| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Mismanaged public pension funds demand taxpayer bailout
In October, I wrote about the problems caused by signficant investment losses in CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement System. At that point CalPERS had lost 20% of its value in 4 months and was going to state and local tax-payers to demand that they make up the hole in their investments.
Well, they screwed up, and they are back asking for more money. Not only did they lose invested money, but they were actually leveraged up, so they did particularly badly. From the WSJ:
Calpers in recent weeks said it expects to report paper losses of 103% on its housing investments in the fiscal year ended June 30. That's because Calpers invested not only its own money, but billions of dollars of borrowed money that must be repaid even if the investment fails. In some deals, as much as 80% of the money invested by Calpers was borrowed.
Now, obviously, it is terrible thwhen at any investor loses their shirts. But it seems that this is just blatant risk mismanagement, shifting assets to higher-risk investment vehicles:
But Calpers has targeted less money in bonds, and about double the allocation to private-equity investments and real-estate deals, than the average public pension fund, according to Calpers documents and an industry survey. ...
Since the average rate applies to Calpers's entire housing portfolio, some individual deals used as much as 80% borrowed money, Mr. McCook recalls. That level is more aggressive than many pension funds or land developers would use, industry consultants and developers say.
So how do they fill the gap? The tax-payer:
Calpers is now warning California's cities, towns and schools that they may have to cough up more money to cover the retirement and other benefits the fund provides for 1.6 million state workers. Some towns are already cutting municipal services, and at least one is partly blaming the Calpers fees.
Let's get this straight. The pension managers mismanage their money by engaging in more risky investments, the investments go under, and now the people of California have to foot the bill so that public employees don't have to suffer?
What about the rest of us? Why do public employees deserve to get bailed out, but not the rest of the pension holders?
Stopping this has got to be a political winner. If I were a California activist, I would be pushing a ballot measure that would require a referendum to approve any additional taxes to fill gaps in CalPERS.
- Soren Dayton's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
Not enough money in the world to pay these
Let's touch base with reality for a moment: There is not enough money in the world to pay off on these politicians' promises of public employee post-retirement pension and health coverage benefits.
Not enough real money, that is. If the feds bailout every loser in sight, pour zillions into keynesian pump priming and in other ways destroy the currency, these can always be paid in fake money - wheelbarrows full of Zimbabwe or Weimar-type money.
Let's set aside that dead-end thought for the moment and imagine we're talking real money.
What that means is that these public employees will take "haircuts" on the promised benefits. Not "are going to have to take," but will take. Refer to paragraph one - not enough money in the world.
How do we get there from here politically? Not my problem. I could suggest state constitutional amendments on the pensions. Give voters a choice - say, accept a 40 percent state income tax, or give these government retirees haircuts. That will be fun.
The health care is a bit easier - in most cases they can just be trimmed in statute (that's the case in my state anyway).
Will this cause the political smack-down of the century when the privilgeged class of government workers are introduced to reality? No doubt, but too bad. Refer again to paragraph one - not enough money in the world.
When these realities start becoming apparent to voters, then the political class vs the people will become the most powerful dimension of American politics - it's already the most important. Candidates who get on the right side of it will both be demonized like you won't believe (imagine the Palin treatment tenfold) and will be immensely popular with the people. The parties may or may not be relevant to that divide.
ummm... yeah.
how about the systematic defrauding of those government workers by the federal government????
priviledged my lily white ass!
go read shadowstats, it'll set you straight. And in a free market, "someone paid for this" way, too!
Cruel Irony
Back in the 70s and 80s CALPERS was a leader in the shareholder activist movement that shook up the "tired old corporations" that were content with making a safe return on investment and paying regular dividends. They used their considerable muscle to insist corporate leadership do something about share price as well. For awhile CALPERS even published a list of worst performing companies as measured by share price appreciation and voted their shares to replace corporate boards and CEOs that could not generate consistent double didgit growth. They were among the first to insist on linking CEO pay to changes in stock valuations. Their brand of growth at any price thinking helped fuel much of the leveraged buyouts of the 80s, the venture capital bubble of the 90s and the financial services fiascos of the 2000s.
