Author Topic: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.  (Read 2037 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« on: June 02, 2009, 08:09:08 PM »
As GM Goes So Goes California in Pensions: Roger Lowenstein

Share | Email | Print | A A A

Commentary by Roger Lowenstein



June 2 (Bloomberg) -- Did pension debts ruin General Motors?

I said they did in “While America Aged,” a book published last year. The thesis was that many decades of inflated pension and health-care benefits forced the company to redirect its free cash flow to retired workers. As a result, there was little or nothing left for the shareholders.

It was as if, I wrote, the company had secretly been sold and now belonged to the retired workers and their dependents. That turned out to be only partly right. When GM is reorganized, the United Auto Workers union will probably end up with 17 percent of the stock. The government will get most of the rest.

But among the obligations that caused GM to file for bankruptcy, two are directly related to worker entitlements. In 2003, GM sold $13.5 billion in bonds -- one of the biggest debt offerings ever -- and plowed the money into its pension fund. Then, in 2007, after the UAW went on strike, GM agreed to funnel more than $30 billion into a special trust for retiree health care.

Both the pension bond and the retiree-trust obligation helped topple GM into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Of course, they weren’t the only causes. The great recession, which cut deeply into sales, was the biggest proximate cause. You can add years of poor engineering, corporate bureaucracy and a culture that was too hidebound to change.

Though the country has rightly focused on the mortgage mess, retirement obligations still loom as a daunting obligation. Thanks to plunging stock markets, which have decimated retirement accounts, they are more pressing than ever.

Trenchant Lessons

And of all GM’s problems, the retiree burden provides the most trenchant lessons. Some companies will always design better cars than others. But at least, if a company builds a lemon, it can try again. Or it can close a factory and shrink to a size appropriate to its sales.

Pensions are different. Once promised, they can never be rescinded. GM’s pension hailed from a negotiation with the UAW in 1949. The result, known as the Treaty of Detroit, produced a pension of only $125 a month. GM was selling cars like hotcakes, its labor force was young, and the pension was easy to afford.

But observers such as Peter Drucker, then a young consultant, wondered what would happen if GM’s business turned south while its pension obligation remained. And the pension didn’t just remain, it steadily grew, and so did health care.

Easier Choice

With each new labor contract, GM management found it easier to grant sweeter future benefits than to raise current wages. Over time, benefits went up much more quickly. That left GM with a daunting unfunded health-care obligation. As retirees lived longer -- one died in 2006 at age 111 -- and the cost of providing health care mushroomed, the expense grew beyond anything imagined in 1949.

GM stayed current on pensions, but the money it funneled into retirement plans left less for engineering and restyling. And shareholder dividends? Forget ‘em. Over a 15-year stretch, GM plowed $55 billion into pensions and only $13 billion into dividends. That’s why I said the shareholders had been disenfranchised.

Eventually, when the competitive landscape turned, GM fell behind on pensions too. By 2002, GM’s pension fund was $20 billion under-funded. It borrowed to make the pension fund whole, but that merely transferred the problem to the balance sheet.

Delphi Spinoff

GM tried to unload some of its retiree obligations by spinning off its auto-parts business, Delphi Corp. But Delphi preceded it into bankruptcy, and GM’s continuing obligation to the Delphi workers was another factor leading to its demise.

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the federal agency that may have to bail out GM workers, is now $33.5 billion in the red. Many more private pension failures loom.

Pensions also pose a huge problem for many cities and states. California’s government, one of the most profligate in awarding pensions, is on the verge of going broke. In many other states, pension funds are grossly under-funded. And even more so than in the private sector, public pensions, once agreed to, are impossible to modify.

Last but not least, retirement is a daunting problem for the federal government. Last month, the Social Security Administration announced that deficits will occur sooner than thought for Social Security and Medicare. Those obligations are on top of the skyrocketing federal deficit, estimated at $1.75 trillion for the current year. These are all symptoms of the same disease.

Viral Symptoms

I am not against retirement benefits; older people need to be able to retire with dignity and a decent life. The lesson of GM is that benefits must be paid for as they are incurred. Corporations with under-funded pensions should be brought to heel. Otherwise, as with Delphi and other failed companies, pensions agreed to by private parties will end up being paid for by the public.

