GM to unload $26B in pension liabilities by shifting white-collar retirees to annuity

Quote from Anonymouse : EVERYONE has a vested interest in seeing Medicare succeed, especially those who can afford to pay for private health care insurance. This isn't even in question, if you like and want a program, you have to be prepared to pay for it, unlike the little old lady from the Tea Party shouting matches a couple years ago who wanted the gummint to keep it's hands off her Social Security payments.

if you can afford private health care insurance.. why would you "especially" have an interest in seeing medicare succeed?

Also 16% of medicare recipients are less than 65 years of age are SSDI recipients. Which can be a very screwy system. Also approx 50% of those people have private healthcare before 65 which I personally find somewhat unacceptable.

When I sit down today and try and plan a retirement I'm not shooting for 65. I'm shooting for 75-80 because of the changes in life expectancy. We should be taxes everyone across the board more who enroll. I'm tired so just spit-balling.. but what if you received a permanent decreased SS payment for enrollment at 65? As people live longer things have to change... the babyboomers hitting retirement was something we've been anticipated for decades, yet everyone will act as if it's a freaking surprise when the costs skyrocket.

I know I'll work well into my late 60's.. I like to work. I hope I'll still like to work.. I give up vacations now to save up today and benefit tomorrow. Isn't that worth something.. maybe more tax breaks for IRA/401k savers?

Quote from DJPlayer : if you can afford private health care insurance.. why would you "especially" have an interest in seeing medicare succeed?

Because if it doesn't, the need to care for those who can't pay still will not go away.
Unless you make it a crime to service the poor, the very hospitals and doctors insureds use will be in jeopardy. Up to 40% of their budgets are MC reliant, some even more so.
No medical care for the poor, large scale epidemics and increased crime to pay for medical services desperately needed by the poor.

This is what I talk about when I criticize people for not being able to follow a chain of logic - this wasn't a "rocket science" extrapolation.
Insureds will pay for it one way or another.

Quote from DJPlayer : Also 16% of medicare recipients are less than 65 years of age are SSDI recipients. Which can be a very screwy system. Also approx 50% of those people have private healthcare before 65 which I personally find somewhat unacceptable.

SSA eligibility is already changing.
Anyone born after 1937 already has to wait longer than their 65th birthday.
Anyone born after 1960, (52 or younger), already has to wait until age 67.

As for that 16%, do you know how hard it is to qualify for SSDI?
It's really hard, you have to be pretty much disabled for life.
Included in those covered under Medicare and under 65 are the minor children of people who received SSA or SSDI, which probably makes up a fairly large chunck of that 16%.
Again, this isn't "rocket science deductive ability". Most people are already aware that minor children of deceased SSA recipients are eligible for coverage under Medicare.
They just fail to connect the dots and get all "righteous" about paying for something THEY aren't getting and so feel nobody else should.
What a selfish country America has become.

Quote from DJPlayer : When I sit down today and try and plan a retirement I'm not shooting for 65. I'm shooting for 75-80 because of the changes in life expectancy. We should be taxes everyone across the board more who enroll. I'm tired so just spit-balling.. but what if you received a permanent decreased SS payment for enrollment at 65? As people live longer things have to change... the babyboomers hitting retirement was something we've been anticipated for decades, yet everyone will act as if it's a freaking surprise when the costs skyrocket.

Again, some changes were already made, perhaps more tweaks are in order as the retirees mount, but a failure to be Nostradamus isn't grounds for just trashing a great idea.
Sweden makes it work, a LOT of countries make it work, but then those countries aren't in the business of starting perpetual wars & simultaneously cutting taxes on the wealthy to enrich their buddies in the oil business either.

Quote from DJPlayer : I know I'll work well into my late 60's.. I like to work. I hope I'll still like to work.. I give up vacations now to save up today and benefit tomorrow. Isn't that worth something.. maybe more tax breaks for IRA/401k savers?

You KNOW you'll work well into your 60s?
What are you, Nostradamus's great great great grandchild?
Miss Cleo's illegitimate son?
I too thought I would work forever - until I died.
Since dying I've been unable to find steady employment, even part time work.
People don't like hiring zombies and there is no EEOC protection for people who've died and been resurrected again.

