Dennis The B
US Veteran
The problem with the teacher's pension is purely a political one, and as such, I cannot discuss it. I will say this however: Pontiac, which was one of the cities in Michigan taken over by an emergency manager, had it's employee's pension funded well above 100%, so it wasn't that the money wasn't/isn't available, more along the lines of how the people in charge delegated it. Remember, the teachers you are referring to are unionized, and their pensions were negotiated, and therefore ultimately part of their pay was diverted to pay the fund. It's OK to renegotiate the contract for newly hired persons, similar to how many companies with defined pension plans have done, but to try and sell the pension to a private investment company and thus do away with what was agreed to for decades is disturbing to say the least. I have known a lot of teachers in Michigan, and not just in the poorer districts who pay a considerable amount of out-of-pocket expenses for their students, either for supplies or other 'non covered' expenses.
The problem with government pension funds is political. Everyone wants the money for investments, and the fund managers can't resist the pressure. The Ann Arbor teachers pension fund lost $10 million of a $20 million investment, on a questionable real estate deal.
The California pension fund has a similar problem; too many unsound investments by their managers.
Just an aside here: If the various states' pension funds had invested passively in the S&P 500 over the years, the returns would have yielded better than 10% annually.
It never ceases to amaze me at the incompetence of these fund managers. The invest in deals, never asking the question, "If this is such a great investment, why don't the commercial or investment banks go for it?"