Spanky
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
... and they may never deliver...
setab said:I paid 7-9 percent of my income into my retirement system for 27 years. (IN addition to the 10 percent to TSP) If there isn't money there, someone took it.
setab
MasterBlaster said:Quarterly statements aside, I take it that you are under the impression that your money went into your (lockbox) account rather than being thrown into the giant abyss know as the federal budget.
Keep saying it... I paid... they promised...I paid... they promised...
maybe that will make you feel better.
kz said:Public pensions are 5 times better than private ones?? I'd love to read that study. I admit I have a great public pension but I don't know of anyone from the private sector that gets only 1/5th of what I get. Heck I don't of anyone who isn't getting darn near the same as me or better.
I really would love to read that study.
setab said:MB,
I don't believe you are correct. The CSRS system is separate, as is the FERS system. That being said, I find almost any scenario possible these days, but what are you suggesting as an alternative? If the Federal pension system goes down, what makes you think any private investing you do is safe? We can all run around shouting the sky is falling, or we can all take a deep breath, and realize that many stories such as the one that started this thread are highly sensationalized pieces of drivel that sell newspapers in spite of their lack of factual bases.
setab
unclemick2 said:heh heh heh heh - P.S. I'll try not to spend it all.
Martha said:My bet is that SS will remain around, with tweaking.
The annual cost of Social Security benefits represents 4.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2005 and is projected to rise to 6.2 percent of GDP in 2030, and then slightly to 6.3 percent of GDP in 2080. ...
Projected OASDI tax income will begin to fall short of outlays in 2017, and will be sufficient to finance only 74 percent of scheduled annual benefits in 2040, when the combined OASDI trust fund is projected to be exhausted. ...
Social Security could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years in various ways, including an immediate increase of 16 percent in payroll tax revenues or an immediate reduction in benefits of 13 percent (or some combination of the two). To the extent that changes are delayed or phased in gradually, greater adjustments in scheduled benefits and revenues would be required.
Medicare's annual costs were 2.7 percent of GDP in 2005, ... now projected to ... reach 11 percent of GDP in 2080.
HI could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years by an immediate 121 percent increase in program income, or an immediate 51 percent reduction in program outlays (or some combination of the two). As with Social Security, however, adjustments of far greater magnitude would be necessary to the extent changes are delayed or phased in gradually, or to make the program solvent on a sustainable basis over the next 75 years and beyond.
katfish said:Skilled public employees, as least at the county level here in South Jersey
are paid, apparently, less then the private sector. I base this on the fact
are authority was unable to find an electrican at the salary we offered.
WE are unable to attract qualified experienced engineers. We are unable
to find, at the salary we will pay, qualified tech. personal. We require
skill levels but we don't pay. WHAT we offer is membership in DP state
plan and good medical. THATS all we offer. Its apparent NJ wants to
cut its DP pension plan. Since all local and county workers are members
I wonder how we are going to find the qualified people to operate water
and wastewater plants. Health departments, highway tech. people
and it goes on and on. You don't realize how many people work for the
public and make life a little better here ... If the public wants a new deal
they can have it .
setab said:I paid 7-9 percent of my income into my retirement system for 27 years. (IN addition to the 10 percent to TSP) If there isn't money there, someone took it.
setab
Zipper said:Texas, 41 years paying into a pension system is a l-o-o-o-o-n-g time.
She's probably getting 2% year, but I'm going by Ontario standards. No one goes that long here. I went 33 = 66% and that's about average.
Age + experience = 85. I paid 9% per year and that was matched by the government.
After 41 years she would be well over 60 and with a life expectancy ~ 25 years her pp has the upper hand. I bet you could have done better if you had saved 10% per annum in a good balanced fund for that amount of time.
setab said:Federal employees work a 2087 hour work year which means hourly pay doesn't come out the same as the schedule suggests. (Any other business you know figure its pay on 2087 hours?)
Cut-Throat said:Big Article on this in the Minneapolis paper in the last few days about Duluth.
The city's human resources manager, Gary Meier, acknowledges that its retiree benefits are "generous" and says they influenced his decision to leave a better-paying job in the private sector in 2000.
He said Duluth's plan dates to 1983, when city administrators agreed to it in exchange for workers' giving up the right to accumulate and cash large amounts of sick leave and vacation. "In 1983, we didn't have double-digit medical inflation," Meier said, "and they had no way of predicting that things would get so out of hand." Duluth's liability is at $300 million and growing by $40,000 a day.
Leonidas said:And so it goes. The first mayor who started this craziness in the 70's? Dead. The next was last heard of as a political consultant advising other mayors how to "run a city like a business". Her replacement is rich as hell and living in his penthouse, while his replacement is teaching "government and political affairs" in the Ivy League. Meanwhile the city, its employees and the taxpayers are left behind to clean up the mess.