I was only seriously sick 3X in my entire life - all 3 with a bad flu.
I'd never been injured on the job seriously, I had absolutely no reason to suspect I would one day find myself unable to get gainful employment before I was old and decrepit.
Yet here I am, too young to retire and get SSA, too young even to retire early and get my Carpenter's Union pension at age 62.
No insurance, no income from gainful employment & a disabled partner who will never work again either.
Fortunately I was smart enough and lucky enough to plan ahead so I'm not in the street already, but it's trying and I cannot predict I won't be one day if another catastrophe wipes out what I have left in real estate.

Do you have some secret plan that protects your investment income 100% from disappearing?
Your 401k investments are recession/depression economy-proof?
Or are you just another one of those who think they are so smart they couldn't possibly find themselves ever needing SSA and Medicare - like I was?
Are you so willing to bet on things completely out of your control that you would discard what little there is to at least cushion your poverty should you find yourself in a position like me?

Quote from Anonymouse : Do you have some secret plan that protects your investment income 100% from disappearing? Your 401k investments are recession/depression economy-proof? Or are you just another one of those who think they are so smart they couldn't possibly find themselves ever needing SSA and Medicare - like I was? Are you so willing to bet on things completely out of your control that you would discard what little there is to at least cushion your poverty should you find yourself in a position like me?

Isn't just phenomenal how so many people are unable to see themselves in another's place?

And seem to think nothing of allowing the elderly to die prematurely as long as they've got their coverage.

But finally see the light when they're facing forced retirement due to age discrimination or disability.

They probably don't even know how expensive medical coverage is when you're over 65, if you can get it at all.....

Quote from Anonymouse : Because if it doesn't, the need to care for those who can't pay still will not go away. Unless you make it a crime to service the poor, the very hospitals and doctors insureds use will be in jeopardy. Up to 40% of their budgets are MC reliant, some even more so. No medical care for the poor, large scale epidemics and increased crime to pay for medical services desperately needed by the poor. This is what I talk about when I criticize people for not being able to follow a chain of logic - this wasn't a "rocket science" extrapolation. Insureds will pay for it one way or another.

see this is where you chain of logic breaks you attempt to connect point A -> B. once that link is broken you think A is affected because B continues to do the same and has an adverse affect on A. You chain of logic is completely static with no ability for modification. This is what I refer to an inability to see beyond what you've been fed, or even outside of a tiny black box. As I previously mentioned per government statistics 50% of people have private healthcare insurance before turning 65. If the cost of healthcare is lowered w/ the subsidies put into Medicare/aid then suddenly the number could probably hit 80% thus the effect on the population is minimized. You see point A and B alone.. w/o considered any other possible points, like C, D, E etc.. example If I lost my job do I go sit on my ass and go on welfare.. no I get another job.. Your example would put me straight to unemployment followed by welfare etc..

Quote : SSA eligibility is already changing. Anyone born after 1937 already has to wait longer than their 65th birthday. Anyone born after 1960, (52 or younger), already has to wait until age 67.

yet still doesn't follow the pattern of the extension of estimate on life expectancy.. another break in the pure logical chain in how things work. SS eligibility should follow life expectancy and possibly factor in a few other variables minutely.

Quote : As for that 16%, do you know how hard it is to qualify for SSDI? It's really hard, you have to be pretty much disabled for life. Included in those covered under Medicare and under 65 are the minor children of people who received SSA or SSDI, which probably makes up a fairly large chunck of that 16%. Again, this isn't "rocket science deductive ability". Most people are already aware that minor children of deceased SSA recipients are eligible for coverage under Medicare. They just fail to connect the dots and get all "righteous" about paying for something THEY aren't getting and so feel nobody else should. What a selfish country America has become.[/COLOR][/B]Again, some changes were already made, perhaps more tweaks are in order as the retirees mount, but a failure to be Nostradamus isn't grounds for just trashing a great idea. Sweden makes it work, a LOT of countries make it work, but then those countries aren't in the business of starting perpetual wars & simultaneously cutting taxes on the wealthy to enrich their buddies in the oil business either.You KNOW you'll work well into your 60s?

those other countries are mere blips on our economic screen also.. they could possibly fall of the face of the earth and we might not notice.

let's look at SSDI for another moment..

http://arthritis.about.com/cs/dis...a/ssdi.htm

Quote : A person must not only be unable to do his or her previous work but cannot engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy, considering the persons: age education work experience

lets say for example I'm 20, dropped out of H.S. broke my arm and professionally have to lift 55lbs. Arguing a week economy with limited jobs, experience and education sounds like I would qualify??? I've seem some people on SSDI for some pretty absolutely ridiculous reasons. And they just let these people ride on it for quite sometime.

