Pols ponder private pension plan

August 9, 2012

Sen. Kevin DeLeon

A controversial measure establishing this country’s first state-run retirement system for private-sector employees ran into a buzz saw of opposition Wednesday in its first test in the California Assembly. (San Francisco Chronicle)

Financial service, insurance and business groups weighed in against the bill by Sen. Kevin DeLeon (D-Los Angeles) asserting that the potential for billion-dollar losses for taxpayers cannot be risked, particularly in light of current fiscal conditions.

DeLeon’s measure would create the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program, making retirement plans available for nearly 7 million low-income workers. The bill has now been delayed in the Assembly Appropriations Committee after passage by the Senate.

Questionable performance of investment markets suggest that taxpayers will end up bearing the brunt of unfunded liabilities in the future, according to business interests.

“SB1234 is not a traditional pension,” De Leon told reporters. His bill would require employers to withhold 3 percent of their workers’ pay.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

You just have to look at PERS (Public Employees Retirement System) and see the hole they are in (as well as the teachers sysstem) to know that Government cannot successful run anything except a taxing system and a handout system. Nothing that is substantiable or self-supporting is able (Medicare, Social Security, Post Office, Amtrak, etc.) Keep their hands out of something they have no idea to run. Besides, where are the low income folks going to get this money from. they can hardly feed or house themselves now and we all know this is going to get worst. There is a scheme or payoff here somewhere for someone, you can smell it!!!!

Now hear this. Financial service, insurance and business groups who sell private pensions and 401k’s have announced that “Questionable performance of investment markets” means pensions and 401k’s might not work out! Now that’s an amazing admission from the ripoff artists themselves. Two questions: 1. Do they tell that to the people they sell this stuff? 2. If they know they’re selling junk, why do they continue to sell it?

First, if it’s an annuity, it probably is junk. Second, if it’s a true 401k or type of IRA, then it depends on the performance of the underlying investments (you do know that a 401k or IRA is only an instrument, not an investment, right?). Second, they DO tell people that – that they may lose money in an investment – that there is no guarantee. Third, the chance of having a successful investment is, among other things, significantly dependent upon the amount of “cost” involved in making the investment (management fees, etc.). If the government gets involved, it only adds another layer of fees and further reduces the impact of any gains.

This is a bad idea, especially when legislators think they know how others need to invest. Typical California liberals thinking they can provide something to someone at no cost to anyone when it’s a blatent attempt to buy votes and secure their OWN future. Considering the solid hold they have on the legislature already, their future is secure unless they totally screw it up (this could be a big step in that direction).

Ever notice that the dems want to control and dole out measly money to the less fortunate in society. Not their own money mind you, Biden and Obama have track records of very low charitable giving, but taking others money to give to other non-earners. Buying votes if you will. When will the voters wake up and smell the coffee?

It’s not just the D’s, it’s ALL OF THEM.

Make it optional and self supporting then we can talk. No way in heck I’d let a bunch of leftist politicians control my retirement funds.

What about republican politicians?

Wow…looks like a rechanneled Rod Blagojevich