“Well, by 1945 the US had run up huge debt for WWII and bequeathed it to younger generations”
That’s a totally bogus argument. Comparing the American economy and it’s potential in 1945 with 2012 is like comparing peaches with avocados. In 1945 the productive capacity of most other of the world’s economic engines throughout the globe had been destroyed along with their infrastructure by WW2. We had no real competitors in the global marketplace to speak of. Naturally we grew like a well fertilized weed. If you think we have the same potential for growth today as in 1945 you need some R&R.
“That was OK… debt is not uniformly bad”
BS. It’s poisonous when it continues to accumumlate at record rates with no means to pay it down. It robs nations of GDP and cuts into standard of livings. Look what is happening to the middle class today in America if you question that. Our GDP is floundering. Once the interest rates rise (voluntarily or involuntarily) to historial norms (5%-6%) just the annual service on the national debt will be close to $1T dollars. Debt KILLS nations and empires. You need to bone up on your world history, spension.
“Debt to just pay pensions ain’t good though”
Be honest, spension. It’s NOT just pensions. It’s welfare. It’s health care. It’s defense. It’s subsidizing illegal foreigners. Don’t just use pensions as the whipping post here. It’s merely ONE chain the the link that is weakening and about to break. Don’t be myopic. A Carrie Nation crusade against pensions is NOT going to solve the problems of this nation. To solve the problems we need honesty.
“I don’t apologize for the innumeracy of politicians and the political process”
I never expected one. That’s why we are a dying nation. No one wants to admit fault or when they’re wrong anymore.
“It is politically unacceptable to get up to the 20-30% contributions now being made, say, for California Safety”
What are you talking about? Employer (taxpayer) contributions are now MUCH higher than that for public safety and even for non PS. Defined benefits need to be eliminated completely to save the system.
“Then benefits should be set extremely conservatively, say, 1% per service year no earlier than age 62, and not raised nor contributions lowered unless there is a surplus for 50 straight years”
No. The retirement age should mimic the SS retirement age and there should be a 401-k equivalent w/ a 3% gov match for the first 3% employee contribution. The pensions should not exceed $30,000 a year (just like with SS) regardless of salary. It should be based on length of service. There’s your answer.
July 15, 2012 at 7:13 pm
my word— the above post by Beezy is yet another long monolog I will never read.
July 15, 2012 at 7:26 pm
I have no idea whether or not the economic future after 2012 will be way worse, about the same, or much better than what happened after 1945. But if you think it will be way worse, bz, you are a pessimist. In any case, debt is simply not *always* bad. Many families and businesses depend on carefully managed debt to increase their long term assets and productivity; government is not different in this respect, if the debt is well managed.
As for today’s middle class, private pensions were looted by CEOs, and US productivity gains have been impressive since 1980, but the middle class has not seen the fruits of their labors… the profits have gone to the top (and not to government). It has not been government debt, although the middle class in general hasn’t managed their debt well, on average. They increased their standard of living through more borrowing when wage increases that were due by their increased productivity did not come to them. A bad decision.
I don’t think social security is in deep trouble, but medicare is. We pay twice as much for half the outcomes compared to other civilized nations. It’s a Rohrshach for your prejudices… people see the solution they want to see in reforming our medical system. Personally, I’m outraged that 100,000 people perish each year in the US because physicians can’t be bothered to wash their hands frequently enough.
As for employer contributions to CalPERS, see the table at:
Click to access 30-year-rate-hist.pdf
Current CalPERS miscellaneous employer contributions are about 20% and Safety 30-34%.
Definited Benefit pensions are simply more economical, for a given level of benefits, than 401(k). To hold otherwise, is, frankly, innumerate. Now the benefits got too high. But don’t lose the forest for a big ugly tree.
July 15, 2012 at 8:09 pm
“But if you think it will be way worse, bz, you are a pessimist”
No sir. I am a realist. I believe in numbers. Math is everything. I don’t pay attention to the mainstream noize…er….I mean ‘news’. When I see that feathery little fowl waddle and quack I have the insight and courage to call it a ‘duck’. I don’t pretend it’s a rabbit or a weasel like many of you do.
“government is not different in this respect, if the debt is well managed”
You aren’t paying very close attention, are you man? They’ve added about $6T to the federal debt in the last 3.5 years. Much of the debt (like medicare and SS) aren’t even listed on the Fed’s balance sheets. heh. Put down the pipe, spension. The Fed debt is now over 100% of our GDP.
