Alaska's Pension System and the current election

[Gabriel76]

Is it true that Alaska recently lost their pension system and that they are now in a 401k type deal? Was that under Pallin?

Is it also true that McCain backed Arnold in 2005 to take away our pensions?

Undecided on the 2008 election but answers to these 2 questions would sure make things interesting. Thanks guys.

[scfire86]

Is it true that Alaska recently lost their pension system and that they are now in a 401k type deal? Was that under Pallin?

Is it also true that McCain backed Arnold in 2005 to take away our pensions?

Undecided on the 2008 election but answers to these 2 questions would sure make things interesting. Thanks guys.

Don't know about Alaska. But the backing of Arnold in '05 in support of pension reform (aka getting rid of defined benefit plans) is true.

[JoeWill]

Anchorage does not have a pension like other big cities, it is indeed a 401k type plan. However i am not sure if this was the doing of the current VP nominee.

[ScareCrow57]

The pension systems do need reform. Those in "defined benefit plans" are not paying for all of the benefits that are dished out by SSI. In fact, they can also get SSI benefits for their disabled child, even though they never paid a dime. No person in (legal or illegal) should be exempt from SSI tax. And I do agree with Obama on this as well, there should be no top income level. Hopefully IF Obama gets in he will at least make these reforms.

[scfire86]

The pension systems do need reform. Those in "defined benefit plans" are not paying for all of the benefits that are dished out by SSI. In fact, they can also get SSI benefits for their disabled child, even though they never paid a dime. No person in (legal or illegal) should be exempt from SSI tax. And I do agree with Obama on this as well, there should be no top income level. Hopefully IF Obama gets in he will at least make these reforms.

And those of us who were originally excluded from paying into SSI disagree.

I'll believe the conservatives demanding an end to defined benefit plans (which was part of the goal championed by McCain in '05) are serious when they take away the military's DB program of 50% @ 20 years.

[ScareCrow57]

And those of us who were originally excluded from paying into SSI disagree.

I'll believe the conservatives demanding an end to defined benefit plans (which was part of the goal championed by McCain in '05) are serious when they take away the military's DB program of 50% @ 20 years.

Hell, if I was exemp0t from a tax I would object as well. However, no one is telling you can't have your defined benefit. All I ask is that you be responsible and step up to he table to pay your fair share of the taxes. If the SSI system were nothing more than a retirement system I might by the twisted logic. However, SS goes above and beyond. And even though you pay nothing into it, you can still receive befits under certain conditions.

FYI, the Military pays SSI taxes. As do many other government employees to include paid fire fighters in other small towns and cities. This injustice needs to end and now. Start losing another 7% from your paycheck and then talk to me about how taxes aren't so bad.

[DaSharkie]

Start losing another 7% from your paycheck and then talk to me about how taxes aren't so bad.

No tax rate is too high for a tried and true, dyed in the wool liberal.

[scfire86]

No tax rate is too high for a tried and true, dyed in the wool liberal.

Nor is borrowing another trillion dollars for a dyed in the wool fiscal conservative who is passing the buck off to someone else.

[scfire86]

FYI, the Military pays SSI taxes. As do many other government employees to include paid fire fighters in other small towns and cities. This injustice needs to end and now. Start losing another 7% from your paycheck and then talk to me about how taxes aren't so bad.

They also have benefits the rest of us will never get. Like 50% @ 20 yrs, subsidized health care, subsidized housing, etc..

When I see conservatives attacking the DoD pension plan I'll know they're serious. Until then it is nothing more than the usual "government employees are all lazy, overpaid, and underworked" BS. I always enjoy reading the writings of those criticizing my profession (FF get paid for sleeping) when they haven't spent one day on a fire engine. But somehow they know all about my job.

[Jasper 45]

FYI, the Military pays SSI taxes. As do many other government employees to include paid fire fighters in other small towns and cities. This injustice needs to end and now. Start losing another 7% from your paycheck and then talk to me about how taxes aren't so bad.

Why do you insist on talking so stupid? It is not an injustice, go back and look at the history of the issue, please.

