kevbone Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 [video:youtube]vLido6G4c2E Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 The unsustainability of pension benefits has nothing to do with cyclical tax revenue cycles. These issues were there for the past 10 years and have only gotten worse. The recent economic strain has only stripped bare the facade. Your argument seems to be "the fat cats are getting tax breaks so there's no reason why public employees should walk away from the public trough - even though these pension programs are unsustainable. you first! your pension is no more sustainable than that of any public employee. Don't know what you mean by this. I'm not a public employee nor do I have a pension. Self-funded 401k that is doing quite fine thank you. What a concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 [video:youtube]Ege_RBhh37A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 "I am a pension actuary, working with private plans, but the issues are similar. To determine the present value of pension liabilities, you need to discount the expected future cash flows of the pension plan. The cash flows are based on the plan provisions, the participant data and assumptions about future events (e.g., mortality, salary increases, retirement rates). Actuaries traditionally used the expected rate of return on the plan's assets (reflecting the asset mix). As noted above, people like Jeremy Gold have argued, based on financial economics, that the determination of the present value should not be based on expected returns, but on the discount rates for similar investments, such as high-quality corporate bonds. The IRS funding rules that apply to private plans and the corresponding accounting standards accept this view. Current discount rates on these bases are roughly 5.5%-6%, which if applied to public plans, would raise the liabilities significantly, and unfunded liabilities. What is the right answer? Clearly, the expectation for those invested in equities is a return higher than those on corporate bonds. The price is increased volatility in contributions and funding status. As some have commented a perverse effect of good returns has been the granting of additional benefits to union members (that happened in NJ around the time of the 2000 crash). In any case, if the standards that apply to private plans were applied to public plans, the funding situation would be much worse than people like Baker are claiming. And that is without considering the post retirement health benefits that are also offered, which have large present values and which are not backed by assets - they are totally unfunded." All that and more here: http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2011/03/how-bad-is-the-state-pension-funding-mess.html#comments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 you first! your pension is no more sustainable than that of any public employee. Don't know what you mean by this. I'm not a public employee nor do I have a pension. Self-funded 401k that is doing quite fine thank you. What a concept. how well was your 401(k) doing 2 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Not bad actually - a little heads up and sound money management will go a long way. Maybe that is what folks are scared about - actually having responsibility over their own future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You must be one of the very few exceptions ... because most everybody else invested in the stock market was very worried and wishing for a bailout of the financial sector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You must be one of the very few exceptions ... because most everybody else invested in the stock market was very worried and wishing for a bailout of the financial sector. Nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 And another... American's do not support cuts in Federal Entitlements Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Well, of course they don't. Frankly - I don't see a solution - the Repubs are just wacko on this subject this day and the Dems don't have a spine regarding softballs like letting the tax benefits for upper income folks expire. The shift of the tax burden to the middle class has been constant the past few decades and I see no signs of it slowing down. Maybe if the dumbass middle class got off their butts something would happen. That appears doubtful as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Scrooge McDuck's Opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 strangely, the people who want the rich to get tax breaks are not actually rich, themselves. Isn't it weird? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 strangely, the people who want the rich to get tax breaks are not actually rich, themselves. Isn't it weird? no wierder than the vast majority of secesh rebels being busted ass crackers w/ hardly a blade of grass, let alone a slave, to their name, yet fighting in defense of plantation kings who didnt' give a shit about them it's almost as if they're part of the same historical continuity... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You must be one of the very few exceptions ... because most everybody else invested in the stock market was very worried and wishing for a bailout of the financial sector. Nonsense. Talk is cheap! KKK now claims that he was willing to see his investments go up in smoke just because his religion says that it was necessary to kill the stock market to save it from government intervention. You people are just a bunch of bad liars or just fucking retarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 strangely, the people who want the rich to get tax breaks are not actually rich, themselves. Isn't it weird? That's bullshit. I just had dinner with a 'rich guy' who stated that "his taxes are way too low". The rich know exactly what kind of great deal they're getting, as they, of course, would. After all, they manage their money better than the rest of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I love this argument: "Well, $250K represents a lot of struggling businesses..." Um...struggling businesses don't pay much if any taxes, by definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You must be one of the very few exceptions ... because most everybody else invested in the stock market was very worried and wishing for a bailout of the financial sector. Nonsense. Talk is cheap! KKK now claims that he was willing to see his investments go up in smoke just because his religion says that it was necessary to kill the stock market to save it from government intervention. You people are just a bunch of bad liars or just fucking retarded. The market is cyclical dumbass. Middle-aged investors know they have decades to retirement so if you 401k plummets 20-30% with 25 years to go, you don't panic and give up on the system. You really are a whiny little turd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I was proud of myself for taking my 401K out of stocks and putting it all into money markets several years ago, before the collapse. I thought I was all clever, cause I saw it coming, and for several years I gloated when I heard about people's 401K's going down. Not Me! I would say. But, several years later, all those funds have since rebounded. I would have gained 7% if I had just stayed put. Ooops! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I stayed put out of shear laziness and ignorance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-rock Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 strangely, the people who want the rich to get tax breaks are not actually rich, themselves. Isn't it weird? no wierder than the vast majority of secesh rebels being busted ass crackers w/ hardly a blade of grass, let alone a slave, to their name, yet fighting in defense of plantation kings who didnt' give a shit about them it's almost as if they're part of the same historical continuity... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Talk is cheap! KKK now claims that he was willing to see his investments go up in smoke just because his religion says that it was necessary to kill the stock market to save it from government intervention. You people are just a bunch of bad liars or just fucking retarded. The market is cyclical dumbass. Middle-aged investors know they have decades to retirement so if you 401k plummets 20-30% with 25 years to go, you don't panic and give up on the system. You really are a whiny little turd. ROTFL Don't tell me you actually believe the market would have rebounded without the bailout before the entire middle class was completely ruined. The extent of your stupidity is mind-boggling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I think it's fair to say that the market would have gone lower - how much? Speculation. But unemployment also would have gone further south along with middle class 401ks, pension funds, etc. without the bailout and stimulus. Could the depth of the financial crisis been averted? Probably. Could the bailout have been smaller without hurting the middle class and unemployment? I don't know. But if you hung in there or manged some proper market timing you're doing pretty well now with equities. 13% for 2010 and almost 6% ytd (S&P). Not without risk but better than stuffing it in the mattress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 You are now doing well with equities because most financial institutions didn't crash as they would most likely have without a bailout (many taxpayer trillions in cheap loans so far). You were able to hang in there because your job survived the recession, contrarily to that of many people who had to draw on their reserves at the worse moment possible, especially if they had to pay a mortgage. You may have lost your job too if the market crash had been worse and had taken more of the real economy with it. During all market readjustment there has got to be losers, it wasn't you this time. May be next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 (edited) Newsflash. You're not the only one aware of how the economic downturn has affected folks, including family and friends. I'll spare you the details. I was merely responding to some of your comments on the downturn. While you seem to be deriding the bailout of financial institutions - which to some degree I agree - but also pointing out the hardships of unemployement, which very likely would have been worse without the said bailouts. My advice to my kid who is in college: work hard, be smart about career choices, be fiscally prudent. Edited March 4, 2011 by Jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 4, 2011 Share Posted March 4, 2011 I am not deriding it, although I strongly disagree with the way it was implemented. I am saying that the value of a 401(k) appears no more sustainable than that of a public pension funds considering that without taxpayers saving the market from a much worse crash who knows where we'd be now. What do you think allowed stocks to recover their pre-crash value in the last 2 years? the roaring economy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.