Here, spension. Smoke some of this:
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
“As for today’s middle class, private pensions were looted by CEOs, and US productivity gains have been impressive since 1980, but the middle class has not seen the fruits of their labors… the profits have gone to the top (and not to government)”
Again, you don’t know what the F you’re talking about. There has been no REAL growth since 1980. Only demand pulled forward with economic bubbles, borrowing from enemy nations, massive credit expansion and money printing MASQUERADING as growth. We’ve turned into nation of WalMart greeters and pizza deliverers. The tech bubble is done. The dot.com bubble is done. The real estate bubble is done. They’ve already shot their wads. Now all they got left is money printing and bailouts. heh. But as long as saps think that’s growth they’ve fooled us for another day! HAH! 😀
“I don’t think social security is in deep trouble, but medicare is”
Finally, some rational thought. SS is in trouble but it can be resolved. Medicare is done. In 1980 the gov spent $52B on health care. Last year it spent about $870B and it continues to increase over 9% a year. Now Obama has implemented fascism in the health care arena by merging the powers of gov and big business. Either buy a product (insurance) from a private company or get a knock on the door from a g-man! HAH! They got you right where they want you, spension. Only a matter of time before debtor prisons make a comeback!!! HAH! 😀 Doctors with dirty hands are the least of your worries!
“Current CalPERS miscellaneous employer contributions are about 20% and Safety 30-34%”
So the employer makes up 20% and 30-34%? The employees contributes about 15% and 0%-5%, respectively? So who pays the additional [(100% – (20% + 15%) = 65%] and [100% – (5% + 30%) = 60%]. The Tooth Fairy? Wake up. Stop being so damn naive.
“Definited Benefit pensions are simply more economical, for a given level of benefits, than 401(k)”
Put down the pipe, buddy. You’re way over the line on that one. No dignified response is even necesssary.
July 15, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Oh, spension, btw….
On that debt clock pay special attention to the section: Money Creation and then look over at the sub-heading called: Currencies and Credit Derivatives. Now look at that 15 digit number that starts with $732….
If 1% of that money comes up missing (>$7T) the economy goes ‘poof’.
Enjoy your day, spension. I suspect this will probably be our final dialog. Hopefully, you learned something.
July 16, 2012 at 2:37 am
Realists didn’t predict antibiotics, nuclear energy, the computer, the cell phone, the blue LED and efficient LED lighting, bz. My position is you and I have no idea what the future holds. It could great. It could be awful. Any true realist would acknowledge that.
If the US debt is so awful, why does the world keep buying our treasuries at record low interest rates? They could buy Spanish bonds and get a way higher return.
No real growth since 1980? Huh? Farm output has more than doubled…. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-productivity-in-the-us/documentation-and-methods.aspx . I guess you don’t use cellphones or computers and still do your banking in cash by 6pm on Fridays or 3pm weekdays.
““Current CalPERS miscellaneous employer contributions are about 20% and Safety 30-34%”
So the employer makes up 20% and 30-34%? The employees contributes about 15% and 0%-5%, respectively? So who pays the additional [(100% – (20% + 15%) = 65%] and [100% – (5% + 30%) = 60%]. The Tooth Fairy? Wake up. Stop being so damn naive.””
I have no idea what you are talking about here. The contributions are 1)accumulated over many years and 2)invested. There is no 100% as you seem to claim here… this is an innumerate calculation.
““Definited Benefit pensions are simply more economical, for a given level of benefits, than 401(k)”
Put down the pipe, buddy. You’re way over the line on that one. No dignified response is even necessary.”
Facts are facts, and DB plans 1)benefit a lot from the `insurance’ effect, where those who die early subsidize those who live a long time. In DC plans, everyone must save enough to live a long time, and 2)DB plans when they are well run in the trading sense (like UCRS and CalSTRS) have lower overhead than DC plans. But all California DB plans over promised benefits.
July 16, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Even though we are at odds on matters in the economy and with pensions I respect your fighting spirit, spension. Most would have high-tailed it by this time.
Naturally, you are not responding to my posts specificially like I do yours. I think the reason for that is because you simply cannot dispute what I say so, therefore, you must speak in generalities. Consequently, I put myself way ahead on points.
“Realists didn’t predict antibiotics, nuclear energy, the computer, the cell phone, the blue LED and efficient LED lighting, bz”
Still, you refuse to concede that credit bubbles, dotcom bubbles, tech bubbles, housing bubbles, bailouts, ZIRP (zero interest rate policy – artificially low interest rate loans) and money printing have been the only means holding GDP in positive numbers. You know this. You simply won’t acknowledge it.
