Blogs | Scam Diego
UC Retirement Funds Face $20 Billion Shortfall
By Don Bauder | Posted August 31, 2010, 10:20 a.m.
According to this morning's (Aug. 31) Los Angeles Times, the University of California retirement system faces a shortfall of more than $20 billion, as revealed in a report released Monday. The report proposed changes such as boosting contributions made by the university system and employees, raising the minimum retirement age for new hires and reducing some benefits, said the Times. "Much of the problem with the retirement fund stems from a decision 20 years ago when UC and its employees stopped paying into the retirement system because it was believed to be overfunded," said the Times. That goes to show that everybody gets giddy in a bull market -- even scholars.
Pensions are the biggest reason for the fee increases in the CSU and UC systems.
By SurfPuppy619 11:52 a.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Retirement funds only work if you consistently pay into the funds. Once you start viewing the fund as a piggy bank you will get in trouble as the market goes through it's cycles. This is the same thing that happens to so called "rainy day funds" for stat budget. Once they get to a certain balance there is a clamor to return the excess to the taxpayers, then when it rains the fund is empty.
By Dennis 11:52 a.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Scholars take it in the shorts...
Maybe this is why our College students are not at the top of the Educational ladder, those teaching them don't understand how the World works well enough to safe guard their own retirement system...
"$HORTFALL$ will become the new buzz word for suddenly realizing that one now has a failed retirement system! For a giant number of Americans that have worked hard their entire lives and are now dependent upon far younger Retirement System Managers (that are GREEDY and also feel they are so smart that they don't have to plan for a rainy day), this will be a financial disaster!
By Founder 12:06 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #1: You could be right on that, although there are no doubt many other factors. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 12:48 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #2: That is a lesson that should have been learned by SDCERS. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 12:49 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #3: There seem to be more public sector pension plans in trouble than ones that are stable. Don't take that as gospel, though. It's based on hearsay. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 12:52 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
The UC regents and administration should be red-faced about all this, but they surely are not. Over the past years, the UC has had such wonders in the president's office as Richard Atkinson, who was nothing much when he headed UCSD, and was followed by Dynes who was even recognized as a weak administrator by his supporters. One ludicrous proposal while he was president was to create a VP slot to perform the administrative functions of the president. What would that have left the president to do? Fund raise? There's always that. Brag? The UC brags about itself constantly.
If these executives cannot even run the campuses properly, why would anyone expect that they could deal with financial issues? One reason for the decline of the reputation of the UC campuses is the weak administration and management of them. This financial fiasco should just add to the erosion of the esteem. Just remember that all the UC campuses think they have the smartest thinkers in the world. But not even they could prevent a pension underfunding. Institutionally, the UC just isn't as accomplished as it claims.
By Visduh 1:42 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Reply #7
What you said also sadly describes our Gov't.;
City, State & Federal...
By Founder 2:28 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #7: The UC system certainly has declined academically from decades back. I agree that Atkinson and Dynes were not good administrators, and, certainly, John Moores's presence on the board of trustees didn't add prestige. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 3:19 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #8: Yes, government at all levels has failed us. But so has the private sector, particularly the financial structure. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 3:21 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
, government at all levels has failed us. But so has the private sector, particularly the financial structure.
====================
The double whammy!
Wall Street has been a mess for at least 25 years now-when Ronnie Raygun started the deregulation, that is when the BIG problems began.
Of course the financial problems today dwarf the S&L problems of the laste 80's. Who remembers Thomas Spiegal of Columbia S&L, built bullet proof bathrooms!!! ....cant make that stuff up. Dixon was the other big cloen, or Bushes son over at Silverado S&L, scams everywhere you turned back then-liek today.
By SurfPuppy619 6:51 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #11: I remember that Nixon talked about lessening regulation of Wall Street, but nothing happened. It may have been an empty fundraising tactic. At the time, I was a rightwing Republican, and even I didn't think loosening Wall Street regulation was a good idea. In fact, I thought it was nuts. Later, when deregulation began to take root (under Carter, actually), I favored it in most industries. But as I look back, I think deregulation didn't work in most industries. To believe in deregulation, you have to believe in the beauty of the way and the goodness of the wayfarers, to quote Samuel Beckett. Greed is entirely too rampant for deregulation. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 8:09 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
I favored it in most industries. But as I look back, I think deregulation didn't work in most industries. To believe in deregulation, you have to believe in the beauty of the way and the goodness of the wayfarers, to quote Samuel Beckett. Greed is entirely too rampant for deregulation.
=================
Good response, I agree, greed destroys the deregulation model.
And BAILING out those greedy dirtbags is about as dumb a thing the president/s could do.
TARP was a scam and I think it was the biggest mistake Bush and Obama made. (I know many feel if the bailout was not granted, chaos would have ruled and wiped out the country-but I strongly disagree with that assumption).
By SurfPuppy619 10:39 p.m., Aug 31, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #13: Bailing out AIG was the single worst move the government made. The company should have been pushed into bankruptcy court, and government investigators should have probed it for possible criminal violations. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 7:14 a.m., Sep 1, 2010 > Report it
Bailing out AIG was the single worst move the government made.
======
I agree 100%.
The more I review the events around the AIG bailout, the more convinced I am that it was a set up, give away, to keep Goldman Sachs solvent.
There was NO REASON for the gov, aka taxpayers, to backstop AIG's CDS to Goldman at 100 cents on the dollars. I think it was done intenionally by insiders to stop Goldman from going BK-which they would have if not for the AIG bailout, just like Lehman Bros did.
By SurfPuppy619 3:53 p.m., Sep 1, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #15: Of course it was a Goldman Sachs bailout. I'm sure Goldman claimed it would be insolvent in the event of an AIG failure. People in the government and Federal Reserve believed Goldman. Some foreign banks were also aided in that smelly deal, too. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 10:10 p.m., Sep 1, 2010 > Report it
The TOO BIG TO FAILS should have been allowed to fail.
As a flaming signpost warning to others not to play fast and lose with other people’s money.
By SurfPuppy619 8:57 a.m., Sep 2, 2010 > Report it
Response to post #17: "Other people's money" is the key to white collar fraud. Trouble is, only the little cozeners get caught for misappropriating other people's money. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 10:39 a.m., Sep 2, 2010 > Report it
#18
and sometime they don't get caught either...or get off with nary a slap on the wrist!!
By nan 11:21 a.m., Sep 2, 2010 > Report it
UCSD outta Peter's pocket to pay Paul
hey wait a minute...that's our pockets homeys!!!
By nan 11:24 a.m., Sep 2, 2010 > Report it
Response to posts #s 19 & 20: So few of the big crooks get caught that taking the risk is worth it. The same is true, only less so, for the small-time crooks. Best, Don Bauder
By dbauder 4:55 p.m., Sep 2, 2010 > Report it