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

America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

foodandwine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 247 posts

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#131

Post by alistairSH »

asdf21 wrote: post #100
mcv wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why it shouldn't even be on the company's budget. They should pay for it to an insurance company while the employee works there, and once the employee doesn't, the insurance takes care of it. Take the employer out of the equation once they're no longer relevant.

>Take the employer out of the equation once they're no longer relevant. Not exactly, if the company is willing to go so far as bankruptcy / reincorporation... how will any previous contracts with whatever insurance company last through that?

The insurance company is effectively acting as a giant escrow account on behalf of the employees/retirees.

The employer pays into the account at whatever rate is required to fully fund retirements. The insurance company manages those funds. If the employer goes bankrupt, the funds are not accessible by raiders/PE firms.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#132

Post by eldavido »

LatteLazy wrote: post #110
fennecfoxen wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to fix this going forward, make all new defined-benefit pensions plans illegal, as we have amply demonstrated that they can't be trusted over the course of a lifetime. Putting your future in the hands of an automaker was bad enough; why do we expect someone to put their future in the hands of a dairy? A defined-contribution pension plan, where you end up actually owning the assets in question, is the only…

Sorry in advance, this is a bit of a rant... The problem is not defined benefit vs defined contribution really, it's that companies are not really required to fund defined benefit. There are 1001 third party companies (normally insurers) who will happily underwrite a defined benefit scheme (so if the employer goes under the pensions are fine). But that would mean employers actually making pensions contributions that…

I take the status quo as my starting point.

McClatchy just had pension trouble. So does my home state of Illinois. So does this company, apparently.

You seem to think it's possible to just magic a large-scale change in human behavior into existence. It isn't. I think DC+social security is a pretty fair compromise. You're never going to starve if you totally screw up. There's also Medicare to help pay medical expenses. So the worst-case scenario isn't awful. On the other hand, if you want a comfortable retirement with a nice house, travel, etc., you need to be a good steward of a DC plan.

I also think having people with a little more skin in the game (the stock market) will help to tamp down this tiresome class politics about how the 1% is screwing everyone over. Pensions are big investors, it's not fair that some investors (pensioners) get bailed out in a bad market environment, whereas others (DC plan participants) don't. Don't forget, pensions don't magically create money, they have to invest and rely on the whims of the market just like DC plan participants.

Plus, there are good DC plans. The better ones opt you into a target date retirement fund and automatically invest in a reasonable basket of securities so you don't have to figure it out yourself. Human Interest is a great example of a simple, no-frills plan I've seen. My wife's Schwab account is too complicated.

I get that DB might be better in theory but I fail to see how, given the constraints of reality, and human nature, and politics, we aren't going to get a repeat of the current DB fiasco over and over again. Just look at the incentives.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#133

Post by ghaff »

scandox wrote: post #130
LatteLazy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry in advance, this is a bit of a rant... The problem is not defined benefit vs defined contribution really, it's that companies are not really required to fund defined benefit. There are 1001 third party companies (normally insurers) who will happily underwrite a defined benefit scheme (so if the employer goes under the pensions are fine). But that would mean employers actually making pensions contributions that…

> But actually, defined benefit schemes are less risky and far more appropriate for the average dummy than defined contribution schemes. Well, yeah because defined benefit actually makes some kind of commitment on what you're going to get, whereas defined contribution just tells you what you'll give, right? I mean it's all in the name. DC is just "give us yer money and sure we'll do our best for you, as long as our f…

Well, it's more than that. With defined contribution you can invest in a reasonably diversified pool of assets and, while there are no guarantees, you will most likely come out OK over a long period of time.

The bigger problem is that unsophisticated investors may overly invest in risky assets that don't pan out or they don't invest at all/borrow against savings/etc.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#134

Post by Accujack »

alistairSH wrote: post #127
swarnie_ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone link? As a limey Brit id rather listen to John Oliver then this Tucker chap. (seriously this passes for news?)

No, Tucker Carlson is not news. He's a pundit/commentator who has a talk show. Neither is John Oliver. I'd almost say they're flip sides of the same coin, except Carlson trends WAY right (often right into conspiracy theory land) and Oliver is more center-left.

