Stanford study - California Pensions are underfund by $1 trillion!

Freddie Millergogo

Freddie Millergogo

Well-Known Member
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-02/stanford-study-reveals-california-pensions-underfunded-1-trillion-or-93k-household

After averaging $77,700 per household in 2014, the amount of public pension underfunding for the state of California jumped to a staggering $92,748 per household in 2015.

LOL! Those insane and lavish govt workers pensions are going to blow up sooner than later. Please liberals in California - secede. Don't wait. When this shit blows it will not be pretty and Chicago and Illinois are right behind you.

The poor taxpayers - f'ed again. 40 million more illegals into Cali will solve this.

More popcorn please.
 
squarepush3r

squarepush3r

Well-Known Member
yeah, California and New York are highest GPD states in USA, but if you look at total debt levels, they are also the highest per capita.



edit: This info if a bit out of date, the main article has more up to date info.
 
Last edited:
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
Freddie Millergogo said:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-02/stanford-study-reveals-california-pensions-underfunded-1-trillion-or-93k-household

After averaging $77,700 per household in 2014, the amount of public pension underfunding for the state of California jumped to a staggering $92,748 per household in 2015.

LOL! Those insane and lavish govt workers pensions are going to blow up sooner than later. Please liberals in California - secede. Don't wait. When this shit blows it will not be pretty and Chicago and Illinois are right behind you.

The poor taxpayers - f'ed again. 40 million more illegals into Cali will solve this.

More popcorn please.
Click to expand...
This is mostly a result of the taxpayers of California not paying anything into CALPERS for the 20 or so years that CALPERS was self funded thru employee contributions & it's investment portfolios. But since the economic problems of 2008 those investments have been underperforming so taxpayers must kick in the difference. The overall pension obligation may be large but for the most part CALPERS pays for itself thru employee contributions & investment returns...
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
This is mostly a result of the taxpayers of California not paying anything into CALPERS for the 20 or so years that CALPERS was self funded thru employee contributions & it's investment portfolios. But since the economic problems of 2008 those investments have been underperforming so taxpayers must kick in the difference. The overall pension obligation may be large but for the most part CALPERS pays for itself thru employee contributions & investment returns...
Click to expand...
Don't bother with facts.

We're in a post-fact society now.
 
G

god1

Well-Known Member
CalPers has been under funded for decades. The fact is the employee unions sought and gained pension contracts not tethered to investment performance and yet provided guaranteed payouts. It's a pretty sweet deal when you can retire at 50, with full benefits and have the dollar amount determined by your last year of compensation as opposed to an average of a set number of years. Employees were certainly motivated to "spike" their compensation. Employee contribution is a fraction of the face value of the contract. Years ago it was on the average of about 14%.

For the most part the programs have changed as the legislators grapple with trying to keep the various programs viable. As a whole, the so called "self funding" has never been higher than about 70%.

It was a pretty good racket for those that were actually able to capitalize. What the hell, the poor f*** tax payer had no say at the bargaining table but got stuck with the bill.

Private run pension programs were tied to investments. In this day and age they are rare. The performance of 401K's, IRA's, RET's, ect., are not guaranteed. That's why they're called investments.

CalPers pensions are guaranteed programs regardless of the economic climate or performance of the investment medium. Big differentiator vs the private sector.
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
god1 said:
CalPers has been under funded for decades. The fact is the employee unions sought and gained pension contracts not tethered to investment performance and yet provided guaranteed payouts. It's a pretty sweet deal when you can retire at 50, with full benefits and have the dollar amount determined by your last year of compensation as opposed to an average of a set number of years. Employees were certainly motivated to "spike" their compensation. Employee contribution is a fraction of the face value of the contract. Years ago it was on the average of about 14%.

For the most part the programs have changed as the legislators grapple with trying to keep the various programs viable. As a whole, the so called "self funding" has never been higher than about 70%.

It was a pretty good racket for those that were actually able to capitalize. What the hell, the poor f*** tax payer had no say at the bargaining table but got stuck with the bill.

Private run pension programs were tied to investments. In this day and age they are rare. The performance of 401K's, IRA's, RET's, ect., are not guaranteed. That's why they're called investments.

CalPers pensions are guaranteed programs regardless of the economic climate or performance of the investment medium. Big differentiator vs the private sector.
Click to expand...
Many of the state employee's gains in retirement were made in contract negotiations "in lieu of pay raises"....many state workers went 5-6-7 years without a pay raise but more retirement....kick the can down the road. The California tax payers milked their workers for years with furlows & no pay raises...
P.S. Most of the paid holidays for state workers were in lieu of pay raises. They didn't ask for all those days off...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top