General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat's an option for underfunded multi-employer plans besides benefit cuts or insolvency?
A bailout from general revenues? I'd vote for it. Anybody think it would pass?
So, if you're against the benefit cuts, and the other option is insolvency, I guess that means you prefer...?
mythology
(9,527 posts)only provides incentives for the companies to underfund. It would need to incorporate real punishments for underfunding that aren't easy to dislodge via bankruptcy.
doc03
(35,324 posts)the employer pays so much per each hour you work. How about increasing it.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)doc03
(35,324 posts)in effect get a big cut in our income.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There are actual non-zero-sum productivity gains here: a single worker can actually produce more (not just nominally produce more) today than 40 years ago, so a single worker can also actually (and not just nominally) support more retirees by his economic activity.
doc03
(35,324 posts)and restaurants would put in touch screens and eliminate cashiers and waiters.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)If minimum wage is $25 a lot fewer people will need jobs, because for instance one earner could support a family.
onecaliberal
(32,816 posts)To underfund.
doc03
(35,324 posts)be long before some of these a--holes decide they can cut company sponsored Defined Benefit Plans. Like magic two problems solved at once
companies get of the hook and the PBGC cures its solvency problem.
msongs
(67,394 posts)he's got possible solutions.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)There's a lot of asshole in any given sausage, as they say. But my point is unions themselves are pretty much split on this provision.