At the government level, pensions are a subset of a rampant fiscal virus: promising goodies without funding them. States that are behind, such as Illinois and New Jersey, must recognize that either they raise taxes and fund their pensions, or they reduce benefits for future employees. No other solution exists.

Congress also must bite the bullet and get Social Security on a sounder footing. That probably means raising the payroll tax. In the case of Medicare, fiscal prudence will likely demand higher taxes and service cuts. Neither private nor public pension sponsors can keep making promises that are above their means, or that they fail to fund. General Motors proved it.

(Roger Lowenstein, author of “When Genius Failed,” is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the author of this column: Roger Lowenstein at elrogl@hotmail.com

Last Updated: June 2, 2009 00:01 EDT


________________________ ____________________ 

Simple math always gets in the way of the unions and those demanding more and more benes. 

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2009, 08:23:37 PM »
crock of shit. 

How about an article titled: How greed, big oil and the globalist agenda killed GM.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2009, 08:34:44 PM »
They should have never killed the electric car.   :'(
w

Hereford

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4028
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2009, 09:21:31 AM »
Offering bonds to fund union payouts is like taking out a loan to pay taxes or fines.  You get nothing from it... there is no innovation, engineering, no forward progress or improvement at all. That should have been done only if there was a 100% chance GM was going to hit it big in the near future.

I really hope some major law firm will file a class-action bad-faith lawsuit on behalf of the share/bondholders against whoever in the company signed the union contracts. This seems to border on fraud against investors.

Unless the government is willing to create and fund universal pentions for all working people, they have no standing to fund only GM and UAW pentions and legacy costs with public funds.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2009, 09:29:08 AM »
Unions have a place but defined benefit pensions should be eliminated for every type of job, most especially government jobs.

There is no way in hell that any company or government should be paying people a salary after they retire.

The better alternative a defined contribution plan where the employer contributes "X" dollars every year while the person is an employee.  These $$'s are segregated and protected in case of bankruptcy but after the employee stops working the employer does not pay another penny.   

This should apply to ALL government workers (city, state, federal)

Hereford

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4028
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2009, 09:37:00 AM »
Government workers can pretty much get whatever they want because there is no need whatsoever to be fiscally responsible or have balanced finances. It's easy to cave into gvt union demands because it's never really anyones money that's going out to fund asanine union schemes and pensions.

Agree with you Straw... there are cases where people are pulling a paycheck for years longer a period than what they actually worked for a company.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2009, 09:39:02 AM »
Unions have a place but defined benefit pensions should be eliminated for every type of job, most especially government jobs.

There is no way in hell that any company or government should be paying people a salary after they retire.

The better alternative a defined contribution plan where the employer contributes "X" dollars every year while the person is an employee.  These $$'s are segregated and protected in case of bankruptcy but after the employee stops working the employer does not pay another penny.   

This should apply to ALL government workers (city, state, federal)

100%.  NYS and all its localities are getting killed because of these insane pensions. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #7 on: June 07, 2009, 05:58:56 AM »
There is nothing wrong with defined benefit pension plans.  Social security is a defined benefit pension plan.  What happened w/ SS?  It's flush with cash but the gov. borrowed and spent that money on other things.

How is GM's pension plan like that?

Mismanagement of the plan's trust funds created ongoing yet legally acceptable shortfalls in the plan's funding.  It was severely underfunded and set to fail.  The workers are not the problem.

A word about 401k and profit sharing plans with 404c 'protection'.  They put the entire burden of funding retirement on one's own shoulders.

Most americans don't know shit about investing money.  Brokers know how to rip off clients with their bullshit 'ride it out' advice to make sure they still collect their gravy 'fees'.  If the money is not there, guess what?  You work till you die.

Kind of defeats the purpose of retirement.

From this angle, defined benefit plans are vastly superior.   

"Congress also must bite the bullet and get Social Security on a sounder footing. That probably means raising the payroll tax. In the case of Medicare, fiscal prudence will likely demand higher taxes and service cuts. ..."

This, I would agree with.  I would also add actuarial adjustments to the benefit formula.

The major problem here is one of perception. 

+33333386666 thinks the workers are the cause.  The workers.  The true wealth creators.  Not the capitalist funding the endeavor.  The worker.  That's just so wrong. 

