Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-27-2014, 09:21 AM   #61
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
I suspect that if the minimum wage was $15 per hour, all SS would be solvent again.
How's that math work? Low income workers get a disproportionately higher 'return' from the money they put in. I would think more $ in at the lower end (and therefore more paid out) could make things worse. I don't think the difference in $8/hour in and $15/hour in is that great to move one up the curve very far in SS.

-ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Pension ERISA anti-cutback Rule at Risk?
Old 12-27-2014, 09:41 AM   #62
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Pension ERISA anti-cutback Rule at Risk?

My pension, the "short" leg on my four-legged stool, is relatively well funded, and they're raising the required contributions in each of the next two years, and they've changed the formulas and requirements. Luckily, I'll be FIRED before they affect me!

Also have heavily-subsidized HI, which is probably "safe", but I suspect premiums will rise, maybe dramatically.

I don't expect changes in SS will affect me "much", since I'll be safely hidden in a fairly low bracket.

Politically, there's a pretty broad spectrum of "beliefs" on this forum, but, since living within or below one's means is such an ER meme, most here would like to see our governments stop using political tricks and slights-of-hand, and actually PAY for the programs they pass. And I suppose the same could be said for implied promises made by corporations...


Sent from my iCouch using Early Retirement Forum
__________________

__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 09:49 AM   #63
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,135
I would expect to see SS do away with the upper limit to annual contributions as one of the first "fixes". That bump in take-home pay I received in early December or so each year was nice, but I wouldn't have squawked too loudly if I didn't see it. That would be an easy "tax the rich" addition to money coming in to SS.

Of course, if they would have been fiscally responsible with the system from the beginning, there wouldn't be a problem.
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 10:32 AM   #64
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
I would expect to see SS do away with the upper limit to annual contributions as one of the first "fixes". That bump in take-home pay I received in early December or so each year was nice, but I wouldn't have squawked too loudly if I didn't see it. That would be an easy "tax the rich" addition to money coming in to SS.

Of course, if they would have been fiscally responsible with the system from the beginning, there wouldn't be a problem.
There has been a slow but steady erosion of how much real return is in SS. Originally, there were a massive number of payers for every receiver. Only a complete idiot believes they have a "real account" with SS with "their" contributions in it. It's a pay-as-you-go system that has been raided for other purposes since it was started back in the 1930s. When it first started, there were several years of payments made (taxes) before anyone was eligible for benefits. The money received was spent so from day one there was no SS trust fund except in the cryptic world of government accounting which would put anyone in the private industry in jail. It has never been fiscally responsible by any rational definition. It is nothing more than a payroll tax with the implied hope that some of this money would come back to us when we're "old." The government can change everything about SS on a whim and their right to do so has been affirmed by SCOTUS. Just like any other promise from the government, SS must have a risk factor applied.
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane -- Marcus Aurelius
2B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 10:41 AM   #65
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Senator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 3,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
How's that math work? Low income workers get a disproportionately higher 'return' from the money they put in. I would think more $ in at the lower end (and therefore more paid out) could make things worse. I don't think the difference in $8/hour in and $15/hour in is that great to move one up the curve very far in SS.

-ERD50
The math works like this.

$8 per hour x 15.3 % = $1.224 per hr going into SS
$15 per hour x 15.3 % = $2.295 per hr going into SS

It doesn't matter when they collect, that's a long time down the road. Social Security was never a bank account, it is a pay as you go scheme. Like a Ponzi scheme. Every worker today would be paying in an extra $1.071 each hour. Raising the top end only affects a small number of people and would not bring in near as much.

More money in today, means more money for retirees today. A worker 30 years from now might have to work longer, or get less. But that's for another president and another congress to fix. Not the ones running now, whatever party they are from.

Raising up the 62 to 63 age would also be a big help to save SS. In the end, I just think it will be a larger 'amount owed', not more paid in.

