Back in the Good Old Days, Leveraged Buyouts (LBOs) all the rage. Not coincidentally, the phrase "underfunded pension liabilities" moved into the mainstream.
Long story short: when legislation is finally passed to make the "underfunded" portion a thing of the past (you can stop laughing any time), several large companies run by Captains of Industry—think Roger Smith and GM—complained that actually putting that funding on their balance sheet would cost One Billion dollars off their market cap. So they were given twenty (20) years to Make It Right.
And Everyone Lived Happily Ever After.
Apparently, until today:
Stung by outsize investment losses, some of the nation’s biggest companies are pushing Congress to roll back rules requiring them to put more money into their pension funds, just two years after President Bush signed a law meant to strengthen the pension system.
The total value of company pension funds is thought to have fallen by more than $250 billion since last winter. With cash now in short supply for companies, they are asking Congress to excuse them from having to replenish the required amounts.
Lawmakers from both parties seem receptive to the idea, and there was talk of adding a pension relief provision to the broad fiscal stimulus package Congress considered for this week’s lame-duck session. [emphasis mine]
The best line, of course, comes from an advocate of the Steal Short, Pauperize Long crowd:
“Congress needs to make the funding less volatile,” said Representative Earl Pomeroy, Democrat of North Dakota, who has long been outspoken on pension issues. “I believe that taking this step will save thousands of jobs without costing the Treasury anything.”
I believe in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy (not the
Tom Noonan version), and the Reagan Revolution, too.
Related Posts by Categories
bailout- TARP, Yet Again: Inflationary?
- Thanks to Ben Bernanke, Ben Bernanke Doesn't Need to be Reappointed as Fed Chair
- Peter Dorman of Econospeak Writes, So I Don't Have To
- PPIP: Bad, Maybe, But Not THAT bad
- Back-of-the-Envelope: Making Sense of TARP
- Dear Brad and Mark (et al.)
- From Insurance to Kleptocracy, with Graphics
- Being sub-A, we try harder?
- If You Think I Believe it's 1931 Again, You Should Ask the Greek Guy
- For those who are interested in not staying in Hooverville II
- Thought-Experiment: Assets and Securities
- Risk and Aversion, Take 2
- The Two Sides of AIG
- This Makes More Sense--or Does It?
- Can We Stop Pretending Nationalisation is a Bad Idea? The WSJ has.
- Still KISSING income inequality
- A Spoonful of Sugar and TARP Part 2
- The TARP-May-Produce-a-Profit Meme can now be laid to rest
- The Only Good Crowding-Out Argument
- Simple Answer to a Simple Question
- Legacy Merrill Lynch employees better hope BofA doesn't declare bankrutcy before late June
- Random Notes, or, More Posts I Don't Have to Write
- GMAC Flashback
- "Ben Tre Logic" Redux: History Repeats Itself
- "Ben Tre Logic" Redux: History Repeats Itself
21st Century economic philosophy- PSA: D-Squared Rivals Quiggin
- When in Crisis, Insult Sociologists?
- Verklaerte KristolNacht
- If You're Marking a Curve, you need to identify an equilibrium point
- The Measured Version of My Screaming
- Norman Borlaug, Michael Jackson, and the Invisible Hand
- Coming Soon from Major Economists Near You
- Quote of the Day, esp. for Economic Modelling
- Mark Cuban Makes the Key Point
- A/l/a/n/ C/a/r/u/b/a/ Milt Shook Explains It All
- I'm Not Here
- The Hoover Institution
- What is competition?
- DeLong, Thoma, Rodrik et al. Do Good
- A Response to Megan McArdle, Again (by cactus)
- The Problem with Macro is Micro
- QOTD, and a bookmark for a future post
- Simple Answers to Simple Questions, CRA edition
- A Short Note on Optimality
- It Looks Like a Great House. Why Does the Basement Always Flood?
- I Remember When Mankiw was still a Neo-Keynesian
- UnReal Business Cycle
- Yankee Interlude
- And Here I Thought Corporations were Rational
- 1,121 Words on Bruce's Post, with footnote
Post a Comment