Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-07-2017, 10:26 AM   #101
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
I could be all wet of course
Yes, that does seem to be the case. Your arguments and reasoning seem more directed at "twisting the knife in glee" as your family's public pension is properly funded (info from another thread) while Illinois state employees will take a bath. Gleefully enjoy your little victory dance!

It's amazing how lucky winners like to gloat to the losers.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
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!

Old 09-07-2017, 10:32 AM   #102
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post

BTW, you seem to not say that SS also changed with teachers... if a teacher was married to someone who qualified to get SS, then along with their pension they got spousal SS.... it is gone now, but it was there... my mom and oldest sister are getting SS.... both were teachers...
You seem to keep going back 30 years or so TP.

GPO has been in place for a long time. Teachers in Illinois, if their pension amounts to much, have any spousal benefit to which they would otherwise be entitled eliminated. They earn no SS on their own account because their employers (Illinois tax payers) don't want to pay the employer's half of SS contributions and wiggled out of the system.

With this system, the state (or school districts in the case of teachers) avoids mandatory contributions to SS and replaces them with voluntary, "suggested" contributions to the so-called pension fund. Since they do no 401k/403b matching and there is little evidence they ever made pension fund contributions that weren't dribbled back into the general budget or plain ole mismanaged away, it puts naive employees in danger........

It's possible that a naive 2nd grade teacher in Mt Morris, Illinois is at a disadvantage in dealing with cunning (and possibly crooked - check the prisons for Illinois politicians) machine politicians and fat-cat labor leaders.

I'm not sure you understand that or are stuck "back in the day" with the old rules.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:00 AM   #103
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 15,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
You seem to keep going back 30 years or so TP.
GPO has been in place for a long time. Teachers in Illinois, if their pension amounts to much, have any spousal benefit to which they would otherwise be entitled eliminated. No ss.

I'm not sure you understand that or are stuck "back in the day" with the old rules.

I understand perfectly well.... I do not think you are reading what I wrote but are being biased in your view...

I am not going back 30 years... my quick looks says it started in 2004... but I could be wrong...

My point was that if you were a teacher and retired back then you GOT SS.... now you will not... that is a change that could cost someone a lot of money... so pensions have been changing for many years for many reasons... expecting them not to change going forward is lunacy... expecting them not to change due to reality is the same...

I have pointed out many instances of changes to my company pension and to my expected SS payments... using real examples...

I have no dog in this hunt as I do not live in Illinois or Kentucky or even California which seem to be the worst... so I will not have to pay taxes to fix the problem if they do not cut pensions... as long as the Federal gvmt stays out and does not try and bail them out I could care less what happens... I am just posting some facts and opinions that many have...
Texas Proud is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:31 AM   #104
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MissMolly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,557
But these changes to teachers pensions and others where there was SS and now there is not happened BEFORE the teachers put in their 25 or 30 years of teaching. It didn't happen AFTER they were already retired. Big difference. They had an opportunity to plan for their entire career. Pulling the rug out from under a retiree is entirely different and should not, under any circumstances, be tolerated. Once you are retired it's too late to go back and change your plans. I have no issue with the governments changing pension plans going forward. The employee knows at the time he/she is hired what will happen.
__________________
And whatever your labors and aspirations in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.- Desiderata by Max Ehrmann
MissMolly is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:39 AM   #105
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
I understand perfectly well.... I do not think you are reading what I wrote but are being biased in your view...
No, not at all. When you keep throwing out statements as though they could be facts but followed by "I could be wrong," it taints the discussion and shows your bias.
Quote:

I am not going back 30 years... my quick looks says it started in 2004... but I could be wrong...
And indeed you are wrong. It started, as I said, 30 years ago in 1977. NEA - Social Security: Brief History of Pension Offset and 'Windfall' Provisions
Quote:

My point was that if you were a teacher and retired back then you GOT SS....
That was a long time ago. Let it go! But, IMHO, public workers whose employers do not enroll them in and contribute to SS should do whatever it takes to change that. Getting into SS, in Illinois anyway, is the only way I can think of where employees can avoid paying into a pension fund from which no output (even their own dollars) is likely.
Quote:
pensions have been changing for many years for many reasons... expecting them not to change going forward is lunacy... expecting them not to change due to reality is the same...
Illinois pensions have changed dramatically in the last several years. See my earlier post on Illinois Tier II pensions. The change Illinois retirees are whining about is that already long-retired people are going to lose all or some of their pension
Quote:

I have pointed out many instances of changes to my company pension and to my expected SS payments... using real examples...
I think the difference is that your pension was not reduced/eliminated after you did your FIRE calculations and pulled the plug. Your shoes have not been stepped on.
Quote:

I am just posting some facts and opinions that many have...
Opinions, yes. Facts, no. It's 1977 not 2004!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:42 AM   #106
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Yes, that does seem to be the case. Your arguments and reasoning seem more directed at "twisting the knife in glee" as your family's public pension is properly funded (info from another thread) while Illinois state employees will take a bath. Gleefully enjoy your little victory dance!

It's amazing how lucky winners like to gloat to the losers.
Where is there any "knife twisting" or "glee" or "gloating"?

I can't see where anyone would get that from what I posted. And it isn't the case. If anyone can point out how I might have given that impression, I'll set about trying to correct it, because I would be misrepresenting how I feel, and I don;t want to do that.

Yes, I've talked about my DW's (small) pension from IMRF (Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund), which is pretty well funded. I mentioned that this fund managed to stay out of the grasp of the politicians, it is run by members, kinda like a credit union. It came with her job, just luck that it is a decent one. It's not big enough to matter much anyway, but if it were poorly funded and an important amount, I'd be making some adjustments to my plans, I think that's only prudent. It's too bad the rest of IL didn't have sensible fund management like that. I think that sound like "compassion" doesn't it? Not "glee"?

If you think anything I posted is not correct or incomplete, can you help fill it in?

Now, maybe I'm wrong about this - but I can't help getting the feeling that some people purposely throw personal attacks in to get the thread shut down, because they don't like the discussion. I would hope the mods would take corrective action on the attacks, rather than the broad brush of shutting down the thread.

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 11:55 AM   #107
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 15,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
No, not at all. When you keep throwing out statements as though they could be facts but followed by "I could be wrong," it taints the discussion and shows your bias. And indeed you are wrong. It started, as I said, 30 years ago in 1977. NEA - Social Security: Brief History of Pension Offset and 'Windfall' Provisions

That was a long time ago. Let it go! But, IMHO opinion, public workers whose employers do not enroll them and contribute SS should do whatever it takes to change that. Getting into SS, in Illinois anyway, is the only way I can think of employees can avoid paying into a pension fund from which no output (even their own dollars) is likely. Illinois pensions have changed dramatically in the last several years. See my earlier post on Illinois Tier II pensions. The change Illinois retirees are whining about is that already long-retired people are going to lose all or some of their pension I think the difference is that your pension was not reduced/eliminated after you did your FIRE calculations and pulled the plug.


Opinions, yes. Facts, no. It's 1977 not 2004!


I guess the people around you are not smart enough to find the loophole... which was closed in 2004.... Soooo, I am right in practice... even though you are right in theory... and my sister retired just before this went into effect...

http://helenair.com/news/national/te...d08f63cda.html



https://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA55...y_Scandal.html


Edit to add... responding to the bold... Is that the case where they are saying to cut current retirees? I really do not follow Illinois much... as I said, not a concern of mine... but I would say that would be bad... maybe take away COL increases or something else... but the reality is that you have to weigh the harm to both the current and future retirees..... IOW, if you keep the payments the same today but someone who retires in 10 years gets nothing, how is that fair? And from what I have read it is not a new problem... it has been up front for many years (maybe decades)..... but the fixes so far have had little in really fixing the problem...

So, what do you think should happen? Raise taxes to pay for all pensions? Do a haircut? Do both? It is not going to look pretty no matter what happens...
Texas Proud is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:01 PM   #108
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissMolly View Post
Once you are retired it's too late to go back and change your plans. I have no issue with the governments changing pension plans going forward. The employee knows at the time he/she is hired what will happen.
+1

As I've pointed out, Illinois enacted Tier II pensions several years ago (teachers hired in 2011 and ongoing. The contribution level is the same as the Tier I pensions but the payout is significantly less (including lower COLA than SS).

