15 ms·

Do you have an example of that? Perhaps I’m biased being in LA and SF but those city budgets seem irreplaceable broken. Infinite amounts to pensions while no o

Do you have an example of that? Perhaps I’m biased being in LA and SF but those city budgets seem irreplaceable broken. Infinite amounts to pensions while no one can propose viable fixes to problems.

quaquaqua1 7y ago
This is the correct opinion. What is worse is that the bugs are features. Politicians and their donors deliberately broke cities for their own personal financial gain,
ajross 7y ago
Sorry, how is meeting pension obligations "irreplaceable broken"? They hired people for years with the promise of retirement pensions. It's a debt, not a budget item.
- wlesieutre 7y ago
  Do you not include debt payments in your budget planning?
  - ajross 7y ago
    Not as an optional item to be ejected because of "better planning", no. Absent any budgetary concerns, there are hundreds of thousands of people who worked careers for these cities with the expectation that they could skip retirement savings because there was a pension. Throwing that out at the behest of a 20-something on HN who's fully funding a 401k with a tech salary isn't "responsible government", it's just selfish.
    - wlesieutre 7y ago
      Nobody said anything about ejecting it, just that the city budgets are screwed. They’re welcome to address that in whatever other way they’d like.
- tdfx 7y ago
  Because the pension obligations are impossible to meet without bankrupting the local governments or causing them to massively slash other services. The financial liability of these underfunded and overpromised pensions should be shared with those whose unions corrupted the electoral incentives and now depend on these pensions. Either accept reductions to a reasonable level or watch the govt go bankrupt and get nothing.
- hash872 7y ago
  Cities & states frequently offer absurdly generous pensions to public sector workers for political payoff or corrupt reasons. State workers can sometimes retire in their 50s with a lifetime of absurd benefits. Or, the infamous '13th check' where some innumerate officials mail pensioners one extra check in a given year when the pension does especially well financially- literally robbing from the fund's future. Many state & city pensions are underfunded because they are simply too generous. Public sector collective bargaining is fundamentally different from private sector. Benefits can't get too generous in the private sector because the bargaining is zero sum and the companies are rational- they can get absurdly generous in the public sector because the payers (politicians) are spending taxpayers' money and not their own. There's little incentive to think about the future
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwaway5752 7y ago
    First, you are overstating how generous public pensions are (and grossly overstating the differential in administration of private and public pensions). Second you think private sector pension planning is better. It is not. Pension funding reduces earnings (and bonuses) and companies will use overly optimistic pension fund growth projections to reduce current contributions, resulting in underfunded private sector pension plans. A great example of how this is handled is Patriot Coal (pension obligation spinoff of Peabody) and Magnum Coal (similar spinoff of Arch, acquired by Patriot). Those were spun off basically insolvent, with all pension obligations, and when the declared bankruptcy the retirees took haircuts and the remaining obligations were socialized with the PBGC (which I suggest you look into if you are interested in public and private defined benefit plan administration analysis).
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  As with many companies, municipalities and states incurred liabilities for contractual promises whilt not fully funding them, kicking the can down the road. What typically happens is that either national government baols out the fund, retirees get squeezed, or both. The true beneficiaries are past taxpayers who benefitted from government service delivery based on promised pension benefits to employees, but who skipped on paying the bill at the time. Oddly, you hear far less about private sector failures in this regard. In part because defined-benefit plans are largely extinct, but the abysmal failure of individualised defined-contribution (401k / IRA) programmes is just the same problem undrr a different flag. But private sector has been dodging this far more than public. There's more to this, yes. Some of it is government corruption and graft. Mancur Olsen's "The Logic of Collective Action', describing both pensioners' and taxpayers' (mostly a small group of highly-motivated wealthy) very self-interested lobbying to maximise commitments whilst skirting payments is far more instructive.
raverbashing 7y ago
Not forgetting the absurd levels of NIMBYism and a coordinated effort to make the life of newcomers as hard as possible
bufordsharkley 7y ago
The existence of Prop 13, coupled with pyramid-scheme-style approaches to financing municipal pensions, have led to disasters of financing. One can imagine a better world in which pension programs are effectively time-independent w.r.t financing (neutral for growth or shrinking), and more financing comes from sources that are likely agnostic to growth or reduction (like Land Value Tax), but the politics here... are not trivial.

