This Year the VRS “Diet COLA” Will Really Hurt

by Steve Haner

The most recent year-over-year inflation measure approached 9%, with many key food or energy items growing in cost even faster. The official inflation estimate just used to increase the state’s gasoline taxes as of July 1 was 7%. So what inflation factor will be used to adjust state and local employee pensions this summer? Those will go up less than 4%. 

The cost of living adjustment (COLA) for Virginia Retirement System retirees under the more generous Plan 1 (phased out for those hired after 2010) will be 3.85%, an extra $38.50 on every $1,000. Plan 2 retirees (of which there are few since most are the younger workers) will get an adjustment of only 3% in their pension payments starting in August.

In its most recent VRS newsletter (which arrived in our mailbox this week, since my wife is a VRS retiree) the point is made that these are the largest COLA amounts since 1991. But the newsletter also informs that no matter what the inflation rate is, the COLA has a nice tight annual cap: 5% for Plan 1 and 3% for Plan 2.

The caps were imposed more than ten years ago as the General Assembly revised VRS in several ways to reduce the demands it was making – and would make in the future – on the state’s treasury.  Through the low inflation of recent years the caps really didn’t create a major gap between the real rises in living costs and the rise in the monthly benefit.

Now it will.

This is just another example of how high inflation works in the real world, and how government manipulates its reaction to it (usually to protect the treasury).  The inclusion of annual COLA provisions has been a major advantage of government pensions, including Social Security, when compared to the private sector, where they are rare.  Virginia is one of the states with a Diet COLA, which will intentionally lag behind real living costs for retirees year after year.

The provision in the Code of Virginia which imposes these caps can be read in full here. The key passage is, shall we say, hard to decipher:

The percentages shall be based on monthly averages and shall be the difference between (i) the average for the calendar year just ended and (ii) the average for the most recent calendar year used in the determination of the post-retirement supplements currently being paid. The annual increase, if any, in the CPI-U shall be considered only to the extent of the first two percent plus one-half of the next two percent of any additional increase, or a maximum increase in the post-retirement supplement of three percent in any given year. However, for anyone who (a) is not a person who becomes a member on or after July 1, 2010, and (b) has at least 60 months of creditable service as of January 1, 2013, the applicable annual increase, if any, in the CPI-U shall be considered only to the extent of the first three percent plus one-half of the next four percent of any additional increase, or a maximum increase in the post-retirement supplement of five percent in any given year.

So, first the official government inflation measure (CPI-U) for two calendar years is averaged.  In this case that is calendar years 2021 and 2020.  Whatever that average is, Plan 1 recipients have the first three percentage points recognized and added in, plus one-half of the next four percentage points (up to a total of five percentage points.) Working backwards, the base inflation for that two-year period was apparently 4.7%.

Presumably, the higher inflation rate for calendar year 2022 will show up when next summer’s adjustment is made, but it will still be averaged with 2021 and capped at 5% maximum. Plan 2 will be capped at 3%. The Hybrid Plan is likewise capped at 3%.

Many other states have faced major financial crises from rising pension costs, and not just where union contracts were the drivers. The Virginia legislative effort, quarterbacked in part by former Republican Speaker William Howell, put VRS on a firmer footing for the future. Now that the retirees understand how it did that, things might get more interesting.

An aside: Any remaining doubt the Richmond Times-Dispatch is dead? This is a huge Richmond story, given how many VRS members and retirees live in the capital region, but so far it is missing from its pages. Maybe if we put up and then tore down a statue at the VRS headquarters?


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

94 responses to “This Year the VRS “Diet COLA” Will Really Hurt”

  1. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Cry me a river. The “automatic inflation adjustment” on my 401(k) is -17%.

    I don’t think any government employee should ever get any form of pension. Don’t get me wrong, I’d be happy to give those employees generous 401(k)’s with generous matches. But a system where the people regulating and managing the economy are divorced from their own decisions regarding their retirement seems counter-productive.

    Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden had 401(k)’s instead of federal pensions they would not have ignored inflation until it became a rip roaring problem.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Congrats — hoping to bounce back up to a 17% loss. 🙂 (Try not to look often.) Nothing lost until you sell….

      It is what it is and the annual COLA decision should be reported by somebody, for goodness sake. It is the first time the new rules have really had a bite on people and many won’t understand it. This is me laying groundwork for a possible push to index the income tax….

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Back to the Future. I got knocked back to January 2021. COLA? Coke-a?

        Cheer up. Ol’ SocSec COLA is slated to be largest in decades. MeowMix tonight!

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Congrats — hoping to bounce back up to a 17% loss. 🙂 (Try not to look often.) Nothing lost until you sell….

      It is what it is and the annual COLA decision should be reported by somebody, for goodness sake. It is the first time the new rules have really had a bite on people and many won’t understand it. This is me laying groundwork for a possible push to index the income tax….

    3. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      I think inflation was pre-ordained when the Feds started sending checks to people – even people that did not need it.

      But your history is , as usual, not complete:

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2880e8bc5d1a2daa75d254d10554f0a0d4b5134442448ceac7f21fbe063745a7.jpg

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        Larry, your usual nonsense. I have always and often noted that the federal spending that got us in this mess started under Trump. You make stuff up and pretend I said stuff I never did. I’m sick of it. You are not honest. I speak with readers all the time and you are probably happy about being famous, but you shouldn’t be happy as to why.

          1. Stephen Haner Avatar
            Stephen Haner

            “The Feds” would include the previous administration, so the attack on Rippert was also baseless but your usual indirection.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            ” Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden ”

            where’s Trump? methinks the “nonsense” sometimes is YOU boy. You’re too old to be this way, you know or have you always been this way?

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            ” Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden ”

            where’s Trump? methinks the “nonsense” sometimes is YOU boy. You’re too old to be this way, you know or have you always been this way?

            I wasn’t even responding to you!

            but I thought it more honest and objective to acknowledge that both Biden and Trump had a hand in it.

            In fact, they killed Biden’s last attempt.

            and this that Trump initially refused to sign the first bill for $600 because he wanted $2000.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/60cc251eb80ca395d38a989b0a53153a3a8afc1463e9897cc8c83d68a3d789b3.jpg

            https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/28/house-passes-coronavirus-stimulus-check-boost-republicans-splinter-451504

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Trump’s 401(k) is called “Emoluments”.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Oooh, oooh. They must looooove me.

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        And your reading comprehension is, as usual, not complete.

        Here is inflation from 2012 through 2022 –

        https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/

        Here is what I wrote:

        “Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden had 401(k)’s instead of federal pensions they would not have ignored inflation until it became a rip roaring problem.”

        There was no inflation to ignore during Trump’s tenure. There was a lot of inflation once Biden took over and both he and Yellen ignored it (calling inflation “transitory”).

        I never made any statement about the cause of inflation.

        RIF – Reading Is Fundamental.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Trump gave away money left and right – both tax cuts and stimulus and it continued with Biden.

          The point is that BOTH Trump and Biden were responsible and when you get right down to it – neither of them, by themselves did any of it. Congress did. Both the GOP congress under Trump and the dem one under Biden.

          It’s not reading comprehension that is the problem here – it’s selective memory and revisionist history.

          I have no problem recognizing the problem under Biden NOR under Trump but some folks can only view one side of it.

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      You’d have loved to have been at NAWC Indy when it went from Gov’t to Northrop (maybe Hughes). First time I saw grown men cry since the Shuttle Challenger.

      One guy had 15 years government service, and when all was said and done his fed pension converted to nothing but $150K in a 401(k).

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        oh…. FERS…

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            oh that’s good… !

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            No, Larry. It may be rich, but it is not good.

          3. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Why do we have so many mackerel snappers on the court?

          4. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Not an accident. And the Republicans were worried about JFK. HA!

