If you are counting on your pension as retirement income, you must read this article.
Wall Street insiders, it says, pumped $300 million into the last election. In return, they get to invest your pension funds. Some of those investments are very risky.
“Illinois, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all recently elected governors who were previously executives and directors at firms which managed investments on behalf of state pension funds. These firms are now, consequently, in position to obtain even more of these public funds. This alone represents a huge payoff on that $300M investment made by the financial industry, and is likely to result in more pension money going into investments which offer great benefits for Wall Street but do little for the broader economy.
“But Wall Street’s agenda goes beyond any one election cycle. It has been fighting to turn public pensions into private profits for quite some time, steering retirement nest eggs into investments that are complex, charge hefty fees, and that generate big profits for management firms. And it has been succeeding. Of the $3 trillion in public assets currently in pension funds throughout the country, almost a quarter of that has already found its way into so-called “alternative investments” like hedge funds, private equity and real estate. That translates to roughly $660 billion of public money now under private management, invested in assets that are often arcane and opaque but that offer high management and placement fees to Wall Street financiers.”

OMG…how disgusting.
LikeLike
“Illinois, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all recently elected governors who were previously executives and directors at firms which managed investments on behalf of state pension funds.”
Great! Fabulous.
I’m telling you, we might do better if we just negotiated with lobbyists directly. I see no need for this layer of “lawmakers” between us and the people making the decisions.
LikeLike
The lobbyists WANT you to cut out the middleman altogether and buy directly from them… that was part of GWB’s “ownership” plan for pensions…
LikeLike
The private sector is at war to seize all the vast assets accumulated in the public sector–schools, pensions, whatever, it’s all a revenue stream to corporate managers. The contradiction here is that the private sector now has on hand far more capital than it is willing or able to invest right now, partly b/c it is looking for high returns. How can it now appropriate the pension plans which were supposed to safely guarantee our retirement? Perhaps someone with economic brains can fill us in–Apple has now about $160 billion in the bank, for example; Wall St. firms are laden with what’s called there “dry powder” or gobs of cash on hand with nowhere to invest it. At the very least, private seizure of public pensions will produce handsome management fees, but the bulk will still remain to be invested when the genius money crowd won’t spend to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure of rail lines, roads, highways, power grids, schools…trying to figure out if this is just piling on to go in for the kill while there is an opening to do so, or if these guys really have an investment plan for the billions they are stealing from us.
LikeLike
Folks might want to find out who is currently investing thier pension funds and where they are invested.
LikeLike
Yuh. New Jersy here. I gathered what I needed to know from the article. Can’t say the earlier Dem govs did any better…. What else is nu?
LikeLike
I noted the comment thread in the article. Most blame the lack of press coverage for the ignorant voting pattern. And of course there’s the Catch-22 that Democrats are equally bought out- one commenter noted that ‘no less than 14 of Obama’s appointees come from Goldman-Sachs.’
I assume the reason the press is bought-out has mostly to do–still– with the rocky transition from print to online media. It would seem the future of America’s democracy lies with a free neutral net, whether it be social media organization of protest or garnering un-bought-out info. Let’s do what we can with ‘likes’ & real-$ suport of sites which spread on-the-ground opinion, & investigative journalism!
LikeLike
Suggest that the only play in the playbook will follow the ‘fix’ in Rhode Island — perhaps we should all do
a little homework. (How many bankers have been prosecuted for fraud in the run-up to 2008? None!
How many were prosecuted for the S & L crises two decades before? Many!)
They are now way beyond ‘Too big to fail’!
LikeLike
And Michael Milken, who’s not allowed to deal securities, is allowed to be a higher-up in K12 virtual charter & other education firms.
LikeLike
Not a good idea to go after people’s pensions-older people vote!
LikeLike
Vote for what?
LikeLike
I might quibble about the idea that pension funds are “steering retirement nest eggs” into these alternative investments. For today’s employees, the nest eggs don’t actually exist. They’re an accounting concept based on the premise that the pension funds will get higher returns on investment than they’ve gotten in a long time, and will continue to get those returns for the rest of time.
