Not possible in Illinois for three reasons (and probably many more):
1. Consolidation probably would impede access to pension funds on favorable terms to friends of the politically powerful;
2. Consolidation would preclude local pols from rewarding friends with pensioned jobs and lucrative consulting contracts; and,
3. Consolidation would probably require audits of the individual plans before they were rolled into a pool, and this could expose past misdeeds.
Haha, sounds exactly correct! Well except “audits” —- as the bandits said in Blazing Saddles: “Audits?! We don’t need no stinking Audits!!! ” ( “badges” in the movie)
You and Peter are right about it not making much difference. But you do need to distinguish substantive consolidation (pooling) from mere administrative consolidation. It would make sense to administratively consolidate many of the 650 smaller municipal pensions, which mostly invest in fixed income and don’t need separate boards, accountants, actuaries….
Steve-Oh
10 years ago
Wouldn’t make a spit in the ocean worth of difference to govt plans that are vastly over-promised, and therefore are vastly underfunded with no answers except to cut benefits after declaring bankruptcy — an inevitability
If this bill passes, say goodbye to local control over all Illinois parks and expect to see open drug and alcohol use, needles, no sanitation and fire hazards, but no ordinary park users.
Not possible in Illinois for three reasons (and probably many more):
1. Consolidation probably would impede access to pension funds on favorable terms to friends of the politically powerful;
2. Consolidation would preclude local pols from rewarding friends with pensioned jobs and lucrative consulting contracts; and,
3. Consolidation would probably require audits of the individual plans before they were rolled into a pool, and this could expose past misdeeds.
Haha, sounds exactly correct! Well except “audits” —- as the bandits said in Blazing Saddles: “Audits?! We don’t need no stinking Audits!!! ” ( “badges” in the movie)
You and Peter are right about it not making much difference. But you do need to distinguish substantive consolidation (pooling) from mere administrative consolidation. It would make sense to administratively consolidate many of the 650 smaller municipal pensions, which mostly invest in fixed income and don’t need separate boards, accountants, actuaries….
Wouldn’t make a spit in the ocean worth of difference to govt plans that are vastly over-promised, and therefore are vastly underfunded with no answers except to cut benefits after declaring bankruptcy — an inevitability