Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (203307)	5/20/2009 11:53:57 PM
From: Peter V	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 306849

In the old days, companies had pensions. People retired on pensions. My Mom has a pension, and that's her sole income along with Social Security. Those have mostly been replaced with 401k plans, and many pension funds have gone BK, leaving the pensioners with nothing. Is it fair that the private sector is f@cking its employees by foregoing any kind of pension plan? How many J2P employees are qualified to oversee a retirement investment plan? Yet they are forced to do so by 401k plans. Things are going to be very bad for many, many private sector employees who are relying on 401k plan retirements that they didn't know how to manage. So just because the California teachers have the "old school" pension plan means that they are greedy a$$holes? 30 years is a lot of service before your retirement at 52, and being a teacher is not the easiest job. Comparing the f'd up private sector retirement options to a typical pension plan is not really fair. I guess you figure if your company won't do it for you, then nobody should have it? Maybe the Unions got too good of a deal, maybe the plan is a little richer than it should be. But condemning it wholesale like you have seems wrong too. .

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (203307)	5/21/2009 12:30:18 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

One additional dynamic I see played out in the public schools is that (especially for K-8) there are lots of single women fresh out of college who enter the profession, and the pay scale and benefits are very stacked against the lowest tiers. They work for a few years and then drop out (elementary ed has got to be the main MRS degree). No net accumulated benefits, and poor pay, and over worked while they did it. Yet they are the ones the kids relate to because they are young, have new ideas, and lots of energy. Meanwhile the teachers with the most seniority collect the highest pay, do less work, and are likely less effective, and cash in generous retirement too.