There are many ways to figure per hour cost. Our loaded rate at work was $146. That is what we charged our customers when we went out to work on their phone systems. We were regulated by the Ak Public Utilities Commission. What was included in our rate was all the supervisors, clerks and management. Also vehicles, housing and work equipment. They would throw that at us in negotiations and get it right back. The bottom line is each vehicle coming off the line carries $1500+ in legacy costs when they were selling millions more vehicles than they are today. So IF GM sold 6 million vehicles in 2007 and only 3 million in 2008 that would double the legacy cost per vehicle. It is likely they will sell a lot less in 2009, running the legacy up closer to $5000 per vehicle. That could be how they are calculating the very high UAW cost per hour. It has nothing to do with the UAW worker on the job. It has to do with the half million retirees still getting full medical, dental, eyecare and VIAGRA.
The usual advice is to diversify your assets, and not put too much money in the company that employs you. Too much risk if you lose your job and your pension.
That's true, but GM doesn't have the money. If the public wanted to subsidize GM, they'd buy the product. If GM hadn't been loosing market share for 20+ years and was able to earn a steady profit on its products when the market was selling 15-17million vehicles I would be more supportive of the bailout. Where else is the $40 billion for the VEBA going to come from? It shouldn't be from the government.
Where else is the $40 billion for the VEBA going to come from? It shouldn't be from the government.
If I promise to pay my ex wife child support for a given amount and fail to do so. I go to jail. Well have they sent Wagoner to jail yet? He had a choice when negotiating that contract with the UAW. He could have told them this is it No more health care for the retirees. You don't like it go on strike or sue me. He signed and now he has no money to pay. GM and the UAW are nothing but losers and deserve to go down for destroying a US industry.
If the stock is worthless, why should the UAW (or a supplier or anyone) agree to accept it in lieu of what they were promised last year (benefits, payments for parts, etc.)?
Gary, I don't see how you can attribute management costs and the rest of it to a line worker's salary. A customer may understand that when he calls out a worker on a job, he's paying more than the salary (overhead), but I don't think that translates too well to an employer paying employees. The electric bill shouldn't figure into the wage portion, even if x number of CFL light bulbs per employee are required. Wouldn't that stuff would fall under a different part of the cost of doing business?
Well in the production of a car you have the whole cost from R&D to the showroom including advertising. It is hard to say where they shuffle the costs. Manufacturing covers every part from the engine to the switch on the dash. I know the UAW likes to use that 8.4% cost for labor. Does it include the labor mowing the grass in front of the headquarters building. I think the real issue going forward is still the legacy. If GM was flush with cash they could just chunk that money in VEBA and fulfill what they agreed to. That would take the legacy cost of $1500 per car away. That does not address the issue. GM does not have the money to put into VEBA. So to keep paying the healthcare of the retirees the money has to come from each car they sell. If it was $1500 in good times. How much is it when they sell half as many vehicles. Has to be $3000. If they do not sell half as many it goes up even further.
I bet that they have a landscape service handle the lawns (and a janitorial service to sweep up).
So ... if GM doesn't have the money to fund the VEBA as promised, and the stock is worthless in the eyes of the UAW, where does the union go? Away? To the bankruptcy court to force GM into involuntary liquidation? To the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation outfit (I doubt that the health trust is covered but don't know)?
In a bankruptcy the pension fund gets taken over by the PBGC. The Health care was not part of the pension. The kicker is the GM pension fund is probably down 20% from where it is supposed to be. Which is close to $20 billion that GM owes the fund. I am not sure what PBGC will do. I know they have limits of what they will pay. I do not know if any retirees are at the max which is $54k per year. I would think with that much pension they can pay their own health care premiums till they are 65 and go on medicare. If not they are young enough to pick up a part time job.
The 8.4% was based on the old wage scale also. My solution is to give them more pension money since it's funded well enough for 80 years and get rid of the retiree and active employee healthcare cost and make up the difference in hourly wages. If it costs $154 an/hr. using a reliable source like Glen Beck, on Fixed News then give the UAW workers $100 an/hr. and that will save GM, according to your reliable news source (Fixed News) $54 an/hr.
But seriously I have no doubt the UAW workers would take a larger hourly wage and dump the healthcare all togeather because GM, is getting ripped off or somebody is getting rebated in corporate for using these certain plans!!!
