GAO REPORT OUT

freight master, Kennesaw Kidd, scooped you again, who needs propaganda, when you can go to "pension tsunami" for all of your pension news.
 
CSPF Investments
The report devotes some 20 pages, starting on page 38, to CSPF’s investments over the years, with various Wall Street money managers. The bottom line, according to the report, is that CSPF’s investment mix has been similar to other large trusts, with similar results. In 22 years surveyed, CSPF had above-median returns 12 years, and below-median 10 years. (page 60). The CSPF moved half of its investments into passive (“indexed”) bond and stock investments during 2003-2010, and that remains the case.

While noting that the CSPF investments were similar to other funds, under the management of Wall Street firms, it does not mention that in 2008, it was Goldman Sachs and Wall Street which drove the economy and our pension fund into the ditch, while enriching themselves. Goldman Sachs was a CSPF fiduciary at that time.

The last section of the report deals with CSPF administration and administrative fees, noting that they are in line with other large funds and in fact below average. Administration costs (PBGC premiums, actuarial services, auditing, legal, contractors, staff and executive salaries, overhead, etc) were $98 per participant in 2014 (pages 67-68).

MY PERSONAL NOTE: In Trumps tax cuts to corporations....Goldman Sachs received the largest of over $24B....while they never were required to repay the money that was lost during their time as the CSPF Fiduciary of OUR fund and the Feds bailed them out too, and NOW a $24B a year tax break?
 
So, we go to Congress, and show the GAO Report. It shows we did similar to slightly better than others.

We say we were screwed by GS. Congress looks at the report and sees It shows we did similar to slightly better than others.

So we say but we had GS! Look again!!! Congress looks at the report. It shows we did similar to slightly better than others. And that GS charged similar to slightly lower charges for their services.

Where's our compelling argument, other than we're broke- same as hundreds of other funds and the PGBC? This affects me as much as anyone, since I'm 64 and in the fund. But I'm a realist. It'll be broke by 2025.
 
Last edited:
MY PERSONAL NOTE: In Trumps tax cuts to corporations....Goldman Sachs received the largest of over $24B....while they never were required to repay the money that was lost during their time as the CSPF Fiduciary of OUR fund and the Feds bailed them out too, and NOW a $24B a year tax break?
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd like to illustrate, in my simple mind, your argument:

Let's say you were BA ot a Teamsters Barn for 22 years. In 12 of those, you won more cases than you lost. In 10, you lost more than you won.

At the same time, you owned a personal biz or farm. In 2008, the biz was awarded a large Federal Grant. In 2018, the biz benefitted from Congress passing Tax Cuts.

Now, the question: Are the Grievants who lost cases under your representation as a BA, legally entitled to be made whole from the money in your personal biz? That appears to be what you think GS should be made to do, even tho the broker and the bank are/were separate entities????? I doubt we'd win that case. Depends on whatever contract or law governed our being managed....
 
So, we go to Congress, and show the GAO Report. It shows we did similar to slightly better than others.

We say we were screwed by GS. Congress looks at the report and sees It shows we did similar to slightly better than others.

So we say but we had GS! Look again!!! Congress looks at the report. It shows we did similar to slightly better than others. And that GS charged similar to slightly lower charges for their services.

Where's our compelling argument, other than we're broke- same as hundreds of other funds and the PGBC? This affects me as much as anyone, since I'm 64 and in the fund. But I'm a realist. It'll be broke by 2025.
How many of those others who were broke that had the Federal Government put someone in charge since the 1980's and NEVER had any oversight built in to make sure we were protected like they did at CSPF? Even in the hearings by Congress they were surprised to find out Goldman Sachs had NEVER been audited to how OUR Pension money was being taken care of?
 
Kennesaw Kidd, flatters me with his personal attacks. I do wish he would brush up on his reading comprehension skills though. Funny Kennesaw, Obama had 8 years to prosecute Goldman sax, but he didn't. That would make Obama and eric holder, either crooked or incompetent, according to your beliefs. That truth must hurt you "fighters". I'm a little curios why you want people to vote democrat. when the democrats didn't prosecute Goldman sax. Kennesaw, you are a silly goose.
 
How many of those others who were broke that had the Federal Government put someone in charge since the 1980's and NEVER had any oversight built in to make sure we were protected like they did at CSPF? Even in the hearings by Congress they were surprised to find out Goldman Sachs had NEVER been audited to how OUR Pension money was being taken care of?
When they vote whether or not to bail us out, the only thing that matters is the bottom line. The GAO Bottom Line (from the report you posted) is that we performed as well as, or slightly better than, similar funds. The other Details / how we got here, are of no consequence to the Federal Budgeting.

All that should be considered, actually, is- how will bailing us out or not bailing us out affect America's Future.
 
Kennesaw Kidd, flatters me with his personal attacks. I do wish he would brush up on his reading comprehension skills though. Funny Kennesaw, Obama had 8 years to prosecute Goldman sax, but he didn't. That would make Obama and eric holder, either crooked or incompetent, according to your beliefs. That truth must hurt you "fighters". I'm a little curios why you want people to vote democrat. when the democrats didn't prosecute Goldman sax. Kennesaw, you are a silly goose.
I thought you had REALLY posted your last post?????
 
When they vote whether or not to bail us out, the only thing that matters is the bottom line. The GAO Bottom Line (from the report you posted) is that we performed as well as, or slightly better than, similar funds. The other Details / how we got here, are of no consequence to the Federal Budgeting.

All that should be considered, actually, is- how will bailing us out or not bailing us out affect America's Future.
The economic impact study is posted on here for what the loss is for each state that CCPF recipients live in per year....it is in the billions each year....more damage than passing the BLA would cost.
 
The economic impact study is posted on here for what the loss is for each state that CCPF recipients live in per year....it is in the billions each year....more damage than passing the BLA would cost.
That's really then all Congress should consider, except where will the money to fund the Bonds come from, and how much it costs the US Taxpayer. And how many other funds it saves or doesnt.
 
I'm against ALL bailouts to ALL entities. I would have told GS, all the banks, GM, Chrysler to ALL go Bankrupt. It's not Congress's $$$$ to give away, even to US. It's the Taxpayer's $$$$

 
The economic impact study is posted on here for what the loss is for each state that CCPF recipients live in per year....it is in the billions each year....more damage than passing the BLA would cost.
Well Kennesaw, I'm sure the average CSPF Teamsters will still to do O.K. even if CSPF goes belly up. With a better than average social security check, $12,870 PBGC guarantee, plus 401k and investments. It is kind of silly, to expect congress to bail out profitable companies. You yourself said ABF'ers were dim wits for voting yes on the first contract. ABF can backstop CSPF just like UPS will. Which leads me to the economic impact on state economies from the butch lewis act. Since most americans don't get pensions or 401k's, doesn't it make sense to give the proceeds from butch lewis to the working poor.

KENNESAW Kidd, WHO WOULD Jesus, give the proceeds from the butch Lewis act to.
 
I thought I read, more than once, that if CSPF goes fails it will take down PBGC so you can forget that $12,870 PBGC guarantee.
 
Well Kennesaw, I'm sure the average CSPF Teamsters will still to do O.K. even if CSPF goes belly up. With a better than average social security check, $12,870 PBGC guarantee, plus 401k and investments. It is kind of silly, to expect congress to bail out profitable companies. You yourself said ABF'ers were dim wits for voting yes on the first contract. ABF can backstop CSPF just like UPS will. Which leads me to the economic impact on state economies from the butch lewis act. Since most americans don't get pensions or 401k's, doesn't it make sense to give the proceeds from butch lewis to the working poor.

KENNESAW Kidd, WHO WOULD Jesus, give the proceeds from the butch Lewis act to.
Probably to the good teamster brothers and sisters who eared them.:6788::eck13::fingure::poster oops:
 
Top