          5. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            Bigot. This is the same as using the N word for blacks, the SP work for Hispanics, the K word for Jews. Jim, is this acceptable?

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            seems like after years of “coonman” not much different…. besides… what happened to “free speech” ?

          7. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            Larry, try a post using the N word, the SP word and the K word.

          8. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I thought coonman was dang close…I’m just pointing out that for al the talk about ‘free speech” even Conservatives have limits or at least say they do.

          9. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Touchy touchy. It is the way it has been between Catholics and Protestants since Martin Luther had the effrontery to nail the articles of reformation to the church door.

            The world is a better place for having alternatives to the obscenely rich, corrupt, pedophile embracing, omnipotent Catholic church.

            But, thanks to the 1st Amendment you are free to worship in any way you choose. The right to have it universally revered, not so much.

          10. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            If one digs more deeply, the blame should be cast on Obama, who was in the best position in decades to protect the right to an abortion by federal statute but, despite his rhetoric, did nothing.

            Clearly, Obama, as an attorney and a very smart individual, was fully aware that Roe and Griswold were poorly decided and had no basis in constitutional law. As such, he was certainly aware they could be reversed.

            In 2009, Obama had strong Democratic majorities in both houses and, for a time, a 60-40 edge in the Senate. which could have defeated any filibuster. It is quite likely that his administration, working with a strong Democratic Party majority and pr0-choice Republicans like the then two Senators from Maine, could have obtained congressional passage of a basic law that protected access to abortion and regulated it as Congress deemed appropriate.

            Keep in mind that not even Justice Blackman opined that the right to abortion was unlimited and unconditional. Moreover, public opinion was and continues to oppose at least third trimester abortions. But altogether, it would have been reasonably certain that a federal law protecting the right to abortion would have passed Congress had Obama tried.

            Moreover, neither political party has had 60 votes in the Senate since. Ergo, any attempt to gut or repeal the law that could have passed would have been filibustered by the Democrats in the Senate.

            Had Obama acted in 2009 consistent with his campaign rhetoric, Dobbs would never have happened. There would be lawsuits challenging the law that could have passed but it would extremely unlikely that any would have prevailed, with the possible exception of around the edges.

            We’d sit today with a federal abortion law that would be largely consistent with public opinion.

          11. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Could say the same thing with regard to Trump and immigration, no?

            the bigger issue in my mind is that if something is NOT addressed in the Constitution – how do we make law on it?

            Abortion is a large issue but one of hundreds of other laws and regulations that have nothing to do with anything specific in the Constitution.

          12. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            Point well taken. Any American president and Congress could address immigration. But there are no immigration rights based on penumbras and emanations.

          13. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            The Conservative fallacy is their belief that if a Right is not specifically enumerated in the Constitution it does not exist.

          14. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Totally Agree. If the Founding Fathers did not perceive it happening and did not address it in the Constitution – what to do?

            How many laws and regulations would have to be done away with if they were not addressed in the Constitution?

            The entire concept of a modern economy and society was not envisioned in the original Constitution.

            So the ‘text-only’ folks basically pick and choose what they want to “rule” on and what they will ignore and let stand.

            It’s untenable in a world that is nothing like the Founding Fathers could envision and understand and no doubt what-so-ever that if they lived today, they’d agree.

          15. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            Don’t see them rushing to overturn Buck v. Bell…

          16. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            a seemingly easy thing to do…..

          17. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            They relied on Men and Women of Honor. Guess they shoulda gone with VMI types and not ND.

          18. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Perhaps there is a lesson in law to be learned. Perhaps the ability to reverse themselves should not be theirs and theirs alone. There is obvious need for expediency in having a SC make decisions, sometimes even poor ones, but the reversal might include, oh say, the Senate as well, especially since they will inevitably have to clean up afterwards. Hell, it’s not as though they are doing anything anyway.

