Yellow | Pension Crisis : It didn't have to turn out like it did!!

[Slim_]

Oh please. Everyone pay attention. The government and all off us owe Slim a living. Let's regulate everything in order to make sure that Slim has a paycheck. Stick it to the man, Slim. Right on brother.

You should start your own right-wing radio talk show. You've got the non-sequiturs down pat.

Yes, the pension owes me a living. Those contributions where made into the pension by the company on my behalf in lieu of earned wages. That is one regulation I get behind. Stick it to the man? I think stick it to the pensioners would be a more appropriate phrase. Bend over and grab your ankles. James Welch (and the investor class for whom he gravels) has a stick for you.

 

[Canadian Flyer]

Dude, your pension fund is at this very moment adapting to the new market. How does it feel? Maybe a "rigged" pricing scheme wouldn't be so bad after all?

Why is it that only the investor class gets to the "rig" the system? If the working class tries the "rig" anything via a Labor Contract? Oh, we can't have that! "Rigged" markets are only for the wealthy. The workers? Free markets for them -- free for the wealthy to rig in their favor. Stick to driving the big Rigs son, and let the us rig the economy.

I'm paying for my future retirement out of my own pocket. There aren't many carriers in Canada with a pension fund of any kind anymore because every paycheck is taxed extensively by my government, some of which is placed into the Canada Pension Plan. The rest is made up for by the individual using 401K and RRSP's.

You can argue all day about it, but if you believe that the game should be rigged in your favor just because it benefits you then you are no better than the people you oppose that have been allowed to get away with it. The game shouldn't be rigged at all. A company and it's workforce should be able to succeed independently on their own merits instead of floating on a bubble of fake money that might burst and bring the whole thing down. Likewise, a company shouldn't be allowed to invent a cheaper version of itself to do the exact same job to deliberately undermine the integrity of the existing one. Both of these things are fraud. And two wrongs don't make a right. Deregulation wasn't done right, but an uncompetitive market is a stagnant one that doesn't allow Joe Consumer a choice.

And if you want an example of what kind of products come out of an uncompetitive market, I urge you to look up the Trabant 601 or anything built by British Leyland. The Trabant ended production months after the wall fell because it had been built the same way for about 30 years and took 9 months from order to delivery to produce against the Volkswagen Golf that could be had immediately and was more modern, more efficient and safer. And British Leyland was the result of the British government rescuing it's automotive industry and negating market competition. This resulted in the notorious labor strikes and the 3 day work week in the 1970's, during which time the quality of all of BL's cars (which included Triumph, Rover, Land Rover, Austin, Morris, MG, Leyland Trucks, Wolsely and Jaguar) notoriously suffered, resulting in the the dismantling and eventual death of the company when MG Rover (all that was left that hadn't died or been sold) went bankrupt in 2005. With the split sale of Bentley/Rolls-Royce and the bankruptcy of TVR and Jensen, this leaves the domestic British automotive industry with Morgan and McLaren, neither of whom build mass produced cars with a unionized workforce. Britain still builds cars, but a lot of the money goes to either China, Germany, India or the US today.

Would you consider it a victory for labor if the company you work for was sold to Chinese investors? You might get a raise, even a pension, but all the money you aren't paid is in the pocket of a foreign government. Is that a victory? Because I wouldn't call it one.

 

[DCM_Doc]

The bankers that were put in charge of the pension fund in the 80's by government should be held accountable for poor investments that lost billions. If the pensions of the politicians had lost billions there would have been an investigation years ago.

 

[Bart]

"Canadian Flyer, post: 1080220, member: 33971"]I'm paying for my future retirement out of my own pocket. There aren't many carriers in Canada with a pension fund of any kind anymore because every paycheck is taxed extensively by my government, some of which is placed into the Canada Pension Plan. The rest is made up for by the individual using 401K and RRSP's.