What is being fought, and with success in the courts so far, is changing the rules for already retired teachers and for the already-worked-years of current teachers.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:02 PM   #109
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissMolly View Post
I do not think that what you choose to call a "promise" is proper description of what the state employees are told. The pension contracts with many of these states contain language that unequivocally states it is an inviolable contract. The definition of inviolable is:

adjective 1. prohibiting violation; secure from destruction, violence, infringement, or desecration: an inviolable sanctuary; an inviolable promise.


2. incapable of being violated; incorruptible; unassailable: inviolable secrecy.


So, far more than a "promise". And this inviolability is expressed to the employees starting with their date of hire and continues throughout their employment. They are told over and over again "this is why we can pay you less". We guarantee this pension to you. Not we "promise", but we GUARANTEE. ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldShooter View Post
...

@MissMolly if you think public pensions are inviolable, just sit and wait. Maybe for only a few months, maybe for a year or two.

As SGOTI once said: "The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, they are the same."
MissMolly, do you have sources to say that "many" of these contracts are "inviolable"? I searched, the closest I could find was this:

http://www.ncpers.org/files/STATE%20...20BENEFITS.pdf

Which used the term only for Kentucky. And I have to agree with OldShooter, I don't know how anyone can look at anything 30 years out and use the word "guaranteed". Stuff happens. Even with IL pension benefits being constitutionally protected, there still exists the path for amending the constitution, or simply no money left. I just don't think anyone is helping themselves by assuming/insisting their benefits are "guaranteed", and especially not "GUARANTEED".

Quote:
... The taxpayers received services from the state at a discounted rate in the form of lower taxes due to the below market salaries that have been paid to the workers for decades. Time for the taxpayers to pay their fair share for these services they have been receiving. ...
I addressed this earlier - the time to ask for the tax increase was when it was supposed to be paid into the fund. That would have given the taxpayers a chance to accept it, or demand changes. To let it lapse, and then ask for it 30 years later isn't right, just like my example of the car, computer or TV.

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:08 PM   #110
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Western NC
Posts: 2,865
I just have to say I'm sorry this is happening.

A modest state teacher's pension of just a few hundred dollars monthly made a huge difference for my grandmother after her husband died (losing his pension & SS retirement) more than a decade before she passed away.

Both of them started their working careers prior to WWII (retired around 1980) and so their investments were in individual stocks bought at hefty commissions (no mutual funds much less ETFs)

The federal 0% capital gains tax rate also helped given the significant gains realized on the above.
ncbill is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:14 PM   #111
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissMolly View Post
... Once you are retired it's too late to go back and change your plans. I have no issue with the governments changing pension plans going forward. The employee knows at the time he/she is hired what will happen.
And no one wants to see benefits cut to the already (or nearly) retired.

But then reality comes to visit. When a private company goes bankrupt, and has an underfunded pension, several things happen. First, they have been making insurance payments to the PBGC to help cover these kinds of cases. Second, PBGC will intervene and try to get the pension more fully funded before there are major problems with the company. Third, if it comes down to it, PBGC takes over the pension - and there is a cap on how much they will pay, and these PBGC pensions do not get COLA'd. The cap is currently $64,432 for a 65 YO in a plan that failed in 2017.

While we don't want to see anyone's benefits cut, it seems a bit off for public pensioners to say it just should never happen, and yet, it does happen to those with private pensions, and they are asked to pay the taxes for those public pensions. If needed, I think some sort of cap system like PBGC uses could be applied to public pensions that are in trouble.

Many of us have used a 75% number when plugging SS into FIRECalc. It may not get cut, but it may get taxed to the point it is worth less. None of us will like it, but we will need to accept it, and some us plan for it, just in case. I'm just not going to risk telling myself that it is "guaranteed".