“If the US debt is so awful, why does the world keep buying our treasuries at record low interest rates?”
Because we own the world’s global reserve currency. Otherwise the dollar would be crap. We are the lesser of the evils due to our reserve status. If (when) that goes bye-bye we will be no better than Greece.
“Farm output has more than doubled…. ”
So has the government subsidies to farmers for not growing crops. Agriculture is a relative small portion of GDP growth. As the economy continues to slow in the EU, China and the developing markets, so will ag production.
“I have no idea what you are talking about here”
Sure I do. Many on these boards claim that they self-fund their pension benefits. That is pure hogwash. If they contribute 15% and their employer contributes 30% on an annual basis who contributes the other 55% of the pie? ROI which was 1.8% for CalSTRS last fiscal year??? heh. Stop being a mensch, spension.
“Facts are facts, and DB plans 1)benefit a lot from the `insurance’ effect, where those who die early subsidize those who live a long time”
The average lifespan of these pension hogs is about 80. When they retire @ age 55 (which many do) that gives them 25 years of life at the taxpayer trough. Do the math.
“2)DB plans when they are well run in the trading sense (like UCRS and CalSTRS) have lower overhead than DC plans”
Overhead is a drop in the damn bucket when you’re running a $2T unfunded liability. That doesn’t even include the subsidized medical care the pension hogs get.
If you care to respond further I only ask you to respond SPECIFICALLY to my points in my comments. Let’s make this an above board debate, shall we???
July 16, 2012 at 8:28 pm
“Still, you refuse to concede that credit bubbles, dotcom bubbles, tech bubbles, housing bubbles, bailouts, ZIRP (zero interest rate policy – artificially low interest rate loans) and money printing have been the only means holding GDP in positive numbers. You know this. You simply won’t acknowledge it.”
There were all sorts of crazy bubbles between 1789 and 1930, too. They did not prevent vast amounts of real growth… we’ve had plenty of real growth since 1980 fueled by innovation; this blog is itself an example of innovation. The consequences of far more efficient dissemination of information are vast, and have greatly influenced efficiency. You provide no proof whatsoever that financial tricks have held the GDP in positive growth… I don’t believe your claim.
“Because we own the world’s global reserve currency. Otherwise the dollar would be crap. We are the lesser of the evils due to our reserve status. If (when) that goes bye-bye we will be no better than Greece.”
Our GDP is 50 times larger than Greece’s. We will always be better simply due to size. The heart of the matter in Greece is that the economy (like Italy’s) is filled through and through with lies. Everyone (particularly the rich) cheat on their taxes. The world has way more faith… even with all the warts… in the US system. What reserve currency will be used instead? China’s (yea right, talk about lying and corruption) or the Euro? Yea right. The US will be the reserve currency as long as our system is way better than the others, even if all are crappy. And this is a discussion about pension debt… the US Taxpayer gave $2T outright to Wall Street during the 2008-2009 meltdown. $2T in pension debt will never crash the US economy… you’re off topic to bring all the other problems we have into a pension discussion.
“So has the government subsidies to farmers for not growing crops. Agriculture is a relative small portion of GDP growth. As the economy continues to slow in the EU, China and the developing markets, so will ag production.”
Non-sequitur. For flat inputs, farm outputs have more than doubled since 1980. You said there had been no real growth since 1980. You are flat wrong, the proof is the doubling in farm output.
“Sure I do. Many on these boards claim that they self-fund their pension benefits. That is pure hogwash. If they contribute 15% and their employer contributes 30% on an annual basis who contributes the other 55% of the pie? ROI which was 1.8% for CalSTRS last fiscal year??? heh. Stop being a mensch, pension.”
Again: 1) most retirees do *not* get 100% of their salaries in retirement, so you are wrong to thing 100% has anything to do with anything in the first place. Non-sequitur. 2)One year of returns are irrelevant, it is the 30-50 year average that matters, not one year. Again non-sequitur. 3)Just like DC plans, in DB plans money is invested, which you seem totally ignorant of. Growth from investment is the dominant source of funds in *all* pension systems (except military pensions, which are paid 100% out of current taxpayer $; most Social Security is pay-as-you go too.). I must say, you are totally lost and ignorant in your comment.
“The average lifespan of these pension hogs is about 80. When they retire @ age 55 (which many do) that gives them 25 years of life at the taxpayer trough. Do the math.”
