Originally Posted by
Cousteau135
How about one more voice in this retirement debate. IMHO I would rather have double digit deposit into my 401K every two weeks as long as it isn't a match. Let me put it in the funds or brokerage of my choice and let it ride. It takes sacrifice on your part to fully fund said 401K, but its portability really appeals to me.
As for pensions, I get that they aren't all created equal and I don't want to debate specific plans and whether its solvent or not. This is what I don't like about them... If the power brokers in DC are willing to reduce the earned retirements of military vets for short term budgetary gains as they were last year, and then only yielded after significant lobbying efforts... who's to say they wouldn't be willing to slip something into a bill to "help" those organizations who manage other pensions... even union pensions. Call me cynical, but if I can't trust Uncle Sugar to live up to his blood debt to vets, why should I trust any union or company CEO to honor their commitments when times get tough and they need to balance their books?
Just my 2¢
Do you get the part that the Teamsters DON'T have pension plans that they run? To do what you envision would require it being done to ALL pension plans and require a re-write ERISA rules? For a pension plan where a fund gets the money directly from the company...plus and additional voluntary employee contribution above the agreed to amount...how would the government interject themself?