          19. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            But then, Roe v. Wade could not have been decided as state laws against abortion had been upheld in the past. Under your proposal, the Supreme Court would not have the absolute power to reverse precedent. Would Roe have been approved by the U.S. Senate in 1972? Not likely. So, the states were free to regulate and even ban abortion under your model.

            Major policy decisions belong in Congress and not in science fiction written by judges.

            But my bottom line remains, President Obama had the ability, opportunity and motivation to have Congress address abortion rights and regulations when he took office in 2009. And assuming the same election results since that time, the Democrats in the Senate could have protected the law through the filibuster.

            Of course, this one sails over the head of the MSM, most members of Congress and, of course, the truth thought leaders of America, entertainers and athletes.

          20. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Hypothetical on the adoption in 73. The reason for it made it. Women were dying.

          21. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I understand why people are up in arms about the ruling, but I also understand why the ruling took place.

            The only positive is that you have more impact at the State level than you do the Federal. So if your state has a Law you disagree with, it’s significantly easier to change it at the local level. Also, I believe 26 states have ballot referendums processes, so that is a means to bypass even a stubborn legislature if you have enough signatures.

          22. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            I’ve got $100 that says that should R’s take Congress and the White House that the filibuster will fall in 15 minutes so they can pass a nationwide abortion ban. They will do it in a heartbeat…

          23. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            I think you’re on to something.

          24. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            I’ll take that $100 bet. 12:15pm 1/20/25 or bust.

          25. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Very nicely stated.

            There was considerable support to codify abortion rights in legislation in 2009 but Obama and the elites shut it down. As you note, the majorities needed to legislate have not existed subsequently. That was just one of many consequences of Obama’s campaign of CHANGE and governance of SAME.

            The failure to use the majorities the country gave them in ’08 cost the Dems the House in ’10. Arguably that started the downhill slide and continuing string of failures they have endured and foolish choices they have made since then. That promises to reverberate again in November.

            I keep hoping they will wake up and get back to their New Deal populist roots, but I’m not holding my breath.

          26. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            I might be mistaken but I believe at the time of Roe’s decision, they were fairly close to codifying abortion. Roe short circuited that through it’s ruling and thus it was put off for another day.

    5. Lefty665 Avatar
      Lefty665

      Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden had 401(k)’s instead of federal pensions they would not have ignored inflation until it became a rip roaring problem.

      In our dreams, it should be so easy to fix stupid.

    6. Lefty665 Avatar
      Lefty665

      Maybe if Yellen, Powell and Biden had 401(k)’s instead of federal pensions they would not have ignored inflation until it became a rip roaring problem.

      In our dreams, it should be so easy to fix stupid.

    7. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Cheer up Buddy Bear. Couldn’t tell you exactly which year, but the S&P took about a 32% hit at least once in the last 70 years. Statistically, it’s a mean of 7% with a 15% standard deviation. Bogel’s estimate of 4.5% forever income from your investments is still holding.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        The sooner inflation was identified and combatted the sooner the stock market would have recovered. Biden’s delay in recognizing obvious inflation was an unforced error.

        Don’t worry about me … I have a source of income beyond any generated by my retirement savings. Pension? No. Social Security? Not taking it yet. I work. Apparently, I am one of the few commentators on this blog who isn’t retired. But I do feel sorry for those who are retired and not eligible for a pension.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          I have no pension, only SocSec, and that’s insurance. Yep, probably woulda been nice if inflation was recognized as a problem earlier, but Biden needn’t have. It’s not like he could have done anything.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Maybe he could have refrained from throwing gasoline on the fire?

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            If, what, $1,400 or $2,800 per person is gasoline, what the Hell was a $1.4T tax cut to business and top taxpayers? Or, was it $3T with only $1.4 unpaid?

            Yeah, maybe it could have been more and better directed, but at the time most of it was said to have gone to savings or debt.

          3. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            The problem was it went to everyone in the country. It was not means tested. For example, not many of the folks who frequent BR “needed” it.

    8. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      You conservatives are always soooo pessimistic.

