Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-20-2012, 12:17 AM   #1
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Public service unions not entitled to pension surplus .Canada

sorry, this is so funny in a "trust fund" MMT way.......................

Public service unions not entitled to pension surplus: Supreme Court

Think about it...........

QuoteQuote:
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled federal employees aren’t entitled to any of the $28-billion surplus the government took from their pension funds a decade ago to help pay down the deficit because the accounts were nothing more than “ledger” records with no real assets.

Wednesday’s unanimous decision, written by Justice Marshall Rothstein, rejected union and pensioners’ claims that the government breached its fiduciary duty when it scooped the surplus from the pension plans of Canada’s public servants, military and RCMP. They wanted the court to return the money to the plans.

The high court upheld previous lower court rulings and found the pension accounts were not separate funds with assets but “rather accounting ledgers used to track pension payments” and to estimate the government’s future pension obligations in its financial statements or the Public Accounts.

With no assets in the plan, the court rejected claims that employees and retirees had an “equitable or legal” interest in the plan and that the government had a fiduciary duty as the plan’s administrator to put members’ interests first.

If the accounts were just records, the court determined, employees and pensioners couldn’t suffer “any detriment” by the government’s accounting treatment and decision to amortize the surplus against the deficit.

“The … accounts are legislated records and do not contain assets in which the appellants have a legal or equitable interest,” the court concluded.


12-20-2012, 01:50 PM   #2
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,187
And starting next month the percentage that public employees pay for their pension increases as does the earliest retirement age for new employees. The pension plan sounds good however at age 65 it is reduced because we collect Canada Pension Plan. Not surprised by the court findings however the reason we are paying more for our pensions is political not financial. Not complaining as my pension although will not be large due to not starting here young enough is better than nothing. For our trades people if they live a long life after retirement they are ahead of those in the private section however if they die in the first ten years they made much less, a trade off of earnings compared to benefits. There are also some claw backs on how the military can collect after they are released but on the other side those who work here and were in the military can use their years of service to count towards the number of days of vacation time they receive.

Just to be totally clear, my posting was for information and background and in no ways should be looked at as either whinning or bragging, I accept what is and will be.
12-20-2012, 02:02 PM   #3
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
And starting next month the percentage that public employees pay for their pension increases as does the earliest retirement age for new employees. The pension plan sounds good however at age 65 it is reduced because we collect Canada Pension Plan. Not surprised by the court findings however the reason we are paying more for our pensions is political not financial. Not complaining as my pension although will not be large due to not starting here young enough is better than nothing. For our trades people if they live a long life after retirement they are ahead of those in the private section however if they die in the first ten years they made much less, a trade off of earnings compared to benefits. There are also some claw backs on how the military can collect after they are released but on the other side those who work here and were in the military can use their years of service to count towards the number of days of vacation time they receive.

Just to be totally clear, my posting was for information and background and in no ways should be looked at as either whinning or bragging, I accept what is and will be.
Point was your "contributions" are not REAL..............just a mere "
accounting convenience"...........like any other gov tax or expenditure..........


QuoteQuote:
The high court upheld previous lower court rulings and found the pension accounts were not separate funds with assets but “rather accounting ledgers used to track pension payments”
12-20-2012, 02:33 PM   #4
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,187
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
Point was your "contributions" are not REAL..............just a mere "
accounting convenience"...........like any other gov tax or expenditure..........
Not really, when we build a new building real money goes from the government to the contractor and then to the sub trades. Or for repairs of buildings or purchase of new equipment. In pensions real money is paid every month to the retired workers. My contributions are not real in that they are not sitting in a bank account waiting for me but what I pay are real, I see the deductions off my pay every two weeks and in four or five years I will be getting a deposit into my bank account every month.

The account is not real however the monies going in and out of the government funds each month is.

12-20-2012, 03:07 PM   #5
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
Not really, when we build a new building real money goes from the government to the contractor and then to the sub trades. Or for repairs of buildings or purchase of new equipment. In pensions real money is paid every month to the retired workers. My contributions are not real in that they are not sitting in a bank account waiting for me but what I pay are real, I see the deductions off my pay every two weeks and in four or five years I will be getting a deposit into my bank account every month.

The account is not real however the monies going in and out of the government funds each month is.
Subtle difference as I understand this the money you pay is "real" but it is NOT a real asset therefore it went 'unreal" per the Fed...

QuoteQuote:
were not separate funds with assets
When they pay out it is really a "new money creation"... otherwise there would be "tangible assets" in the account.. Courts said they don't exist...therefore your "real money" goes "poof"

when they pay "new money" goes poof.....

Legal proof that money doesn't exist till they create it.. and money gets destroyed when they take it....

IF you put $10,000 in the bank and draw $5000 there is $5000 in "assets" left.. Your court ruled that it doesn't "exist" and just "bookkeeping-ly" shifted a few numbers on paper.. which they apparently can do ..

Funny isn't it..

QuoteQuote:
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled federal employees aren’t entitled to any of the $28-billion surplus the government took from their pension funds a decade ago to help pay down the deficit because the accounts were nothing more than “ledger” records with no real assets.
Read more: Public service unions not entitled to pension surplus: Supreme Court


In the real money world of states/corps/and us that would be theft............. but since it never "existed".. oh well...

Steal your money and then guilt you on top of it..BRILLIANT....
QuoteQuote:
If the unions had been successful, the government could have found itself with an additional $28-billion liability added to the national debt.
QuoteQuote:
Benson said public servants were “misled” for years by government documents and statements by ministers and senior bureaucrats that the pension fund had “assets” or was “fully-funded.” The court acknowledged the “words” government officials used to describe the plan didn’t “accurately” reflect how the plan operated.

“So while the court says there are no assets in the account, the government has been misleading its employees for decades and that was at the core of the problem,” said Benson
.

Last edited by jeffkrol; 12-20-2012 at 03:13 PM.
12-20-2012, 04:55 PM   #6
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
If I am understanding this correctly, the public employee's pension program in canada is more like the US Social Security program's "trust fund" than like an american state or institution's pension fund which usually gets invested into hedge funds. Like the US politicians did to SS, they decided to use that supposed trust fund to paper over other budget deficits and now that the beneficiaries are trying to collect the politicians are trying to stiff them by making them wait longer or take reduced benefits in order to prevent running present day deficits for their past sins.

This is sounding like the typical argument for SS privatization. Invest that trust fund in "real assets" so that the government can't steal borrow money from it.
12-20-2012, 05:12 PM   #7
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
If I am understanding this correctly, the public employee's pension program in canada is more like the US Social Security program's "trust fund" than like an american state or institution's pension fund which usually gets invested into hedge funds. Like the US politicians did to SS, they decided to use that supposed trust fund to paper over other budget deficits and now that the beneficiaries are trying to collect the politicians are trying to stiff them by making them wait longer or take reduced benefits in order to prevent running present day deficits for their past sins.
actually they are saying the "money' never existed.. or basically a subordinate position in a bankruptcy.. Not sure how anyone can get this to look like a reason to invest "privately".. The Canadian gov can just cut a fiat check to refund the fund.. unlike REAL money losses in the priv. sector............
12-21-2012, 07:33 AM   #8
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
actually they are saying the "money' never existed.. or basically a subordinate position in a bankruptcy.. Not sure how anyone can get this to look like a reason to invest "privately".. The Canadian gov can just cut a fiat check to refund the fund.. unlike REAL money losses in the priv. sector............
They are telling two different stories about the money, they are telling RRC that the money was actually earned and showing it as a line item on his pay stub but then they are saying that it doesn't exist when it is time to cash it out. If it had been invested privately, rather than just existing on an accounting ledger, the money could have been invested in the real economy and kept circulating and being productive for the rest of society. If the time comes to cash out the investment and it has gone south the government can still print or borrow the shortfall but they should be printing/borrowing a lesser amount to meet their pension obligations (although they might have needed to print or borrow more when they actually spent that money by raiding the trust fund).

12-21-2012, 08:05 AM   #9
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
If it had been invested privately, rather than just existing on an accounting ledger, the money could have been invested in the real economy and kept circulating and being productive for the rest of society. If the time comes to cash out the investment and it has gone south the government can still print or borrow the shortfall but they should be printing/borrowing a lesser amount to meet their pension obligations (although they might have needed to print or borrow more when they actually spent that money by raiding the trust fund).
IF it would be "guaranteed" at a minimum i.e if the economy tanks your pension doesn't .. THAT would be a fitting compromise.. Unfortunately that gets into the FMN/FRE situation.....

nothing stopping having the pension AND investing...
free market is not a "guaranteed' market..............THAT is the problem.. Only the creator of money can guarantee payment.......the others are just an illusion.. That is why the FDIC (yes it is privately funded TO A DEGREE) exists.
12-21-2012, 01:52 PM   #10
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
IF it would be "guaranteed" at a minimum i.e if the economy tanks your pension doesn't .. THAT would be a fitting compromise.. Unfortunately that gets into the FMN/FRE situation.....

nothing stopping having the pension AND investing...
free market is not a "guaranteed' market..............THAT is the problem.. Only the creator of money can guarantee payment.......the others are just an illusion.. That is why the FDIC (yes it is privately funded TO A DEGREE) exists.
Most SS privatization plans I have seen such as the Ryan plan include a back stop similar current benefit levels. Effectively federally insuring a small part of your retirement investments.

If we have managed to find a way to make you support SS Privatization, it is a P&R Miracle!!!!
12-21-2012, 02:21 PM   #11
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,435
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote

If we have managed to find a way to make you support SS Privatization, it is a P&R Miracle!!!!
ANY gov. spending is an "investment" in the private sector.. no miracles today..


UNFORTUNATELY when you add benefit reducti9ons and "sliding benefits due to market conditions" and more corporate "welfare"there is little incentive to change the current system EXCEPT to accept the fact FICA is NOT necessary and therefore the EXACT SAME could be accomplished (and even more) by making it the "normal" budgetary illusion account..

I would NEVER accept soc. sec privatization EVER.......... EVER ...........EVER.. they (the financial industry) gets enough perks already.. Eliminating FICA is enough .................take your "savings" and invest it any where you want...

QuoteQuote:
2. Debt burdens future generations
Not true. Government debt is a private sector asset and government deficits create private sector surpluses. Think about it this way: if there were only two people in the economy and one spent more than she earned, giving her a deficit, what must be true about the other? He must have earned more than he spent and thus has a surplus. Now replace “she” with “federal government” and “he” with “private sector” and you’ll see. Nor is there a day of reckoning when federal government debt must be reduced to zero. Thus, it will NOT be necessary to tax future generations in order to finance today’s deficit. Reducing the budget deficit reduces the private sector surplus and reducing debt destroys private sector assets.
Our Christmas Gift From Washington: Recession and Unemployment - Forbes
12-21-2012, 03:22 PM   #12
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,187
QuoteOriginally posted by mikemike Quote
If I am understanding this correctly, the public employee's pension program in canada is more like the US Social Security program's "trust fund" than like an american state or institution's pension fund which usually gets invested into hedge funds. Like the US politicians did to SS, they decided to use that supposed trust fund to paper over other budget deficits and now that the beneficiaries are trying to collect the politicians are trying to stiff them by making them wait longer or take reduced benefits in order to prevent running present day deficits for their past sins.

This is sounding like the typical argument for SS privatization. Invest that trust fund in "real assets" so that the government can't steal borrow money from it.
Mike

It is the Canada Pension Plan that is very similar to your Social Security program. Our pension plan is based on years of service and your best five years earnings and if you quit at a young age you get your contributions back or can transfer them into either certain other pension plans or RRSP or get the cash and pay income tax right then.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
accounts, assets, court, employees, government, pension, records, service, surplus, unions
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Scott Walker vs. Public Employee Unions mikemike General Talk 381 04-21-2011 08:26 AM
How Public Unions Took Taxpayers Hostage mikemike General Talk 23 01-26-2011 02:01 PM
Public Service Announcement; How to prune your bare root roses Damn Brit Post Your Photos! 4 01-15-2009 07:48 AM
Public Service Announcement laissezfaire Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 10-18-2008 05:59 PM
Hey A*85/1.4 owners! Public service announcement! tranq78 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 11-27-2007 05:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:11 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top