It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why on earth are people still getting pensions?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




Sure the $10 you put in is yours, but you end up drawing out far more than any tangible, real money you saved, and you will almost certainly end up drawing more than any rate of return your money realized too.


So you are saying that you think I will draw out more money from my pension fund than I put in?

You say that like it is a fact yet you do not know how much we put into our pension fund and our monthly accrual rate?

Trust me, I will not pull out more than I put in




posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The reason why jobs and health insurance are related goes back to WWII.

What workers there were could not be lured via higher wages, so companies started offering health coverage to get workers.


And we've been stuck with this since.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Pensions don't work huh?

My grandmother had $400k in her 401k. Prior to 2008 her 401k was making $100 a day. The market imploded and she lost it all. It's a good thing she has my grandfathers pension to fall back on. He worked for Crystler. So why is Crystler still offering pensions? Because the unions make them open their books to the workers. If auto makers couldn't afford pensions they wouldn't be offering it to their employees.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Dont worry they will print money and prop up the DOW to protect 401ks and pensions and my generation will be forced to pay for them while they are being eliminate

Fricken state retirees entitled spoiled brats



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm


The pension plan as it was first designed was a good plan. But it did not take in to consideration the crooked criminal element of those who would take advantage of it at everyone else's expense.

Here is one of the biggest problems in a nutshell that most people are not aware of. Pensions are based on your salary the day you retire. Say a guy makes $60,000 a year. He is about to retire. He asks his buddy, the mayor, for a nice raise two weeks before retiring. So the mayor bumps his salary to $100,000 a year. Now on his 60% pension he is making the exact same amount as when he was working. It was never meant to work that way. That money wasn't in the original plan. Now the state has to continue to pay one full time salary to a retired guy and another full time salary to the guy who replaced him.

Do this a few hundred thousand times over several decades and Illinois happens.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: wantsome
Pensions don't work huh?

My grandmother had $400k in her 401k. Prior to 2008 her 401k was making $100 a day. The market imploded and she lost it all. It's a good thing she has my grandfathers pension to fall back on. He worked for Crystler. So why is Crystler still offering pensions? Because the unions make them open their books to the workers. If auto makers couldn't afford pensions they wouldn't be offering it to their employees.


Why was your grandmother heavily invested in stocks? Any advisor will tell you that when you approach retirement you should be going to less risky investments like bonds.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
a reply to: Edumakated




They are poorly funded and the unions with the help of politicians award themselves retirement benefits that they'd never get under any other circumstances. In return, the politicians get the votes of the union members. All this is done at the expense of the tax payer.


Yes that is true... Who would a teachers union or city workers union sign a contract with? The city? You can't blame the unions... you cant blame the union worker... Joe America has been collecting trash or teaching school for 30 years, made a decent wage and gets his pension he was promised.... That in itself does not sound like anything anybody can argue against...

They way you say it is based on their salary at retirement sound f'd up.... I pay way more into mine than I will ever get out... maybe that is what keeps ours solvent idk


If you are putting more into your pension than you will get out, you have a horrible pension / investment. It means you are losing money.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Fill me in a little here, I'm not from the US, Australia. The pensions you are referring to here, is that kind of like an employers contribution to a fund? In Australia we have a "superannuation fund" which employers must put a percentage into from each pay that you are not allowed to access until you retire. The more you earn, the more you will have when you retire. The super fund also invests with your money so it builds (or sometimes shrinks) over time. Generally builds over long term.

In Australia, a pension, in this case it would be the "Aged Pension" is a federal tax payer funded fortnightly payment that all people of retirement age are entitled to. Essentially a living wage. People who have large sums of money in the bank or are making income over a certain threshold from investments may not be eligible. There are other pensions, "Disability" or "Carers" for example but these are always up for review as to whether you still require them. The aged pension is something everybody gets from when they retire until death unless they have considerable wealth or have significant income from investments. Is there an equivalent to this in the US? I always assumed there was.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 09:27 PM
link   
What kind of pensions to American politicians receive? And free health care for life all paid for by the taxpayer.

Kinda like socialism for the elite, eh? But some on here call Social security socialism for the masses even when they pay into the system for their entire working career.



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

My pension. Fully funded and financialy sound. I work for the private sector, I also have a 401k plan. I thought pensions were something my grandpa got. I am super happy I have a fully funded private sector pension plan. I also worked in the public sector in the past and only had a 401k. But I agree, pension plans are going the way of the dinosaur.



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 05:09 PM
link   
It's not just about financial literacy. A 401k runs out. When you retire you have no idea how long you're going to live. 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? Longer?

You have no idea what health issues you will have or how much your living expenses are going to be a decade later. It's impossible to plan your expenses 10 years ahead.

Pushing all retirement plans over to 401k's is just fvcking everyone over and telling them to crawl into a hole and die when they run out of money. It's bull#.

Instead of scrapping the pension system, exploitation of the pension system should be fixed.

Your highest earning 3 years determine how much the system pays out. Lots of state and federal employees work huge amounts of overtime their last 3 years to pad their income as much as possible to earn the biggest pension they possibly can. They do this and end up getting pension payments that are much higher than their average wage for the 30 years or more that they worked as a government employee. Also bosses will sometimes give raises to employees they know are about to retire to boost their pension because they know only 3 years are being counted for the calculation.

Fix that. My suggestion would be something like this:

less than 10 years - average wage of highest earning 3 years and you earn 25% of that.
10 to 20 years - average wage of highest earning 6 years and you earn 50% of that.
20 to 30 years - average wage of highest earning 9 years and you earn 75% of that.
30 or more years - average wage of highest earning 12 years and you earn 100% of that.

* Overtime does not count towards your pension payments and is completely excluded from calculation.

This encourages government employees to work a full-time job for as long as possible, and prevents the abuse of overtime to pad pensions. Calculating more years also prevents the abuse of short-term raises for long-term pension boosts.

Make these changes and I suspect a lot of the overhead would disappear.
edit on 3/9/19 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Pension padding is a thing. There are all sorts of articles available about it.

link

link

Not all government employees do that though. I suspect it's a few bad apples putting most of the strain on the system.
edit on 3/9/19 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 05:20 PM
link   
To me, it seems weird that retirement age is still 65 in most juristictions.

Social Security was bought in at age 65 in the 1930's, when average life expectancy was 70-75. It was meant to give the retiree 5-10 years coverage before they passed away.

Now, with many living into their 90's, the retirement age hasn't changed. It should really be set at 80 or 85 if it kept up, but there's massive outcry if someone even suggests raising it by even a couple of years.

There should also be a financial barrier beyond which you no longer qualify for social security. If you have millions in the bank, why are you still getting a social security check every month?
edit on 9-3-2019 by babybunnies because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join