3 ms·
The reason is because in 2006, a law was passed that required the USPS to fully fund 75 years worth of expected retirement compensation. That's not reasonable,
by battery_cowboy 7y ago
The reason is because in 2006, a law was passed that required the USPS to fully fund 75 years worth of expected retirement compensation. That's not reasonable, and was designed to destroy the service so it could be privatized.
- Shivetya 7y agoWell that is the line we are always fed but it hasn't been true[0] since day one. In effect they are under similar rules to most private pensions in funding out to 25 years with requirements to project what their 75 year liability would be. Another view [1] Simply put, the use of the Postal Service has dropped a lot but the number of employees retired or eligible to retire has not. In other words, they have so many eligible for full benefit retirements that they were not even trying to service the debt and instead likely to end up defaulting it to the PBGC which would have gutted payments and left retirees in a lurch. So what would you have? [0]https://www.cnbc.com/id/45018432 https://www.cnbc.com/id/45018432 [1]https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/05/13/why-aoc-is-mostly-wrong-about-post-office-pensions-an-explainer/#1fb63d701746 https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/05/13/why-aoc-is-mo...