Oliver is a journalist, though. That's why Snowden granted him an interview first, before anyone else in the world.

Sure, he's humorous, but he's not offering his opinions except in the most general terms. He follows facts, not hype.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#135

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

I’m constantly amazed at how cheap milk is in the grocery store. A gallon of Great Value 1% milk is $2.77 now. That seems low for what you are getting (a gallon of protein rich fluid milked from a cow and transported to you). How much profit could be left? I’ve heard that grocery stores sell milk for less than they buy it for just to get you into the store, because they know you will buy other things. I haven’t checked the truthfulness of that statement though.

http://www.fmpc.uconn.edu/research/milk/conference/Criner.pd...

A link about the margins implies that may be technically untrue but I don’t know enough about the grocery business to say.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#136

Post by shkkmo »

gruez wrote: post #120
koboll wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy, you damn well shouldn't be able to discharge pensions you've promised your employees for decades.

How would this work? If the company goes bankrupt and sold all its assets, who will you take the money from?

In other types of theft, there are mechanism for recovering the stolen assets. It seems like in theory you could hold the CEO, Board, and other people who made money off of the theft of the pension fund responsible and hold them financially liable for making the pension whole.

In practice, this would probably be messy, very costly, and extremely unlikely to happen.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#137

Post by eldavido »

alistairSH wrote: post #131
asdf21 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Take the employer out of the equation once they're no longer relevant. Not exactly, if the company is willing to go so far as bankruptcy / reincorporation... how will any previous contracts with whatever insurance company last through that?

The insurance company is effectively acting as a giant escrow account on behalf of the employees/retirees. The employer pays into the account at whatever rate is required to fully fund retirements. The insurance company manages those funds. If the employer goes bankrupt, the funds are not accessible by raiders/PE firms.

This already exists. It's called a 401(k).

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#138

Post by ghaff »

eldavido wrote: post #132
LatteLazy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry in advance, this is a bit of a rant... The problem is not defined benefit vs defined contribution really, it's that companies are not really required to fund defined benefit. There are 1001 third party companies (normally insurers) who will happily underwrite a defined benefit scheme (so if the employer goes under the pensions are fine). But that would mean employers actually making pensions contributions that…

I take the status quo as my starting point. McClatchy just had pension trouble. So does my home state of Illinois. So does this company, apparently. You seem to think it's possible to just magic a large-scale change in human behavior into existence. It isn't. I think DC+social security is a pretty fair compromise. You're never going to starve if you totally screw up. There's also Medicare to help pay medical expenses…

The other issue is that DB was historically oriented towards lifetime or at least long-term employment at GM, federal/state government, etc. It doesn't have to be that way. I suppose you could have some sort of common pool that employers paid into. You're still creating what's basically a large organization-specific retirement scheme. But if you somehow extend it more broadly, it starts to look a lot like another version of Social Security--which probably doesn't make a lot of sense.

I like the fact that I have a DB plan from a prior employer but, as you say, I'm not sure it's a great fit for most situations moving forward.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#139

Post by uhtred »

t0ddbonzalez wrote: post #92
m463 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's lots of evidence milk isn't as good for you as the dairy industry advertises.

> " There's lots of evidence milk isn't as good for you as the dairy industry advertises." lol at this ridiculous comment. Present the evidence please. How many millions of years do you think mammals have been drinking milk for?

Their mother's milk, during infancy. No mammals other than humans drink milk after infancy, and humans have only been doing that for a few thousand years. I'm sure there's links to evidence I can find but I'm not going to waste my time as it's common sense.

Re: America's Biggest Milk Producers Are Going Bankrupt

#140

Post by [deleted] »

thawaway1837 wrote: post #53
_bxg1 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how bigger waves haven't yet been made about these locusts. Where's the New York Times expose? Proposals by Congress on how to make this vampirism illegal? Literally anything?

https://www.nytimes.com/search?dropmab=false&endDate=2020010... There’s like 10 different companies discussed on the first page itself, including the specific company here. I mean, it’s all over mainstream media.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN