Political Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   USPS must fund retirements but Private Sector a no go! (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=7858)

Oerets 07-15-2014 07:11 PM
USPS must fund retirements but Private Sector a no go!
 
So just how is this happening? A bailout for the private sector but the USPS is held to a different standard by funding retirements fully for many years to come.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...-traveled-road

""With the highway legislation, lawmakers resorted to an accounting trick called "pension smoothing." By letting companies with traditional pensions delay required payments to those funds, companies will have higher profits, which will boost what they pay in taxes. The House plan would raise $10.9 billion, most of which is needed to pay for highway projects through the end of the year. About $6.4 billion of the total would come from pension smoothing.""

""The downside is that near-term smoothing could lead to long-term bumpiness; the trick could leave pensions underfunded in the future, resulting in higher costs to taxpayers if the federal government has to eventually step in to take over those pension funds.""



Just being done to keep from raising the fuel tax.



Barney

bobabode 07-15-2014 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerets (Post 230915)
So just how is this happening? A bailout for the private sector but the USPS is held to a different standard by funding retirements fully for many years to come.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...-traveled-road

""With the highway legislation, lawmakers resorted to an accounting trick called "pension smoothing." By letting companies with traditional pensions delay required payments to those funds, companies will have higher profits, which will boost what they pay in taxes. The House plan would raise $10.9 billion, most of which is needed to pay for highway projects through the end of the year. About $6.4 billion of the total would come from pension smoothing.""

""The downside is that near-term smoothing could lead to long-term bumpiness; the trick could leave pensions underfunded in the future, resulting in higher costs to taxpayers if the federal government has to eventually step in to take over those pension funds.""



Just being done to keep from raising the fuel tax.



Barney
It's just to keep the Norquist-lings at bay until after the next election fundraising season. The problem there is that the House members are off and running on Nov.8th to gather donations for the next election in two years.
What a racket. :rolleyes:

icenine 07-15-2014 08:23 PM
I think that moron from Vista (Issa) was behind the effort to force the USPS to completely fund retirement pensions in an effort to destroy it by making it noncompetitive with other companies like Fedex, etc.

Republicans hate infrastructure now. The only thing they do not hate is hating government in general.
Never mind that those in Congress will never lose their pensions. That includes all the baggers too.

merrylander 07-16-2014 06:54 AM
Are there actually any private pension plans left? I thought the courts had let them slide out from under the plans by declaring bankruptcy.

Oerets 07-16-2014 08:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by merrylander (Post 230969)
Are there actually any private pension plans left? I thought the courts had let them slide out from under the plans by declaring bankruptcy.
My thinking that the few still waiting to be claimed by those who were enrolled years ago are the ones they are after. My wife with close to forty years with a company still has hers. But this hits close to home for me. Mine was through legal means used up by the company so they could file for bankruptcy and then the government is now forced to pay. Of course not the same amount of offers healthcare.

Plus I'm not to sure of it's effects on the people now getting a check already retired.

I was more wanting to point out the Hypocrisy of this action. Nothing new other then that.


Barney

Tom Joad 07-16-2014 09:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerets (Post 230973)
Mine was through legal means used up by the company so they could file for bankruptcy and then the government is now forced to pay.
So the government has to clean up the mess after the private sector Robber Barons are though raping and pillaging?

Tom Joad 07-16-2014 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by icenine (Post 230925)
I think that moron from Vista (Issa) was behind the effort to force the USPS to completely fund retirement pensions in an effort to destroy it by making it noncompetitive with other companies like Fedex, etc.
The postal service was a place where ordinary working stiffs could earn a decent salary and benefits.

We can't have that.

What we need is a compliant, job scared workforce that will work a double shift with no notice and then clock out when they hit 38.5 hours for the week so that we don't have to pay them any OT or give them any benefits. All that for fucking minimum wage.

Pio1980 07-16-2014 09:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Joad (Post 230979)
So the government has to clean up the mess after the private sector Robber Barons are though raping and pillaging?
Private profiteering, public borne loss burden. Who pays? We do. They are essentially shamelessly picking our pockets to stuff their own.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Oerets 07-16-2014 09:43 AM
The defined benefit pension is still enforce for some older workers, waiting to collect. I see this as an attempt to allow the private sector to get out of them once and for all. Letting the US government pickup the tab.


Barney

Tom Joad 07-16-2014 09:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerets (Post 230990)
I see this as an attempt to allow the private sector to get out of them once and for all. Letting the US government pickup the tab.


Barney
Actually that would be a good thing IMO.

If I were dictator I would just double Social Security and do away with all other retirement plans. And the way I'd fund it would be to leave the employee contribution at 6.2%, but increase the employers share by whatever it takes. I'd also remove the cap entirely and make every employer participate in it, no exceptions. Self employed would have to pay both the employee and employers share. Again, no exceptions.

And if you feel you need more than 2X Social Security, then you need to save for that yourself. After all Social Security is the only plan that has shown real dependability over the years.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.