Quote : What are you, Nostradamus's great great great grandchild? Miss Cleo's illegitimate son? I too thought I would work forever - until I died. Since dying I've been unable to find steady employment, even part time work. People don't like hiring zombies and there is no EEOC protection for people who've died and been resurrected again. I was only seriously sick 3X in my entire life - all 3 with a bad flu. I'd never been injured on the job seriously, I had absolutely no reason to suspect I would one day find myself unable to get gainful employment before I was old and decrepit. Yet here I am, too young to retire and get SSA, too young even to retire early and get my Carpenter's Union pension at age 62. No insurance, no income from gainful employment & a disabled partner who will never work again either. Fortunately I was smart enough and lucky enough to plan ahead so I'm not in the street already, but it's trying and I cannot predict I won't be one day if another catastrophe wipes out what I have left in real estate.

If something catastrophe occurs and you get wiped.. I believe it's 100% your fault for being ignorant to the possibility. I could live w/o healthcare, go with only liability insurance for autos, limit my tort insurance, drop my premium on my home to cover less. I could lower probably a dozen payments I make to decrease my monthly expenses and increase my possible liabilities. But then again.. I guess I choose to be prepared for the catastrophic.

Quote : Do you have some secret plan that protects your investment income 100% from disappearing? Your 401k investments are recession/depression economy-proof? Or are you just another one of those who think they are so smart they couldn't possibly find themselves ever needing SSA and Medicare - like I was? Are you so willing to bet on things completely out of your control that you would discard what little there is to at least cushion your poverty should you find yourself in a position like me?

I have safeguards in place that watch for certain percentage drops.. if that drop is encountered it moves money to bonds, mutual fund etc.. So yes... I'm big into the stock market.. I manage my IRA daily. I could probably spit off the estimates and quarterly results of each position or even break down the percentages of assets distributing in each ETF position. Knowledge is power, ignorance is well.. something people really on as an excuse for government assistance. (although not everyone, just those that willingly role the dice in life to save a couple bucks). I'm in my 30's and have estimated my retirement funding into my late/mid 80's w/o taking into account homeownership assets etc.. Haven't you planned the same?

Quote from DJPlayer : If something catastrophe occurs and you get wiped.. I believe it's 100% your fault for being ignorant to the possibility. I could live w/o healthcare, go with only liability insurance for autos, limit my tort insurance, drop my premium on my home to cover less. I could lower probably a dozen payments I make to decrease my monthly expenses and increase my possible liabilities. But then again.. I guess I choose to be prepared for the catastrophic.

How MANY catastrophic events do you "plan for"?
The reason I didn't have health care when I had my heart attack and died is because I had to quit working to become the sole health care provider for my wife and her $1M new kidney.
For a time I was still covered under her old plan, (while she went through a year of dialysis), but eventually that also lapsed. Her "Cadillac" gummint plan had a $500,000 LIFE TIME cap for any one disease, which we exceeded long before we got to the transplant stage a year after her kidneys crashed.

How does one reasonably prepare for kidney failure in one spouse and a deadly heart attack 18 months later, to the other?
Um, make millions of dollars BEFORE it occurs, maybe?
My bad, I didn't plan for that and only worked 300 hours a month. Clearly not enough to provide those millions.

Quote from Anonymouse : How does one reasonably prepare for kidney failure in one spouse and a deadly heart attack 18 months later, to the other? Um, make millions of dollars BEFORE it occurs, maybe? My bad, I didn't plan for that and only worked 300 hours a month. Clearly not enough to provide those millions.

I guess that was your mistake then.. by the problems you describe as a couple.. that sounds like a decent age.. by 55 or so you should have about a million alone in your 401k or IRA etc.. Home is already paid for etc.. etc..