"....."Why be an employee? Why? Why? Why???????" Are you as a person only a "Union Member"?"
No, I am more than a union member. I am a life member of the local fire and rescue departments. i love to work on cars and collect coins. I love to coach Little League.
I am happy with my lot in life. Is there anything wrong with that???
I'm not even sure if it's that much. I left the UAW after 25 years. When I'm 65 I will receive a monthly pension of around $1,350. I know that a 30-year retiree would receive slightly more but nowhere close to $36k/yr.
I was also at the very top wage scale of any blue collar worker, so I imagine production workers would receive even less.
imidazol97- The healthcare Daschle slipped into the bill rushed through limits services to those who shouldn't have good medicare care. Is that part of your nationalized healthcare hopes? I hope yourself or your children aren't wanting that specialized medicine or surgery that the government decides isn't warranted because it's too expensive or experimental.
Like it or not, I'm afraid that's what it's going to have to come down to. Health care is going to have to be rationed (I know, that's a bad word) at some level, because we just can't afford to give everything to everybody - the pot of money just isn't that big. That might mean denying a $20,000 hip replacement to an 85 year old, or denying a $200K cancer treatment to a young child because they're probably going to die anyway.
My wife has a rare eye condition that, to prevent further loss of her sight, uses a drug "off-label". Because of this, the treatment is deemed experimental by the insurance company and they refuse to pay, so we're paying over $1,000/month out of pocket for this. The irony is that when she's in the waiting room, she's there with a bunch of 70 and 80 year-olds who are getting the same treatment, but for a slightly different form of the condition, and which is covered by Medicare. So, she's having to pay for her own treatment out of pocket, then, through payroll taxes, have to pay for the treatment of the Medicare recipients.
steve HOST - Gary, I don't see how you can attribute management costs and the rest of it to a line worker's salary. A customer may understand that when he calls out a worker on a job, he's paying more than the salary (overhead), but I don't think that translates too well to an employer paying employees. The electric bill shouldn't figure into the wage portion, even if x number of CFL light bulbs per employee are required. Wouldn't that stuff would fall under a different part of the cost of doing business?
Yes, it usually does. When our company competes or negotiates a contract, there are several things that go into the cost of the contract. There's the cost of the materials, of course. Then there's labor cost, which is billed, depending on the skill set (lower for a line working than for a senior level engineer), at a price that's approximately 50% higher than the actual hourly wage paid to an employee. That 50% includes benefit (health insurance, 401K /pension, sick time, etc) and other non-wage costs. Then, on top of that, a percentage or fee is added that goes by different terms in different companies - it's callled G&A where I work. The G&A includes electricity to run the building, depreciation of capital assets, and also various overhead coats such as the HR department, secretaries and other support staff (which are not direct charges), and also the compensations for upper level management that are not charges directly to a specific contract.
Well the GM pension is $3050 a month and I heard they got a very slight increase for cost of living but I'd have to double check with my pops. However the pension obligation is reduced once a person hit social security something that the Teamster, fund is unaffected by. The Teamster pension doesn't get reduced once a person reaches S.S.
With the cost of living of today it's not that much. My uncle who is a Teamster, will get a lot more than my UAW father and when my uncle reaches s.s. his pension won't be reduced and the s.s. will be like a extra income coming in each month. The UAW pension isn't as good as other union plans. I'm sure even gagrice, can admit to that. They have to pay so much a month now for their healthcare insurance and it's not free going to the doctor like many on here have been led to believe by false sources. I guess when you have people like Glen Beck, running his suck well after a while the perception become reality in many gullible minds. :sick:
The problem (maybe not the right word to use) with defined benefit plans, which is what the UAW has, from the company's standpoint is that the future costs of the plan that the company is on the hook for is unconstrained. Yeah, they can do actuary projections and estimate, based on life expectancy, etc how much they will have to pay in the future, but it's still just an estimate (though they may claim it's a very good estimate).
That's one of the reasons many companies (including my own) have terminated their defined benefit plans and replaced them with defined contribution plans of some sort, be they 401K's, cash balance plan, or something else. That way their costs are better defined.