+401k PS plans are 'wealth creators'.  No they are not.  Retirement plans exist to provide a stream of reliable retirement income.

Let's all get comfortable with some truer ideas:

There are economic classes in this country.

The working class is not an investing class...no matter what the snake oil salesmen tell you.

Labor is not the problem...as the apologists for the upper socio-economic crust would lead one to believe.

Now that 'job security' is a pleasant memory, DB plans for private companies is antiquated.  The Capitalist has won the class war once again. 

The C has his portable workforce (no job security).  Now he just has to dump the underfunded DBs on the PBGC and decide whether it's worth the trouble to even offer a 401k plan to his workforce.

If the workers don't like it, they can find another job.   Isn't that fucking grand?

In other words, the capitalist has his foot on the throat of the workforce and he's still not satisfied.

Still blaming the 'greedy workers'.

The last funny note about these "insane pensions" is that when the GM executives were making the promise to pay these benefits they reaped the windfall of full employment with the value of the Pension worked into the wages from the labor agreement.

Then when it came time to cough up the cash, oopsie, you greedy workers are killing this company...fucking assholes.

Pension shortfalls do not 'sneak up' on anyone.  These fucking people knew what the balance sheet was all along.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2009, 07:09:46 AM »
Decker - this is not the 1950's anymore where GM Ford, etc, dont have any competiton from Honda Toyota BMW, Nissan etc.

I am not blaming the workers, but the management and unions agreed to unsustainable pensions.  its a fact, a reality, and people like yourself refuse to accept the reality of the numbers involved.     

You simply cannot have a system where 95,000 workers support over 500,000 reitrees and still expect the company to make money.  Its sheer nonsense.

The same goes for NY, CA, NJ, and all the other states that have ridiculous pensions.   


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2009, 07:19:27 AM »
Decker,  

There are a couple of significant differences.  First, SS pays out much less per month that a typical defined benefit pension where you have a long time employee taking home 80-95% of their salary every month.  Social Security is also paid for by an ever expanding population of current workers who are paying for those that are already retired.   In CA ( I live in San Jose) we've got a huge problem with pensions for police and firefighters.  They literally take home 80%+ of their top income when they retire and we've got a mini-scandal here in San Jose as many of these retirees found a way to convert their pension to disability income and thereby avoid paying taxes on a large portion of their income.  

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2009, 07:23:12 AM »
Decker,  

There are a couple of significant differences.  First, SS pays out much less per month that a typical defined benefit pension where you have a long time employee taking home 80-95% of their salary every month.  Social Security is also paid for by an ever expanding population of current workers who are paying for those that are already retired.   In CA ( I live in San Jose) we've got a huge problem with pensions for police and firefighters.  They literally take home 80%+ of their top income when they retire and we've got a mini-scandal here in San Jose as many of these retirees found a way to convert their pension to disability income and thereby avoid paying taxes on a large portion of their income.  

Same is true in New York where public employees ramp up the OT in the last three years and can get almost 100% of the base salary as pension for life, while only contributing 3% of their salary for 10 years.

Its simply not mathmatically possible to do this.  There is no amount of money that can cover these insane payouts. 

Additionally, these reitrees pay no NYS income tax on their pensions. 

Cap

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6366
  • Trueprotein.com 5% discount code= CSP111
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2009, 08:58:23 AM »
Same is true in New York where public employees ramp up the OT in the last three years and can get almost 100% of the base salary as pension for life, while only contributing 3% of their salary for 10 years.

Its simply not mathmatically possible to do this.  There is no amount of money that can cover these insane payouts. 

Additionally, these reitrees pay no NYS income tax on their pensions. 
That's a terrible pension system.  Guys I know have to work 35 years to get 90% of their pay.  I'd say that if you're retire by 60 that a pension is a fair system.  The stuff Straw Man is talking about is unfortunate with the disability cheats, which is even crazier considering the pay of Nor Cal police officers but I wouldn't abolish pension systems but rather alter them. 

Don't politicians, like the President, get pensions?  Just curious.
Squishy face retard

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2009, 09:00:12 AM »
That's a terrible pension system.  Guys I know have to work 35 years to get 90% of their pay.  I'd say that if you're retire by 60 that a pension is a fair system.  The stuff Straw Man is talking about is unfortunate with the disability cheats, which is even crazier considering the pay of Nor Cal police officers but I wouldn't abolish pension systems but rather alter them. 