It is impossible to compare Canada to the U.S. given the socialist Canadian system

You can argue all day about it, but if you believe that the game should be rigged in your favor just because it benefits you then you are no better than the people you oppose that have been allowed to get away with it. The game shouldn't be rigged at all. A company and it's workforce should be able to succeed independently on their own merits instead of floating on a bubble of fake money that might burst and bring the whole thing down. Likewise, a company shouldn't be allowed to invent a cheaper version of itself to do the exact same job to deliberately undermine the integrity of the existing one. Both of these things are fraud. And two wrongs don't make a right. Deregulation wasn't done right, but an uncompetitive market is a stagnant one that doesn't allow Joe Consumer a choice.

I'm confused here you are all over the place. Which one is it regulate or don't regulate business?

And if you want an example of what kind of products come out of an uncompetitive market, I urge you to look up the Trabant 601 or anything built by British Leyland. The Trabant ended production months after the wall fell because it had been built the same way for about 30 years and took 9 months from order to delivery to produce against the Volkswagen Golf that could be had immediately and was more modern, more efficient and safer. And British Leyland was the result of the British government rescuing it's automotive industry and negating market competition. This resulted in the notorious labor strikes and the 3 day work week in the 1970's, during which time the quality of all of BL's cars (which included Triumph, Rover, Land Rover, Austin, Morris, MG, Leyland Trucks, Wolsely and Jaguar) notoriously suffered, resulting in the the dismantling and eventual death of the company when MG Rover (all that was left that hadn't died or been sold) went bankrupt in 2005. With the split sale of Bentley/Rolls-Royce and the bankruptcy of TVR and Jensen, this leaves the domestic British automotive industry with Morgan and McLaren, neither of whom build mass produced cars with a unionized workforce. Britain still builds cars, but a lot of the money goes to either China, Germany, India or the US today.

Once again I can't see any comparisons to the U.S. market!

Would you consider it a victory for labor if the company you work for was sold to Chinese investors? You might get a raise, even a pension, but all the money you aren't paid is in the pocket of a foreign government. Is that a victory? Because I wouldn't call it one.

You are to late for this argument! For example Toyota Camry #1 selling car for years. America was sold out by politicians long ago![/QUOTE]

 

[BIG R GUY]

The bankers that were put in charge of the pension fund in the 80's by government should be held accountable for poor investments that lost billions. If the pensions of the politicians had lost billions there would have been an investigation years ago.

If the politicians pension fund had any sign of default, our hardworking congress would just pass a bill to shore it up with tax money....

 

[White]

The bankers that were put in charge of the pension fund in the 80's by government should be held accountable for poor investments that lost billions. If the pensions of the politicians had lost billions there would have been an investigation years ago.

Government & accountable in the same sentence?

 

[roadboss]

The only reason deregulation killed the companies that died is because they only made money based upon a rigged pricing scheme and they failed to adapt to the new market. And, as you said, it's the unfunded liabilities that are really dragging down the CSPF. Too many of the bankrupt companies were allowed to skate without paying. And that's compounded by the investment bankers screwing everything up.

Deregulation hurt the union, but it's far from the reason the pension is in trouble. That's just the easy low-hanging fruit for people who don't want to blame the fund itself for being poorly managed.

We do go after bankrupt companies,for our pension liability and for health and welfare.Usually we will get pennies on the dollar.when they go out of business.Theres nothing left .

 

[BIG R GUY]

The only reason deregulation killed the companies that died is because they only made money based upon a rigged pricing scheme and they failed to adapt to the new market. And, as you said, it's the unfunded liabilities that are really dragging down the CSPF. Too many of the bankrupt companies were allowed to skate without paying. And that's compounded by the investment bankers screwing everything up.

Deregulation hurt the union, but it's far from the reason the pension is in trouble. That's just the easy low-hanging fruit for people who don't want to blame the fund itself for being poorly managed.

Did not adapt to the challenge from the growing non Union companies was a big part of the problem, CF. Our failure to come up with work rules to meet the challenges also had contributed to the downfall of many union companies.

 

[Dracula]

You should start your own right-wing radio talk show. You've got the non-sequiturs down pat.