Quote from the 3-stooges, "I would rather owe you, than cheat you out of it".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
I would expect to see SS do away with the upper limit to annual contributions as one of the first "fixes".
That may well happen, it is raising faster than the COLA increases. But it is a small amount collected.
__________________
FIRE no later than 7/5/2016 at 56 (done), securing '16 401K match (done), getting '15 401K match (done), LTI Bonus (done), Perf bonus (done), maxing out 401K (done), picking up 1,000 hours to get another year of pension (done), July 1st benefits (vacation day, healthcare) (done), July 4th holiday. 0 days left. (done) OFFICIALLY RETIRED 7/5/2016!!
Senator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 11:03 AM   #66
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,376
With my pension not having the PBGC protections, and SS WEP whacking me on the other end, I would be very vulnerable to pension cut. Hopefully if the system did deteriorate, they would work on adjusting the pension funding levers of the multiplier number and age of retirement for newcomers before anything drastic as a cut. The system has been proactive, so maybe that process would continue.
As far as Illinois goes, I am assuming their personal contributions are on a "pre tax" basis but yet their pensions are state tax exempt. Maybe they should tax the pension income so it is not tax free going in and coming out to help fund it. Of course that is easy for me to say as I am not paying the tax!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 11:03 AM   #67
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
I suspect that if the minimum wage was $15 per hour, all SS would be solvent again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
How's that math work? ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
The math works like this.

$8 per hour x 15.3 % = $1.224 per hr going into SS
$15 per hour x 15.3 % = $2.295 per hr going into SS

It doesn't matter when they collect, that's a long time down the road. ...
That is an odd definition of 'solvent'.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 01:04 PM   #68
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Senator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 3,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
That is an odd definition of 'solvent'.-ERD50
I agree. And its exactly what we have now...
__________________
FIRE no later than 7/5/2016 at 56 (done), securing '16 401K match (done), getting '15 401K match (done), LTI Bonus (done), Perf bonus (done), maxing out 401K (done), picking up 1,000 hours to get another year of pension (done), July 1st benefits (vacation day, healthcare) (done), July 4th holiday. 0 days left. (done) OFFICIALLY RETIRED 7/5/2016!!
Senator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 01:17 PM   #69
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,323
The fear is that having breached these pension promise walls, businesses and government will now find it easier to breach other walls. Sort of a slippery slope towards legally taking compensation away from people who have already earned it.

Having seen how some businesses treat their employees, I do not doubt that if they thought they could cut pensions legally they would, not matter how people suffered. I have to sound negative, but I have seen to many good workers tossed under the bus without a care.

My advice to young people remains the same: You should control your retirement finances - 100% completely. Do not leave it up to your employer, financial adviser, or a politician.
__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 06:36 PM   #70
Recycles dryer sheets
Taxman59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
The math works like this.

$8 per hour x 15.3 % = $1.224 per hr going into SS
$15 per hour x 15.3 % = $2.295 per hr going into SS

Every worker today would be paying in an extra $1.071 each hour. Raising the top end only affects a small number of people and would not bring in near as much.

Raising the minimum wage would only affect those making less than that. Those workers who make more than $15 per hour wouldn't raise a dime of SS tax. Removing the cap would affect a smaller group, but at levels that are much greater!


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum
__________________
Taxman59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 09:42 PM   #71
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
The math works like this.

$8 per hour x 15.3 % = $1.224 per hr going into SS
$15 per hour x 15.3 % = $2.295 per hr going into SS....
You might have a point IF employment remained the same in that everyone earnings between $8 and $15 would be paying in more, but I suspect that there would be fewer people employed at those levels so it might not work out as you think. Businesses that employ people at that level would try to make do with less people.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 12:52 PM   #72
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
With my pension not having the PBGC protections, and SS WEP whacking me on the other end, I would be very vulnerable to pension cut...
Imagine how vulnerable a retired 65-74 individual would be. I can't imagine the thinking behind this new law.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
The fear is that having breached these pension promise walls, businesses and government will now find it easier to breach other walls. Sort of a slippery slope towards legally taking compensation away from people who have already earned it.

Having seen how some businesses treat their employees, I do not doubt that if they thought they could cut pensions legally they would, not matter how people suffered. I have to sound negative, but I have seen to many good workers tossed under the bus without a care.
Exactly my view, and I see it as being realistic and prudent as opposed to negative.
__________________
Options is offline   Reply With Quote
Pension ERISA anti-cutback Rule at Risk?
Old 12-29-2014, 01:52 PM   #73
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,376
Pension ERISA anti-cutback Rule at Risk?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Options View Post
Imagine how vulnerable a retired 65-74 individual would be. I can't imagine the thinking behind this new law.









Exactly my view, and I see it as being realistic and prudent as opposed to negative.

