# Pensions lost



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune ... 34108.html

this is going to be a big deal, why the hell should we as taxpayers have to bail them out??? We do that and all of these companies will dump their pension obligations on the taxpayer. :eyeroll:

Boy if there was ever an argument for privatization of SS this is it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I heard that on the news this week-end. That is insane. If I remember correctly the railroad, because of their history of reliability, and their retirement plan is exempted from Social Security. Is that correct? Perhaps if these companies can not be trusted the money they say they are putting into a retirement fund they should have to put into accounts outside of their control.

Who is next, and if this company gets away with it you can bet they will be standing in line. This is nothing short of criminal in my book. I think they should take the judge that allowed it and their board of directors and reinstate public flogging.

Ya, I agree on the social security privatization. If these companies can't be trusted let them pay in to social security and an equal ammount to the privatization side of it.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

The pension problem at United is not related to social security. I agree that companies should not be able to ditch their pension problems on the american taxpayer. The pension benefit guarantee program problems have not been in the news until United bailed on its employees but has a long sad history going back to the steel industry. As usual, both parties and the media were ignoring the problem which is just as bad or worse than SS since that program is projected to go broke much much sooner than SS and affects a huge number of workers. To me, it just represents one more instance where private industry/big business uses the government to bail them out and just one more example of not being able to trust the private sector to do the right thing. Would anyone like to hold up United, the steel industry and many others as an example of how private accounts and pensions should be administered? In many cases, the private pension is just the tip of the iceberg. Their employees private investment accounts are in trouble just as much as the pension accounts.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> The pension problem at United is not related to social security


Yes it is, in this very crucial way, they are both unfunded, and therefore unsustainable. The situation at United is dumping on the taxpayers after being mismanaged just like SS is now looking to screw the taxpayers after our wonderful congress has spent the money on their pork barrel vote buying schemes. Either way the taxpayer gets the shaft. If you don't have sontrol of your money you are at risk period! Its one of the oldest tenets of sensible investing. I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone with an ounce of sense would want congress managing their retirement fund, why is there so much resistance to haveing you own account and control over it.



> Their employees private investment accounts are in trouble just as much as the pension accounts


. 
No they are not in trouble! The market has recovered, if they invested in diversified mutual funds they are doing just fine. If they didn't thats just a good example of the pitiful economic education offered by todays schools.


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

The united pension fund was/is independent of social security. I agree that both programs are in trouble. United private accounts are also in trouble. Their program did not allow for sufficient diversification (as you and I agree is necessary) and to me, is just another example of a private program that was designed wrong and administered wrong.

As to the market recovery, that is a pile of BS. S&P 500 index(used by many portfolios including feds), has finally recovered to 1998 levels and the 5 year rate of return is -3.4%. Yes, in my own diverisified portfolio, my real estate investment trusts and natural resource funds as well as some bond funds have kept the losses to a minumum, but tech, S&P and wilshire 5000 are still down.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

1998 level are very good up substantially from the low and corrections are part of the game so whats the problem. Your comment sounded to me like we are on the brink of depression.

I know they are independent of each other my point is the similarity, of unfunded pensions thats all...SS is an unfunded mess


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

The "Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation" .... Which ends up carrying the bag on these pension bailouts will at some point turn into a tax payer burden or we will have hundreds of thousands of folks out there without pensions ... or both.

The PBGC already downgrades pension payouts as I understand it so many folks, in the best case scenario, will see maybe as little as Half what they thought they would be collecting in pension benefits.

I have no idea how long it will take ... or what it will take ... but somehow we will eventually be forced to let go the "Socialist Train of Thought" we in American became so fond of starting back in the thirties and forties.

I personally view FDR as an old, sick, crippled man who had been in office way too long and (on account of those factors) wound up doing some real imprudent things before he died.

The concepts he put in motion back then set America on track for a financial Train Wreck ... We now are seeing the headlights in nearly every tunnel we peek into ... be they governmental or private.

We can only hope to heck our current President can turn FDR's "New Deal" into GWB's "Ownership Society."


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib ... varre.html


----------