Yes, the pension owes me a living. Those contributions where made into the pension by the company on my behalf in lieu of earned wages. That is one regulation I get behind. Stick it to the man? I think stick it to the pensioners would be a more appropriate phrase. Bend over and grab your ankles. James Welch (and the investor class for whom he gravels) has a stick for you.

I wish it was different and you and the others were going to get what's due. The problem is that someone gave you and the other pensioners an IOU and for whatever reason(s) there is no money to pay that IOU. It's not a rigged system. Western States played by the same rules and showed that it could be done. Central States left you and the others hanging.

 

[Slim_]

I wish it was different and you and the others were going to get what's due. The problem is that someone gave you and the other pensioners an IOU and for whatever reason(s) there is no money to pay that IOU. It's not a rigged system. Western States played by the same rules and showed that it could be done. Central States left you and the others hanging.

If you don't think the system is rigged against the working man and has been becoming increasingly more so in the last three decades I don't know what to say.

There are some bailed out bankers who would like you to vote for the politicians they have selected for you.

 

[vongrimmenstein]

I wish it was different and you and the others were going to get what's due. The problem is that someone gave you and the other pensioners an IOU and for whatever reason(s) there is no money to pay that IOU. It's not a rigged system. Western States played by the same rules and showed that it could be done. Central States left you and the others hanging.

Just guessing, but I believe the Western Fund will show a funding problem very soon. What is the ratio in the fund for working versus drawing? Maybe the fund is solvent. Any Teamster company that was paying in to the Western fund & now closed has plenty of people drawing money & fewer companies paying in to it. If there was an independent audit of the Western fund I belief it would show it in financial problems. Like I just said a guess. Any thoughts?

 

[mud]

Just guessing, but I believe the Western Fund will show a funding problem very soon. What is the ratio in the fund for working versus drawing? Maybe the fund is solvent. Any Teamster company that was paying in to the Western fund & now closed has plenty of people drawing money & fewer companies paying in to it. If there was an independent audit of the Western fund I belief it would show it in financial problems. Like I just said a guess. Any thoughts?

http://www.wctpension.org/downloads/documents/WCTPT_Annual_Funding_Notice_2015.pdf

 

[vongrimmenstein]

http://www.wctpension.org/downloads/documents/WCTPT_Annual_Funding_Notice_2015.pdf

Like I said, guessing. Boy was I ever wrong. But, do people believe that the western fund is fully funded for the future retirees who are working now? No one has a crystal ball, so it makes me wonder. The state of IL is 84 Billion dollars behind in funding the state employees pension fund. And the ILLinois Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that they have to pay it. No relief. Their direct quote in their ruling said 'you promised them the money, now pay up. Work in Illinois & a lot of the over time you work will pay for the old geezers to enjoy a nice lifestyle during their remaining years. Talk was an increase of some taxes as high as 20% to fund it. Welcome to the land of Lincoln.

Want a sour taste in your mouth. Teamsters who work in Illinois whose pension fund will see a medium to large cut will now have to pay more taxes to fund the state pension fund with no relief for their own pension. If that doesn't suck canal water, nothing else does. von.

 

[mud]

Like I said, guessing. Boy was I ever wrong. But, do people believe that the western fund is fully funded for the future retirees who are working now? No one has a crystal ball, so it makes me wonder. The state of IL is 84 Billion dollars behind in funding the state employees pension fund. And the ILLinois Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that they have to pay it. No relief. Their direct quote in their ruling said 'you promised them the money, now pay up. Work in Illinois & a lot of the over time you work will pay for the old geezers to enjoy a nice lifestyle during their remaining years. Talk was an increase of some taxes as high as 20% to fund it. Welcome to the land of Lincoln.

Want a sour taste in your mouth. Teamsters who work in Illinois whose pension fund will see a medium to large cut will now have to pay more taxes to fund the state pension fund with no relief for their own pension. If that doesn't suck canal water, nothing else does. von.

It's the same old argument von, we taxpayers have little or no say in how our tax dollars will be spent. Especially our federal tax dollars.