Fifty or sixty years ago, public pension funds mainly held simple bonds that were relatively low-risk and predictable. Then they moved into the stock market for higher returns and rode a bull market for a couple decades. They retroactively enhanced benefits and said the enhancements wouldn’t require higher contributions because the bull market would never end. Almost immediately, the bull market ended, but the pension funds kept doing their accounting as if it hadn’t ended, because that was the only way they could keep benefits intact without having to increase contributions.
When hedge funds and private equity went mainstream, the public pension funds naturally started moving into those for higher returns. I recall that one of the big California funds may be bucking this trend somewhat, but that’s the exception. The rule is that laws keep getting passed that raise the cap on these investments with union support and little coverage by media, mainstream or otherwise. There was one passed in NY this summer.
The fees are terrible, but apparently the alternative is even worse.
LikeLike
Diane, This brings up many good points and misses one very important one. If we collectively insisted that our funds are not used on XYZ, we could actually drive the economy, could force corporations to stop using GMO’s, investing in foreign companies and terrorist groups, de-fund big oil….in short, if we were all willing to be a little less greedy with our pension investments we could affect positive change on the entire economy and that in turn would drive investment dollars toward honest, ethical companies willing to play by the rules…the very same rules and ethics we try to teach in our classrooms to our student.
LikeLike
Charter school lobbying group pushes One Newark plan on Detroit:
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/wayne-county/2014/11/19/detroit-schools-common-application/19273041/
It’s all very local and grass roots and collaborative, ed reform, which is why it looks exactly the same in every place they parachute into.
The existing public schools will be gone in 5 years, tops. Mission accomplished.
LikeLike
Aaaarrrggghhh! “Partners” with the usual suspects: the Waltons, TFA, K-12 Education, Education Trust.
http://www.excellentschoolsdetroit.org/en/partners
LikeLike
I cords-posted the link to the article itself.
LikeLike
These are definitely bipartisan neoliberal opportunists. Mayor Rahm Emanuel in Chicago accepted campaign contributions from financial firms that manage the city’s pensions, so
“Chicago Lawmakers Call for SEC Investigation of Mayor Rahm Emanuel”
http://www.ibtimes.com/chicago-lawmakers-call-sec-investigation-mayor-rahm-emanuel-1725673
LikeLike
My greatest concern regarding education “reform” is that of the future of our children.
My greatest personal concern is that of the future of my pension.
A LOT of people lost their pensions and more during the past few decades as a result of the savings and loan scandal, Enron, and the 2007-2008 financial collapse. A relative few reaped huge rewards from these ripoffs.
This could so easily happen again. I hear what Flerp’s saying about the history of our pension funds. This is something I need to investigate more. But from what I’m hearing, our investments in NYC have been relatively conservative in comparison to the high risk investments I’m reading about here and in other articles.
LikeLike
This posting is laughably uninformed about the realities of public pension plans and their relationships to investment forms. The vast majority of public pension plans divide up their asset management amongst many investment firms in order to diversify their holdings. A pension plan may have investments at Fidelity, Vanguard, fifteen different hedge funds, ten private equity funds, etc. This practice has been a staple of public pensions for decades – it’s not at all a recent happening.
Some public pension assets are directly invested by employees of the funds; those employees are paid market level compensation for their expertise, meaning several hundred thousand dollars per year. And the biggest reason that public pension plans use hedge funds is that they want the possibility of higher than average returns so that public employees and their employers don’t have to contribute very much to the pension plans. Illinois under Democratic one-party rule is Exhibit A for public employers who have irresponsibly not made anywhere close to sufficient employer contributions for many years.
None of these facts are known by most of this blog’s readers, few of whom will care anyway. It’s more personally satisfying to base opinions regarding this issue on emotions and pretensions to moral superiority.
LikeLike
Yup.
LikeLike
“None of these facts are known by most of this blog’s readers, few of whom will care anyway. It’s more personally satisfying to base opinions regarding this issue on emotions and pretensions to moral superiority.”
Is your purpose here to educate or denigrate?
We’re not all economists, you know…nor should we be.
