Final thoughts from pension panel

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.
Leave a Reply
1 Comment
-
Loyola arrives to their first Final Four in 55 years in style in San Antonio
-
Rambling to the Final Four: Loyola, Sister Jean share the moment together
-
18 firefighters laid off in Harvey due to financial issues
-
Gov. Rauner unveils 2019 budget proposal
-
Rambling to the Final Four: A test for Clayton and the Ramblers – literally and figuratively
-
-
Pritzker defends finances; Top 3 Democrats running for governor face off in debate
-
US ‘Rejects’ shock Sweden to win men’s curling gold
-
Illinois Gov. Rauner delivers State of the State; Opponents respond
-
Jordan Bernfield gives his thoughts on the building of Loyola’s program on Sports Feed
-
GOP memo: Chicagoan triggered Russia investigation
-
-
The Texas First-Step: Loyola faces Michigan in the Final Four tonight
-
Rambling to the Final Four: Of Drake, Donte Ingram, and Instagram
-
Jeff Arnold discusses Loyola’s incredible Final Four run on Sports Feed
MikeIsD1
Great contribution by WGN to the debate!
Disturbing for anyone in the state including state workers.
The overall series reinforced my belief that the only real solution is to convert the pensions to a 401K system. I believe that this can only be done by involving the unions. The big mistake was made in the 1970 constitution and that needs to be amended.
Almost every abuse in the system would disappear under a 401K plan.
But big incentives need to be given to the rank and file to convert. A 25% of income funding plan with 8% from the employee and 17% from the state would assure a substantial retirement for the individual employees. Because it is a stated contribution, it cannot be deferred by the state. An $80K year employee could walk away with $2.75 million in their fund after 30 years instead of $60K year pension that may fail.
Finally, maybe the most haunting question was from a senior who asked the rhetorical question "whether the state will start shifting costs to the local school districts and will that cause a mass exodus of people with the most to lose from the state – homeowners and retirees to more tax friendly states…!"
The retirees and rank & file union need to ask themselves what good is their present plan if it destroys the state and forces people to flee, further jeopardizing whatever benefit they have?