Bottom line is all these surgeries, procedures, services etc.. are not free. Somehow in your mind you see them as services that should be basically free (or financially provided by someone other than yourself). At the same time that you want these services provided to at low or no cost. you also expect the absolute best service money can buy. Why not let med students w/ only 4 yr degrees perform procedures? Actually why even require degrees? If you want low cost healthcare (or no cost) what entitles you to Cadillac level service?

Quote from DJPlayer : I guess that was your mistake then.. by the problems you describe as a couple.. that sounds like a decent age.. by 55 or so you should have about a million alone in your 401k or IRA etc.. Home is already paid for etc.. etc.. Bottom line is all these surgeries, procedures, services etc.. are not free. Somehow in your mind you see them as services that should be basically free (or financially provided by someone other than yourself). At the same time that you want these services provided to at low or no cost. you also expect the absolute best service money can buy. Why not let med students w/ only 4 yr degrees perform procedures? Actually why even require degrees? If you want low cost healthcare (or no cost) what entitles you to Cadillac level service?

Because that's how insurance is supposed to work. The few who have catastrophes are funded by the many who don't. Who, when rational, understand that in return they will be taken care of if they have the bad fortune to become one of the few.

Problem is, too many gamble that they won't be among the few, and end up being subsidized by the tax payer and the responsibly insured, making insurance so expensive that even more take that gamble.

Quote from DJPlayer : http://triblive.com/news/1880796-74/pension-state-legislation-employees-county-pileggi-plan-reform-retirement-senate http://triblive.com/news/1888117-74/plans-401-defined-employees-pennsylvania-pension-contribution-state-benefit-bloomingdale Getting a matching 401k is like saying don't let the door hit you on the way out?? seriously? In what world did working for a company for a finite number of years create an obligation to support you till the day you die?

I agree. This comment is ridiculous.

Quote from Dr. J : Funny part is.... a 401k is YOURS. You can decide how it's invested, change investments around, even roll-over to a new job. Often there is employer match - free money! Yet some would rather have a PROMISE by some president/ceo/elected official? Huh?

Most people believe all else equal pensions are better deals than 401ks. I certainly do.

Quote from DJPlayer : I love 401k's because you control the assets in them (excluding sometimes the matching funds). I recently flipped an old 401k to an IRA and handpicked a set of ETF's and a few positions I wanted a 1yr stake in. Problem is that it creates a finite sum of money. A pension in an set payment you receive till death. Imagine this.. your mother cared for you in the womb, she took care of you till 18 years of age and often longer. Should children then be forced to financially care for their parents till death? I just proved at least 19 or more years of FT service.

You act as if pensions are not earned and that they are handouts. That cannot be further from the truth. Why so much anger towards the working people?

Quote from TRNT : You act as if pensions are not earned and that they are handouts. That cannot be further from the truth. Why so much anger towards the working people?

i would argue that pensions are earned but due to unfair political deals (quid pro quo) they are too generous. My best friend is an accoutant, just tonight he told me about a client (who is a retired teacher) that just cleared 1 million dollars in total income from her pension ALONE. he has worked with her for > 20 years as her accountant. he remarked that her contribution into the pension was less than $1000 (in total, for all years working). I did not believe him at first but he you went on and on about it. he is one of those accountant/finance guys who knows what he is talking about. now, I dont expect you to automatically accept that as fact but I beieve him. if thats the truth then I think it is pretty damn ridiculous.

as an aside, i know a guy getting ready to retire from the local police in my county after working for 20 years. 20. twenty. I know cause we have known each other for that long and he clearly explained it to me (although he did not tell me what he would receive).

so, I am pretty confident that the public pension system is broken. (I have other stories too but won't blabber on about all of them.)

Quote from SigX : i would argue that pensions are earned but due to unfair political deals (quid pro quo) they are too generous. My best friend is an accoutant, just tonight he told me about a client (who is a retired teacher) that just cleared 1 million dollars in total income from her pension ALONE. he has worked with her for > 20 years as her accountant. he remarked that her contribution into the pension was less than $1000 (in total, for all years working). I did not believe him at first but he you went on and on about it. he is one of those accountant/finance guys who knows what he is talking about. now, I dont expect you to automatically accept that as fact but I beieve him. if thats the truth then I think it is pretty damn ridiculous. as an aside, i know a guy getting ready to retire from the local police in my county after working for 20 years. 20. twenty. I know cause we have known each other for that long and he clearly explained it to me (although he did not tell me what he would receive). so, I am pretty confident that the public pension system is broken. (I have other stories too but won't blabber on about all of them.)