I enjoy hearing from people with knowledge that I don’t possess, so I was more than happy to read your post until that last paragraph.
Take out the word “moral”. I could just as easily say that your basing your opinions regarding this issue on pretensions of superiority.
LikeLike
The 8:46 post has “disgustingly” biased comments.
Peter Mallouk, in his recent book describes the “lies”, of the hedge fund industry, regarding their returns and claims of less volatility. Calpers demonstrated that knowledge recently, by divesting of all hedge funds.
Another example of dramatic change in the practice of pensions is occurring, in N.J.. The management fees that pensioners are charged, increased significantly, under the current governor. (Joel Franks comment- TIAA Consumerism website and news articles referring to charges)
The SEC could protect pensioners with stronger rules against agent fees. (Chris Tobe’s financial columns and his book, Kentucky Fried
Pensions)
IMO, the most significant misinformation about pensions was presented by an economics professor, who aggregated the widely disparate situations of hundreds of pension plans, from the fifty states. One expert described the paper’s conclusions, as, at the threshold of malpractice. (Pensions and Investments website) . Specialists in the retirement field have debunked the broad brush indictment, of “unrealistic rates of return”.
(National Institute for Security in Retirement).
Pew “researchers” and the professor, toured the state capitols to testify. It was later revealed that the anti-pension Arnold Foundation provided funding for Pew’s “research”. And, the professor was very slow to respond to questions about who paid for his cross-country trek.
The commenter’s viewpoint is similar to that of State Budget Solutions, which until about a year ago, identified itself as a partnership with the Koch-funded ALEC. As David Sirota said, the elimination of pensions, creates the playbook for the elimination of Social Security, which was David’s Koch’s goal, when running for vice-president.
Indeed, people who are fighting to preserve a middle class and democracy, in the U.S. have moral superiority.
LikeLike
I agree with this in a lot of ways.
LikeLike
Linda flails wildly trying to comment on something she obviously knows nothing about. Everything I wrote is common knowledge to anyone with even the slightest background in the area of public finance and pensions. I don’t oppose public pension plans; my complaint is that they’ve made unrealistic promises to beneficiaries, and elected officials in most states have refused to require that these funds be actuarially sound. Illinois is the worst state, because for many years elected officials – almost all of them Democrats – flimflammed the public by not making sufficient employer contributions to keep the pension plans financially sound. Union leaders had to have known about these shortfalls in contributions, but they went along rather than advocating the hugely unpopular increases in state taxes – or decreases in promised benefits – that financial soundness required.
You can emote and scream all you want, and chant mindless slogans about ALEC and the Koch brothers. Those ravings won’t change the math of the badly managed public employee pension plans.
LikeLike
Linda cited her sources, which is much more indicative of someone concerned with facts, which people can readily investigate further, than your “common knowledge.”
LikeLike
CT,
I think that Rodger12’s post was primarily directed at the original post’s contention that current retirement funds somehow do not involve “wall street”.
I think Linda is in Connecticut. The largest single investments in the the combined investment fund’s liquidity fund in that state are in mutual funds managed by Merrill Lynch, Barclays, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs.
You can see the holdings here: http://www.ott.ct.gov/PDFs/2013CIF_CAFR.pdf
The single largest holding of stock is in Exxon Mobil.
LikeLike
You might be right, Rodgers12. I’ve heard and read similar conversations on the unrealistic political promises made in order to get and keep the vote. I’ve also heard plenty about the campaign against Social Security.
So you might be right. Unfortunately, the delivery of the message is angry and derisive. You probably don’t care, but it’s a shame that a lot of people who might listen to and possibly profit from your statements are going to shut you out before the sentences are completed.
If we want real, lasting change, we have to come from a place of respect towards the listener.
LikeLike
I spent three years in the business. I could talk about actuarial assumptions for
a long, long time. Thank you for your post Linda.
LikeLike
Actually, it’s Rodgers12 who has shown his pretense of “moral superiority,” as demonstrated in his assumptions that educated people here don’t care about facts and know nothing about pensions, diversified portfolio investments etc.