When Social Security was instituted, firefighters were intentionally left out. It could be argued that we were discriminated against. Remember, please, that it wasn't until 1993 or so, that joining Social Security was even an option for us. This is not an "injustice", and our inclusion into the system will not do anything except be more of a drain on the system. The contributions that we would make would hardly be of any benefit.
In fact, you're much better off money-wise, by not having us participate. The guys who have part-time jobs that do contribute barely receive any of the benefit they are eligible for, because of our pension plans. The fact that they pay a full share into the system is proof enough, with a minimal of research. Change the other factors involved, like our total inclusion, every firefighter will now collect a much bigger benefit.
We don't earn that much money, so the amount that would be added would be very small, in the whole scheme of things.

We weren't included in the original plan, and we were forced to fend for ourselves on a salary that was only a step or two above broke. They didn't want us in then, by letter of the law, why should we be forced into it now? It wasn't fair then, it isn't fair now. We'll stick on our own, as we seem to be doing a very good job at it, thank you very much for your concern.

You actually have it pretty good right now. Guys who work part-time contribute in far more than they will ever receive back in the benefit.

And so what if they have a special needs child who will collect this benefit? And without ever paying in? That already happens with plenty of people who are disabled and have never paid.
I am familiar with cases of people who are non-hearing, who received SSI as children, who never contributed into the system. Thats part of why the system is there, as it is an entitlement program.

[MTKROUSH]

They also have benefits the rest of us will never get. Like 50% @ 20 yrs, subsidized health care, subsidized housing, etc..

When I see conservatives attacking the DoD pension plan I'll know they're serious. Until then it is nothing more than the usual "government employees are all lazy, overpaid, and underworked" BS. I always enjoy reading the writings of those criticizing my profession (FF get paid for sleeping) when they haven't spent one day on a fire engine. But somehow they know all about my job.

I don't know about you but I get 50% @ 20 years. None of that other good stuff but I get the 50. If I read my plan right

[Catch22]

I don't know about you but I get 50% @ 20 years. None of that other good stuff but I get the 50. If I read my plan right

I get the same, 50% after 20, 1% longevity on top of that for every year after 20 up to 65%. I also get a lump-sum buyback, which is every dime I put into the pension for the duration of my employment (18.08% after taxes).

Basically, I get $150-200K (estimated right now) when I retire, plus a pension check of 50% of the average of the best 3 of the last 5 years. That's a helluva lot better than I'll ever see out of social security.

[FireCapt1951retired]

I get the same, 50% after 20, 1% longevity on top of that for every year after 20 up to 65%. I also get a lump-sum buyback, which is every dime I put into the pension for the duration of my employment (18.08% after taxes).

Basically, I get $150-200K (estimated right now) when I retire, plus a pension check of 50% of the average of the best 3 of the last 5 years. That's a helluva lot better than I'll ever see out of social security.

Catch,

If you chose to just take the cash out before 59 1/2 are you required to roll it over into an IRA or a qualified annuity without paying the immediate penalties (10%) and regular taxes due (becomes a big time tax bill, would have been 44% with state and fed taxes) or were your pension payments pre-taxed (not sure if that's what you meant by after taxes)? My pension system is very smilar in the annuity portion (not pre-taxed). On the roll over I was allowed to draw a certain percentage from the qualified annuity/IRA until age 59 1/2 without paying the 10% penalty, plus my tax percentage is less by drawing on it every month versus the whole.

As for social security, I will never draw a dime from them nor will I be eligible for medicaid or any other benefit.

[scfire86]

I don't know about you but I get 50% @ 20 years. None of that other good stuff but I get the 50. If I read my plan right

That sounds like a good plan.

My point is that McCain and other conservatives attack defined benefit plans (even though McCain draws his Navy pension) of public employees as being too expensive, out of touch with the civilian sector etc.

Yet they never lump the military's DB program into those attacks. I believe that if McCain were that serious about getting rid of DB plans (which he campaigned for in CA back in 2005) he should start by addressing the DoD's pension plan. Especially since he is a federal legislator and the DoD is a federal department.

