CSNbbs

Full Version: State Pensions in trouble, Total Debt over $130 Billion
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
The state of Illinois is is trouble. We have over $61 billion in pension underfunding. We have total debt of $130 billion. Our Leaders(Republican and Democrat) have robbed Peter to pay Paul and soon the we will not be able to pay our bills. Serious changes are needed. Our state bond rating is on of the worst in the U.S.

Great article in the Suntimes today by Terry Savage. She gets it.

If I am a state government employee, I would be concerned that at some point, my pension check might stop.
In an article on Foxnews, Illinois was rated the worst state in the union for pension funding. Way to go Illinois. At least we are number one in something.

Wish it was job creation but you have to take what you can get.
The cumulative debt for all states is now over $1T. Link

At some point, governments are going to need to do what most of the private sector did 10-20 years ago - freeze pensions for current employees, all future retirement savings are via 401(k).
- Pension is no different that Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme. People can't take out more than their share of what was put in. Eventually, things get underwater when you spend more than you save. People are living longer and consuming additional benefits via the longer lifetime, and consuming more than their share of benefits at what will eventually be taxpayer's expense.
- 401(k) solves the problem, you save and can only take out the growth of one's savings
- 401(k) can have a typical match, like the first 4% of one's salary.
- No 401(k)'s or 403(b)'s, etc. giving people an additional 10% of their salary like some plans do, we simply can't afford it.

I hope the states can somehow go to bankruptcy court to terminate archaic union contracts which guarantee lavish entitlements for public workers.
- Extend retirement age from 55 to 65.
- Require early retirees to pay their own retiree health insurance premiums. If they can't afford them, then they have to work like everyone else!
- Public workers won't like having to fend for their own like the people in the private sector. Tough sh**! I don't want to pay for theirs and mine. I have to take care of my own, public sector and union pieces of sh** should have to pay for their own too!
(02-19-2010 12:03 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]The cumulative debt for all states is now over $1T. Link

At some point, governments are going to need to do what most of the private sector did 10-20 years ago - freeze pensions for current employees, all future retirement savings are via 401(k).
- Pension is no different that Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme. People can't take out more than their share of what was put in. Eventually, things get underwater when you spend more than you save. People are living longer and consuming additional benefits via the longer lifetime, and consuming more than their share of benefits at what will eventually be taxpayer's expense.
- 401(k) solves the problem, you save and can only take out the growth of one's savings
- 401(k) can have a typical match, like the first 4% of one's salary.
- No 401(k)'s or 403(b)'s, etc. giving people an additional 10% of their salary like some plans do, we simply can't afford it.

I hope the states can somehow go to bankruptcy court to terminate archaic union contracts which guarantee lavish entitlements for public workers.
- Extend retirement age from 55 to 65.
- Require early retirees to pay their own retiree health insurance premiums. If they can't afford them, then they have to work like everyone else!
- Public workers won't like having to fend for their own like the people in the private sector. Tough sh**! I don't want to pay for theirs and mine. I have to take care of my own, public sector and union pieces of sh** should have to pay for their own too!
I see you are one of those compassionate conservatives that we keep hearing about. :)
The state of Illinois finally did change one rule for retirement. I believe through this year as a teacher, if you announce you will retire, you automatically get a 30% raise your final year. This was done so your pension payment will be bigger. Not a bad perk to have, unfortunately, us taxpayers are paying for this. There is so much waste in all levels of government and this is a small snapshot of it.
just out of curiosity...when was the 401k system brought into play? and how successful has it proven to be for all those who have been with the 401k system? you always hear about how the stock market has returned positive "X%" over the longhaul...but has this principle carried over into the real world and the 401k world?
(02-19-2010 12:24 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-19-2010 12:03 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]The cumulative debt for all states is now over $1T. Link

At some point, governments are going to need to do what most of the private sector did 10-20 years ago - freeze pensions for current employees, all future retirement savings are via 401(k).
- Pension is no different that Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme. People can't take out more than their share of what was put in. Eventually, things get underwater when you spend more than you save. People are living longer and consuming additional benefits via the longer lifetime, and consuming more than their share of benefits at what will eventually be taxpayer's expense.
- 401(k) solves the problem, you save and can only take out the growth of one's savings
- 401(k) can have a typical match, like the first 4% of one's salary.
- No 401(k)'s or 403(b)'s, etc. giving people an additional 10% of their salary like some plans do, we simply can't afford it.