 

[Volnuck1]

Yes, but this part of a post that I originally found to be inspiring:

"I don't want to work there until I'm 70 but I'm not in any position to leave and live on scraps. Medical would take anything I would get. That's the position of alot of us there. Age too. Just stuck between a rock and a hard place. I've had four surgeries in three years. May be more in the future. I need the insurance. So I will not be able to retire. There are other reasons too but I'm not going into my whole financial problems here. But being off all that time for surgeries is a big part of it. It's tough. But it's how it is. No matter who we work for. It would happen anywhere. Just so happens we are atYRC."

These are the stories that break your heart ( if you have one). I had to retire at 57 with 5 spinal surgeries. They penalized me 55% of my pension. I went from $2500 to $1045 a month. God's good, I have always stayed out of debt knowing my back could break again at anytime (no pity for me, please). However, many others with large families and terrible injuries have to live check to check. These are the ones we need to pray for.

 

[Canadian Flyer]

"Canadian Flyer, post: 1080220, member: 33971"]Once again I can't see any comparisons to the U.S. market!

You are to late for this argument! For example Toyota Camry #1 selling car for years. America was sold out by politicians long ago!

You made it for me. The Toyota Camry that is sold in North America is built in the United States. I believe the factory is in Indiana. It is not a unionized factory, wherever it is.

So if Ford and General Motors, by some unimaginable miracle, went under or were bought out by a foreign investor, like Chrysler was, you would still call them American companies? Even though every dollar of profit goes to a corporation in a different country?

And why is it that the Toyota Camry has been the best selling car in America since the mid 1990's when the car before it was the Ford Taurus? Should everyone build cars for the same price as the Camry? With the same engine and trim? What if the ONLY CAR SOLD IN AMERICA was...the American-made, Japanese-owned Toyota Camry? Why shouldn't it be? It's the best seller, after all.

Except if that were true, the rest of the people out there who think the Toyota Camry is a boring pile of scrap wouldn't be able to choose something else, would they? There are cheaper vehicles with fewer features and more expensive ones with more. There are more versatile vehicles like pickup trucks and SUV's. More fuel efficient vehicles like sub-compacts. Even in the Camry's class, there are arguably better vehicles with more features out there for the same price. But that wouldn't be possible if the best seller was the only seller, would it? Maybe, just maybe, the car everyone had to buy because there was no competition would be an expensive heap of junk that had no luxuries at all.

Oh, wait...

But I guess we shouldn't learn from other people's mistakes, should we? After all, it didn't happen in America!

Nope, not to the automotive industry. But this, up here? This is the result of a stagnant market with no competition and rigged prices. And the post-deregulation failed trucking companies? This is why they failed. Cheaper prices/better service entered the market and exposed their offerings as poor. Just like Datsun did in England and Volkswagen did in East Germany.

 

[Bart]

You made it for me. The Toyota Camry that is sold in North America is built in the United States. I believe the factory is in Indiana. It is not a unionized factory, wherever it is.

So if Ford and General Motors, by some unimaginable miracle, went under or were bought out by a foreign investor, like Chrysler was, you would still call them American companies? Even though every dollar of profit goes to a corporation in a different country?

And why is it that the Toyota Camry has been the best selling car in America since the mid 1990's when the car before it was the Ford Taurus? Should everyone build cars for the same price as the Camry? With the same engine and trim? What if the ONLY CAR SOLD IN AMERICA was...the American-made, Japanese-owned Toyota Camry? Why shouldn't it be? It's the best seller, after all.

Except if that were true, the rest of the people out there who think the Toyota Camry is a boring pile of scrap wouldn't be able to choose something else, would they? There are cheaper vehicles with fewer features and more expensive ones with more. There are more versatile vehicles like pickup trucks and SUV's. More fuel efficient vehicles like sub-compacts. Even in the Camry's class, there are arguably better vehicles with more features out there for the same price. But that wouldn't be possible if the best seller was the only seller, would it? Maybe, just maybe, the car everyone had to buy because there was no competition would be an expensive heap of junk that had no luxuries at all.

Oh, wait...

But I guess we shouldn't learn from other people's mistakes, should we? After all, it didn't happen in America!