The cost of providing health care for retirees is even more difficult to project into the future. That's why many (most?)companies do not provide any health care benefits at all for retirees. The long term cost of doing so is almost impossible to project. This is what the D3/UAW has found out the hard way.
That's pretty funny. I don't even like Hondas. Especially the dealers. They are overbearing and arrogant from my experience. The only Honda I ever owned was a worthless piece of crap. Which has nothing to do with the UAW and their greed that is destroying the US auto industry.
Well, I as well paid my way through college without relying on Mommy or Daddy. Funny thing is, I don't feel I'm any better off financially than my parents. About the only difference between me and my Dad is that I have a nicer car. I'm still single and don't want any children. I'm worried about surviving my own life. What kind of life would my hypothetical children live in the bankrupt, impoverished, crime-infested, ultra-violent, deindustrialized America of the near future? At least if I go down, I won't be dragging any innocent people with me.
That is why I'm for National Healthcare and I also think one should be limited to so many children but I won't open up that can of worms.
I'm still cold to national health care system, but I am open to some type of universal insurance program that anyone can have access too. I don't think it should be free to the end user though, but offer affordable premiums and it would obviously have to be subsidized for those who earn low incomes. That would hopefully take some pressure off the hospitals.
I also agree on the a child limit based on income, if you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them, but like you said Rock, that opens a whole can of worms.
Curious thing I noticed. I remember how I used to get tons of junk mail for pre-approved credit cards and banks urging me to take outrageous home equity loans so I could "take that dream vacation." I haven't seen any of it lately. Sometimes there are good things about recessions.
The problem (maybe not the right word to use) with defined benefit plans, which is what the UAW has, from the company's standpoint is that the future costs of the plan that the company is on the hook for is unconstrained. Yeah, they can do actuary projections and estimate, based on life expectancy, etc how much they will have to pay in the future, but it's still just an estimate (though they may claim it's a very good estimate).
Well in it's current form it is "projected" the employees who are entitled to the define benefit plan are covered for 80 years thus that right now presently is really a non-issue.....
That's one of the reasons many companies (including my own) have terminated their defined benefit plans and replaced them with defined contribution plans of some sort, be they 401K's, cash balance plan, or something else. That way their costs are better defined.
I can understand the need of a define contribution plan for a small business but understand most americans lost 40% in their 401K plans and are screwed. 401K plans are like playing roulette at a Michigan, casino thus it's a hit and miss retirement plan and peoples lives shouldn't be made or broken on such a gamble IMHO. I personally would like to see some sort of a larger social security fund that way everyone will have something once they reach retirement age. I think Norway, has such a fund!!!
The cost of providing health care for retirees is even more difficult to project into the future. That's why many (most?)companies do not provide any health care benefits at all for retirees. The long term cost of doing so is almost impossible to project. This is what the D3/UAW has found out the hard way.
Well that is why we need to regulate this industry. Why should my prescriptions cost more than the guy in Canada??? It makes no sense why us American's got to do the paying for everyone else!!! I'm sick of this type of crap!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
Curious thing I noticed. I remember how I used to get tons of junk mail for pre-approved credit cards and banks urging me to take outrageous home equity loans so I could "take that dream vacation." I haven't seen any of it lately. Sometimes there are good things about recessions.
I've noticed that too. I'm still getting credit card apps, but they've slowed way down. The slow down in junk mail is probably part of the financial problem the postal service is experiencing.
You might be right lemko, and I can respect that!!! I don't regret having my kids and yes I'm worried about their futures in this deindustrialized country!!!! :sick:
The Teamster pension doesn't get reduced once a person reaches S.S.
That is correct. I know you believe the UAW to be leaders in the business. This is a very important reason they are not. The Teamsters, IBEW, Carpenters, Operating Engineers to name a few take so much per hour directly from the employer and have their own fund. This allows for much more generous retirement benefits. Not affected by SS. Almost all company pension plans reduce the retirement benefit when SS kicks in. I am not sure why the UAW did not start their own plan. Much of the problems today would not be an issue. Does every retiree get the same amount? or is $3050 the max? The Teamster plan is not as good as many of the other Alaska Unions. But much better than that. The best one I know of is the Operating Engineers. My buddy retired at about 52 years old with $7700 per month. More than he was making on the job. He worked many 6 month long shifts through the 1970s and 80s. That is 26 weeks 12-16 hours per day. With NO days off. During the construction of the pipeline it was not uncommon for a guy to make $200k per year at less than $20 per hour.
