Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 260 posts

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#161

Post by chooseaname »

ScottFree wrote: post #151
chooseaname wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love for this to happen. But I see a couple blockers. 1) It is some sort of badge of honor to get a "job with benefits". 2) What if more people decide to not get healthcare? If your job gives it to you and you "only" have to pay a few hundred a month for your family, you are more likely to get it than if you payed everything out of pocket each month (even if your compensation increased). People would see all…

I have yet to meet a single person who hasn't enthusiastically agreed that we should separate healthcare from employment. The reluctance comes when nobody has any idea what we're going to replace it with. We're at an unusual social state in this country where nobody trusts the government and nobody trusts big business. What does that leave? I'm a US freelancer, so I don't get health insurance through my employer. I g…

> I have yet to meet a single person who hasn't enthusiastically agreed that we should separate healthcare from employment. The reluctance comes when nobody has any idea what we're going to replace it with.

Sadly, I have, and it is invariably from people who basically say those who don't work don't deserve healthcare. It is disturbing to hear people say this. They don't want to "pay" for someone else's healthcare. They don't get that they already are.

> We're at an unusual social state in this country where nobody trusts the government and nobody trusts big business. What does that leave?

Where did we go so wrong? Is it because we treat government like football games? One side has to dominate the other; all or nothing? What happened to compromise for the greater good?

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#162

Post by fencepost »

spo81rty wrote: post #45
kpmcc wrote: post #27

And while they cut pension benefits, this is what the CEO makes: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/05/new-ge-ceo-larry-culp-inks-s...

It says his compensation is largely tied to company stock performance. He is not guaranteed all of that money. He and the company have to perform.

You know how you raise the stock price when you're a CEO? You get a tax cut from 35% down to 21% with the nominal purpose being so your company can hire more workers (to handle the business that was previously not profitable enough to cover their wages?), then you use that money for stock buybacks.

Less supply of your stock plus a deep pocketed purchaser? It's bonus time!

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#163

Post by Faark »

dx87 wrote: post #144
admiun wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding 2), you could just make healthcare insurance mandatory. We have that in The Netherlands.

What if someone refuses to pay? Do they get a fine that's higher than what the cost of paying for healthcare would have been?

Its send to collections. So you're only fine if you are poor enough to not have anything they can take from you. And at that point you are eligible for gov support to your healthcare bill anyway.

Here in germany you can actually kind of get away with not paying for a while when not consuming. But coverage has to be continuous, so if you need insurance since you want to go to the doctor a few years down the line, you have to pay up for the entire period.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#164

Post by rumanator »

hocuspocus wrote: post #157
dx87 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if someone refuses to pay? Do they get a fine that's higher than what the cost of paying for healthcare would have been?

Here in Switzerland if you don't give proof of insurance the state will pick one for you. Then if you don't pay, it's like with any other bill, you'll get into troubles really quick.

Sounds like it would be far simpler and easier for everyone if the state provided healthcare services paid by everyone through taxes.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#165

Post by slg »

Someone1234 wrote: post #129
Spivak wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay look, I get that it’s fun to be angry the high salaries of CEOs but it’s one of those things that just doesn’t matter and does nothing but distract from the actual problems. That 2.5 million dollars distributed to the 20k pensioners amounts to $125/person/year. If you distribute it to all $300k GE employees they get a $6/yr raise.

That $2.5M isn't even half of their compensation. Why did you pick the lowest figure in the article to make this argument?

So double it or even triple it. You could redistribute it all among the 20k people impacted and we are till only talking about $20 - $30 per month. That would certainly help people, but it isn't going to by life changing money.

CEO pay seems like a constant red herring. If we care about inequality, we are probably better off focusing our attention on our tax system (this story [1] is also on the front page of HN at the moment) which has a much bigger impact than CEO pay.

[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21181664

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#166

Post by amluto »

ScottFree wrote: post #151
chooseaname wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love for this to happen. But I see a couple blockers. 1) It is some sort of badge of honor to get a "job with benefits". 2) What if more people decide to not get healthcare? If your job gives it to you and you "only" have to pay a few hundred a month for your family, you are more likely to get it than if you payed everything out of pocket each month (even if your compensation increased). People would see all…

I have yet to meet a single person who hasn't enthusiastically agreed that we should separate healthcare from employment. The reluctance comes when nobody has any idea what we're going to replace it with. We're at an unusual social state in this country where nobody trusts the government and nobody trusts big business. What does that leave? I'm a US freelancer, so I don't get health insurance through my employer. I g…

> The reluctance comes when nobody has any idea what we're going to replace it with.

