More Union Pension Plan Bailouts Proposed - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Financial Forum Economics and Precious Metals

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-08-2019, 01:36 PM
Prepper_Ed's Avatar
Prepper_Ed Prepper_Ed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 227
Thanks: 248
Thanked 302 Times in 128 Posts
Default More Union Pension Plan Bailouts Proposed



Advertise Here

These stupid ideas won't die! Yet another proposed bailout of a mis-managed Union pension plan has been proposed, the Miners' Pension Protection Act. According to the Heritage Foundation, union managed private sector pension plans are in a cumulative hole of $638 Billion, meaning workers were promised nearly $640 Billion more in benefits than the union funds have in projected assets. Much of the short-fall is in multi-empoyer funds.

The huge labor unions and large employers are almost solely to blame for this predicament. In the past 10 years, stocks have enjoyed an extended bull market which has boosted pension returns so that the average corporate fund was 87% funded at the end of 2018. Not so most union controlled multi-employer funds.

The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp (PBGC) is a Federal Government administered insurance fund that's supposed to guarantee pensions. There are separate funds for single employer and multi-employer pensions. The single employer fund is in good shape financially but the multi-employer fund is in horrible shape because large corporations, who fund pension insurance, were not make actuarily sound payments into the fund.

The solution is fairly simple:
1) Require huge corporations that have multi-employer pensions to make larger insurance premium payments into the multi-employer PBGC fund.
2) Require labor unions to calculate reasonable rates of return when assessing the funding level of their pensions and require companies to make adequate contirbutions to their pension plans.
3) Cut benefits to pensioners rather than tax hard-working taxpayers in order to make up the difference in promised pensions.

It is hugely important that taxpayers resist bailing out private pensions as a Federally managed bailout of private, union plans may lead to bailouts of public sector funds.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Prepper_Ed For This Useful Post:
Old 11-08-2019, 04:55 PM
Jlrhiner's Avatar
Jlrhiner Jlrhiner is offline
Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arnold, Missouri
Age: 61
Posts: 1,265
Thanks: 2,423
Thanked 2,988 Times in 891 Posts
Default

The reason these pension plans are failing is because the employers are either not making the contributions or come back and take the money for other uses rather than leave it alone for the men and women who earned it.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jlrhiner For This Useful Post:
Old 11-08-2019, 05:54 PM
Madoc Madoc is offline
Target Shooter
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 429
Thanks: 620
Thanked 964 Times in 322 Posts
Default

I'm curious

Quote:Require huge corporations that have multi-employer pensions to make larger insurance premium payments into the multi-employer PBGC fund.

What makes you think even if this was enacted into law, that corporations would not just pass the cost onto taxpayers by raising prices and cutting staff?

Quote: require labor unions to calculate reasonable rates of return when assessing the funding level of their pensions.

Sorry, in what fantasy land have unions ever agreed to be reasonable in recent decades?
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Madoc For This Useful Post:
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-08-2019, 09:14 PM
bunny bunny is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,693
Thanks: 12,860
Thanked 5,902 Times in 2,537 Posts
Default

I believe the start of Unions was a good ides. However the unions are paid by the workers of the company. That means that we employ them to do a job for us. Have you ever seen how much the union pays themselves. Your top men and women in the union live like Kings and enjoy perks that the workers pay for. Their intention at the start of unionization was good and honorable but somewhere along the way they became greedy. Got a card from the union telling me to vote. Every person they listed was a liberal. Now I see where they are coming from and can imagine where they are going.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to bunny For This Useful Post:
Old 11-08-2019, 10:29 PM
Jlrhiner's Avatar
Jlrhiner Jlrhiner is offline
Curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Arnold, Missouri
Age: 61
Posts: 1,265
Thanks: 2,423
Thanked 2,988 Times in 891 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bunny View Post
I believe the start of Unions was a good ides. However the unions are paid by the workers of the company. That means that we employ them to do a job for us. Have you ever seen how much the union pays themselves. Your top men and women in the union live like Kings and enjoy perks that the workers pay for. Their intention at the start of unionization was good and honorable but somewhere along the way they became greedy. Got a card from the union telling me to vote. Every person they listed was a liberal. Now I see where they are coming from and can imagine where they are going.
I don't know how your Union does it, but mine (Boilermakers Local 27, St.Louis, MO.) pays our Field Reps General Foremans wages. Elected Officers that do not actually work in the office do so as volunteers, or get their Field Dues returned. Aint nobody living like Kings.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Jlrhiner For This Useful Post:
Old 11-09-2019, 10:23 AM
OldDesertrat OldDesertrat is offline
Target Shooter
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: South Georgia
Posts: 408
Thanks: 2
Thanked 543 Times in 239 Posts
Default

The FRB's low interest rates make it difficult for any pension fund's investments to have an adequate return. Those which are restrained from the stock market in particular are in trouble.

Most pension funds' investments need a return of eight to ten percent per year to be viable. Can't do that with bonds at two or three percent.
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-09-2019, 07:08 PM
Prepper_Ed's Avatar
Prepper_Ed Prepper_Ed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 227
Thanks: 248
Thanked 302 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jlrhiner View Post
The reason these pension plans are failing is because the employers are either not making the contributions or come back and take the money for other uses rather than leave it alone for the men and women who earned it.
The union pension managers have allowed corporations to make unreasonably small contributions in the past which contributes to the plans short-falls. The multi-employer PBGC has allowed corporations to make unreasonably low insurance premium contributions.

Once an employer contributes money to the plan, he can't pull it out.
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-09-2019, 07:18 PM
Prepper_Ed's Avatar
Prepper_Ed Prepper_Ed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 227
Thanks: 248
Thanked 302 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDesertrat View Post
The FRB's low interest rates make it difficult for any pension fund's investments to have an adequate return. Those which are restrained from the stock market in particular are in trouble.

Most pension funds' investments need a return of eight to ten percent per year to be viable. Can't do that with bonds at two or three percent.
Well-managed plans are invested in a mix of stocks and bonds, say 60/40. I don't believe there are many plans barred from investing in stocks, that was more a pre-1980s thing. Although corporations, unions and plan managers may be assuming 8 - 10% returns, returns of 7% are more likely over the long-run and entirely possible.

The shortfall between the overly aggressive assumption of 10% returns and reality has to be made up through higher contributions by employers, workers or both or through lower benefit payments.
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-09-2019, 07:35 PM
Goodwrench708's Avatar
Goodwrench708 Goodwrench708 is offline
SBs Resident Non Prepper
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Dominican Republic-Georgia
Age: 56
Posts: 5,469
Thanks: 5,157
Thanked 8,515 Times in 3,293 Posts
Default

Us taxpayers should not be bailing out Union Pensions.
If the Unions can not manage their own money ....then no one gets a check
The taxpayers should not bail out Union pensions
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Goodwrench708 For This Useful Post:
Old 11-09-2019, 10:27 PM
fistfulladirt fistfulladirt is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,196
Thanks: 2,678
Thanked 2,150 Times in 1,109 Posts
Default

CWA member for 25 years to present. First time I’ve heard of a union pension.
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2019, 10:05 AM
rabbitone's Avatar
rabbitone rabbitone is offline
Hiker
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 730
Thanks: 835
Thanked 977 Times in 389 Posts
Default

<Retired IT manager for finance> No one talks about the “real” BIG pension crisis :

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/...pension-plans/

“...But Moody’s Investors Service recently estimated that public pensions are underfunded by $4.4 trillion. That amount, which is equivalent to the economy of Germany, accounts for one-fifth of national debt. It’s a significant concern for public employees who were banking on a fully funded retirement to get them through their golden years. ...”

The $4.4 trillion is just US “public” pensions (in more than 600 US cities) ...then add private (business, unions, self-employed, farmers,...) pension shortfalls...then add pensions from around the world....the short fall number has not been defined well but I have see $13-$15 Trillion (not Billion) as the shortfall.

Then we hear the “...why did this happen?...” as a long long list of who done it. Legislators...employer management...pension administrators....and so forth. Yeah people over promised and under delivered. But there is more to it...

The macro view is this. Pensions were designed (using the 1960s model) with 2 main objectives. Deliver a yearly return AT MINIMUM in the range of 7.2% low to 8.7% high but on average 8.1% or better is expected to brake even. This old model was build on a large portion of fixed income assets (bonds) and smaller variable income (stocks). It was very common in the pension model to have a large portion (2/3) of the fixed (safe) income assets mandated as government bonds.

What no one saw coming was a 10 year period (last 10 years) where close to zero interest rates would dominate. Now imagine your pension fund that said 2/3 in Government bonds was mandatory. Whoops. We can’t make 8.1% this year or in fact any year in the last 10 years. Quick find some one blame. Yeah!..Ahhh it was the employer not contributing enough!!...Ahhhhh. No it was the pension fund not investing in the right stocks...

And each year gets worse as higher and higher pensions are promised...
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2019, 08:58 PM
Prepper_Ed's Avatar
Prepper_Ed Prepper_Ed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 227
Thanks: 248
Thanked 302 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fistfulladirt View Post
CWA member for 25 years to present. First time I’ve heard of a union pension.
They are multi-employer plans managed by the union the employees belong to. Most of the corporations who participate in the plan are small to medium sized.

Here's the poster child:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/.../#4d9ce2036c10
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2019, 09:03 PM
Prepper_Ed's Avatar
Prepper_Ed Prepper_Ed is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: NW Arkansas
Posts: 227
Thanks: 248
Thanked 302 Times in 128 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbitone View Post
<Retired IT manager for finance> No one talks about the “real” BIG pension crisis :

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/...pension-plans/

What no one saw coming was a 10 year period (last 10 years) where close to zero interest rates would dominate. Now imagine your pension fund that said 2/3 in Government bonds was mandatory. Whoops. We can’t make 8.1% this year or in fact any year in the last 10 years. Quick find some one blame. Yeah!..Ahhh it was the employer not contributing enough!!...Ahhhhh. No it was the pension fund not investing in the right stocks...

And each year gets worse as higher and higher pensions are promised...
Who is responsible for choosing and overseeing the management of a single employer pension plan? Who is responsible for keeping the plan funded if returns don't match assumptions?
Quick reply to this message
Old 11-10-2019, 09:30 PM
ksmedman's Avatar
ksmedman ksmedman is offline
Dunning-Kruger Survivor
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 6,986
Thanks: 11,183
Thanked 19,865 Times in 5,155 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodwrench708 View Post
Us taxpayers should not be bailing out Union Pensions.
If the Unions can not manage their own money ....then no one gets a check
The taxpayers should not bail out Union pensions
100% this.
Unions are crooked scams from top to bottom. Haven't accomplished anything worthwhile since the 20's probably.

Bunch of commies IMHO. Why should I be on the hook for their corruption and/or incompetence? And if it's the 'corporations fault' then what good are the darn Unions anyway? And how does that make it my problem???
__________________
“There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally, and attempting to make them equal.” – Frederich Hayek
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ksmedman For This Useful Post:
Old Yesterday, 05:38 PM
country_boy country_boy is offline
Hunter
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,400
Thanks: 50
Thanked 1,140 Times in 661 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prepper_Ed View Post
They are multi-employer plans managed by the union the employees belong to. Most of the corporations who participate in the plan are small to medium sized.

Here's the poster child:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/.../#4d9ce2036c10
As an (academic) engineer, we see a lot of union pensions in fields where the employees change jobs constantly ie construction. IBEW is the big one, but I think pipe fitters, operating engineers, laborers, insulators, etc do it. Not much other opportunity for a pension in those industries. I suspect teamsters and stevedores are in a similar situation.

I still remember the ****storm I created pumping manholes fresh out of college. We were paying a union contractor to show up with three guys to open a manhole lids and pump it out, maybe 2.5 hrs before work started. Because they were working critical infrastructure, working at night, and on overtime, they were paid $60/hr ( as a new hire engineer I got less than $20). Once they got the pump set up, they slept for 2 hrs- I had to stay up because I was responsible for them. After a week of this, I went and bought a pump and told them not to show up until starting time. They made a counteroffer of using laborers instead of electricians . By this point it was easier for me do do it myself. They eventually got over it, and were always professional about the work.
Quick reply to this message
Old Yesterday, 05:46 PM
PalmettoTree PalmettoTree is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 13,101
Thanks: 2,651
Thanked 17,661 Times in 7,392 Posts
Default

Root cause of the problem: UNIONS

You got what you voted for.
Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
bailout, pension, unions



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net