Did you guys read about Saab, going belly up???? The Swedes, don't want to bail em' out thus it looks like they are done!!! Wonder what's going to happen to the 4500+ workers who build em' many of which are union??? That brand had so much potential to be as good if not better than Volvo!!! :sick: :sick:
I never said the UAW, is better than the Teamsters. I have a great deal of respect for the Teamsters union. I told you the other day just how much good I thought Hoffa, did for working people despite him being "connected" The UAW, indeed dropped the ball when it came to retirement plans but many edmunds posters think you are wealthy if you have a UAW-D3 retirement. Yes the $3050 to the best of my knowledge is the max one can get.
I do hope you noticed the UAW was whining about Made in America and US auto content in 1982. That was 27 years ago. The Congress was controlled by Democrats all during that time up until 1995. The 1970s and 80s under the watchful eyes of a Democrat controlled Congress let 100s or 1000s of jobs slip away. So what makes you think this Democrat Congress will do anything with an even stronger global emphasis? You saw how fast Obama and the Congress back peddled on buying US made steel for the stimulus projects. The UAW has not done a good job of keeping a level playing field for their workers. When the imports started moving into the country, they should have told the workers we are going to be challenged to produce more and maybe for less money. Instead they went along business as usual striking for dumb reasons while gaining little except contempt by those they caused to suffer by those strikes.
Yes, when the UAW went on strike in 1998 they hurt the guy selling GM cars in Idaho and California. No cars, no sales, no commission. When the strike was settled did those salesmen get anything for their suffering. No they did not. I hope someday you will see the damage caused by the UAW greed. You should as you just lost a job selling Saturn. Or will you just blame that on everything else?
Lots of double talk. Do you think it will change anything to do with trade? You should be for open trade with Canada. They are much more Unionized than the USA. They also are the highest ranked Auto plants in the world. Of course the CAW does not want anything to do with the UAW that they consider corrupt.
I see two main problems with Defined Benefit plans. 1. The cost to the company. The market effects pension funds too. Where do you think the money is in the pension fund? It's invested in stock and bond funds and other instruments that offer a return. Japan's corporate pension fund lost over 20% in 2008. Nothing is immune to market risk except for maybe treasuries, then you risk returns to low to achieve your goals. If the market tanks, the company has to maintain the balances in the pension funds based on estimated investment returns. Obviously it's very expensive and their is no free lunch.
2. The second part of a defined contribution plan is portability. This may not be important to the person who aspires to work at the same factory for 30 years, but for people like me who've followed their spouse's job from state to state and have changed jobs multiple times may never be vested in a defined benefit plan.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss. If you've in your 40's or younger you've got a great buying opportunity to earn potentially great returns.
Did you guys read about Saab, going belly up???? The Swedes, don't want to bail em' out thus it looks like they are done!!! Wonder what's going to happen to the 4500+ workers who build em' many of which are union??? That brand had so much potential to be as good if not better than Volvo!!! :sick: :sick:
I read about that last night and immediately thought of you. Apparently the Swedes are a little less socialist than I thought. Why send good money after bad. I think they felt Saab was GMs problem, thus we should bail Saab out. That better not happen. I think we should let Chrysler fail and try to salvage GM and Ford. The pie is not getting bigger anytime soon.
I gagrice, as I've said many times before don't think the UAW, isn't free of any wrong doings but instead of blaming them for everything like you and a few others have done over the last couple of years well I like to look at the big picture and the contributing factors that also lead to the present. If we addressed those contributing factors which many are national security issues well the UAW workers would still be living high on the hog and their would be millions of good-paying manufactoring jobs in this country and life would be good for all americans even the ditch digger!!!
Saturn, died because Jack Smith neglected it during the lost decade!!! :sick: I personally would trade Oldsmobile for Saturn any day!!!
The UAW and CAW are structured the same and live off of the coat tails on what the UAW, gets in their contract thus the CAW, is looked upon as the "good guy" as is the "IUE" which takes more/less what the UAW, negotiates!!!!