Nope, not to the automotive industry. But this, up here? This is the result of a stagnant market with no competition and rigged prices. And the post-deregulation failed trucking companies? This is why they failed. Cheaper prices/better service entered the market and exposed their offerings as poor. Just like Datsun did in England and Volkswagen did in East Germany.

I have no problem with a free market it just that the American market is free and the competitions is not. Trying to use an Eastern bloc company in the conversation is humorous at best. Deregulation has done more harm than good in the U.S. and the examples are numerous: trucking , airlines , savings & loans , banks , electricity....... The peasants were told every time that prices would be cheaper! Ok now they are cheaper but at the expense of jobs , pensions etc. The American Dream was destroyed and a small group benefited at the expense of the majority !

I hope you are not implying that door just fell off when it's obvious from the damage it didn't

 

[Canadian Flyer]

I have no problem with a free market it just that the American market is free and the competitions is not. Trying to use an Eastern bloc company in the conversation is humorous at best. Deregulation has done more harm than good in the U.S. and the examples are numerous: trucking , airlines , savings & loans , banks , electricity....... The peasants were told every time that prices would be cheaper! Ok now they are cheaper but at the expense of jobs , pensions etc. The American Dream was destroyed and a small group benefited at the expense of the majority !

I hope you are not implying that door just fell off when it's obvious from the damage it didn't

The door did fall off. It was damaged after bouncing off the ground a few times before the electrical cables snapped and let it free. The Rover SD1 was so awful even the press cars had poorly fitted doors.

And I'm not contending that deregulation hurt. It did. It was done wrong and things have spiralled down the tubes because there is no floor to the market. I believe that there should have been something to mitigate the massive undercutting, just like I believe that Toyota should be taxed on every car sold in America, regardless of if it was built here or not, because they are a foreign company.

Controls are not bad. But they should not be so tight that competition is discouraged. Just tight enough that cut-rate carriers can't get away with stealing business and creating a lowered expectation in the marketplace, driving wages down. Deregulation was bad because it was deregulation, where it should've been a reevaluation of regulations to encourage competition.

A closed tap gives no water. A fully opened tap offers too much water. There has to be somewhere in the middle, don't you think?

 

[SAC75]

The door did fall off. It was damaged after bouncing off the ground a few times before the electrical cables snapped and let it free. The Rover SD1 was so awful even the press cars had poorly fitted doors.

And I'm not contending that deregulation hurt. It did. It was done wrong and things have spiralled down the tubes because there is no floor to the market. I believe that there should have been something to mitigate the massive undercutting, just like I believe that Toyota should be taxed on every car sold in America, regardless of if it was built here or not, because they are a foreign company.

Controls are not bad. But they should not be so tight that competition is discouraged. Just tight enough that cut-rate carriers can't get away with stealing business and creating a lowered expectation in the marketplace, driving wages down. Deregulation was bad because it was deregulation, where it should've been a reevaluation of regulations to encourage competition.

A closed tap gives no water. A fully opened tap offers too much water. There has to be somewhere in the middle, don't you think?

No lol

 

[Dracula]

If you don't think the system is rigged against the working man and has been becoming increasingly more so in the last three decades I don't know what to say.

There are some bailed out bankers who would like you to vote for the politicians they have selected for you.

What is rigged? Did the bankers threatened you, physically force you, or, in some other way, made you go to work into a union situation, that promised you whatever and a pension when you retired? No, they didn't. You chose to work in that situation, you could have chosen not to work in that situation at any time, and you made the choice to stay. If anyone rigged the game, it was you. You were the only one who could decide to stay in or to leave. You decided to stay and cash all those paychecks, utilize the healthcare benefits, and turn a blind eye to the growing pension fund collapse. The bankers couldn't make you stay, the Feds couldn't make you stay. You could have elected to leave at any time, but you decided to stay even when you knew who was investing the fund's money.

In your post, you wrote "I don't know what to say". Here's a suggestion. I screwed up, I stayed in even when the warning signs were flashed years ago about a potential fund collapse, and it's my fault that I find myself in this predicament.