Will California be our Greece?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
The parallels are legion.
California and Greece have massive unfunded liabilities. A recent study by a group at Stanford University pegs California’s unfunded pension liabilities at $500 billion. But that only includes state debt for California. When you factor in California’s 13 percent stake in the U.S. economy, which is saddled with $13 trillion in debt, the state’s total debt liability is over $2 trillion. Some analysts peg Greece’s unfunded liabilities at a similarly astronomic level. And these numbers only tell a piece of the story.

In many ways California as a state has bigger problems than Greece as a country. The unemployment rate in California is higher than that of Greece. And California spends more on many government programs. For example, the 167,000 inmates in California prisons occupy 11 percent of the budget, or $8 billion. By comparison, Greece prisons hold only 12,300 prison inmates.

Both California and Greece suffer from a huge number of unionized government employees accustomed to large defined benefit packages, including annual salary increases and lifetime pensions. Much has been made of the ability of Greek government workers to retire at the age of 53. In California, government workers can retire at 55.

...
California’s problems are being compounded as businesses leave the state. Last month’s announcement that Northrup-Grumman was shifting its headquarters to Virginia followed HP’s announcement that it was also moving out. Maybe these departures have something to do with Chief Executive naming California as the worst state in which to do business, and with the Tax Foundation ranking California as the 48th worst business tax climate in the nation. California also insists on its own rules for gas mileage, silly ubiquitous pregnancy warnings and even its own TV energy usage standards. The message California sends to businesses is clear: Stay away.
...​
What will happen? States cannot go bankrupt under our law. They can just stop paying debts owed. If things get worse, bond ratings will continue to drop, payments will not be made, and the new governor will have to choose between paying government pensioners and cutting services and government employees.

We saw what decades of fiscal irresponsibility have led to in Greece: Fiscal collapse, billion-dollar bailouts and violent riots. In late February, the Telegraph reported that JP Morgan head Jamie Dimon said that California is a bigger risk than Greece. I think he is right.
Serious problems ahead, or a tempest in a teapot?
 

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
I thought Greece was our Greece, since we're helping to bail them out.
 

Deleted member 42

I note that California's problems began with Enron. And got worse with Ahnold.
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
Things look worse than they really are because of the recession right now, just as they looked better than they really were in 2000 when the NASDAQ reached its peak, and the pension funds were rolling in so much money that making them more generous seemed to carry to little risk.

California's real fiscal problem is over-reliance on taxes have a lot of volatility based on how the economy is performing, and a constitution with a 2/3 requirement to pass a budget that inhibits the ability to deal with the problem.
 

thothguard51

A Gentleman of a refined age...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
9,316
Reaction score
1,064
Age
72
Location
Out side the beltway...
Are they still talking about splitting the state into two states? Now might be the time...
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
Just what we need. Four Senators from the left coast. :D
 

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
I note that California's problems began with Enron. And got worse with Ahnold.
California's problems go a lot further than that, I think. As to getting worse and better, California was on the leading edge of the housing bubble, thanks to the dot-com bubble and the limitations on land use in certain areas.

And any way you slice it, the government of California--no matter who is/was in charge--threw money around like there was no tomorrow.

It's a cautionary tale, to be sure. But I wouldn't say the Greece analogy really works all that well. California has bigtime industry, much more than Greece. The technology sector, alone, dwarfs the entire Greek economy.
 

CACTUSWENDY

An old, sappy, and happy one.
Kind Benefactor
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
12,860
Reaction score
1,667
Location
Sunny Arizona
So, California dropping off into the sea might not be such a bad idea? Arizona could really use the beach front along its west side. I think it would be a real boom to our own money woes.

I know we here in Arizona are doing lots of cut backs and the natives are not happy about it. Folks seem to think you can just keep on being the spenders forever.
 

Zoombie

Dragon of the Multiverse
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
40,775
Reaction score
5,947
Location
Some personalized demiplane
Uh...if California dropped into the sea, I'd never post here again, and I know everyone would miss me.

Right?

...right?
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
Uh...if California dropped into the sea, I'd never post here again, and I know everyone would miss me.

Right?

...right?
Just keep your surfboard handy, Zoombie. Then we won't have to miss you. You can report from the Arizona shore. :)
 

MattW

Company Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
6,326
Reaction score
855
Both California and Greece suffer from a huge number of unionized government employees accustomed to large defined benefit packages, including annual salary increases and lifetime pensions. Much has been made of the ability of Greek government workers to retire at the age of 53. In California, government workers can retire at 55
Exemplifies the disconnect of state and federal workers and those who work outside of government. No one is ever guaranteed raises, pensions, healthcare, or even employment anymore. And government worker unions only ever ask for more.

While the underpaid, underemployed, unemployed, and afraid-of-retirement sectors foot the bill for cadillac benefits and pensions.

CA isn't the only state like this...
 

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
Exemplifies the disconnect of state and federal workers and those who work outside of government. No one is ever guaranteed raises, pensions, healthcare, or even employment anymore. And government worker unions only ever ask for more.