Don't politicians, like the President, get pensions?  Just curious.

Check out my new post anbout NY pensions.

Cap

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6366
  • Trueprotein.com 5% discount code= CSP111
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2009, 09:06:48 AM »
Check out my new post anbout NY pensions.
I did, and that is nuts.  To get that much of your pay you should be vested for 40 years, not ten.  In fact I don't know any government or city employee that gets 100% of their pension...crazy.
Squishy face retard

Slapper

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4297
  • Vincit qui se vincit
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2009, 10:34:00 AM »
Decker - this is not the 1950's anymore where GM Ford, etc, dont have any competiton from Honda Toyota BMW, Nissan etc.

I am not blaming the workers, but the management and unions agreed to unsustainable pensions.  its a fact, a reality, and people like yourself refuse to accept the reality of the numbers involved.     

You simply cannot have a system where 95,000 workers support over 500,000 reitrees and still expect the company to make money.  Its sheer nonsense.[...]

Riiiight, fut funneling 85% of the profits (golden parachutes) to less than 1% of the company (CEOs and management layers) makes a lot more sense.

THAT makes a whole lotta sense.

 ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2009, 10:42:11 AM »
Riiiight, fut funneling 85% of the profits (golden parachutes) to less than 1% of the company (CEOs and management layers) makes a lot more sense.

THAT makes a whole lotta sense.

 ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

The difference is one is a publicly traded company and the shareholders/board can do something about it if they wish.

 The other is system that is paid for by the tax payers.

I see no reason why the public employess can't be given a defined contribution each year of employment (and paid and segregated during that year) and at the end of their time at work they can do with it as they please.   This would be much easier to manage and plan and would not require budget crushing payouts for years beyond the time when the employee is actually working and producing.   

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2009, 11:41:43 AM »
Why is it that Unions and Pensions are to blame when many other companies such as Philip Morris are quite profitable even though they have the same types of overheads?

Dupont is another company that springs to mind... They have Pensions and Unions and yet, even though they may have to lay off a few people, they are remaining stable and viable.

Seems to me that if it was Unions and Pensions as you put it, then they would also have the same problem, but they don't.

The only difference is the management of those companies and their ability to change and adapt to changes in consumer wants.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2009, 12:58:23 PM »
Why is it that Unions and Pensions are to blame when many other companies such as Philip Morris are quite profitable even though they have the same types of overheads?

Dupont is another company that springs to mind... They have Pensions and Unions and yet, even though they may have to lay off a few people, they are remaining stable and viable.

Seems to me that if it was Unions and Pensions as you put it, then they would also have the same problem, but they don't.

The only difference is the management of those companies and their ability to change and adapt to changes in consumer wants.

From the little I've read (ok - only 1 article) "A 25-year employee who retirees at age 60 receives pension checks that equal about 40% of the employees final pay, said spokesman"

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Retirementandwills/Retireinstyle/P95335.asp

GigantorX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6370
  • GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2009, 02:06:08 PM »
Why is it that Unions and Pensions are to blame when many other companies such as Philip Morris are quite profitable even though they have the same types of overheads?

Dupont is another company that springs to mind... They have Pensions and Unions and yet, even though they may have to lay off a few people, they are remaining stable and viable.

Seems to me that if it was Unions and Pensions as you put it, then they would also have the same problem, but they don't.

The only difference is the management of those companies and their ability to change and adapt to changes in consumer wants.

Half correct.

GM's pension/benefit system was profitable at a certain level of sales/market share. Once those levels were passed, GM went into its death spiral.

It isn't as simple to say it was just management or just the Unions or just the pensions. It has to do with a storm of elements that includes and are not limited too horrible trade policy, a lot of foreign/domestic competition, foreign currency manipulation, bad management, CAFE/Insurance/EPA insanity,pensions, unions, insane focus on Wall St. quarterly earning which led to a lack of future planning.

The list goes on. GM is truly a microcosm of our nations rise/fall/future concerning manufacturing, trade policy, retarded tax structures, Wall St., foreign competition etc.