I am still against free-trade of any kind but trading with Canada, is different than trading with Mexico, or any other 3rd world corrupt nation for that matter!!! :mad:
The Swedes, don't want to bail em' out thus it looks like they are done!!! Wonder what's going to happen to the 4500+ workers who build em' many of which are union???
Maybe Volvo will expand and they can get a job there. Maybe Obama sees the Swedes as good examples of not throwing good money after bad. He has made comments on copying the Swedish banking model. What you are not seeing is GM along with Saab have not been able to produce vehicles that sell. You have to sell vehicles to make money. Thus GM and Saab are both money LOSERS. Why encourage that with bailout money?
I see two main problems with Defined Benefit plans. 1. The cost to the company. The market effects pension funds too. Where do you think the money is in the pension fund? It's invested in stock and bond funds and other instruments that offer a return. Japan's corporate pension fund lost over 20% in 2008. Nothing is immune to market risk except for maybe treasuries, then you risk returns to low to achieve your goals. If the market tanks, the company has to maintain the balances in the pension funds based on estimated investment returns. Obviously it's very expensive and their is no free lunch.
True, but when you are dealing with billions of dollars and you hire the best people to administer the funds well the risk is a lot less than what you or I, can do individually. There is also a better return on those risks as GM, proved when they got out of the stock market and put the money they made in secure area's and now it's really a non-issue!!!
2. The second part of a defined contribution plan is portability. This may not be important to the person who aspires to work at the same factory for 30 years, but for people like me who've followed their spouse's job from state to state and have changed jobs multiple times may never be vested in a defined benefit plan.
All true but that is why I'm for what some democrats proposed as a national retirement fund so that portability is never an issue because diesel, not all 401K plans can be rolled over. My plan from Johnson Controls, couldn't be rolled over to my next job working at the Nuke plant here in MI. thus I had to cash out. Luckily I didn't have much in there to get excited over.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss. If you've in your 40's or younger you've got a great buying opportunity to earn potentially great returns.
I'd agree with that but most americans aren't as financially educated as you pal!!! I'm glad you are so optomistic about our future. If we don't make some major changes I'm afraid it won't get better for a decade!!!
Is it just possible they are the GOOD GUYS? Is it possible they are thankful for a high paying job and do not go on strike just to get free jelly donuts? Striking the company when it needs the support of the workers more than ever. Like the strikes last year. I can tell you that thinking Americans were not impressed with that display of total disregard for GM and their plight.
I read about that last night and immediately thought of you. Apparently the Swedes are a little less socialist than I thought. Why send good money after bad. I think they felt Saab was GMs problem, thus we should bail Saab out. That better not happen. I think we should let Chrysler fail and try to salvage GM and Ford. The pie is not getting bigger anytime soon.
Yes I hate seeing Saab, die!!! I saw so much potential for the brand. I have no problem letting Saturn and Hummer, go!!! I would of put Saab, in the Buick and GMC, house and really push the XWD and bring to the U.S. a real diesel engine for Saab and Cadillac. Oh well I will shed some tears when it officially closes and I'm suprised the Swedes, don't want to save the brand. I think Wagoner, will regret it once the economy gets better because the chinese, would probably buy Saab's if GM, would make Yao Ming, it's spokesman!!! :P
I'd agree with that but most americans aren't as financially educated as you pal!!! I'm glad you are so optomistic about our future. If we don't make some major changes I'm afraid it won't get better for a decade!!!
That's being a bit generous. I just have a general interest in finance, so I've always taken an interest in my investments.
As for being optimistic about the future. No, I'm worried as hell. I'm only optimistic because the alternative is to depressing. We could be easily looking at things being bad for a decade plus.
All true but that is why I'm for what some democrats proposed as a national retirement fund so that portability is never an issue because diesel, not all 401K plans can be rolled over. My plan from Johnson Controls, couldn't be rolled over to my next job working at the Nuke plant here in MI. thus I had to cash out. Luckily I didn't have much in there to get excited over.
There are options other than rolling your old 401k into a new one. You might be able to just keep your 401k with your previous employer, if you have a large enough balance. However, I think some companies might have a minimum balance, like $5,000 or so. Another possibility is to transfer the money into a rollover IRA. I had to do this with one of my old 401k's, because the company got bought out and the 401k was being disbanded, somehow. However, it was no big deal. That 401k was held by Fidelity, and I just transferred it to a rollover IRA with them.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss.
I haven't checked my balances in a couple days, but I'd be grateful if 40% is all that I've lost! Also, if you want to retire at a young age, you'd better keep at least part of your portfolio aggressive, or else inflation will eat away your nest egg and you might outlive your money. At the rate things have been going though, I dunno how many people are going to retire at a young age anymore, though. :sick:
Saab, isn't a loser image. It is known for safety and looks like nothing else out there. I still think the 9-3 XWD is the best all around "car" money can buy. I would of loved to had a Turbo X :shades:
Comments
That's true, but GM doesn't have the money. If the public wanted to subsidize GM, they'd buy the product. If GM hadn't been loosing market share for 20+ years and was able to earn a steady profit on its products when the market was selling 15-17million vehicles I would be more supportive of the bailout. Where else is the $40 billion for the VEBA going to come from? It shouldn't be from the government.
If I promise to pay my ex wife child support for a given amount and fail to do so. I go to jail. Well have they sent Wagoner to jail yet? He had a choice when negotiating that contract with the UAW. He could have told them this is it No more health care for the retirees. You don't like it go on strike or sue me. He signed and now he has no money to pay. GM and the UAW are nothing but losers and deserve to go down for destroying a US industry.
Gary, I don't see how you can attribute management costs and the rest of it to a line worker's salary. A customer may understand that when he calls out a worker on a job, he's paying more than the salary (overhead), but I don't think that translates too well to an employer paying employees. The electric bill shouldn't figure into the wage portion, even if x number of CFL light bulbs per employee are required. Wouldn't that stuff would fall under a different part of the cost of doing business?
So ... if GM doesn't have the money to fund the VEBA as promised, and the stock is worthless in the eyes of the UAW, where does the union go? Away? To the bankruptcy court to force GM into involuntary liquidation? To the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation outfit (I doubt that the health trust is covered but don't know)?
-Rocky
But seriously I have no doubt the UAW workers would take a larger hourly wage and dump the healthcare all togeather because GM, is getting ripped off or somebody is getting rebated in corporate for using these certain plans!!!
-Rocky
No, I am more than a union member. I am a life member of the local fire and rescue departments. i love to work on cars and collect coins. I love to coach Little League.
I am happy with my lot in life. Is there anything wrong with that???
I'm not even sure if it's that much. I left the UAW after 25 years. When I'm 65 I will receive a monthly pension of around $1,350. I know that a 30-year retiree would receive slightly more but nowhere close to $36k/yr.
I was also at the very top wage scale of any blue collar worker, so I imagine production workers would receive even less.
Like it or not, I'm afraid that's what it's going to have to come down to. Health care is going to have to be rationed (I know, that's a bad word) at some level, because we just can't afford to give everything to everybody - the pot of money just isn't that big. That might mean denying a $20,000 hip replacement to an 85 year old, or denying a $200K cancer treatment to a young child because they're probably going to die anyway.
My wife has a rare eye condition that, to prevent further loss of her sight, uses a drug "off-label". Because of this, the treatment is deemed experimental by the insurance company and they refuse to pay, so we're paying over $1,000/month out of pocket for this. The irony is that when she's in the waiting room, she's there with a bunch of 70 and 80 year-olds who are getting the same treatment, but for a slightly different form of the condition, and which is covered by Medicare. So, she's having to pay for her own treatment out of pocket, then, through payroll taxes, have to pay for the treatment of the Medicare recipients.
Microsoft???
Yes, it usually does. When our company competes or negotiates a contract, there are several things that go into the cost of the contract. There's the cost of the materials, of course. Then there's labor cost, which is billed, depending on the skill set (lower for a line working than for a senior level engineer), at a price that's approximately 50% higher than the actual hourly wage paid to an employee. That 50% includes benefit (health insurance, 401K /pension, sick time, etc) and other non-wage costs. Then, on top of that, a percentage or fee is added that goes by different terms in different companies - it's callled G&A where I work. The G&A includes electricity to run the building, depreciation of capital assets, and also various overhead coats such as the HR department, secretaries and other support staff (which are not direct charges), and also the compensations for upper level management that are not charges directly to a specific contract.