This topic has been discussed here before, including the failure of the state of Illinois to make sufficient employer contributions into the pension fund, and many people have expressed concerns about it (including those of us who are not public employees and have no pensions). Blaming Democrats for this overlooks the fact that it has been a bipartisan practice that started long ago and continued while Republicans had a stronghold on state government.
“Illinois: A Long History of Underfunded Pensions”
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/The-312/December-2012-1/Illinois-A-Long-History-of-Underfunded-Pensions/
LikeLike
The election of Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren would improve the financial situation of most Americans, through the enactment of greater financial controls on Wall Street. The revolving door, between unproductive financial firm managers and government oversight agencies, makes a mockery of the hard work of the average American.
The worthless exercise of aggregation of diverse pension situations, from the 5O states, is a tactic in a war, which we recognize as the technique, manufacturing a crisis.
Specific recommendations going forward:
The best policy at the state level is to remove political control, both parties, from pension decisions.
Pensioners should require their fund managers invest in indexed funds.
They should require their pension boards prepare and distribute to members, a slate of political candidates that support pensions.
Since the elimination of pensions creates the playbook for Social Security’s elimination, (promoted with with an estimated 1/2 billion dollars from hedge funder, Pete Peterson, via his “Fix the Debt” campaign), all Americans should make themselves well-informed about self-serving Social Security lies. I recommend the research of Vermont’s Sen. Sanders.
When listening to businessmen, remember the adage, “While they are often wrong, they are always certain.” Also, read the attack plans attributed to Rick Berman, available at PRWatch.
LikeLike
To all of whom it may concern:
IMO, all fund managers who have a connection with political power could bend the rules in investing strategy as long as they are well protected from hiding all true facts that they fail to bring their prediction of the return as per their promises.
Regarding PUBLIC PENSION FUND, we only need to invest in resources that can be prospered within the certain of period of time, and within our country control.
I came from communist country. Please DO NOT trust all tactics that are just empty promise, or empty resources, or fake rumour about “GOLD MINE” / “OIL in OCEAN FLOOR”…from the speculative source of those “buy out” expertise, scholars from any prestige institutions.
One thing is for sure that GREED and HOPE in VAIN are the worst nightmare for any investor. WHY? It is because greed and hope in vain drive people in rush to do foolish and blind / illogical investment.
Marketing and public relation agents are paid for writing and saying things that are NEVER based on TRUE FACTS and FIGURES, but rather than “SPECULATIVE” story.
Relax and think over that in this technology and information age, there are many billionaires in the third world, thanks to many GULLIBLE workers who must work longer hours at lower wages, without time to rest and learn in order to critically examine and analyze the pros and cons of their own lives, left alone of their investments.
Most of all, when people are exhausted from their JOBS, they intend to trust THE “professional in ECONOMY, or in BANKING, or in FUND MANAGERS” to do good job in investment on their behalf. OH NO, workers will get BURNED by too gullible and trusting in CROOKS with licence to rob them legally.
Here is my true example or story about the bank manager who advised me to borrow from the bank to invest in mutual fund in retirement home and will get back from government for income tax return in the end of every year for ten years.
According to him, my income with overtime will qualify me to get back almost 50% income tax return from government for every dollar I put in my retirement saving. He worked in details for two hours to show me that in ten years, I will have $ 500,000.00 ONLY IF my investment produce a SAFE minimum 6% ANNUALLY in return, with loan at minimum interest rate at 3.5% DAILY. The truth is that interest rate will climb up (in 1982, it was at 25%), and a safe investment like government BOND only offers at 3.5% for 10 years.
I only smiled and gently told him that I appreciated his conscience and effort to work in details to show me how to earn $500,000.00 in 10 years. However, with the unstable economy, I am sure that I will need to remortgage my home to pay for the interest in borrowing the loan because the reverse will happen. Yes, you can envision the ugly picture when your investment goes sour yearly, and your loan will exponentially increase with high interest rate calculated DAILY.
Life is very simple whenever you are conscientious enough to help others, NOT to rob others. Back2basic
LikeLike
m4potw,
Thanks for sharing your experience.