While the underpaid, underemployed, unemployed, and afraid-of-retirement sectors foot the bill for cadillac benefits and pensions.

CA isn't the only state like this...

OK, I think it was bad trend when the private sector moved away from guaranteed pensions. But one thing to consider with respect to California public employees (and those in many other states) is that they don't participate in Social Security, so if you move totally toward a defined contribution, rather than a defined benefit, plan, they don't have anything at all guaranteed. And, if you're like me and worked over 20 years me in the private sector, then became a teacher, you lose part of the Social Security benefits you already earned. And while there are tax-deferred supplemental retirement programs (like 403b and 457b plans that are similar to 401k plans), there's no employer match like there is in the private sector. And there's obviously nothing an employee stock purchase plan to supplement the investment savings.

So having worked in both places, I think I have a pretty reasonable grasp on the comparison, and I really don't see that the pension plans are all that outrageous. You can actually get rich from the company matching and stock purchase opportunities working in the private sector. I've seen people do it. The pension plans are not going to make you rich.

If you want to know what my pension is going to be, it's 2.5% of the average of my last three years' salaries times the number of years of service. If I retire at 65, that will give me 18 years, and I'll get 45%. I don't think that's an outrageous amount. And I'll probably lose about $400 a month of my Social Security benefit.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
If you want to know what my pension is going to be, it's 2.5% of the average of my last three years' salaries times the number of years of service. If I retire at 65, that will give me 18 years, and I'll get 45%. I don't think that's an outrageous amount. And I'll probably lose about $400 a month of my Social Security benefit.
Yes, but that's 45% of your salary as a teacher, which as we all know is a hugely remunerative occupation.
 

CACTUSWENDY

An old, sappy, and happy one.
Kind Benefactor
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
12,860
Reaction score
1,667
Location
Sunny Arizona
Will throw you a rope with a life ring at the end of it Zom.
 

Zoombie

Dragon of the Multiverse
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
40,775
Reaction score
5,947
Location
Some personalized demiplane
I find that offensive. Just because I'm Californian, you assume I know how to surf? Have I ever indicated that I know how to surf?
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
I find that offensive. Just because I'm Californian, you assume I know how to surf? Have I ever indicated that I know how to surf?
Well, I saw it under your avatar... ;)
 

dmytryp

Banned
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
7,207
Reaction score
700
Location
Stranded in Omaha
Website
www.webpage4u.co.il
If you want to know what my pension is going to be, it's 2.5% of the average of my last three years' salaries times the number of years of service. If I retire at 65, that will give me 18 years, and I'll get 45%. I don't think that's an outrageous amount. And I'll probably lose about $400 a month of my Social Security benefit.

Yes, but that's 45% of your salary as a teacher, which as we all know is a hugely remunerative occupation.
Not to be a nag here, but here are a couple of points

1. This was exactly the same position our pension funds were in before the reform in 2003 (only we would get 2% per every year, instead of 2.5%). They went under. Literally under. They didn't have the money to pay people their pensions. Part of it was due to mismanagement (money was taken out of the funds for other needs by the central union that had run them), but more significantly it was due to increases in life expectancy and the likes. The gov bailed them out under several conditions -- namely, the union was no longer in charge, all the new members (who joined after the reform) would get 2% of the total average, not the last 3 years (whih makes a certain sense, since people would pay out of lower salaries at the beginning of the road, but get money back only according to the bigger ones at the end of their career) and the pen age was gradually raised to 67.

2. May I ask why you started putting money towards retirement at an age of 47?
EDIT: I reread your post again. I think the fact that you've lost the benefits for the years before the gov employment is an idiotic practice (I had something slightly similar while I was in the IDF, but the loss is capped at 10 years -- after that you still get your proportional part of the benefits)

3. Since you are only going to pay for 18 years, why exactly is it a surprise that the pension would only be 45%. That's not bad at all. By your figure somebody who paid for 35 years would get almost 90% (we have a cap of 70%, no matter how long you are working)
 
Last edited:

clintl

Represent.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,611
Reaction score
603
Location
Davis, CA
2. May I ask why you started putting money towards retirement at an age of 47?
EDIT: I reread your post again. I think the fact that you've lost the benefits for the years before the gov employment is an idiotic practice (I had something slightly similar while I was in the IDF, but the loss is capped at 10 years -- after that you still get your proportional part of the benefits)

3. Since you are only going to pay for 18 years, why exactly is it a surprise that the pension would only be 45%. That's not bad at all. By your figure somebody who paid for 35 years would get almost 90% (we have a cap of 70%, no matter how long you are working)

I didn't wait until I was 47. I changed careers at the point. I'm going to be fine - I have a nice sum of money in an IRA account that was rolled over from a 401k from my previous career (although the last decade has been a waste as far as that goes).

I'm not complaining about the amount, I'm complaining that someone thinks it's an exorbitant amount.

And, unlike the private sector pension at the company I worked for that had one, it's not completely employer-funded. Our contribution from our salary is equal to the district contribution.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.