I hope the states can somehow go to bankruptcy court to terminate archaic union contracts which guarantee lavish entitlements for public workers.
- Extend retirement age from 55 to 65.
- Require early retirees to pay their own retiree health insurance premiums. If they can't afford them, then they have to work like everyone else!
- Public workers won't like having to fend for their own like the people in the private sector. Tough sh**! I don't want to pay for theirs and mine. I have to take care of my own, public sector and union pieces of sh** should have to pay for their own too!
I see you are one of those compassionate conservatives that we keep hearing about. :)

Why do private sector employee have to live life like a palper while governmental employees get huge pensions and live life on easy street.

you pay nothing to the government. Your opinion means nothing to me. When you start paying your fair share, come talk to me. I don't want to pay any more of my hard earned money. You can start to contribute your money to pay these costs.

Send the state a check.
(02-19-2010 01:51 PM)klake87 Wrote: [ -> ]Why do private sector employee have to live life like a palper while governmental employees get huge pensions and live life on easy street.

First of all, the workers have been paying into the pension fund for the length of their employment. Its not their fault that the state hasnt been pulling its share of the weight over the past decades.
(02-19-2010 01:58 PM)niuhuskie84 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-19-2010 01:51 PM)klake87 Wrote: [ -> ]Why do private sector employee have to live life like a palper while governmental employees get huge pensions and live life on easy street.

First of all, the workers have been paying into the pension fund for the length of their employment. Its not their fault that the state hasnt been pulling its share of the weight over the past decades.

Everyone gets screwed by our politicial leaders. First, they spent our money like drunken sailors promising everything to everybody. So far, only the private sector has felt the pain. Now that CASH is running out, now governmental employees will feel it now. Pensions should have been adjusted decades ago but no one wanted to tackle the problem.

The pension system, like Social Security, is run like a ponzi scheme.
We should prosecute our leaders for mismanagement.
(02-19-2010 01:13 PM)huskiealum03 Wrote: [ -> ]just out of curiosity...when was the 401k system brought into play? and how successful has it proven to be for all those who have been with the 401k system? you always hear about how the stock market has returned positive "X%" over the longhaul...but has this principle carried over into the real world and the 401k world?

The 401(k) was put into law ~1974.

For your second answer, I would say, yes. The stock market has returned something like 8% per year, adjusted for inflation, since the end of the Great Depression. An S&P 500 mutual fund in a 401(k) should track the broader stock market. I've had a 401(k) for 7 years, and it goes up and down with the market. I know that my Dad and one of my uncles have had 401(k)'s for a long time, and they saw massive growth in the 90's and early to mid 00's, and also saw it drop and rebound the last three years.
(02-19-2010 12:24 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I see you are one of those compassionate conservatives that we keep hearing about. :)

Do you have any ideas on how to fund the pension deficit or just amuse yourself on a message board by pointing out people who have a conservative philosophy?
(02-21-2010 08:14 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-19-2010 12:24 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I see you are one of those compassionate conservatives that we keep hearing about. :)

Do you have any ideas on how to fund the pension deficit or just amuse yourself on a message board by pointing out people who have a conservative philosophy?
I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).

Btw, I don't have to point out who has a conservative philosophy. It is pretty obvious. THe "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about other people" philosophy is easy to see.
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).


Since you don't mind a tax increase for the pensions, does that mean you don't have a problem writing a check for $10,000 to the state? At $130B, assuming there are $13M people in the state to keep the math easy, each citizen owes $10k for the pension underfunding.

Maybe your retirement is already secure, you sit on boatloads of cash, and don't mind paying the $10k and watching the fat cats can get fatter.
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]Btw, I don't have to point out who has a conservative philosophy. It is pretty obvious. THe "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about other people" philosophy is easy to see.

I don't see "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about other people" as a conservative philosophy.

I see "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about the taxpayer" as being government's rationale for funding lavish benefits which the private sector had to give up years ago since the private sector doesn't have raising taxes as an option to pay for lavish benefits.
(02-21-2010 10:32 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).


Since you don't mind a tax increase for the pensions, does that mean you don't have a problem writing a check for $10,000 to the state? At $130B, assuming there are $13M people in the state to keep the math easy, each citizen owes $10k for the pension underfunding.