That is A LOT of pension for blue collar. $3000 a month should easily allow the retiree to take care of "ALL" their health care cost.
They are getting more pension than most "un Skilled" workers make as a wage.
Kip
-Rocky
-Rocky
-Rocky
-Rocky
That's one of the reasons many companies (including my own) have terminated their defined benefit plans and replaced them with defined contribution plans of some sort, be they 401K's, cash balance plan, or something else. That way their costs are better defined.
The cost of providing health care for retirees is even more difficult to project into the future. That's why many (most?)companies do not provide any health care benefits at all for retirees. The long term cost of doing so is almost impossible to project. This is what the D3/UAW has found out the hard way.
I wrote Senator Levin, just a few minutes ago about re introducing a new bill regarding this topic.
I also asked him to put pressure on Obama and Congress regarding Free-Trade, Currency Manipulation, Illegal Immigration!!!
-Rocky
That's pretty funny. I don't even like Hondas. Especially the dealers. They are overbearing and arrogant from my experience. The only Honda I ever owned was a worthless piece of crap. Which has nothing to do with the UAW and their greed that is destroying the US auto industry.
I'm still cold to national health care system, but I am open to some type of universal insurance program that anyone can have access too. I don't think it should be free to the end user though, but offer affordable premiums and it would obviously have to be subsidized for those who earn low incomes. That would hopefully take some pressure off the hospitals.
I also agree on the a child limit based on income, if you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them, but like you said Rock, that opens a whole can of worms.
Well in it's current form it is "projected" the employees who are entitled to the define benefit plan are covered for 80 years thus that right now presently is really a non-issue.....
That's one of the reasons many companies (including my own) have terminated their defined benefit plans and replaced them with defined contribution plans of some sort, be they 401K's, cash balance plan, or something else. That way their costs are better defined.
I can understand the need of a define contribution plan for a small business but understand most americans lost 40% in their 401K plans and are screwed. 401K plans are like playing roulette at a Michigan, casino thus it's a hit and miss retirement plan and peoples lives shouldn't be made or broken on such a gamble IMHO. I personally would like to see some sort of a larger social security fund that way everyone will have something once they reach retirement age. I think Norway, has such a fund!!!
The cost of providing health care for retirees is even more difficult to project into the future. That's why many (most?)companies do not provide any health care benefits at all for retirees. The long term cost of doing so is almost impossible to project. This is what the D3/UAW has found out the hard way.
Well that is why we need to regulate this industry. Why should my prescriptions cost more than the guy in Canada??? It makes no sense why us American's got to do the paying for everyone else!!! I'm sick of this type of crap!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
-Rocky
-Rocky
I've noticed that too. I'm still getting credit card apps, but they've slowed way down. The slow down in junk mail is probably part of the financial problem the postal service is experiencing.
-Rocky
That is correct. I know you believe the UAW to be leaders in the business. This is a very important reason they are not. The Teamsters, IBEW, Carpenters, Operating Engineers to name a few take so much per hour directly from the employer and have their own fund. This allows for much more generous retirement benefits. Not affected by SS. Almost all company pension plans reduce the retirement benefit when SS kicks in. I am not sure why the UAW did not start their own plan. Much of the problems today would not be an issue. Does every retiree get the same amount? or is $3050 the max? The Teamster plan is not as good as many of the other Alaska Unions. But much better than that. The best one I know of is the Operating Engineers. My buddy retired at about 52 years old with $7700 per month. More than he was making on the job. He worked many 6 month long shifts through the 1970s and 80s. That is 26 weeks 12-16 hours per day. With NO days off. During the construction of the pipeline it was not uncommon for a guy to make $200k per year at less than $20 per hour.
-Rocky
-Rocky
-Rocky
Yes, when the UAW went on strike in 1998 they hurt the guy selling GM cars in Idaho and California. No cars, no sales, no commission. When the strike was settled did those salesmen get anything for their suffering. No they did not. I hope someday you will see the damage caused by the UAW greed. You should as you just lost a job selling Saturn. Or will you just blame that on everything else?
What do you think?
