3 ms·
Being required to contribute the present discounted value of the benefit, as private corporations do, is not absurd; the absence of that preparation is what's a
by SilasX 7y ago
Being required to contribute the present discounted value of the benefit, as private corporations do, is not absurd; the absence of that preparation is what's absurd, and has led to numerous pensioners getting stiffed when it turns out that megacorps are not perpetual fonts of wealth.
- gumby 7y agoI agree, though the US postal service in particular is subject to specific IMHO abusive constraints: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-04/congress-not-amazon-messed-up-the-u-s-postal-service https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-04/congre... and https://www.rstreet.org/2019/05/30/usps-pensions-vs-the-world-more-rules-worse-funding/ https://www.rstreet.org/2019/05/30/usps-pensions-vs-the-worl... In this case the evolution of the rules was not properly handled and the risk assigned post facto to a population (these tiny businesses) not set up to handle the new rules. With regards to the megacorps: they have often treated the future obligation and the current obligation as uncoupled on their balance sheets which is great in the short term and disastrous in the long. A bit of "apres moi le deluge". Not just the megacorps; the US state of Illinois made the same terrible decision.