This is so meaningless. Most people's "contribution" to their pensions is zero. So it seems this woman had overpaid.

Any benefit whether explicitly paid for or not, including the SS portion that employer pays, is EARNED by the workers. Why so much animosity towards workers?

Quote from Anonymouse : Because if it doesn't, the need to care for those who can't pay still will not go away. Unless you make it a crime to service the poor, the very hospitals and doctors insureds use will be in jeopardy. Up to 40% of their budgets are MC reliant, some even more so. No medical care for the poor, large scale epidemics and increased crime to pay for medical services desperately needed by the poor. This is what I talk about when I criticize people for not being able to follow a chain of logic - this wasn't a "rocket science" extrapolation. Insureds will pay for it one way or another.SSA eligibility is already changing. Anyone born after 1937 already has to wait longer than their 65th birthday. Anyone born after 1960, (52 or younger), already has to wait until age 67. As for that 16%, do you know how hard it is to qualify for SSDI? It's really hard, you have to be pretty much disabled for life. Included in those covered under Medicare and under 65 are the minor children of people who received SSA or SSDI, which probably makes up a fairly large chunck of that 16%. Again, this isn't "rocket science deductive ability". Most people are already aware that minor children of deceased SSA recipients are eligible for coverage under Medicare. They just fail to connect the dots and get all "righteous" about paying for something THEY aren't getting and so feel nobody else should. What a selfish country America has become.Again, some changes were already made, perhaps more tweaks are in order as the retirees mount, but a failure to be Nostradamus isn't grounds for just trashing a great idea. Sweden makes it work, a LOT of countries make it work, but then those countries aren't in the business of starting perpetual wars & simultaneously cutting taxes on the wealthy to enrich their buddies in the oil business either.You KNOW you'll work well into your 60s? What are you, Nostradamus's great great great grandchild? Miss Cleo's illegitimate son? I too thought I would work forever - until I died. Since dying I've been unable to find steady employment, even part time work. People don't like hiring zombies and there is no EEOC protection for people who've died and been resurrected again. I was only seriously sick 3X in my entire life - all 3 with a bad flu. I'd never been injured on the job seriously, I had absolutely no reason to suspect I would one day find myself unable to get gainful employment before I was old and decrepit. Yet here I am, too young to retire and get SSA, too young even to retire early and get my Carpenter's Union pension at age 62. No insurance, no income from gainful employment & a disabled partner who will never work again either. Fortunately I was smart enough and lucky enough to plan ahead so I'm not in the street already, but it's trying and I cannot predict I won't be one day if another catastrophe wipes out what I have left in real estate. Do you have some secret plan that protects your investment income 100% from disappearing? Your 401k investments are recession/depression economy-proof? Or are you just another one of those who think they are so smart they couldn't possibly find themselves ever needing SSA and Medicare - like I was? Are you so willing to bet on things completely out of your control that you would discard what little there is to at least cushion your poverty should you find yourself in a position like me?

SS beneficiaries [ssa.gov]

SS worker bees paying taxes [ssa.gov]

translation, 3 pay in, one takes out. its not remotely sustainable. it must be fixed.

Quote from TRNT : This is so meaningless. Most people's "contribution" to their pensions is zero. So it seems this woman had overpaid. Any benefit whether explicitly paid for or not, including the SS portion that employer pays, is EARNED by the workers. Why so much animosity towards workers?

i thought I made that clear but will repeat it for clarity. I think the pensions are too generous and the payments are too large. it also seems to me that they are allowing people to retire at an younger age than those in the private sector. this all seems a bt unfair to me. to be clear, I have no expectation for public sector employees to make less money/benefits/retirement than private sector, i would wish then to be as EQUAL as possible.

Quote from Dr. J : Funny part is.... a 401k is YOURS. You can decide how it's invested, change investments around, even roll-over to a new job. Often there is employer match - free money! Yet some would rather have a PROMISE by some president/ceo/elected official? Huh?

But 401k plans typically let you sock away only half as much as traditional pensions do, and while they're safer in case of company bankruptcy (unless the 401k is invested in company stock), workers often have to put up with high fees, like 1.2% a year for a balanced fund.