quaquaqua1 7y ago

This is the correct opinion. What is worse is that the bugs are features. Politicians and their donors deliberately broke cities for their own personal financial gain,

ajross 7y ago

Sorry, how is meeting pension obligations "irreplaceable broken"? They hired people for years with the promise of retirement pensions. It's a debt, not a budget item.

wlesieutre 7y ago
Do you not include debt payments in your budget planning?
- ajross 7y ago
  Not as an optional item to be ejected because of "better planning", no. Absent any budgetary concerns, there are hundreds of thousands of people who worked careers for these cities with the expectation that they could skip retirement savings because there was a pension. Throwing that out at the behest of a 20-something on HN who's fully funding a 401k with a tech salary isn't "responsible government", it's just selfish.
  - wlesieutre 7y ago
    Nobody said anything about ejecting it, just that the city budgets are screwed. They’re welcome to address that in whatever other way they’d like.
tdfx 7y ago
Because the pension obligations are impossible to meet without bankrupting the local governments or causing them to massively slash other services. The financial liability of these underfunded and overpromised pensions should be shared with those whose unions corrupted the electoral incentives and now depend on these pensions. Either accept reductions to a reasonable level or watch the govt go bankrupt and get nothing.
hash872 7y ago
Cities & states frequently offer absurdly generous pensions to public sector workers for political payoff or corrupt reasons. State workers can sometimes retire in their 50s with a lifetime of absurd benefits. Or, the infamous '13th check' where some innumerate officials mail pensioners one extra check in a given year when the pension does especially well financially- literally robbing from the fund's future. Many state & city pensions are underfunded because they are simply too generous. Public sector collective bargaining is fundamentally different from private sector. Benefits can't get too generous in the private sector because the bargaining is zero sum and the companies are rational- they can get absurdly generous in the public sector because the payers (politicians) are spending taxpayers' money and not their own. There's little incentive to think about the future
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway5752 7y ago
  First, you are overstating how generous public pensions are (and grossly overstating the differential in administration of private and public pensions). Second you think private sector pension planning is better. It is not. Pension funding reduces earnings (and bonuses) and companies will use overly optimistic pension fund growth projections to reduce current contributions, resulting in underfunded private sector pension plans. A great example of how this is handled is Patriot Coal (pension obligation spinoff of Peabody) and Magnum Coal (similar spinoff of Arch, acquired by Patriot). Those were spun off basically insolvent, with all pension obligations, and when the declared bankruptcy the retirees took haircuts and the remaining obligations were socialized with the PBGC (which I suggest you look into if you are interested in public and private defined benefit plan administration analysis).
dredmorbius 7y ago
As with many companies, municipalities and states incurred liabilities for contractual promises whilt not fully funding them, kicking the can down the road. What typically happens is that either national government baols out the fund, retirees get squeezed, or both. The true beneficiaries are past taxpayers who benefitted from government service delivery based on promised pension benefits to employees, but who skipped on paying the bill at the time. Oddly, you hear far less about private sector failures in this regard. In part because defined-benefit plans are largely extinct, but the abysmal failure of individualised defined-contribution (401k / IRA) programmes is just the same problem undrr a different flag. But private sector has been dodging this far more than public. There's more to this, yes. Some of it is government corruption and graft. Mancur Olsen's "The Logic of Collective Action', describing both pensioners' and taxpayers' (mostly a small group of highly-motivated wealthy) very self-interested lobbying to maximise commitments whilst skirting payments is far more instructive.

raverbashing 7y ago

Not forgetting the absurd levels of NIMBYism and a coordinated effort to make the life of newcomers as hard as possible

bufordsharkley 7y ago

The existence of Prop 13, coupled with pyramid-scheme-style approaches to financing municipal pensions, have led to disasters of financing. One can imagine a better world in which pension programs are effectively time-independent w.r.t financing (neutral for growth or shrinking), and more financing comes from sources that are likely agnostic to growth or reduction (like Land Value Tax), but the politics here... are not trivial.