Maybe your retirement is already secure, you sit on boatloads of cash, and don't mind paying the $10k and watching the fat cats can get fatter.
I never said it all should be taxes. I said there should be some cuts. I also don't think we should be taking away what people earned through their hard work. I know you don't care if it is taken away from someone you don't know but I can guarantee you would be VERY upset if something you worked for throughout your careeer was taken away from you. As I stated the "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about anyone else" is easy to spot. You have that affliction.
(02-21-2010 10:44 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 10:32 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).


Since you don't mind a tax increase for the pensions, does that mean you don't have a problem writing a check for $10,000 to the state? At $130B, assuming there are $13M people in the state to keep the math easy, each citizen owes $10k for the pension underfunding.

Maybe your retirement is already secure, you sit on boatloads of cash, and don't mind paying the $10k and watching the fat cats can get fatter.
I never said it all should be taxes. I said there should be some cuts. I also don't think we should be taking away what people earned through their hard work. I know you don't care if it is taken away from someone you don't know but I can guarantee you would be VERY upset if something you worked for throughout your careeer was taken away from you. As I stated the "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about anyone else" is easy to spot. You have that affliction.
So I should give up my retirement fund (which I started when I was 18) to fund the pensions of state employees? So because our politicians can't manage our money, we should suffer?
Government employees has screwed up. They have kept electing these politicians that have been feeding them a bunch of crap. The pension system, as it is currently, is unsustainable. Like Social Security, they have spent money on other things and now it is coming back to haunt them. I am not saying that their pensions should be eliminated just modified to make them sustainable.
Eliminate the pension system and make state employees work till they are 60 like the rest of us. Wait, I am a state employee, crap! Eliminate it and go to the 401(k) system. I for one love my roth IRA, I like that I am responsible for my retirement, if it fails, that is my fault. Taking responsibility for ones self...there's a notion!
(02-22-2010 10:33 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 10:44 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 10:32 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).


Since you don't mind a tax increase for the pensions, does that mean you don't have a problem writing a check for $10,000 to the state? At $130B, assuming there are $13M people in the state to keep the math easy, each citizen owes $10k for the pension underfunding.

Maybe your retirement is already secure, you sit on boatloads of cash, and don't mind paying the $10k and watching the fat cats can get fatter.
I never said it all should be taxes. I said there should be some cuts. I also don't think we should be taking away what people earned through their hard work. I know you don't care if it is taken away from someone you don't know but I can guarantee you would be VERY upset if something you worked for throughout your careeer was taken away from you. As I stated the "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about anyone else" is easy to spot. You have that affliction.
So I should give up my retirement fund (which I started when I was 18) to fund the pensions of state employees? So because our politicians can't manage our money, we should suffer?

Bleeds has it exactly right. Why should the taxpayers pay for the pensions essentially a second time? The state employees should take a hit, just like the taxpayers will.

And, I'm a government employee.

Nothing has to be "negotiated" to make significant changes to the pension system, i.e. to keep out new employees. The Dems that run this state just have to make it so.
(02-22-2010 11:36 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-22-2010 10:33 AM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 10:44 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 10:32 PM)HuskieJoe Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-21-2010 09:34 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]I think some cuts and some tax increases to pay for the current pensions but I have no problem with changes to the pension for future workers(or even get rid of it if it can be negotiated).


Since you don't mind a tax increase for the pensions, does that mean you don't have a problem writing a check for $10,000 to the state? At $130B, assuming there are $13M people in the state to keep the math easy, each citizen owes $10k for the pension underfunding.

Maybe your retirement is already secure, you sit on boatloads of cash, and don't mind paying the $10k and watching the fat cats can get fatter.
I never said it all should be taxes. I said there should be some cuts. I also don't think we should be taking away what people earned through their hard work. I know you don't care if it is taken away from someone you don't know but I can guarantee you would be VERY upset if something you worked for throughout your careeer was taken away from you. As I stated the "As long as I get mine, I don't give a damn about anyone else" is easy to spot. You have that affliction.
So I should give up my retirement fund (which I started when I was 18) to fund the pensions of state employees? So because our politicians can't manage our money, we should suffer?

Bleeds has it exactly right. Why should the taxpayers pay for the pensions essentially a second time? The state employees should take a hit, just like the taxpayers will.

And, I'm a government employee.

Nothing has to be "negotiated" to make significant changes to the pension system, i.e. to keep out new employees. The Dems that run this state just have to make it so.



the dems AND the reps...both parties have a stake in running this state into the ground
Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's