The straightforward answer is to replace it with self-paid insurance plans. Even without redesigning our awful system of medical payments in the US, we could easily get rid of the “employer pays” part.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#167

Post by zarro »

chooseaname wrote: post #118
zarro wrote: post #85

I really think that the sooner we can separate out pensions and healthcare from employers, the better. Businesses main area of expertise is not in pensions and healthcare, and they cannot provide these services as efficiently as if there were many different insurance companies on the market offering these services for sale, and instead the company paid you a fee for your services, and then you went out on the market…

I would love for this to happen. But I see a couple blockers. 1) It is some sort of badge of honor to get a "job with benefits". 2) What if more people decide to not get healthcare? If your job gives it to you and you "only" have to pay a few hundred a month for your family, you are more likely to get it than if you payed everything out of pocket each month (even if your compensation increased). People would see all…

Contrarian argument regarding point 2:

I find it weird and misguided how people think that using coercion to force people into buying healthcare is somehow acceptable. To those that think it will make the cost of healthcare more expensive for the rest of us, I think that is a dubious assertion, in fact I think it will get much cheaper. The presumption that they are in contentious debate with is the necessity that different people have to get different tiers of service based on how much they pay.

It makes all the sense in the world when you compare it to any other business. You wouldn't expect for someone who paid $1M to get the same level of treatment as someone who paid $100.

People would buy insurance according to different tier levels of quality and risk profile, with their being astronomically high costs of insurance for old wealthy rich people, who in their desire to prolong life will incentivize creation of new modes of treatment to cure themselves (Which in the short run the development of which will help them, but in the long run, everyone, as after it gets discovered and scaled it will get cheaper).

People would also buy cheaper level of tiers, from which naturally the quality of treatment, and queues will get lower/longer.

You will also have people that don't buy insurance, and this should be their prerogative to do, as it would be the healthcare providers prerogative to decide whether to provide them with free treatment (they are not slaves, they are not obligated to provide a free service, and what makes the people that don't pay more important or a higher priority than those that willingly pay and fund these services).

I'm not saying that this is the BEST solution, I'm saying that this is BETTER than anything else proposed which leads to things like the "cobra effect" in which you make the initial problem way worse by the implemented solution, than by what it would have been without it.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#168

Post by stephen_g »

ajnin wrote: post #154
zarro wrote: post #85

I really think that the sooner we can separate out pensions and healthcare from employers, the better. Businesses main area of expertise is not in pensions and healthcare, and they cannot provide these services as efficiently as if there were many different insurance companies on the market offering these services for sale, and instead the company paid you a fee for your services, and then you went out on the market…

It's not that they can't, more that they don't want to, because that gives them leverage on their employees. Look at the recent GM strike : not happy ? We're cutting your health insurance. They reversed it ultimately but I bet it'll make people think twice next time they're thinking about going on a strike. And you know what is even more efficient than market-based health insurance and pensions ? Socialist state-leve…

We have basically 'Medicare for all' in Australia. Works well. We spend way less as a proportion of GDP than the US on healthcare and the hospitals in the big cities (where they send people for anything serious) are world class.

Most things like GPs, physiotherapists, etc. are private but the Medicare system pays for something like 60% to 100% of the bill depending on various factors. You won't usually pay more than $30 for a standard GP consult, for example.

Crazily, the private insurers (it's optional) are trying to push for tax breaks to employers if they pay for private health insurance for their employees (more like the US system but basically unheard of here), despite the fact that the private system is already heavily subsidised (big rebate on private health insurance and also tax benefits for moderate and high income earners), and despite the fact that our public system is more efficient (according to studies), so we'd actually be better off just investing that cash in the public system (because of underfunding there are waiting lists for a lot of elective surgery).

But the private insurance industry is generally struggling because they've been raising premiums and reducing service (more exclusions and bigger excesses) and our public system is good.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#169

Post by lotsofpulp »

nguoi wrote: post #150
lotsofpulp wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on some quick Googling, I don't see what is so much better about an SIPP or a group personal pension plan? SIPP offers some kind of matching from the government, but it doesn't seem significant.

I don't know anything about the 401k system, but the money going into my pension is from my gross salary. Combined with high taxation, it means that it's worth up to twice as much going into my pension as it would be going into my bank account. SIPPs are beyond my lifestyle.

It's the same in the US.

Re: GE freezes pension benefits for 20k employees

#170

Post by zaphod420 »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #80
zaphod420 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment I replied to said "There is no longer such a thing as a "safe investment". The only way to grow your money is to take risks with it". Bitcoin is seen as a risky investment by most people. To those of us that understand what it actually is and how it works, it's the best kind of money/store of value ever invented. The only other options I see for storing wealth are things like precious metals, real estate,…

> Bitcoin is seen as a risky investment by most people. To those of us that understand what it actually is and how it works, it's the best kind of money/store of value ever invented. Why? Just because the other options have downsides, what makes Bitcoin good? There was a rush in 2018 - are you assuming it's going to happen again? Bitcoin seems to be super unstable, more so than anything else I'm aware of - why would…

Bitcoin is good because there is a fixed supply. The scarcity of it means basic supply and demand market mechanics are in play. It’s price is volatile because people with a lot of money can move the price easily by simply buying and selling large amounts of it. The value has steadily increased year over year though, and eventually there will be sufficient market depth which will help stabilize prices. It’s also good because banks can easily prevent you from accessing your own money. When your money is in bitcoin, no one can confiscate it, or charge you negative interest rates on it.

Lots of new coins claim to be the next bitcoin, but the truth is, bitcoin is the next bitcoin. Look up the user aantonop on YouTube for why this is the case.

Post reply on HN