3 thoughts on “Forbes post, “Retirement Crisis Update: Is It Really All ‘Downhill From Here’?”

  1. I think Segal fudged the numbers on their submission to cut participants under MPRA. Inactive vested aren’t right. 2013 5500 always done late, in 2014 said the fund was going insolvent in 2023, but in 2014 5500, again not put out until 2015, suddenly the fund was going insolvent in 2026. Amazing comeback even though the investments didn’t do as well in 2014 as they did in 2013. So Jane, you call this ethical? Is this the math actuaries now project just to make millions from these funds like Segal makes? How do we know what you say is even true, if we see lies from people like you. I am beginning to think you are the problem not the solution and you people just manipulate things to the point it is corrupted? Are you held to high standards? What are your standards? Are you people even ethical? Who holds you all accountable.
    Yeah this is a mess. That’s the only agreement we can agree on, but other than that, there is nothing that impresses me about people who manipulate numbers. How long it’s been done I don’t know but if you want the proof, I would be happy to send you the proof.

    Like

  2. I believe it’s called union busting. When the feds freaked out when the plans were overfunded and wanted take the funds excess cash it gave the plans a choice, to give it to the feds (tax) or give to the rank and file. My pension has been reduced by 68% because of the PBGC handling and lack of good oversight. So now I be funding the PBGC from bankruptcy by the cut I took. So in that 20 years my money have bailed out the Fed bank system, wall street (with retention bonuses) , GM, my pension plan, the businesses responsible , and now the feds PBGC. THEY ALL have worked on it for years. 401Ks??????? They will get them too. I’m about out of money and time. Take from the old and working class. LOL Be more than glad to explain in detail

    Like

  3. By the way, the fund was only funded 40% in when? Where do you get your info? I have the 5500 form back in 1982 when the actives outnumbered the retirees 1982
    169796 active non vested
    153164 active vested
    322960 actives
    -20412 inactive vested
    105202 retired.
    Now at that time no one got 100 a year for retirement so tell me how the assumption could have possibly been 40% when they didn’t know what Deregulation would do yet? My guess is your projections you all are saying were based upon what happened after that. But at the time, it would have seemed much higher.
    Because I can find nothing close to saying 40% in the 5500 form back in the day. So, yeah, it’s pretty easy when you know the numbers going forward.

    What I am saying to you, is that you don’t have the 5500 forms in you hand, so you project word of mouth. Who says it was only 40% funded? How then after Deregulation did the fund become 70% funded? Guess that kind of rules out Deregulation then doesn’t it?
    So the reality here is there were toxic things in Central States that you don’t have a clue about.
    But I assure you, the number crunchers were part of them.

    It’s easy to give comment without all the facts in front of you. But the reality here is actuarial people in pensions are just as much a problem as management and losing people. I mean lets look at this rationally. Actuaries were being paid to do the numbers. Did it help? NOPE.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s