I have done the math many times… first and foremost, investment returns are the dominant source of retirement funds for both DC and DB plans. You can’t argue against DB in favor of DC by any argument about investment returns not existing; you neglect them and show considerable ignorance thereby.
“Overhead is a drop in the damn bucket when you’re running a $2T unfunded liability. That doesn’t even include the subsidized medical care the pension hogs get.”
Use of perforative, adolescent terms like `hogs’ just continues to embarrass you. And you are changing the subject, which was: DB plans, for given benefit in retirement, are more economical than DC plans are. Overhead, when compounded over many years, is a surprisingly large effect. It is a simple numerical fact that DB plans are more efficient than DC plans. Rant and rave all you want, and show off your ignorance. Now, the public pensions guaranteed *way* to big a benefit for the contributions; that is the problem, not DB versus DC.
Medical care is another non-sequitur… the US has medical care which is 2X expensive for 1/2 the performance, compared to other civilized nations. Calling Obamacare `fascism’, as you have done, gives way to big a compliment to fascism, which was a truly awful and murderous system of government, and just embarrasses you further.
Not that I think Obamacare is so great. But this morning I spent 3 hours on the phone with my insurance provider, and I can tell you, our current system is awful too.
July 16, 2012 at 10:56 pm
“They did not prevent vast amounts of real growth… we’ve had plenty of real growth since 1980 fueled by innovation; this blog is itself an example of innovation”
BS. There has been no real growth in the economy since the 1980’s. The numbers prove that without borrowing, money printing, economic bubbles, inflation, bailouts and now ZIRP there would be no measurable growth. The economy has been stagnant. Look at how the spending has increased for Medicare/Medicaid since 1980. From $52B to $870B. Yet the average lifespan has barely budged. You are living in a cacoon of denial.
“Our GDP is 50 times larger than Greece’s”
But our debt is 100x’s larger than Greece’s. The principle is the very same. False promises were made to people that simply cannot be fulfilled because it’s beyond the nation’s financial capacity.
“What reserve currency will be used instead? China’s (yea right, talk about lying and corruption) or the Euro?”
Obviously you haven’t been paying attention. The other econ superpowers have had meetings that intentionally excluded the US about putting together a hybrid global reserve currency and discontinuing using the US dollar as the sole reserve currency. This will eventually materialize. The other nations fully understand that the US dominance in world economics is simply not sustainable. These are all facts. I think you are arguing for the sake of argument. I don’t even think you believe what you say. If you do you are very misinformed and underinformed. You need to read more and stop watching the national 6 o’clock news.
“I have done the math many times… first and foremost, investment returns are the dominant source of retirement funds for both DC and DB plans”
Didn’t you hear the news yet??? CalPERS reported an ROI of 1% for the previous fiscal year!!! HAH! For the last 10 years the ROI has averaged 3%. What the hell is wrong with you? When I read your initial posts you are now contracdicting what you wrote only a matter of days ago. Maybe you need a break?
“Calling Obamacare `fascism’, as you have done, gives way to big a compliment to fascism, which was a truly awful and murderous system of government, and just embarrasses you further”
By definition Fascism is the merger of state and corporate powers. Unless you have been asleep for the last 3.5 years fascism has now reared it’s head in America. Obamacare is only one of those examples. Lack of prosecution of financial terrorists is another. Wow. I thought you were a bright guy a few days ago. I was wrong. I apologize for my faulty perception.
“Use of perforative, adolescent terms like `hogs’ just continues to embarrass you”
It’s very appropriate to use the hog analogy. Hogs would eat themselves to death if allowed to. Pension hogs will destroy a nation with their greed if allowed to.
Smoke some of that.
July 17, 2012 at 12:13 am
“BS. There has been no real growth in the economy since the 1980′s. The numbers prove that without borrowing, money printing, economic bubbles, inflation, bailouts and now ZIRP there would be no measurable growth. The economy has been stagnant….”
Prove it with actual numbers. Here is the chart that shows real US Gross Domestic Product in the US has doubled since 1980.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_real_gdp_history
““Our GDP is 50 times larger than Greece’s”
But our debt is 100x’s larger than Greece’s. The principle is the very same. False promises were made to people that simply cannot be fulfilled because it’s beyond the nation’s financial capacity.”
