Michigan Central Restored and Opening
RESTORED MICHIGAN CENTRAL DEPOT OPENS »



Results 1 to 25 of 45

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default

    Here's more:

    privatize D-DOT.

    Hunt down delniquent Detroiters who didn't pay city taxes on time and put foreclosure notices on their front door.

  2. #2
    lilpup Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Danny View Post
    Hunt down delniquent Detroiters who didn't pay city taxes on time and put foreclosure notices on their front door.
    A tax amnesty might not be a bad idea to bring in some $$$. Pay any unpaid taxes owed within a certain time with penalties and interest being waived.

  3. #3

    Default

    "What difference does that make? If there is a law that says I must pay you one million dollars, and I only have three thousand dollars, you don't get your one million dollars."

    The point is that everything else is going to get cut before the pensions go unpaid. Look at Pontiac. The EFM is raising taxes to pay pension costs even as he's slashing and selling off everything else in the city.

    http://www.theoaklandpress.com/artic...7515419586.txt

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Novine View Post
    "What difference does that make? If there is a law that says I must pay you one million dollars, and I only have three thousand dollars, you don't get your one million dollars."

    The point is that everything else is going to get cut before the pensions go unpaid. Look at Pontiac. The EFM is raising taxes to pay pension costs even as he's slashing and selling off everything else in the city.

    http://www.theoaklandpress.com/artic...7515419586.txt
    Well the good news is that if they stop pension benefits for new hires or anyone with less than 10 years of tenure, then the pension liabilities will eventually decrease as pensioners die out. The pension was on of the greatest inventions, we just: [[1) failed to fund it fully and [[2) grossly underestimated how long people were going to live.

  5. #5

    Default

    "Well the good news is that if they stop pension benefits for new hires or anyone with less than 10 years of tenure, then the pension liabilities will eventually decrease as pensioners die out. "

    True. In about 30 years. Until then, you have to keep paying into a system that doesn't have any new members coming in and contributing to the cost. Which is why switching from a pension plan to a 401-k style plan actually ends up costing you more money over the short and medium term than sticking with the pension plan.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Novine View Post
    "Well the good news is that if they stop pension benefits for new hires or anyone with less than 10 years of tenure, then the pension liabilities will eventually decrease as pensioners die out. "

    True. In about 30 years. Until then, you have to keep paying into a system that doesn't have any new members coming in and contributing to the cost. Which is why switching from a pension plan to a 401-k style plan actually ends up costing you more money over the short and medium term than sticking with the pension plan.
    I'm not following. Pension isn't like social security, where the new employees contribute to cover for the benefit of the older employees. My understanding was that it's a pay-as-you-go plan, with companies contributing to your pension fund when you start in order for the money to be there when you're retired.

    So with those assumptions -- which may be false, I'm not sure -- switching from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan saves you money immediately since you are no longer contributing to the newer employees' pensions. Of course, to be fair, the companies should pass on that savings directly to the employee in the form of a raise. But even with that, since all our pensions are underfunded anyway, the moment you stop making promises to future recipients, the sooner you stop the bleeding from getting worse.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corktownyuppie View Post
    I'm not following. Pension isn't like social security, where the new employees contribute to cover for the benefit of the older employees. My understanding was that it's a pay-as-you-go plan, with companies contributing to your pension fund when you start in order for the money to be there when you're retired.

    So with those assumptions -- which may be false, I'm not sure -- switching from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan saves you money immediately since you are no longer contributing to the newer employees' pensions. Of course, to be fair, the companies should pass on that savings directly to the employee in the form of a raise. But even with that, since all our pensions are underfunded anyway, the moment you stop making promises to future recipients, the sooner you stop the bleeding from getting worse.
    I stand corrected, Novine. I was confusing the meaning of "Pay-as-you-go"...

    Quote Originally Posted by skyl4rk View Post
    "The City has a long standing practice of paying OPEB liabilities as they become due from current revenues. [[Pay-as-you-go or Pay-go)"

    City of Detroit, Enterprise Funds Deficit Elimination Plan, July 22, 2011

    OPEB = Other Post Employment Benefits

    In other words, at some time there was a decision to fund Detroit employee pension benefits in the same way that Social Security is funded, based on current revenues with no cash reserves.


    A reserve fund should have been established to hold cash to pay for future pension benefits.
    .

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by corktownyuppie View Post
    So with those assumptions -- which may be false, I'm not sure -- switching from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan saves you money immediately since you are no longer contributing to the newer employees' pensions. Of course, to be fair, the companies should pass on that savings directly to the employee in the form of a raise. But even with that, since all our pensions are underfunded anyway, the moment you stop making promises to future recipients, the sooner you stop the bleeding from getting worse.
    Something I find interesting is the fact that regardless of which population you're referring to, the young ones are always the only ones asked to sacrifice. The older generations had much greater opportunities to earn money. Yet and still the only ones being asked to sacrifice are the younger generation. Whether it be this conversation about Detroit, or a private company killing pensions for new hires, or the federal government only willing to change social security / medicare for future recipiants.
    Shared sacrifice anyone?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Instagram
BEST ONLINE FORUM FOR
DETROIT-BASED DISCUSSION
DetroitYES Awarded BEST OF DETROIT 2015 - Detroit MetroTimes - Best Online Forum for Detroit-based Discussion 2015

ENJOY DETROITYES?


AND HAVE ADS REMOVED DETAILS »





Welcome to DetroitYES! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
DetroitYES! is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to DetroitYES! [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.