      Look at it this way. Your 401(k) balance is roughly the same as it was in January 2021, but now it only has to last you two years less time.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        …and it is worth more than it was in January 2020 and has to last 3 fewer years. Unless of course you adjust for inflation…

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          And Bob’s your uncle. By George, I think he’s got it!

          But kidding aside, if in January 2020 your retirement had a high probably of success (money outlasting you), then that hasn’t changed. You still have a high probability of success on the shorter interval.

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    one question that perhaps grump Haner might answer.

    got a view on chained CPI – for VRS?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      It would be more generous than this CPI-U with the cap. I admit my ambivalence on this. As a taxpayer I want the state to be frugal, but that monthly VRS check my wife gets really helps cover the bills. We built our plans around it. She had the pension and me the 401K, etc.

  3. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    One word; Greece.

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    “This package presents a balanced approach that honors the commitment to state employees and teachers while taking the tough but necessary steps to protect their retirement.” — Bill Howell

    https://augustafreepress.com/mcdonnell-announces-vrs-plan/

    · Reduce the benefit multiplier from 1.7 to 1.6 for general state and local employees and teachers, hired on or after Jan. 1, 2013 who have no prior service credit in the VRS (new hires). The multiplier would not change for members of SPORS, VaLORS, JRS, or local LEOS members, or for general state and local employees and teachers hired before Jan. 1, 2013.
    Cap COLA Formula at 3 Percent for All Current and Deferred Members (All Plans Including Judges) (Effective Jan. 1, 2013)
    · Reduce COLA benefit to a maximum of 3 percent (new hires, current employees and deferred members). The revised COLA formula would match the consumer price index for the first 2 percentage points of increase, and then match the next two percentage points at the rate of one-half to one, after which the COLA would be capped at 3.0 percent.
    · Members who are within 5 years of their unreduced retirement date as of Jan. 1, 2013 would be grandfathered.
    Defer COLA Benefit Until Employees Reach Age for Unreduced Retirement Benefits (All Plans, Including Judges) (Effective Jan. 1, 2013)
    · Limit COLA benefit to employees who have reached the age for an unreduced retirement benefit (new hires, current employees and deferred members).

    Coulda been worse… coulda been Scott Walker.

  5. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    All the colas suck. For SS it was 5.9% this year with an inflation rate approaching 9%. Last year it was a 1.6% cola with an inflation rate of 7%. That is a net loss in real value of over 8% over the two years. VRS is an even larger decrease. At least 401Ks will recover with the market, SS and VRS never will.

    In the 70s when my Dad retired as a Fed the retirement cola was inflation plus 1%. After about 4 years retired he was making more than the folks he worked with who had not retired. They were not amused.

    That didn’t last long, nor did the generous health benefits, but it was a good ride while it lasted. Recall too that back then Fed pay was not competitive with the private sector. Benefits and retirement were how they narrowed the gap.

  6. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    VRS has sent a loud and clear message to Virginia’s educators. Get out. Get out now. No chance of a roof over your head from this lousy pension plan. Doesn’t matter if it its Plan 1 or 2. I am so used to getting screwed by Loudoun County and Commonwealth of Virginia. I guess I like it now. Glad I married an accountant instead of a school teacher. I prefer Royal Crown COLA.

  7. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    VRS has sent a loud and clear message to Virginia’s educators. Get out. Get out now. No chance of a roof over your head from this lousy pension plan. Doesn’t matter if it its Plan 1 or 2. I am so used to getting screwed by Loudoun County and Commonwealth of Virginia. I guess I like it now. Glad I married an accountant instead of a school teacher. I prefer Royal Crown COLA.

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Just to make clear, these are the VRS plans from Bill Howell and Bob McDonnell. Hey! Worked well for 9 years.