Prove it with actual numbers. As far as I know, our debt is 60% of GDP (about the same as Germany, much lower than Japan):
BTW, our debt was way higher relative to GDP just after WWII:
Greece’s debt is 143% of GDP:
http://www.economicsinpictures.com/2011/09/greek-debtgdp-only-22-in-1980.html
So, our debt is not 100x’s times the size of Greece’s, it is (60/153)*50=20x the size of Greece’s.
Once again, you spout off and ignore the actual numbers.
“The other nations fully understand that the US dominance in world economics is simply not sustainable. These are all facts…”
Prove that statement.
“Didn’t you hear the news yet??? CalPERS reported an ROI of 1% for the previous fiscal year!!! HAH! For the last 10 years the ROI has averaged 3%. What the hell is wrong with you? When I read your initial posts you are now contracdicting what you wrote only a matter of days ago. Maybe you need a break?”
ROI in one year or 10 years is irrelevant. It is the 40-100 year average return that matters. I’m not contradicting anything. DB plans, for the same level of benefits, are numerically cheaper than DC plans. The problem is: benefits that were *way too high* were promised to California public pensioners. That is the problem, *not* DB versus DC. Perhaps you need a refresher in reading comprehension.
“By definition Fascism is the merger of state and corporate powers. Unless you have been asleep for the last 3.5 years fascism has now reared it’s head in America. Obamacare is only one of those examples. Lack of prosecution of financial terrorists is another. Wow. I thought you were a bright guy a few days ago. I was wrong. I apologize for my faulty perception.”
My memory is that Fascism originates in the Latin word for a bundle of sticks used by enforcers to beat up those who disagree or misbehave. The Nazis and Italian Fascists had secret police who regularly beat to death people they did not like. That is not happening today, therefore, whatever Obamacare is, it is not fascist. You may not like it, but elevating the thuggery and brutality of those regimes to the current situation in the US is sophomoric, inaccurate, and inappropriate.
“It’s very appropriate to use the hog analogy. Hogs would eat themselves to death if allowed to. Pension hogs will destroy a nation with their greed if allowed to.”
The current pension deficit is numerically about the same as what was turned over outright to Wall Street in 2008. If the government ran a deficit to pay off the public pensions, it would not destroy the nation. But I *do not advocate doing so*. I just point out the innumeracy of your argument. I think public pensions should be trimmed, or, sovereign defaults of states allowed to happen.
July 17, 2012 at 4:09 am
“Prove it with actual numbers. Here is the chart that shows real US Gross Domestic Product in the US has doubled since 1980”
In 1980 the federal debt was $907B.
Today the Federal debt is $15.8T.
17X’s what it was in 1980.
I rest my case.
“Prove it with actual numbers. As far as I know, our debt is 60% of GDP”
You’re capable of 9th grade math, right?
GDP for 2011 = $15.3T
National debt at end of 2011 = $15.8T
$15.8 / $15.3 = 103.2%
I just proved it.
“It is the 40-100 year average return that matters”
You’re really making an idiot of yourself.
“The Nazis and Italian Fascists had secret police who regularly beat to death people they did not like. That is not happening today, therefore, whatever Obamacare is, it is not fascist”
Fascism is an economic term. It’s when the state and corporate powers merge to control a population. A police state is a by product of fascism. If you haven’t seen the increased militarization of our local police deparments and all the corruption and civil rights abuse – you must be sleeping. The Wall Street – Capital Hill connection is as blatant as the nose on your face. If you’ve missed the corruption and immunity from financial criminal activity – you must be sleeping.
“The current pension deficit is numerically about the same as what was turned over outright to Wall Street in 2008”
Federal, state and local pension debt exceeds $7T without the gimmick accounting methods used today. Enough to take down our entire economy.
Why are you such an apologists for the pension hogs? In the beginning you seemed so reasonable. Now you’re holding hands with the hogs. oink. oink. 😉
July 17, 2012 at 5:23 am
Beezy– do you realize what a pompous ass you are? Or do you need to get the boot from this site as well? lol
July 17, 2012 at 5:41 am
“Beezy– do you realize what a pompous ass you are?”
Bite me, fatboy.
July 17, 2012 at 6:05 am
BZ, you totally ignore any proof for your earlier statements. You just punt on the issues below, and be default, YOU LOSE, you microcephalic pedarast with tenesmus.
““BZ – BS. There has been no real growth in the economy since the 1980′s. The numbers prove that without borrowing, money printing, economic bubbles, inflation, bailouts and now ZIRP there would be no measurable growth. The economy has been stagnant….”
Prove it with actual numbers. Here is the chart that shows real US Gross Domestic Product in the US has doubled since 1980.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_real_gdp_history“”
You proved *nothing* about your claim that `the economy has been stagnant. You don’t know how to correct for inflation. You got nothing.
To repeat again:
“”BZ – But our debt is 100x’s larger than Greece’s. The principle is the very same. False promises were made to people that simply cannot be fulfilled because it’s beyond the nation’s financial capacity.”
Prove it with actual numbers. As far as I know, our debt is 60% of GDP (about the same as Germany, much lower than Japan):
BTW, our debt was way higher relative to GDP just after WWII:
Greece’s debt is 143% of GDP:
http://www.economicsinpictures.com/2011/09/greek-debtgdp-only-22-in-1980.html
So, our debt is not 100x’s times the size of Greece’s, it is (60/153)*50=20x the size of Greece’s.
Once again, you spout off and ignore the actual numbers.”
You again bring nothing to the discussion about Greece, and you are clueless as to comparison of apples apples. The Greek public debt is comparable to he US public debt, which is not $15 trillion, but $10 trillion. If you want to include the social security portion of the US debt *YOU HAVE TO DO THAT FOR GREECE TOO*. You did not.
You sure have a love of hogs and pigs, BZ, you must love to bend over them and enjoy probing their exhaust ports.
July 17, 2012 at 2:57 pm
BZ… “Overhead is a drop in the damn bucket when you’re running a $2T unfunded liability.”
Sorry, 401(k) overhead on average reduces DC plan $ by 1/3…
http://www.demos.org/publication/retirement-savings-drain-hidden-excessive-costs-401ks
Because overhead and fees average to about 2.5% in the US DC industry. In CalSTRS and UCRS, fees average 0.15%, and in CalPERS (which has serious corruption issues) 0.5%.
To claim DC plans are superior is something only non-mathematical illogical people do.
DB plans are in general superior, but the pension benefits allowed in CalSTRS, UCRS, and CalPERS got way to high and are unsustainable. A combination of poor management and innumerate politicians…. they are just as innumerate as you, BZ.
You, BZ, are a pea in the pod with the California politicians who messed up California’s public pensions. Or, pinheads in a pod.
July 19, 2012 at 2:05 am
Yeah, spension. We’re in great shape.
When you get about a half hour or so read all the accounts of criminal banking fraud that has happened in the US in the last 5 years. heh. This is the nation that has the strongest economy in the world. heh. It’s no better than a 3rd world banana republic built on a foundation of sand. Not even one prosecution of a major player in these crimes either.
If this is happening within the heart and soul of our biggest financial institutions which guide the future of our fiscal ship – what do you think is going on with our gov balance sheets, debt bubbles and estimates of pension fund liabilities? heh,
We’re living on the edge of a cliff on a foundation of sand.
Smoke sum of dat.
http://maxkeiser.com/2012/07/18/ritholtz-a-concise-list-recent-bank-fraud/
July 19, 2012 at 2:52 pm
That link didn’t take.
Here, straight from the horse’s mouth:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/07/are-big-banks-criminal-enterprises/
That’s your system, spension. The one you love and claim is solvent. heh. 😉
July 19, 2012 at 10:40 pm
I just read that private investment equity is at a 3 year low, spension.
That’s bullish, eh?
Triple down, my man.
The economy is on fire! HAH! 😀
July 20, 2012 at 8:20 pm
BZ, you never make a post without subtracting from the sum of human knowledge.
Of course Wall Street is a den of thieves, and of course the pension managers for California’s big DB plans forgot that, and assumed that down periods like 2000-2012 would never recur. Of course they thought the good times from 1981-1999 were due to their cleverness. And of course politicians on both sides (Pete Wilson who wanted to raid funds when the market was up (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1992/01/13/75954/index.htm… and Gray Davis who bumped up benefits in 1999) only see the up side of the market but don’t prepare for the downside.
But there is no doubt that DB pensions, run with suitably low benefits, are more efficient than the ghastly expensive DC plans, where Wall street reams the little investor. In a well run DB plan, the pension managers can sue and fight for more honesty in Wall Street, because the fund can afford real legal clout and influence.
CalPERS did so for divestment in South Africa and against Enron.
150 million balkanized DC account holders are never going to fight for right and honesty.
BZ, you support DC plans, and are therefore just a supporter of the big banking interests. They all want DC plans so they can charge high fees.