Essentially, they knew it was next to impossible to deliver on the pension promises that were being made unless their investments appreciated at a much faster pace. So they used their proxy votes to shift corporate leadership from focusing on the long term health of their companies to the short term stock appreciation. They inflated the bubbles, now they are bursting in their face.
got some links for this?
*interested kitty is interested*
On that note....
a large town in CT got crushed by the Madoff scam
http://blogs.courant.com/capitol_watch/2008/12/fairfield-ensnared-in-bernie-m.html
Since the political party that runs Fairfield is not mentioned in this story, use your imagination...
We have been trying to reign in pensions here in Ca
I have been working for two years in Napa County and with other tax groups in California, but no one has been able to get it together to file an initiative, and I don't know why. Maybe now...
Schwarzeneggar started to when he first got elected and the employee unions raised $50 million in one afternoon and went on a dishonest propaganda campaign and he lost his nerve and withdrew it. He has been a real disappointment and has stood for almost nothing.
One problem is that a court has ruled that pensions are private property, and since they are defined benefit they must be paid. If the government here tries to cut them they will be taken to court and lose. Imagine that, 90% of an overinflated salary that you receive at age 50 must be paid for life, with generous cost of living increases of course. It is your private property which is protected by the fourth amendment.
But your own land, well, we can and do regulary zone much of that so that all you can really do with it is pay property taxes on it.
California is totally f'ed up and things are going to get really bad out here.
NO cost of living increase is generous
they are all LIES. now kindly crawl back into your cave where inflation hasn't been running 10% a year....
Why don't you monitor the money supply?
I thought somewhere...
...either in state or federal law, a state only had the power to bind itself to a contract insofar as state revenues covered the defined benefits of the contract. In other words, when a state over extends itself, rather than go into debit, like the federal government, states must either increase revenues at the ballot box or renegotiate the contracts to reflect existing revenue? Is this wrong? Does anybody know?
I know of nowhere where a court has the power to directly order tax increases.
Lastly, it may be in California state pensions are private property, but I would thing the defined benefits are public. But I may be wrong.
ex animo
davidfarrar
so, when the FUCK will you bitch about 20 to 1 leverage
*crickets*
oh, that's right! NeverMIND that five to one leverage is CONSERVATIVE compared to most hedge funds. Compared to most investments, including OWNING A HOUSE. Twenty Percent down payment? That IS 80% leveraged!
Now here we have it folks, the man doesn't want us to own houses anymore!
The man is a nutcase blowing smoke out of his rear end at a small problem, rather than looking at the SOURCE of the problems.
In other news, the Federal Reserve is panicking. Short now or forever hold your peace.
Help Me Out Here
I'm having a real hard time getting on the same page as a lot of posters, here and on other blogs, who seem outraged by requests to have taxpayers "bail out" public employee pension funds. This sentence nicely encapsulates my problem:
"Why do public employees deserve to get bailed out, but not the rest of the pension holders?"
The answer seems simple: because the promises that were made to public employees were made on behalf of the public, i.e., the taxpayers. If the state of California made overly generous promises to its employees, the responsibility for those promises falls squarely on the shoulders of the people of California. This is completely different from a private company that makes unsustainable commitments to its workforce and then expects the rest of us to help it make good on those commitments. So am I missing something here, or what?
The agency holding our saved
The agency holding our saved money should really be noted as credible. Wasted money is hard to retrieve because it requires another amount or even greater to do so.Bernie Madoff ripped off a lot of people. It comes as small consolation that Madoff is going to jail for the rest of his life, because he ruined the lives of so many. An entire Connecticut town has filed suit against him, his family, his estate and all of his holdings, and also Fairfield Greenwich Group. The allegations is that after people in the town invested money from their pensions into the fund, and therefore to Madoff, he stole the money. To retirees, pension is their lifeline – they cannot rely on payday loans alone. If things go well and fortune smiles on them, they may be able to recover half their funds. Let us hope they can get enough to not have to rely on payday loans instead of their pensions.
tiffany jewellery
If things go well and fortune smiles on them, tiffany jewellery they may be able to recover half their funds. Let us hope they can get enough to not have to rely on payday loans