What's new

Yellow | Nyhan disagrees

codebreaker

codebreaker

TB Lurker
Credits
3
The great overseer of OUR pension Nyhan disagrees with any and all proposals that contradict his ideas of what should happen to OUR pensions.

Surely he is not going to take any type of reduction in pay. Although if he were to take a 50% pay cut along with everyone of the people who have worked for so many years for THEIR pension, $300,000 would give 10 pensioners an extra $30,000 or (30 months @ $1,000). This may not be a drop in the bucket but if he did this for the next 10 years (predicted life of OUR fund) then that is 300 pensioners over that 10 years.

I wonder if he is afraid to consider any type of other proposal because with his proposal he will still be getting his enormous salary. He doesn't want to consider having to give up his job and salary because of the CSPF prediction to go broke in 10 years.

When did he become the great KARNAK !
If the CSPF would cut some of the fat off the top, such as paying out outrageous fees to the top executives and to the Wall Street advisors that have put the CSPF in the shape it is in now, we ALL might have more money in OUR pension future. They are basing OUR future on the status quo. WHO are they to say that the fund cannot make enough money, if managed correctly, could not last long enough for everyone to have a solid future in retirement. If $17 billion dollars were managed correctly, it looks like the sky would be the limit on investment returns.
 
codebreaker said:
The great overseer of OUR pension Nyhan disagrees with any and all proposals that contradict his ideas of what should happen to OUR pensions.

Surely he is not going to take any type of reduction in pay. Although if he were to take a 50% pay cut along with everyone of the people who have worked for so many years for THEIR pension, $300,000 would give 10 pensioners an extra $30,000 or (30 months @ $1,000). This may not be a drop in the bucket but if he did this for the next 10 years (predicted life of OUR fund) then that is 300 pensioners over that 10 years.

I wonder if he is afraid to consider any type of other proposal because with his proposal he will still be getting his enormous salary. He doesn't want to consider having to give up his job and salary because of the CSPF prediction to go broke in 10 years.

When did he become the great KARNAK !
If the CSPF would cut some of the fat off the top, such as paying out outrageous fees to the top executives and to the Wall Street advisors that have put the CSPF in the shape it is in now, we ALL might have more money in OUR pension future. They are basing OUR future on the status quo. WHO are they to say that the fund cannot make enough money, if managed correctly, could not last long enough for everyone to have a solid future in retirement. If $17 billion dollars were managed correctly, it looks like the sky would be the limit on investment returns.
Click to expand...
It needs to more than triple the 19 billion it has to break even.
 
jimmy g said:
It needs to more than triple the 19 billion it has to break even.
Click to expand...
That is all fine and dandy, but what is wrong with the Director, who misdirected or blindly led or maybe just maybe, did not do anything wrong as we did not, why can he not take a cut as well. Oh yes, I almost forgot, it was in the law that he cannot be touched or sued. DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!, I should think before I type. :lmao:I got :busted:, will someone please :chairshot: me. I can't quit :crybaby:
 
Great statement Codebreaker, I'm still waiting for the list of multiple pension drawers and the cuts they are taking ,,remember those assholes never drove a truck or humped a pound of freight ,,,we paid their pension for them now they are going to screw us out of the one we worked for.I never dreamed that the Great Teamsters Union ( which I joined in 1971 ,and was so proud of ) would actually do the retirees this way .I pissed away all those dues payments I made through the years .GO RIGHT TO WORK STATES!!!!!!
 
Everyone at Cspf should be fired and a federal investigation should be launched to find out how they lost so much money. I have a real hard time believing any professional money managers could have lost that much money without theft and deception going on. I know the pension would still have problems with more drawing than paying in, but the situation would still be much better, just look at the western fund for proof.
 
Pardon my trolling. Wouldn't or shouldn't there be substantial funds in the combined pension funds to "re-invest" and recover? Any member that will be immediately effected, present thru 5-10 years from now, be step-rated versus cut. 10-20 year folks possibly be the same. It would mean less now but closer to whole than the current bend over. Ima truck driva, so I's don't know nuttin.
 
racecat said:
Great statement Codebreaker, I'm still waiting for the list of multiple pension drawers and the cuts they are taking ,,remember those assholes never drove a truck or humped a pound of freight ,,,we paid their pension for them now they are going to screw us out of the one we worked for.I never dreamed that the Great Teamsters Union ( which I joined in 1971 ,and was so proud of ) would actually do the retirees this way .I pissed away all those dues payments I made through the years .GO RIGHT TO WORK STATES!!!!!!
Click to expand...
I feel ya racecat. I joined in 1972. Working a union job was the only way to go. Lot's of Mom and Pop company's and they were the way to go although I worked for McLean the first 4 and 28 for Roadway before retiring in 2004. I used to be a proud Teamster. I just wonder who all the cuts affect higher than rank and file. I'm still in shock of a 50 percent cut.
 
Shouldn't the PBGC pay out on top of whats in the fund? If this was a car lets say. You mash up the whole side. Does the insurance take your car and in return write you a check for 1/3 its value? So why does the PBGC get to **** our fund to insure our pensions. I guess we only paid for liability on our really expensive pension funds. That or like everything the government does, its been taking all those insurance payments and spending them.
 
SAC75 said:
Shouldn't the PBGC pay out on top of whats in the fund? If this was a car lets say. You mash up the whole side. Does the insurance take your car and in return write you a check for 1/3 its value? So why does the PBGC get to **** our fund to insure our pensions. I guess we only paid for liability on our really expensive pension funds. That or like everything the government does, its been taking all those insurance payments and spending them.
Click to expand...
You see if CSPF went belly up and it caused the PGBC to go under those single employer people(white collar) would get a taste of what we have to deal with
 
SAC75 said:
Shouldn't the PBGC pay out on top of whats in the fund? If this was a car lets say. You mash up the whole side. Does the insurance take your car and in return write you a check for 1/3 its value? So why does the PBGC get to **** our fund to insure our pensions. I guess we only paid for liability on our really expensive pension funds. That or like everything the government does, its been taking all those insurance payments and spending them.
Click to expand...
No. When they passed the Omnibus bill last year it relieved them and the government of that responsibility. Thank your congressman!!!
 
SAC75 said:
Shouldn't the PBGC pay out on top of whats in the fund? If this was a car lets say. You mash up the whole side. Does the insurance take your car and in return write you a check for 1/3 its value? So why does the PBGC get to **** our fund to insure our pensions. I guess we only paid for liability on our really expensive pension funds. That or like everything the government does, its been taking all those insurance payments and spending them.
Click to expand...
Here LIES the problem.Congress hasnt kept up with their end.See the PBCG isn't even funded properly.Its in the Red or shall we say underfunded substatially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top