2018 430i Gran Coupe
2. The second part of a defined contribution plan is portability. This may not be important to the person who aspires to work at the same factory for 30 years, but for people like me who've followed their spouse's job from state to state and have changed jobs multiple times may never be vested in a defined benefit plan.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss. If you've in your 40's or younger you've got a great buying opportunity to earn potentially great returns.
I read about that last night and immediately thought of you. Apparently the Swedes are a little less socialist than I thought. Why send good money after bad. I think they felt Saab was GMs problem, thus we should bail Saab out. That better not happen. I think we should let Chrysler fail and try to salvage GM and Ford. The pie is not getting bigger anytime soon.
Saturn, died because Jack Smith neglected it during the lost decade!!! :sick: I personally would trade Oldsmobile for Saturn any day!!!
-Rocky
I am still against free-trade of any kind but trading with Canada, is different than trading with Mexico, or any other 3rd world corrupt nation for that matter!!! :mad:
-Rocky
Maybe Volvo will expand and they can get a job there. Maybe Obama sees the Swedes as good examples of not throwing good money after bad. He has made comments on copying the Swedish banking model. What you are not seeing is GM along with Saab have not been able to produce vehicles that sell. You have to sell vehicles to make money. Thus GM and Saab are both money LOSERS. Why encourage that with bailout money?
True, but when you are dealing with billions of dollars and you hire the best people to administer the funds well the risk is a lot less than what you or I, can do individually. There is also a better return on those risks as GM, proved when they got out of the stock market and put the money they made in secure area's and now it's really a non-issue!!!
2. The second part of a defined contribution plan is portability. This may not be important to the person who aspires to work at the same factory for 30 years, but for people like me who've followed their spouse's job from state to state and have changed jobs multiple times may never be vested in a defined benefit plan.
All true but that is why I'm for what some democrats proposed as a national retirement fund so that portability is never an issue because diesel, not all 401K plans can be rolled over. My plan from Johnson Controls, couldn't be rolled over to my next job working at the Nuke plant here in MI. thus I had to cash out. Luckily I didn't have much in there to get excited over.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss. If you've in your 40's or younger you've got a great buying opportunity to earn potentially great returns.
I'd agree with that but most americans aren't as financially educated as you pal!!! I'm glad you are so optomistic about our future. If we don't make some major changes I'm afraid it won't get better for a decade!!!
-Rocky
Is it just possible they are the GOOD GUYS? Is it possible they are thankful for a high paying job and do not go on strike just to get free jelly donuts? Striking the company when it needs the support of the workers more than ever. Like the strikes last year. I can tell you that thinking Americans were not impressed with that display of total disregard for GM and their plight.
Yes I hate seeing Saab, die!!! I saw so much potential for the brand. I have no problem letting Saturn and Hummer, go!!! I would of put Saab, in the Buick and GMC, house and really push the XWD and bring to the U.S. a real diesel engine for Saab and Cadillac. Oh well I will shed some tears when it officially closes and I'm suprised the Swedes, don't want to save the brand. I think Wagoner, will regret it once the economy gets better because the chinese, would probably buy Saab's if GM, would make Yao Ming, it's spokesman!!!
-Rocky
That's being a bit generous. I just have a general interest in finance, so I've always taken an interest in my investments.
As for being optimistic about the future. No, I'm worried as hell. I'm only optimistic because the alternative is to depressing. We could be easily looking at things being bad for a decade plus.
There are options other than rolling your old 401k into a new one. You might be able to just keep your 401k with your previous employer, if you have a large enough balance. However, I think some companies might have a minimum balance, like $5,000 or so. Another possibility is to transfer the money into a rollover IRA. I had to do this with one of my old 401k's, because the company got bought out and the 401k was being disbanded, somehow. However, it was no big deal. That 401k was held by Fidelity, and I just transferred it to a rollover IRA with them.
As for 40% losses in 401k/IRAs, if your within 5 years of retirement or in retirement, you did a piss poor job of managing your funds. You should have had the majority of your funds in fixed investments, thus you'd have a minimal loss.
I haven't checked my balances in a couple days, but I'd be grateful if 40% is all that I've lost! Also, if you want to retire at a young age, you'd better keep at least part of your portfolio aggressive, or else inflation will eat away your nest egg and you might outlive your money. At the rate things have been going though, I dunno how many people are going to retire at a young age anymore, though. :sick:
-Rocky