    Just a funny thought… if VRS had only been managed by the same group that manages the UVa endowment…

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      That really did sound like a Republican calculation aimed at slashing the budget that Haner quoted above. Thanks for confirming.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        The effort and the movement had bipartisan support. The reality is something similar will be needed for Social Security and soon, or else….My wife and I understood that the savings and investments to supplement the pensions would be required. And we made the adjustments to our spending (deferring quite a bit in our 40s and 50s) in order to divert income in that direction. Glad we did. I never failed to max the 401K and max the match, then set up a SEP and maxed that.

        Like Lefty I watched my retired AF dad enjoy his federal (and then VRS) pensions, I remember the COLA Plus, but understood that gravy train shut down long ago.

        1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
          Eric the half a troll

          So is it a good thing to screw retirees in an effort to cut government commitments by design or not… the Conservative dilemma… (probably why that “empathy off” switch is so close at hand)…

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            It was earnest negotiations PRIOR to 2013 in which employees gave up pay increases to receive retirement promises that led the State to overcommitted retirement plans.

            “How about just 2% now and we add a COLA adjustment that will keep up with inflation in your retirement?”

            The easiest thing to promise is future money.
            It’s also the easiest thing to steal back. Think Madoff.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          The primary problem with SS is not govt malfeasance but simple demographics and actuarials – in short – SS was designed for people retiring at 65 and dying at 70-something.

          I guess you can call that govt incompetence but the same problem affects private sector pensions and annuities also.

          The other thing is what kind/scope of entitlements would be needed for older folks who did not have SS to start with?

          It’s been estimated that as many as 40% of seniors would be in poverty without SS.

          And we already know the problem with who pays for nursing homes for too many.

          1. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
            f/k/a_tmtfairfax

            Private sector pensions have largely been eliminated.

            FDR did not see, nor could he be expected to see, the reality of people living so much longer. But, even if he had, I’m not sure he would have proposed anything different. Despite all the rhetoric, he was largely an incrementalist.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            They have been substantially downsized, agree.

            To me the basic question with regard to SS is what would happen without it.

            Would taxpayers have to pay entitlements for those that did not save and when they got old – ended up in slums or on the streets – like we see in 3rd world countries?

          3. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            SS was initially a way to immediately put money into the hands of mostly indigent elderly people. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 3/4 of America’s old people were in poverty.

            It evolved into the universal retirement system for people who are living longer we are struggling with.

            SS would be fully solvent if we had maintained the withholding limit at 90% of wages instead of letting it fall to the low 80s. That has been a profound failure.

        3. Lefty665 Avatar
          Lefty665

          I remember the COLA Plus

          It at least recognized that playing catch up to inflation lagged and the 1% bump partially compensated for that. The killer in the late ’70s was the inflation rate of 10% and more over several years.

          COLA indexing retirement far exceeded the Federal pay schedule adjustments. Retirees roughly maintained real income while current workers took a big hit. That was insult to injury for future retirees who would never catch up because their wages (that retirement was based on too) lagged inflation.

          COLA Plus was a lot more equitable than current COLAs that do not come close to matching inflation or are engineered, like VRS, to intentionally short adjustments.

          With high inflation likely to last several years and wages as well as retirement continually falling behind, all of us will be getting poorer.

          Remember too that we have changed how we calculate inflation. Recent reporting shows current inflation would be over 15% if calculations were done as they were in the late ’70s.

          Current suppressed COLAs also understate the real rate of inflation. It’s a twofer, screwed and screwed again.

