Quote:You are making no sense. If you don't understand the issue, just say so.
And who cares about your views on Soc. Sec.? Same old cliche - I won't live to see a dime, yada yada yada. That has nothing to do with this subject.
And there is money available for this plan. The topic is how to pay for it. It will be paid.
Now ... continue with your obsession with Hillary and whatever ...
If you pay into it, you are especially allowed to have a view on it. You have a lot of anger in those bones of yours.
Quote:I don't expect to ever collect a dime from Social Security, and I've been paying into it at 2x the rate most people do.
Please explain what rate you are paying and why? I pay the standard amount, and it gets capped once I hit a certain amount of yearly income. Really just curious why or how you send SS more money--?
I am getting hit at about 6% on my Fed OASDI/EE taxes. I'd love to be able to invest that 6% myself.
Quote:I know it went up like 2 points about 2 or 3 years ago. Thanks Obama. Now we are at 4.5%?
6.2% from employer, 6.2% from employee, 12.4% if you are self-employed.
Quote:
And there is money available for this plan. The topic is how to pay for it. It will be paid.
The solution is to reform the plan, not to take more from the public when the plan fails. That's called contagion.
All pension plans are going belly up, because there's no way to meet the projections. They were created with the assumption that the fund will grow at least 8% a year. With the Fed keeping interest rates at 0% forever there's no possible way to earn 8% unless the fund makes increasingly risky investments which put the whole fund at risk.
Quote:6.2% from employer, 6.2% from employee, 12.4% if you are self-employed.
Thank you.
I still expect to collect mine, but anybody after me should be wary.
Here's the Dallas Police Pension Fund and the results of their investments.
This pension plan is already paying out $2.44 for every $1 it collects. It's a Ponzi scheme. Now the people who are supposed to grow the fund are losing 12% a year making risky investments.
Who makes up the difference on this PRIVATE pension fund? The public.
Vote NO on the sales tax referendum August 30. A YES vote just encourages more bad behavior by the fund managers.
![[Image: Dalla%20Pension%20-%20Returns_1_0.png]](http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user230519/imageroot/2016/08/18/Dalla%20Pension%20-%20Returns_1_0.png)
Quote:The problem is this was a cronyism, good ol' boy special which was voted on and enacted. It's a terrible deal for taxpayers, and is unsustainable. But it is what it is. Our city's credit rating has dropped. We are broke. Something needs to be done. Pulling the pension is not a real option. And this fuzzy math plan Curry is floating isn't either. I will vote no (though I wish I had a plan I felt good enough to vote yes on) and when my property taxes inevitably go up, I will happily pay the increase as the good patriot I am.
Agree.
It was a bad deal and both sides knew it.
But I disagree on the proposal. I feel we must do what we must do to get past it. It will sting a little, but we need to get it behind us and never do it again. If we continue to kick the can down the street it will only get worse.
Quote:6.2% from employer, 6.2% from employee, 12.4% if you are self-employed.
Since 1990 except they lowered it for 2 years to 10.4% as a temporary measure.
Quote:???
You're losing it. The question was asked if a sales tax increase should remain to fund a project that includes pension for city employees. I'm of the belief that people are responsible for their own retirement, not their employer even if it's city government. I personally don't want my tax dollars to fund a city employee's retirement plan.
If you live in this county you are already funding the retirement plan. The debt has already been incurred. The question is, how do you want to pay for it.
Quote:If you live in this county you are already funding the retirement plan. The debt has already been incurred. The question is, how do you want to pay for it.
These pensions need to be allowed to fail. That's the only possible reform.
Quote:These pensions need to be allowed to fail. That's the only possible reform.
Sorry but that is not happening.
Quote:No I don't. Employers should not be responsible for people's retirement, that should be up to the people. City employees should fund their own retirement plan (pension) through 401k's or other avenues.
While I agree with you in principle that people should manage their own retirement and treat employer-provided benefits as a plus, not a plan, I disagree with one basic concept here. When these employees were interviewed, they were presumably told about their pension benefits, and those benefits were presumably put in writing. A commitment was made to them that their pensions would be there for them when they retired, and that commitment must be lived up to. I'm not against discontinuing pensions for new employees, but you can't tell someone who gave you forty years of their life that, oops, surprise, that pension you've earned over the last forty years doesn't exist anymore. Too bad. Enjoy Wal-Mart until you're 92 and dead.
Quote:Sorry but that is not happening.
The pension failure is absolutely happening or they wouldn't come to the public with their hands out. Anyone who thinks voting YES will solve the pension problem cannot do simple math. The promises will not be kept because they cannot be kept.
Quote:The pension failure is absolutely happening or they wouldn't come to the public with their hands out. Anyone who thinks voting YES will solve the pension problem cannot do simple math. The promises will not be kept because they cannot be kept.
Byron the pension holders ARE getting paid. Period. Gripe all you want but the money is coming just depends on where.
If the pension holders are getting paid, then what's the problem? You can't have it both ways.
I really don't know. I see both sides.
Defined benefit retirement plans are the only thing in existence that can threaten the sovereignty of this nation.