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2009, 08:30:44 PM »
From the little I've read (ok - only 1 article) "A 25-year employee who retirees at age 60 receives pension checks that equal about 40% of the employees final pay, said spokesman"

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Retirementandwills/Retireinstyle/P95335.asp

Right, but that's not completely unheard of... But it kills GM and yet other companies are still making it with the same policy?

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2009, 09:04:39 PM »
Americans who wouldn't buy American killed of GM

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2009, 04:50:55 AM »
Americans who wouldn't buy American killed of GM

Not really, Americans have choices and dont want to overpay for a mediocre product copmared to other better options. 

GM produced crap cars for a long period of time and really screwed over the customer for many years. 

If you believe in freedom of choice, as I do, than I am free to use mard earned dollars to purchase what i believe to be the best car for my $$$. 
 

 
 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2009, 06:52:24 AM »
Decker - this is not the 1950's anymore where GM Ford, etc, dont have any competiton from Honda Toyota BMW, Nissan etc.

I am not blaming the workers, but the management and unions agreed to unsustainable pensions.  its a fact, a reality, and people like yourself refuse to accept the reality of the numbers involved.     

You simply cannot have a system where 95,000 workers support over 500,000 reitrees and still expect the company to make money.  Its sheer nonsense.

The same goes for NY, CA, NJ, and all the other states that have ridiculous pensions.   
The GM executives knew the costs of the DB plan up front.  Now they don't want to pay.  That's the reality.

You raged against the 5, 10 or 15 dollar per hour advantage domestic line workers had (years ago) over their foreign counterparts.  I didn't hear you rail against the executives making 10 to 20 TIMES what their foreign counterparts were earning.

You want global competition setting the wages...except for the executive class.

It's hard to fund a db plan when the executives won't fund it.

What does GM get out of funding a DB plan?  Worker satisfaction?  Sure.  Massive tax deduction?  Now you're speaking the language of the wealthy.  GM gets the huge tax deduction up front but will not pay out the promised benefit when it comes due.

Hmmmm.  Someone's bargained in bad faith here.

Like I said, it is dishonest for any commentator to claim that 'no one could have seen these costs coming'  That's a pure lie.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39423
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2009, 07:00:43 AM »
Obviously you dont read. 

These agreements were put into place when GM had a higher market share and the life expectancy was not as high as it is today. 

I agree about the exec compensation, however, the corp. is ultimately ACCOUNTABLE TO THE SHAREHOLDERS, not the workers.  You claim to be a lawyer, surely you took corps in law school correct?????

Again, do the damn math, 95,000 people supporting 500,000 only can last so long before it collapses.   

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: How Unions and Pensions killed GM - good read.
« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2009, 07:23:29 AM »
Decker,  

There are a couple of significant differences.  First, SS pays out much less per month that a typical defined benefit pension where you have a long time employee taking home 80-95% of their salary every month.
I don't agree with that at all.  Context.  Private retirement plans are one of the three legs of funding one's retirement - Soc. Sec. and private savings also go into the mix.  Most of these pension plans (def. ben. plans) predate the advent of 401(k) plans.

I don't know of any giant company-like GM-that has a benefit forumla that pays 80-95% of a participant's annual (monthly) salary.  Usually the benefit at retirement is less than half of the participant's nominal annual salary.  GM has a formula that uses 1.25% of average monthly base salary.  (Accruals have been frozen for a couple of years now).  When annuitized that's not a huge cost.


Quote
Social Security is also paid for by an ever expanding population of current workers who are paying for those that are already retired.   In CA ( I live in San Jose) we've got a huge problem with pensions for police and firefighters.  They literally take home 80%+ of their top income when they retire and we've got a mini-scandal here in San Jose as many of these retirees found a way to convert their pension to disability income and thereby avoid paying taxes on a large portion of their income. 
Firefighters and police are notorious for gaming the system.  They usually have a benefit formula based on the final 5 or 3 year average.  So guess what?  Guess who's working 3000 hours their last 3 years on the force at top pay?

I'm not saying that DB plans are perfect.  With work, they are superior to DC plans b/c of the emphasis on the security of retirement income versus playing the market chasing some notion of wealth creation.

Social SEcurity is a DB plan.  That's what I'm saying.  It can work.  I know that private db plans are private db plans and that the attendant census data for SS is not the same as private companies implementing a pension plan.