Posted on Aug 6, 2017
This tiny Sierra Valley town voted to pull out of CalPERS. Now city retirees are seeing their...
1.25K
6
9
3
3
0
Anyone living on a state pension, especially in California, should read this story and prepare
This tiny Sierra Valley town voted to pull out of CalPERS. Now city retirees are seeing their...
Posted from latimes.comPosted in these groups: 
Retirement
Retirement
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
1
1
0
Not to go into all the reasons this pension is billions in the hole - but politics and failure to see risk are two things that stick out. As well the state taking $1.6 billion to cover their debt didn't help.
The debt or “unfunded liability” (pension obligations over the next 30 years not covered by the projected assets) dropped to $43.3 billion as of June last year, down from about $49.9 billion in the previous year.
So even if this town would have stayed in the CalPERS they aren't free and clear - city fees would have gone up while pensions would be cut and taxpayers footing more of the bill.
IL faces a similar pension problem but much worse - Illinois's unfunded pension liabilities is around $100 billion +.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2017/06/05/illinois-credit-downgrade-proves-public-pensions-should-be-outlawed/#40d2b44f7d4a
The debt or “unfunded liability” (pension obligations over the next 30 years not covered by the projected assets) dropped to $43.3 billion as of June last year, down from about $49.9 billion in the previous year.
So even if this town would have stayed in the CalPERS they aren't free and clear - city fees would have gone up while pensions would be cut and taxpayers footing more of the bill.
IL faces a similar pension problem but much worse - Illinois's unfunded pension liabilities is around $100 billion +.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2017/06/05/illinois-credit-downgrade-proves-public-pensions-should-be-outlawed/#40d2b44f7d4a
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is the result of burdensome social programs. The government cannot be everyone's parents when they always mismanage other people's money. People need to take personal responsibility for their lives and that includes saving for retirement. People and bears tend to become lazy when they realize someone else will do the work for them.
(1)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
I wish I could have saved more for my retirement. Sadly, 15% of every penny I earned went to pay for other people's retirement. Imagine what I could have done with 15% of my lifetime (45 years) earnings (more than $3 million). That's $450,000. Imagine if I had invested it conservatively. I could easily have a retirement fund of $1.5 million. But, I didn't and I don't. Now that it's time for my retirement, other people are contributing 15% of their earnings to help support my retirement and the retirement of a growing population of elderly Americans. ("Wait", I hear you cry. "I'm not contributing 15%). Well, you are. You don't see it, but your employer is paying half of it, money that could be paid directly to you if they weren't required to give it to the government. As a self-employed person most of my life, I had the privilege of paying all of it myself. And the government invested that money very conservatively, in federal bonds. The Social Security Trust Fund is full of them and they're mostly worthless. The feds can't repay them so they print money to pay them. Money printed without value diminishes the value of our money. Thus, you're being taxed indirectly on income that was already taxed. Don't you just love government?
(1)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
I don't love what they've become, CPT Jack Durish; they've grown beyond the limits of the constitution. You have to wonder if any of the "leaders" were ever taught the lessons of diminishing returns.
An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation. - John Marshall, McCullough v. Maryland, 1819
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a6_2s34.html
An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation. - John Marshall, McCullough v. Maryland, 1819
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a6_2s34.html
Article 6, Clause 2: McCulloch v. Maryland
[D. Webster, for the plaintiff in error] . . . 2. The secondquestion is, whether, if the bank be constitutionally created,the state governments have power to tax it? The peopleof the United States have seen fit to divide sovereignty,and to establish a complex system. They have conferredcertain powers on the state governments, and certain otherpowers on the national government. As it was easy to foreseethat question must arise between these...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I'm not surprised this is going on in Cali..... The exit fee is insane I don't know how anyone would have allowed that to be written in.. unless they were getting a pay off for it.
(0)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Perhaps the United States should charge Kalifornia an "Exit Fee" for when they vote to secede from the Union.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google