These pension plans are at risk of going broke

CNBC ^ | July 12, 2019 | Lorie Konish

[where's_the_Outrage?]

If your pension is through a private company, Union, state or local Government the Federal Government should have no liability for your pension.

So all those A$$holes you voted in to give you a great pension are not the responsibility of the US GVT.

And if you continue to vote for retirement confiscation Democrats, you may get what you deserve.

[Wuli]

THE ONLY legislation in this area should do one of two things.

If the PBGC is going to remain in existence, then (1) the law needs to mandate that any pension plan desiring to remain eligible for possible help from the PBGC has ten years to improve the funds managed to drastically lower their underfunded conditions, or lose eligibility for PBGC assistance, and (2) all funds now eligible to receive PBGC assistance must close to new members any funds that are defined benefit funds, establishing only defined contribution plans for new members, and (3) the PBGC has to be required by law to raise it’s premiums on the covered plans, constantly, to match the underfunded risk the plans demonstrate, to the point that the PBGC cannot itself be underfunded at any time.

Or, the PBGC has to be closed, returning any funds it has as rebates to the plans it got premium payments from, and those plans can then go out on the private market to get underfunded plan risk insurance on their own.

There is much wrong with the pension plans involved.

But the PBGC has been wrongly run also. It has not been (maybe not empowered to be) a strict enough policeman/insurance plan for the pension plans it has agreed to assume an insured risk of covering for underfunded conditions. A strictly private, non-governmental insurer would have refused their insurance to plans that were continually poorly run, and charged higher premiums all along.

As to the pensioners, while I have SOME sympathy for them, some of them received promises (benefit expectations) that they never should have been promised. Some of the promises were actuarially irresponsible, some were made with rosy unrealistic expectations, and many were made by decisions of persons who would no longer be left holding the bag when their promises collapsed against reality. It’s only too bad that laws don’t make it so that you are never released from the fiduciary responsibility for financial mistakes you make with other persons money, even after you’ve left the official seat of that responsibility but the consequences of your decisions have not yet played out. If there were such laws, the officers and board members, past and present, of many public and private pension funds could be locked up for “professional malpractice”.

These are all arguments for ALL “pension contributions”, by employers and employees, to be paid on behalf of the employee into a private retirement/[pension system of the employee’s own choosing, and that such deposits be allowed to be moved to a different plan, without penalty, anytime the individual is unhappy with how the funds are being managed. However, the only type of plan such contributions should be allowed to be paid into are either a mere “retirement investment account” mandated to be held until a certain retirement age, or a private not-for-profit defined contribution pension plan. Anything else well make bogus promises not to be believed, or expensive at someone else’s expense.

[dynachrome]

Colorado is not in good shape, either.

[minnesota_bound]

1 stock at a time. Done well like hundreds of thousands in the last 3 years with just the last 2 stocks I had which were nvidia and amd.