    2. walter smith Avatar
      walter smith

      You mean the same ones currently virtue-signaling about sustainable investment? All in on ESG? It’s good to virtue signal with other peoples’ money.
      It’s easy to get a 40% return when you blow up the market and scare the world and then pick up the pieces with the 0% real interest money you can access at fire sale prices. My portfolio did that without the cheap cash access…
      We propped up the market for at least 10 years with interest rates that screwed over the middle and lower classes, and now the inflation genie is out of the bottle and the poor (you know, the people the Left claims to love while screwing them over) is going to really get it – good and hard. And killing babies is now State optional – what a horrible country says all the people supporting the original eugenicist who specifically wanted to target black babies and “mental defectives” and whose intellectual descendants are totally good with requiring an experimental medical product being mandated on others, claim not to know what a woman is, then scream “my body my choice” when you merely allow a State to fall on the side of the clump of cells is a human life, which it is…cuz SCIENCE!
      The emperor has no clothes, and that is why our clerisy yammers on and on about “democracy at risk.”
      Yeah…the people have awakened to not defer to people who do not deserve deference.
      I’d rather pick 535 people from physical trades – HVAC, plumbing, trucking, longshore, miners, construction. People who live under OSHA rules and know risk and actually do things with value in the real world. It couldn’t be worse. I bet they even understand that you can’t spend money you don’t have!

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Yeah, that’s the ticket. Pick people who know nothing about it, and rely on divine intervention. Yours is a good argument for never naming anything after Jefferson… he just got lucky.

        BTW, you did exactly that when you voted for Trump. Pick someone completely ignorant and unprepared. Good job there, Bubba.

        1. walter smith Avatar
          walter smith

          Says the SCIENCE! crowd… $2 gas sucked and $5 gas is good! Chestfeeding! Men need tampons!
          I guess you are part of the clerisy and we’re never employed in a meaningful manner that actually filled a need for real people.
          Lemme see… Trump is an idiot and unprepared. Biden 47 years of “public service” becomes President…and you prove my point. Maybe you people who think you are so smart aren’t so smart after all…
          I know…challenging your worldview that you are God…

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “…what a horrible country says all the people supporting the original eugenicist who specifically wanted to target black babies and “mental defectives”…”

        What do Winston Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt, And Warren Harding have to do with anything…??

        Since you brought such things up and given Thomas’ statement that he wishes to work on overturning standing SCOTUS decisions, maybe he can start with Buck v. Bell rather than shooting first at outlawing birth control…

        1. walter smith Avatar
          walter smith

          Snore…
          Maybe you could choose a real thing to worry about…like inflation, supply chains, possible food shortages instead of hypothetical potential Supreme Court cases where the proper balance could be restored and we could get out judicial diktat and let real legislatures pass real laws…you know, like the Covid “vaccine” should have been…
          Oh, the legislatures didn’t have the bravery to do it? Maybe that tells you it wouldn’t have happened and shouldn’t have been done by mandate…
          Just guessing there, champ, but you live in fear that Griswold or the Lemon test is at risk…I’ll live in the real world.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            that’s the shortest response I have EVER seen from you! wow!

          2. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            not true

          3. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “Maybe you could choose a real thing to worry about…”

            When the head of the SCOTUS Conservative bloc tells us what he intends to do, it is a real thing… why would you doubt him? Of course, your comment went on to begin the Conservative justification for the coming Religious Right theocratic state. It has already begun…

          4. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Well, I hope your fear carries on for 50 years, like the usurpation of the democratic process for 50 years like Roe v Wade. The cases don’t spring up overnight or at a Justice’s whim. Seriously, get a grip…but, if it will keep you from polluting serious commentary because of your fear, please stay fearful.

          5. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            You… Mr. I Am Afraid of Needles are talking about fear…?? That is very funny indeed…

          6. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            You need to do more research on afraid of needles. I am getting my 15th bone marrow biopsy next week and basically spent two years being jabbed constantly. But you do you…
            Griswold v Ct is at risk! And the Lemon strict scrutiny test! Maybe even Obergefell! Oh, the horror!

          7. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            still a bit amazed you trust some new/evolving science and not other.

            Pretty sure the CDC and FDA also deal with the science you are benefiting from.

            what makes the difference for you?

