SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rambi who wrote (488)6/7/2005 10:51:36 AM
From: Dale Baker  Respond to of 541457
 
The more I think about it, letting companies dump their pensions on the state sounds a lot like the anticompetitive policies that many Americans criticize in Europe, i.e. not letting companies fail when they are running at chronic losses.

If United and GM would simply go under, their market share and assets could be divided up among healthier companies. Presumably those companies would operate on a more modern 401(k) retirement plan.

The more we look at PBGC, the more it smells.



To: Rambi who wrote (488)6/7/2005 10:55:08 AM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 541457
 
I was offered a job by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation thirty years ago. They were a tiny agency with only a handful of pension plans of any size. I got the impression that they had no expectation of growing much over the years. It sure didn't turn out that way.



To: Rambi who wrote (488)6/7/2005 12:28:47 PM
From: richardred  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541457
 
IMO-Yes, but in return. I would say smaller carriers have an advantage also. Some newer carriers are non union and have a labor cost advantage also. Smaller carriers also are efficient in that their load factor is much higher because their route structure isn't bloated.