I don't know Options.....In my 50s and retired I think I feel more vulnerable as odds are I have to live longer... I'm already 5 years out of career and certifications all long expired. I'm only about as good as they would be...second career as a door greeter. I guess though my knees might not be as creaky yet so I could do a double shift.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 02:00 PM   #74
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,326
Threads like these have helped me to decide to continue at least part-time, money making hobbies until I die or get demented. Maybe that can make up for any future SS, Medicare or pension cuts.
__________________
daylatedollarshort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 06:22 PM   #75
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
I don't know Options.....In my 50s and retired I think I feel more vulnerable as odds are I have to live longer... I'm already 5 years out of career and certifications all long expired. I'm only about as good as they would be...second career as a door greeter. I guess though my knees might not be as creaky yet so I could do a double shift.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yes, that's my point. What struck me about this law, if you compare it to SS, is that all talk regarding SS "reform" has usually grandfathered people 55, or even 60. Reasoning is one is older and it is really late to change course. That this new pension reform law didn't grandfather in anyone under 75 really struck me. I know people approaching retirement age who made retirement plans based on receiving their pension. Who knows where this will lead in 10 years, especially when more pension plans encounter trouble
__________________
Options is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 07:55 PM   #76
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Laguna Hills
Posts: 137
The issues discussed in this thread terrify me. Emotionally I love the USA. Objectively not so much. So few practiced LBYM over the past several decades when the economy was stronger and wages relatively high. How do we expect the next generation to now both save by LBYM and fund SS, pensions etc.. Something will have to give.

I am in OK shape for the present but I seriously fear for the generation now entering the workforce. Not a pretty picture for our young adult children, the working poor or the shrinking middle class.
__________________
longranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 10:30 PM   #77
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,411
I am hopeful that the great recession has been a wake up call for many that they need to put more focus on saving vs spending. It also seems that folks in their 20s and early 30s are learning from seeing the struggles that some of our generation have experienced through living beyond their means and high debt loads and are more conservative. I know my kids and my nieces and nephews seem to be.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 10:41 PM   #78
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I am hopeful that the great recession has been a wake up call for many that they need to put more focus on saving vs spending. It also seems that folks in their 20s and early 30s are learning from seeing the struggles that some of our generation have experienced through living beyond their means and high debt loads and are more conservative. I know my kids and my nieces and nephews seem to be.
Not according to the statistics. United States Personal Savings Rate | 1959-2014 | Data | Chart | Calendar

I ran the chart from 1969 until 2014, and while we're above the 2008 range we're still way below the historic rate. I don't know about the youngsters in particular, though. I know DD is a really good saver, but that's more because she worked in a bank department dealing with people who really screwed up their finances than because it's part of her generation. I'd like to think you are right about them, but time will tell.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2014, 05:25 AM   #79
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
gauss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Options View Post
Yes, that's my point. What struck me about this law, if you compare it to SS, is that all talk regarding SS "reform" has usually grandfathered people 55, or even 60. Reasoning is one is older and it is really late to change course. That this new pension reform law didn't grandfather in anyone under 75 really struck me. I know people approaching retirement age who made retirement plans based on receiving their pension. Who knows where this will lead in 10 years, especially when more pension plans encounter trouble
I believe that the grandfathering provisions of the new law only fully protected those over 80 years of age. I believe 75 to 80 was a sliding scale.

-gauss
__________________
gauss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2014, 02:51 PM   #80
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by gauss View Post
I believe that the grandfathering provisions of the new law only fully protected those over 80 years of age. I believe 75 to 80 was a sliding scale.

-gauss
This to me is of little consolation to anyone from say 65-75, already retired with a pension, and with otherwise poor prospects. As I posted upthread, cuts under this law appear to be income based and definitely substantial for those with larger pensions. Up to 60% IIRC. I don't call that grandfathering at all. It's more like what were they thinking?
__________________

__________________
Options is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Just Received Copy of MegaCorp's 2008 EBSA/ERISA Filing... jdmorton Young Dreamers 4 09-29-2009 06:21 PM
Company Pension, RMD rule changes MichaelB FIRE and Money 6 01-05-2009 12:27 PM
Risk? What risk? REWahoo FIRE and Money 3 08-16-2006 09:39 AM
CD's & Anti-Inflation strategies JohnR FIRE and Money 24 04-22-2005 08:02 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.