          8. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            You and Troll really need to pay attention. The issue with the vaccine has always been the mandate. The decision belonged to the individual. Not by bureaucratic mandate. And not for an experimental medical product. Mandating participation in a medical experiment (which by definition is all EUA) without informed willing consent violates the Nuremberg Code. I evaluated the risk reward and was not persuaded. And I am right, but that is besides the point – here is some SCIENCE! for you – negative efficacy…
            https://jdrucker.substack.com/p/conspiracy-theory-confirmed-covid?s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct
            So what makes the difference? I use my brain and make my own decision based on reality. And bone marrow has been constantly improved for 50 years. I could have done nothing and been dead from leukemia in a month…or undergo chemo, kill the leukemia, then do the bone marrow to replenish my blood production/ immune system. That wasn’t a hard decision.
            Fear over Covid was falsely stoked… To the detriment of society. And the “experts” did not cover themselves with glory.

          9. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So it’s vaccines that make you quiver – aren’t you bwave… Yes, Griswold is at risk. The bigots can subjugate anyone they want now. Congrats…

          10. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Well, since you are an idiot over the non “vaccine” I guess you have read this latest SCIENCE! on efficacy, or lack thereof…
            https://jdrucker.substack.com/p/conspiracy-theory-confirmed-covid?s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct
            And the issue, which you obviously are too dim to understand, is the mandate of an experimental medical product, which violates the Nuremberg Code, so you are a Nazi sympathizer? Get the shot if you want. But don’t make others do it. My body my choice when you are going to kill a clump of cells but not on your own body by itself…

          11. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            “Ooo… a vaccine!! Sca-wee..!!” You are nothing but a quivering bag of fear and you attempt consistently to transfer that fear to others. You big wuss!

          12. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Sticks and stones Troll.

          13. Eric the half a troll Avatar
            Eric the half a troll

            So it’s vaccines that make you quiver – aren’t you bwave… Yes, Griswold is at risk. The bigots can subjugate anyone they want now. Congrats…

  9. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    When it comes to pensions and 401Ks and the like, a good discussion might be what a VRS pension really is. If one retires with their own 401k – as is – then what you have is the bulk fund that you’d draw down on and if you outlast it, the rest goes to heirs; if you outlast the 401, then you’re in trouble.

    SS is an annuity, (actually an insurance annuity). You can’t outlast it. It pays as long as you live. Conversely, if you die early, yours heirs don’t get the balance of what you paid in.

    I suspect that VRS pensions are annuities like SS.

    but when and how that works might be as interesting as the COLAs.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Yes, VRS is an annuity basically. Unlike Social Security, to create a survivor benefit you much accept a reduced benefit.

  10. U.S inflation is basically a hidden form of taxation. Uncle Sam runs up huge deficits, the Fed monetizes the debt by inflating the money supply, and inflation is the result. As a retiree, you lose real income (adjusted for inflation), while Uncle Sam gets to pay off its $30 trillion debt with inflation-shrunken dollars.

    Admittedly, the story gets a bit more complicated this year because major supply-side disruptions are contributing to inflation. I haven’t seen a good analysis, but those disruptions may be contributing 2-3 percentage points of last year’s 8.6 percent Cost of Living increase. The rest is pure income transfer.

    As Haner observes above, inflation affects everyone. It is the most regressive tax of all. But politically, it has one advantage. The authors of the inflation can blame everyone but themselves — Putin, corporate greed, etc. — and a lot of people will believe them.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      You can have significant inflation that is NOT due to govt deficits or money policies though.

      As you opine, supply side – purely private sector can contribute mightily to inflation – as we are seeing.

      Even now, people forget early on in the pandemic – the cost of certain things like PPP , alcohol, TP , hundreds of items skyrocketed in price because demand far outstripped supply and govt had virtually nothing to do with it.

      And similar things can and do happen outside of pandemics. Take the chip issue or insulin – neither caused by govt policies.

    2. Lefty665 Avatar
      Lefty665

      Uncle Sam gets to pay off its $30 trillion debt with inflation-shrunken dollars.

      That’s the way most national debt gets paid off isn’t it? But, it does not seem likely to help us beat national debt back below 100% of GDP (also inflated), Scary.

Leave a Reply