You also pretend you know the economic future of the US and you know it will be bad. Hogwash. Pessimists like you predicted none of the outstanding achievements of the past. If you’d have been making predictions in 1880, you would have said improving steam boiler efficiency was all we could do.
July 20, 2012 at 10:11 pm
DB plans more efficient??? HAH!!! Talk about penny smart and pound foolish!!! The thievery that goes along with DB plan far outweighs any damage sustained by a higher expense ratio for DC plans even if you claim had any truth attached to it.
The people simply have no faith left in our financial system. It’s run by crooks who are immune from the law. It would be like placing bets in a casino that you knew was run by the mafia which had no oversight.
Okay, Mr. Optimist. LIke I told you. Go triple down on the market. Get a second on your home and stick it all into financials! HAH! Walk your talk, Mr. Glass Half Full!!! HAH!
Oh, btw, I know a great deal on some ocean property in AZ. Half off! Interested??? HAH!!! 😀
July 20, 2012 at 11:59 pm
Thievery is thievery, DB plans are DB plans. Thievery does not equal DB and DB does not equal Thievery.
If you are against the economies that make DB plans cheaper and better, you are against the entire insurance industry, where the whole concept is: everyone need not save full cost for every possible disaster; we all pay a little and then those who suffer the disaster get the $, while all the rest of us get piece of mind.
In DB plans, everyone need not save enough to live to be 100. In DC plans, everyone must save to be 100.
In DB plans, those who die early subsidize those who live a long time.
Just as: those who purchase insurance but don’t have a… car accident, house burn down, trip and fall on their property… subsidize those who do. But everyone gets peace of mind.
You have no ability to use logic and mathematics.
If you want to rant against the US financial system, you should go Occupy Wall Street. Here, pensions are the main issue.
July 21, 2012 at 1:21 am
“Thievery does not equal DB and DB does not equal Thievery”
BS. DB’s is one of the primary reasons the Ca cities are going belly up. Taxpayers are on the hook by no choice of their own. The taxpayers never approved these inflated pensions. It’s thievery in the true sense of the word. The public unions are the thieves and the politicians are the lookouts. They work hand in hand to steal from the victim citizens.
But that will all come to an end as soon as the math fails to calculate.
And stop with your DB’s are cheaper and better. You’re an enabler. You applaud in the stands as you watch the public unions and the polticians strongarm the taxpayers. You aren’t any better than they are.
“In DB plans, those who die early subsidize those who live a long time”
The average age is 80 goofball.
That means some die at 90, others die at 70.
Which means, on average, these greedy pension hogs collect a pension check for 25 years. And then, in most cases, the spouse gets to run with the ball until he or she croaks.
You fool no one.
“If you want to rant against the US financial system, you should go Occupy Wall Street”
I didn’t rant. I handed you the FACTS – something you seem to abhor. You interpret the FACTS as rants.
Typical trough feeder.
July 21, 2012 at 8:06 am
You don’t provide a single fact… not one. Just rants. You couldn’t do math if your son or daughter’s life depended on it.
The problem is not DB, but that benefits promised were way too high. I have argued long and hard on this forum that Sovereign Default is the only practical way out of the over promising of benefits. It was not just the unions, BTW, that got and get the high benefits… lots of prison physicians, administrators in counties and cities, and college brass get the highest benefits. Way more than the pension funds can support.
I’ve given way more numerical, mathematical, and logical arguments than you have. 5% employee, 10% employer, and 1% per year of service, no retirement until 62 at least, would work.
You, BZ… nothing, nada, no numbers. You don’t even understand how pension funds are accumulated, or how DC systems are way more expensive per $ benefit.
The taxpayers elected the politicians, you microcephalic. In the end the taxpayers are just as responsible for their stupidity as the politicians. All of the unions and public administrators are indeed greedy, but unfortunately, greed is encouraged in America.
The root of the problem is not thievery or theft but numerical ignorance, particularly ignorance that market downturns are inevitable, on the part of the actuaries who run the PERS systems. You know nothing about that.
You have no idea how insurance works, but I’ll bet you purchase car insurance, personal liability, and medical insurance.
Do everyone a favor and learn something before posting more faceless nonsense.
July 22, 2012 at 5:08 am
You’re a common knuckledragger.
You won’t even admit that the economy is in the tank and that most critcal global and domestic economic indicators show we are on the verge of a second downturn.
You won’t even admit that there is anarchy on top of the food chain where financial terrorists are given immunity from the law by the government.
You won’t even admit that most Americans recognize the US financial system today as a fixed casino where normal investors end up getting snookered by the crooks who control the system.
