It just became easier for employers to dump retirees' pensions

It just became easier for employers to dump retirees' pensions

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/20/economy/lump-sum-pensions-retirement/index.html

"With no fanfare in early March, the Treasury Department issued a notice that allows employers to buy out current retirees from their pensions with a one-time lump sum payment. The decision reverses Obama-era guidance, issued in 2015, that had effectively banned the practice after officials determined that lump-sum payments often shortchanged seniors."

My view: Another attack on the average guy to give more benefits to corporations. Watch for a flurry of buyout offers. Retirees, many of them in the beginning of mental decline, will be ill equipped to resist these offers, which will look good on paper, but will shift money from retirees pockets to corporations, so they can buy back more stock.

If I was a retiree, there would be no way in hell that I would vote for the GOP ever again. The attack on SS is already making a comeback, with Trump's proposed budget, but see this attack in full force if Trump gets re-elected in two years.

 

It doesn't allow them to buy out, it allows the employee to take a lump sum if they don't want to roll it over to another IRA or 401K. I went through this recently, of course I choose to move it penalty free but the lump sum premium was attractive vs what it would have been in the past. In the past you would have only gotten what was in the fund, minus penalty, minus taxes. This eliminates the penalty and allow the employer to pay a higher rate that's in the fund, which gives the employee more options and employer an way out without completely screwing the employees if they are going out of business.

 

The party says we need to exploit illegal immigrants using stolen IDs to prop up SS. The same who aid and abet illegal immigrants and provide them with sanctuary cities and stolen IDs, are dependent on the taxes they pay in and can't claim.

 

This is a good idea, but we should try it with government workers first.

 

This is no suprise, Reagan was the King of killing pensions!

Back in the 80s you could buy a company out ant steal pensions legally, all they had to do is make sure the employee only got what they put in, nothing more.....So you could have worked for 30 or 40 years, and then end up with no interest over the decades.....This is more GOP just spoon feeding the 1%.................The GOP never changes, just new and creative ways to lie and steal from the middle class!............

 

The modern workforce killed pensions. The rise in popularity of 401ks and the simple reality that people did not stay at one company for decades meant retirement options needed to be expanded. Blaming this on politics is asinine...

 

thanks for breaking down for folks here

 

So true, pensions are a thing of the past and not nearly as successful or good as IRAs or 401ks

 

BS..................Thats your opinion............Pensions are guaranteed...........There is nothing about a 401k that holds a candle to it.............You just butt hurt your first GOD Reagan screwed you again.....No different than him taxing SS...................and raising taxes 13 times!

 

To get a pension that will support you in retirement requires staying somewhere for decades. Who does that anymore? Not many people, which means they would end up working for decades with little or no payoff in the end. Your inability to understand that go on an anti-Reagan rant is nonsensical...

 

How is this political, or specifically some nefarious GOP plot to screw retirees?

 

You're against giving people the choice?

Why shouldn't people be able to choose a lump sum if that's what they want?

But yeah, don't vote GOP so they can stick illegal aliens on Social Security.

That's going to go well.

 

Momma says giving people choices is the devil.

 

The 401k was popular alright -- with employers! It allowed them to shift risk to the employee. This sunsetting of the Obama era rule is another way to shift risk to the employee. Actually, not only the risk, but the employer also keeps more money. Why do you think the employers will push for the buyouts? Because of the goodness of their heart? Or because they know that the lump sum is worth less than the pension? Think about it.

Of course, many retirees will see a (for them) large sum of money and sign on the dotted line -- only to fall on hard times in retirement later.

 

Thing is, maybe the employee knows better than the employER how best to leverage that money. I've got - so FAR - a pretty nice pension with STRS but on the other hand this is California and I'm not entirely sure I trust them to maintain it. I also have a relative who's a financial genius - seriously the kid has some kind of a gift, and he's helped me grow my portfolio in ways I could never have done on my own.

Is managing the pension by yourself a good option for EVERYBODY? I don't agree - but should the choice be out there for those for whom it is? I think it should.

Hell, for the left that should be the default position anyways.

 

Pensions aren’t guaranteed, if there is no money there is no money. He only raised taxes after drastically cutting them and when he got the economy booming again. The rate was much lower when he left office then when he started it

 

From your link:

It seems to be an option.....not a requirement. I should have the choice of how to take my pension. If I had terminal cancer with only a year to live, the lump sum might look fairly attractive.

 

It doesn't kill pensions

 

What are you talking about how is this shifting the risk. IT'S VOLUNTARY. As I said above, the company I left 15 years ago was selling, it protected me and allowed me if I chose to take a premium lump sum or move it to my new 401k free of penalty free. Why try to say that's a bad thing and puts risks on employees? Your confused.

 

By who?
Who do you trust to guarantee that for you?
Why are you worried if they're "guaranteed"?

 

Don’t accept a buyout if you don’t want to. If the company goes bankrupt due to legacy commitments pensioners are sometimes the last to get their piece of the company. If the company is not facing any financial duress there’s no reason to accept a lump sum.

 

If employers are supporting this latest trickery, then we know its a bad thing.
Capital versus Labor, it's a never-ending battle in this country.

 

My dad worked for the Fed government and was given this option late 80'/early 90s. He took it and it worked out really well for my folks. Its really not for you or Obama to decide what is the better option for someone you or he doesn't know. Assuming people getting ready to retire are senile is kinda bad.....

 

Sounds like becoming part of the 1% would be a good idea.

 

Ths

Thank you, Mr. Marx.

Or is it Mr. Engels?