Warren Buffet said it was unwise to invest in a product that we don’t understand. Many financial products like annuities, are purposely opaque. I found the investing advice in Peter Mallouk’s book to be the best I’ve read. He stated that hiring a financial advisor, licensed only by the SEC, not FINRA, provides cause for action, if he/she fails to place the client’s interests, first.
LikeLike
Thanks Linda and m4potw! Here’s some historical info:
“How the middle class became the underclass”
http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm
LikeLike
Reteach-
Thanks for the link to the graphic.
LikeLike
Hi Linda:
I really appreciate your sharing knowledge in this thread. In the reality of the business world, I assume that we might know pretty well all of the strategies in investment, but we tend to forget THE SOURCE where the manipulation and the speculation will take place.
Investors like us are very naive and trusting in our logical mind without realizing the business SOURCE who always INTENTIONALLY tricks and lures naive people into their TRAPS based on their GREED and HOPE in VAIN.
The best DEFENSE in investment is to research for the TRUE SOURCE with our knowledge and experience in the field that we want to invest. For instance, in the educational field, all educators in this website are expertise in many different disciplines from general education like arts, history, languages, literature, philosophy, math… to some specific disciplines like legal system, economy, investment, marketing, political campaign…We can be honest to ourselves that for thousands of years THE TRUE DIFFERENCE between educators and business people is that:
EDUCATORS are always and will be CONSCIENTIOUS, INTEGRITY and CARING for the welfare of others, while
Business people are 100% profit driven minded type. For this SOLE reason, business people are SELFISH, CRUEL, and DECEITFUL.
Now, I understand that the cliche about “people who can’t do, teach” implies that we educators cannot do EVIL/CORRUPTED things like those scumbags in business.
We, educators, are the seen Angels on earth with GOD given mission to cultivate HUMANITY in humans to protect humans against infested/corrupted evil GREED, FAME, and EGO. Back2basic
LikeLike
At one time, America’s captains of industry created value and contributed to GDP. As few as 30 years ago, they operated with the understanding that their businesses were guests in society. We should all be wary of the current 1%, particularly from the fields of finance and technology. Social researchers claim that a large percentage of CEO’s have sociopathic tendencies.
The flip side of the coin is that a number of the highly visible and politically active 1%, told reporters they fear threats, with an alarming number, identified as “credible”.
LikeLike
Linda,
Was this the time of Vanderbilt or of Rockefeller or of Andrew Mellon? The good people who were at Ludlow, Everett, Bay View might have differnt views.
LikeLike
Readers, Don’t be fooled by the references to robber barons and injustices to workers that occurred long before the “30 years ago” mentioned by Linda. We need the same kinds of government clamp downs today that were enacted in the early 20th century, in order to protect Americans from corporate predators, which resulted in regulatory oversight of big business, increased taxes on the rich, protections for workers and unionization, and the rise of the middle class.
Much of that has been incapacitated by neoliberal policies implemented by both parties in the last few decades and working class people have suffered greatly, while the 1% has benefited. Contrary to appearances, this troll has strong allegiances to big business, not to American workers, and he is not worthy of your precious time.
LikeLike
Cosmic,
You might not that poster Linda’s post said as few as thirty years ago…..suggesting that further back things were equally good.
I think poster Linda is viewing history with hear rented nostalgia. I have found people often claim they are nostalgic for the time of thier youth but what I think they are really nostalgic for is thier youth. To quote a song from my own youth, these are the good old days.
LikeLike
The facts about business, thirty years ago, can be understood from a video filmed, at the time, at Columbia University. A business school professor assembled those involved in corporate takeovers, T. Boone Pickens and Sir Goldsmith, the CEO’s of major corporations, New York’s attorney general, Guillani, corporate lawyer, Arthur Liman, and a few other people. The debate focused on the responsibility of business in society, trends that would adversely affect GDP, etc. The film is historically significant because it showed the beginning of a major change in business conduct and rationalization.
te,
My comment didn’t address the beginning date or origin, for the view, “business is a guest in society.” A CEO, in the video, used the phrase, which was a well-known perspective at the time. The CEO, looked to others present, to confirm that it was the view taught in business schools. The phrase did not originate with him.
LikeLike