To be fair, there is a diffrence between wages earned and the actual labour costs. A LOT of people seem to forget that.
The heads of US automakers are arrogant, lazy, unoriginal, buffoons with huge wallets that dont give a shit about a quality product. And were just in it for the perks, short term goals and gains.
The UAW are powerful, demanding, spoiled sulks who earned so much that they are detrimental to their own industry.
In my opinion they can have each other. Fuck 'em both.
0
To be fair, there is a diffrence between wages earned and the actual labour costs. A LOT of people seem to forget that.
The heads of US automakers are arrogant, lazy, unoriginal, buffoons with huge wallets that dont give a shit about a quality product. And were just in it for the perks, short term goals and gains.
The UAW are powerful, demanding, spoiled sulks who earned so much that they are detrimental to their own industry.
In my opinion they can have each other. Fuck 'em both.
explain to me how a pension plan is not a ponzi scheme
if you have 1000 employees and 300 retirees the pension plan pays the 300 retirees with dues from 1000 employees and probably has some leftover
this continues on until there are more retirees than employees paying in. if the company has nothing left in the pension fund because its been depleted by retiree payouts then the plan fails
i dont blame the workers or management...the plan itself is a failure unless of course you fund your own pension plan and you only get out the nominal amount you put in and you invest in cash the entire time your are funding.
Once again you might be a money guy, but your totally wrong about pensions. How pensions get paid is by the savings employers get by paying employees less in wages. Think of it as the employer taking care of your 401k plan for. Workers accept lower wages for their job over the course of their working career in order to get that pension. The employer is supposed to take those savings they get in the lower wages they paid out and invest them for you. Its no differnt then you investing in your own 401k plan, accept the employer is doing it for the worker.
You got this thing in your head that its a ponzi scheme paid for by the next guy and your 100 percent wrong. The employee actually paid for his own pension, thru lower wages while he was working.
Your completely mixed up on how pensions work. Its totally differnt then how ss works, where you need people to keep contributing in order to pay out.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
explain to me how a pension plan is not a ponzi scheme
if you have 1000 employees and 300 retirees the pension plan pays the 300 retirees with dues from 1000 employees and probably has some leftover
this continues on until there are more retirees than employees paying in. if the company has nothing left in the pension fund because its been depleted by retiree payouts then the plan fails
i dont blame the workers or management...the plan itself is a failure unless of course you fund your own pension plan and you only get out the nominal amount you put in and you invest in cash the entire time your are funding.
Once again you might be a money guy, but your totally wrong about pensions. How pensions get paid is by the savings employers get by paying employees less in wages. Think of it as the employer taking care of your 401k plan for. Workers accept lower wages for their job over the course of their working career in order to get that pension. The employer is supposed to take those savings they get in the lower wages they paid out and invest them for you. Its no differnt then you investing in your own 401k plan, accept the employer is doing it for the worker.
You got this thing in your head that its a ponzi scheme paid for by the next guy and your 100 percent wrong. The employee actually paid for his own pension, thru lower wages while he was working.
Your completely mixed up on how pensions work. Its totally differnt then how ss works, where you need people to keep contributing in order to pay out.
Also KOAJ, amazing how you like to always attack the little worker earning a pension, yet you never say two words about the fatcat corporate bigshots who walk awy with hundreds of millions of dollars when they retire. Those kinds of costs are what dooms companies, not pensions which are actually paid for by the employees themselves. The pension price tag doesnt even come close to the amounts given to the bighsots when they retire.
0
Also KOAJ, amazing how you like to always attack the little worker earning a pension, yet you never say two words about the fatcat corporate bigshots who walk awy with hundreds of millions of dollars when they retire. Those kinds of costs are what dooms companies, not pensions which are actually paid for by the employees themselves. The pension price tag doesnt even come close to the amounts given to the bighsots when they retire.
Theres a lot of spinning going on on almost every article i read. I found one a while back where they alledged labour costs were so high because they were using some tricky math.
In this article it was:
wages + pensions + benefits paid in total to everyone divided by the number of people currently employed.
Thing is the side of the equation before the divide includes all retirees. THATS how they can make it sound as if people are earning so much.
Like i said above. Fuck both sides in this debate. But there is a lot of number skewing and generalization going on.
0
Theres a lot of spinning going on on almost every article i read. I found one a while back where they alledged labour costs were so high because they were using some tricky math.
In this article it was:
wages + pensions + benefits paid in total to everyone divided by the number of people currently employed.
Thing is the side of the equation before the divide includes all retirees. THATS how they can make it sound as if people are earning so much.
Like i said above. Fuck both sides in this debate. But there is a lot of number skewing and generalization going on.
Once again you might be a money guy, but your totally wrong about pensions. How pensions get paid is by the savings employers get by paying employees less in wages. Think of it as the employer taking care of your 401k plan for. Workers accept lower wages for their job over the course of their working career in order to get that pension. The employer is supposed to take those savings they get in the lower wages they paid out and invest them for you. Its no differnt then you investing in your own 401k plan, accept the employer is doing it for the worker.
You got this thing in your head that its a ponzi scheme paid for by the next guy and your 100 percent wrong. The employee actually paid for his own pension, thru lower wages while he was working.
Your completely mixed up on how pensions work. Its totally differnt then how ss works, where you need people to keep contributing in order to pay out.
mgmt is just as guilty in all of this and dont want to see c-level execs walk away with millions when the worker gets nothing
cd - think of it as a see-saw. on one side you have people paying into the pension plan, on the other you have people receiving benefits. once the people taking dollars out outweigh the people paying dollars in, the plan fails
picture the see-saw with bricks on each seat...and each year add a few to people paying in and add more to people paying out and watch see saw tip over after a period of time.
pension plans invest in stocks, debt, money markets and those values fluctuate...combine a 40% drop in the markets in the last year and us job losses and a growing number of retirees and these plans have major issues in the next few years
unless you keep your investment in cash and only take out what you put in upon retirement then the plan will not work over a long period of time b/c there is never a balance of new workers and retiring workers
0
Quote Originally Posted by cd329:
Once again you might be a money guy, but your totally wrong about pensions. How pensions get paid is by the savings employers get by paying employees less in wages. Think of it as the employer taking care of your 401k plan for. Workers accept lower wages for their job over the course of their working career in order to get that pension. The employer is supposed to take those savings they get in the lower wages they paid out and invest them for you. Its no differnt then you investing in your own 401k plan, accept the employer is doing it for the worker.
You got this thing in your head that its a ponzi scheme paid for by the next guy and your 100 percent wrong. The employee actually paid for his own pension, thru lower wages while he was working.
Your completely mixed up on how pensions work. Its totally differnt then how ss works, where you need people to keep contributing in order to pay out.
mgmt is just as guilty in all of this and dont want to see c-level execs walk away with millions when the worker gets nothing
cd - think of it as a see-saw. on one side you have people paying into the pension plan, on the other you have people receiving benefits. once the people taking dollars out outweigh the people paying dollars in, the plan fails
picture the see-saw with bricks on each seat...and each year add a few to people paying in and add more to people paying out and watch see saw tip over after a period of time.
pension plans invest in stocks, debt, money markets and those values fluctuate...combine a 40% drop in the markets in the last year and us job losses and a growing number of retirees and these plans have major issues in the next few years
unless you keep your investment in cash and only take out what you put in upon retirement then the plan will not work over a long period of time b/c there is never a balance of new workers and retiring workers
mgmt is just as guilty in all of this and dont want to see c-level execs walk away with millions when the worker gets nothing
cd - think of it as a see-saw. on one side you have people paying into the pension plan, on the other you have people receiving benefits. once the people taking dollars out outweigh the people paying dollars in, the plan fails
picture the see-saw with bricks on each seat...and each year add a few to people paying in and add more to people paying out and watch see saw tip over after a period of time.
pension plans invest in stocks, debt, money markets and those values fluctuate...combine a 40% drop in the markets in the last year and us job losses and a growing number of retirees and these plans have major issues in the next few years
unless you keep your investment in cash and only take out what you put in upon retirement then the plan will not work over a long period of time b/c there is never a balance of new workers and retiring workers
KOAJ,
This is wrong. Each person basically pays for their own pension over the life of their working careers, thru lower wages. If where i worked didnt want to provide me with a pension{even thou i paid for it} then they should have given me the money in my paycheck and i would have done the same thing the company was supposed to [manage where the money was going}
When the pension is run properly, it doesnt matter if there arent any new people, because each person has paid for their own pension anyways. Where as ss, relies on people to keep paying into the fund, in order to pay out. Big difference here.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
mgmt is just as guilty in all of this and dont want to see c-level execs walk away with millions when the worker gets nothing
cd - think of it as a see-saw. on one side you have people paying into the pension plan, on the other you have people receiving benefits. once the people taking dollars out outweigh the people paying dollars in, the plan fails
picture the see-saw with bricks on each seat...and each year add a few to people paying in and add more to people paying out and watch see saw tip over after a period of time.
pension plans invest in stocks, debt, money markets and those values fluctuate...combine a 40% drop in the markets in the last year and us job losses and a growing number of retirees and these plans have major issues in the next few years
unless you keep your investment in cash and only take out what you put in upon retirement then the plan will not work over a long period of time b/c there is never a balance of new workers and retiring workers
KOAJ,
This is wrong. Each person basically pays for their own pension over the life of their working careers, thru lower wages. If where i worked didnt want to provide me with a pension{even thou i paid for it} then they should have given me the money in my paycheck and i would have done the same thing the company was supposed to [manage where the money was going}
When the pension is run properly, it doesnt matter if there arent any new people, because each person has paid for their own pension anyways. Where as ss, relies on people to keep paying into the fund, in order to pay out. Big difference here.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