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:17 PM   #112
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post

I addressed this earlier - the time to ask for the tax increase was when it was supposed to be paid into the fund. That would have given the taxpayers a chance to accept it, or demand changes. To let it lapse, and then ask for it 30 years later isn't right, just like my example of the car, computer or TV.
But you addressed it incorrectly. Public employees in Illinois have always preferred their pension fund to be properly funded, in the actuarial sense of "properly." I've been involved with this for decades and I've yet to hear an employee state that it was fine with them if their pension became drastically underfunded. They paid their 9.5% like clockwork every payday and expected the politicians to do the same.

Why do you use "30 years" when no funding, borrowing back after funding and low (less than actuarial standards) is still going on today? You seem to be trying to bias the situation to make it sound like the "bad boy" political stuff was all long ago. It's happening and being fought today.

Yes, the shell game the politicians gave them sometimes put them inappropriately at ease. Statements like "We're going to skip the pension payment yet again this year but we'll definitely make it up later" or "the money we're borrowing from your fund will be paid back with interest later" shouldn't have fooled them. I find teachers to be naive and gullible in this regard. So, no doubt you'll win and have the satisfaction of a pension delivered as promised at your house while state employees get screwed. [mod edit]
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:22 PM   #113
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
And no one wants to see benefits cut to the already (or nearly) retired. But.........
Except perhaps ERD50?
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:29 PM   #114
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: chicago burbs
Posts: 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Where is there any "knife twisting" or "glee" or "gloating"?

I can't see where anyone would get that from what I posted. And it isn't the case. If anyone can point out how I might have given that impression, I'll set about trying to correct it, because I would be misrepresenting how I feel, and I don;t want to do that.

Yes, I've talked about my DW's (small) pension from IMRF (Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund), which is pretty well funded. I mentioned that this fund managed to stay out of the grasp of the politicians, it is run by members, kinda like a credit union. It came with her job, just luck that it is a decent one. It's not big enough to matter much anyway, but if it were poorly funded and an important amount, I'd be making some adjustments to my plans, I think that's only prudent. It's too bad the rest of IL didn't have sensible fund management like that. I think that sound like "compassion" doesn't it? Not "glee"?

If you think anything I posted is not correct or incomplete, can you help fill it in?

Now, maybe I'm wrong about this - but I can't help getting the feeling that some people purposely throw personal attacks in to get the thread shut down, because they don't like the discussion. I would hope the mods would take corrective action on the attacks, rather than the broad brush of shutting down the thread.

-ERD50
Good to hear about IMRF. My wife will be collecting in a few years - she works pt at our local library. It ain't much (her pension) but it's something.
golfnut is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:44 PM   #115
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
... I'm just surprised you're so pleased and enjoy the gloating so much.
But you have not pointed out why you think I'm "pleased" or "gloating" over any of this. I take offense at that language. As I said before, if I'm giving that impression, please point it out so I can set the record straight. But you seem to be the only one taking it that way, that I can see.

Tough times sometimes call for tough measures. That doesn't mean anyone "enjoys" it, but kicking the can down the road isn't working.

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:57 PM   #116
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
I guess the people around you are not smart enough to find the loophole...
I read the article you referenced. It's familiar and I think you've posted it before. No, that "loophole" was not a tactic used here. I'm glad they shut it down in Texas.
Quote:

Edit to add... responding to the bold... Is that the case where they are saying to cut current retirees?
There are many proposed solutions and some definitely call for cutting or even eliminating the pensions of current retirees. I think the talk of eliminating current retiree pensions entirely is premature and meant to be dramatic. But this is Illinois, so ya never know. Of course, the politicians will still get their full pensions!
Quote:
maybe take away COL increases or something else...
New hires, since 2011, get a COLA lower than SS.
Quote:
, if you keep the payments the same today but someone who retires in 10 years gets nothing, how is that fair?
None of the numbers are that dramatic at this stage but I suppose it could get there. Illinois politicians are a strange breed of crooks....... Maybe you'd call them dumb crooks. (Or maybe not, they're getting rich from it all........). But even with the sharply lower pensions of teachers hired since 2011, they still won't make actuarially sound annual pension contributions. Even today, there's talk of borrowing from the dramatically underfunded funds. It's just something in their genes. There always has to be a scam, a way to put shoe boxes of cash on their closet shelves. And underfunded pensions. Multi-employer teamster pension problems and the Illinois state pension problems have a lot in common.
Quote:
So, what do you think should happen? Raise taxes to pay for all pensions? Do a haircut? Do both? It is not going to look pretty no matter what happens...
Well, since you asked, I do have the answer. I'm talking about the non-Chicago teacher situation (TRS).

1. Put all teachers, all TRS members really, on SS.

2. Continue to have new hires on Tier II.

3. Continue with the rules that now prohibit spiking, double dipping, etc. These things were never as prevalent as the media tried to sell, but they are better done away with completely and permanently.

4. Switch incumbent teachers hired before 2011 to Tier II for future years (years not yet worked). This gives them a chance to leave for other employment if they feel undercompensated. Pay them their earned Tier I pension on a pro-rata basis for years already worked.

5. Continue rolling out DBP alternatives that have recently begun such as cash balance pensions and 403b's with matching.

6. Pay already retired teachers per the plan they are on now and that they made their retirement decisions based on.

7. Pass legislation that requires actuarially sound (as opposed to politically expedient) pension fund funding.

8. If cuts to existing pensions are required, a process similar to bankruptcy should occur. (I know states can't declare bankruptcy but the courts can cause them to reveal all the information they would have to reveal in bankruptcy.) Detroit retirees made out much better under the bankruptcy agreement than the offer made to them in the earlier "avoid bankruptcy" stages.

I love the Wisconsin plan. If you're not familiar with it, give it a read.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 12:58 PM   #117
Administrator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland again!
Posts: 35,206
This is getting a little personal. How about we all take a step back and relax.
MichaelB is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 01:05 PM   #118
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
But you addressed it incorrectly. Public employees in Illinois have always preferred their pension fund to be properly funded, in the actuarial sense of "properly." ... .
Of course they "preferred" that their pension fund be properly funded. But what did they do about it when it wasn't being properly funded?

I'm just having trouble reconciling that this was allowed to happen (or at least they watched while it happened), and now these retirees are saying that it shouldn't be allowed to affect their pensions. That's a big disconnect for me. It seems like "magical thinking".

Now, if the Unions really had no power to force the State to make their contributions, then at least it seems they should have been warning their members that their pensions could be cut in the future, and members should have been acting accordingly.

What's the point of funding the pension at all? Let it go to zero and pay out of current taxes. But it wasn't set up that way, and when the funding stops, some red flags, and alternate plans should have been made. You can't just go along and ignore reality. I know that if my pension exceeded (or was even close to) PBGC caps, my plans would count only the amount up to the cap, and probably a bit less. I wouldn't be happy about it, no one would. But it would be my reality. Some of the talk from public pensioners just strikes me as a disconnect from reality, that's all.

-ERD50
ERD50 is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 01:08 PM   #119
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
OldShooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: City
Posts: 7,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
... Even with IL pension benefits being constitutionally protected, there still exists the path for amending the constitution, or simply no money left. I just don't think anyone is helping themselves ...
With the latest IL court ruling that even pension benefits for new hires cannot be cut IMO it is a foregone conclusion that the IL constitution will be amended. There is no other way out.
OldShooter is offline  
Old 09-07-2017, 01:21 PM   #120
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 46
Substitute "Social Security" for "pension" and see how most people who expect half, 3/4 or more of their eventual SS benefits would be screaming. What if the federal government decided they'd rather not pay the people who paid into this their whole lives? Would that make the entire US population "naive"? Comparing contracted state public pension raiding to private corp pensions isn't as relevant as comparing them to federal public annuities (SS).
Sandman62 is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
state pension


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
State-by-state exchange rate data Htown Harry Health and Early Retirement 10 09-30-2013 02:09 PM
Net impact of living in no-state-tax state ? Delawaredave5 FIRE and Money 46 01-06-2013 08:01 PM
State residency for Armed Forces personnels for in-state college tuition. Sam Other topics 9 07-30-2007 05:06 PM
Why does health insurance vary state to state teejayevans Health and Early Retirement 130 04-22-2007 09:21 AM
I'm 51 y.o., female, state employee with 30 yrs state service 82577 Hi, I am... 4 03-26-2007 05:21 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:04 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.