Yet he decided to attack the choices available to local government.

[Catch22]

Catch,

If you chose to just take the cash out before 59 1/2 are you required to roll it over into an IRA or a qualified annuity without paying the immediate penalties (10%) and regular taxes due (becomes a big time tax bill, would have been 44% with state and fed taxes) or were your pension payments pre-taxed (not sure if that's what you meant by after taxes)? My pension system is very smilar in the annuity portion (not pre-taxed). On the roll over I was allowed to draw a certain percentage from the qualified annuity/IRA until age 59 1/2 without paying the 10% penalty, plus my tax percentage is less by drawing on it every month versus the whole.

As for social security, I will never draw a dime from them nor will I be eligible for medicaid or any other benefit.

Our contribution is taken out after taxes, so my lump sum won't be taxed, no matter what age (I'll be 48, well below 50.5). They're basically using it for interest to keep the fund solvent, along with our city's 17% match.

[DaSharkie]

Nor is borrowing another trillion dollars for a dyed in the wool fiscal conservative who is passing the buck off to someone else.

Actually it is. But at least I will admit borrowing more than taking in is wrong. You admit that you would tax everything that is made and take it all. Yet you say that there is no difference between Liberalism and Communism/Socialism.

Love your hypocracy.

[ScareCrow57]

Why do you insist on talking so stupid? It is not an injustice, go back and look at the history of the issue, please.

When Social Security was instituted, firefighters were intentionally left out. It could be argued that we were discriminated against. Remember, please, that it wasn't until 1993 or so, that joining Social Security was even an option for us. This is not an "injustice", and our inclusion into the system will not do anything except be more of a drain on the system. The contributions that we would make would hardly be of any benefit.
In fact, you're much better off money-wise, by not having us participate. The guys who have part-time jobs that do contribute barely receive any of the benefit they are eligible for, because of our pension plans. The fact that they pay a full share into the system is proof enough, with a minimal of research. Change the other factors involved, like our total inclusion, every firefighter will now collect a much bigger benefit.
We don't earn that much money, so the amount that would be added would be very small, in the whole scheme of things.

We weren't included in the original plan, and we were forced to fend for ourselves on a salary that was only a step or two above broke. They didn't want us in then, by letter of the law, why should we be forced into it now? It wasn't fair then, it isn't fair now. We'll stick on our own, as we seem to be doing a very good job at it, thank you very much for your concern.

You actually have it pretty good right now. Guys who work part-time contribute in far more than they will ever receive back in the benefit.

And so what if they have a special needs child who will collect this benefit? And without ever paying in? That already happens with plenty of people who are disabled and have never paid.
I am familiar with cases of people who are non-hearing, who received SSI as children, who never contributed into the system. Thats part of why the system is there, as it is an entitlement program.

In the beginning it was a retirement system and one only contributed 2%. Since then it has become just another POS government entitlement plan. No one should be exempt from paying for the illegals and the disabled.

[Jasper 45]

No one should be exempt from paying for the illegals and the disabled.

Well tough. We weren't included in the beginning, nor should we have to help out your mess now.
After all, that's only fair.

[scfire86]

Actually it is. But at least I will admit borrowing more than taking in is wrong. You admit that you would tax everything that is made and take it all. Yet you say that there is no difference between Liberalism and Communism/Socialism.

Love your hypocracy.

How so? All that borrowing done by conservatives is the same thing. All those borrowed dollars have to get re-paid from the US Treasury. All conservatives have done is push off the bill to a different group.

[DaSharkie]

How so? All that borrowing done by conservatives is the same thing. All those borrowed dollars have to get re-paid from the US Treasury. All conservatives have done is push off the bill to a different group.

With the help of innumerable Democrats who voted for the same budgets as the Republicans.

Then again, you could never blame a Democrat for doing the same thing as a Republican.

You are such a freaking hypocrate. It takes more than just one party to bankrupt the country, yet you only blame the one party. I hold out hope that one day you may find a cure for your rectal-cranial inversion.