You won’t even admit that government labor costs are the primary cause of the cities going belly up. Labor costs meaning salaries, benefits and pensions.
You’re just another bait swallower who is rushing toward the edge of the cliff like with all the other lemmings.
Enjoy your brief view of the scenery as you fall.
July 22, 2012 at 5:14 am
BTW, CalPERS did a study showing that the AVERAGE CalPERS pensionier lives to the ripe old age of 80.
And the ones who get the biggest pensions live the longest.
That’s 25 years of pension benefits.
You’re revered DB system is going to fold like a chinese deck of cards.
But keep rooting from the cheap seats.
The oligarchs love your kind.
July 22, 2012 at 10:32 pm
Facts? The average 65 year old male survives to 82, female to 85. Look some actual data rather than your cranial flatus:
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
Proof that the people with the biggest pensions live the longest… you have none.
All longevity problems are way more severe for DC plans, because everyone must plan for the 100 year life. The power of pooling risk in DB plans makes them much more financially economical.
You are the one who supports the oligarchs with your support of DC plans. They take vast fees from DC plans.
You are innumerate and a joke. Probably your are paid by the post by representatives of the thieves at the top of the US economic heap.
July 23, 2012 at 6:03 am
As usual, you fail to respond to any of my points in my 5:08pm post above. You consistently fail to respond because you know I am right and you are wrong. And you aren’t man enough to admit it.
Here is a summary of the CalPERS study on CalPERS employees life expectancy. If an employee @ age 55 can expect to live to over 81 YOA. The average non-safety employee retires @ 59 YOA. The average safety employee retires @ 55 YOA. Safety employees get 90% of their final paycheck – so they collect the MOST and they live as long as non-safety employees – and collect a pension benefit for over 26 years!!! HAH! Look at the % of the general fund that is spend on public safety at these bankrupted cities!!! 75% or more!!! HAH!
http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2977:calpers-debunks-myth-of-shorter-life-expectancy-for-safety-employees&Itemid=79
Now go carry some more water for your pension buddies. Aren’t your arms getting tired by this time??? HAH! 😀
July 23, 2012 at 2:28 pm
Spain’s stock market has been down 12% in the last 2 days. Bond yields @ 7.5%. heh. Dow Industrials down 215 so far in this morning’s trading.
Keep looking that that glass half full of water until you burn a hole it it, spension! HAH! 😀
July 23, 2012 at 3:21 pm
One day or a few days of stock market gains are irrelevant. 30-50 years of stock market are relevant.
Of course pension costs are out of control. Never any denial of that from me. The reason is: pensions were granted (in the most binding of manners) that were way too high for the contributions, and the government agencies are stuck making up the difference.
For example, 3% at 50 for safety is way to high. I’ve consistently argued for 1% at 62. Can you read, BZ?
You are grossly ignorant as to how pensions work. Not every safety worker who retires at 55 gets 90%. In my opinion they would have to work until 62, and the maximum benefit would be… 42%. Can you do simple mathematics, BZ, or just mindlessly rant?
Grossly high benefits (like 3% at 50) in my opinion are likely to lead to the sovereign default of the State of California. BZ, you have non-existent reading comprehension to have missed all of that.
DB is not the problem. DB is cheaper than DC for a given level of benefits, that is simply a mathematical fact, and DC fees and overhead enrich the investment community. That you can’t understand that, BZ, suggests you are pawn of the investment community.
July 23, 2012 at 7:10 pm
The only fair DB would have a 1%@67 formula, across the board. Just like with social security which is forced on all the little people.
Your ignorant tripe ranks right up there with the best I’ve seen on the boards.
Keep your eye on Spain. We aren’t far behind them. No government can spend more than it can tax on a consistent basis without going belly up or using a currency that is, by and large, worthless. We are on that road. The one with your half full glass of water!!! HAH! 😀
July 23, 2012 at 9:24 pm
Your ignorance in comparing SS (mostly pay-as-you-go, and I learned that from these boards) with a pre-funded retirement plan is astonishing.
Most (not all) pay into the pension funds *in addition to* paying into Social Security.
But Social Security is not a DC plan, so you’ve finally made infinitesimal progress.
July 25, 2012 at 6:18 pm
spension, you got your head so far up your rear end that you wear your collarbone for a hat. 😀
August 4, 2012 at 9:42 pm
beezyboob—-
spension posts like an adult with some brains.
you post like a teenager.
sorry little buddy