Tbf there are some (mostly rich) people that believe wealth inequality isn’t a problem as long as the standard of living keeps going up for everyone. But that falls apart once you consider monopolization generally leads to rent seeking and not better services
It's because our software uses the canonical URL when it finds one, and the link you posted lists https://old.reddit.com/r/IBM/login/ as its canonical URL. I've changed it back now.
They used to wait until end of year to match funds until recently they switched to monthly matching. So if you left before end of year, your match didn’t pay out iirc. Now they’re getting rid of 401k matching entirely so suppose it’s a moot point.
So they're basically switching employees from an investment plan where the employees profit from falling interest rates to an investment plan where IBM profits from falling interest rates.
Except IBM also takes plenty of upside if interest rates stay high too, by paying way below-market yield for the first few years.
The fund is based on 10Y treasury bonds which have significantly underperformed the S&P historically. First 3 years, you get a 6% guaranteed return. The remainder, you get only 3% guaranteed. For reference, my HYSA yields 4% a year.
Presumably IBM invests this money and pockets the difference. What a scheme - your employee retirement plan is actually a profit center. Fucked up that this could be allowed to happen.
Plus most importantly it's non-portable. You're dependent on their good will (hah!) for the ability to retrieve it from them in the future at whatever (partial) rate they decide they can get away with.
I thought they were criminals for going to lump sum match. This is net level stuff...
Speculation is that it’s beneficial to IBM because the money will be under their management rather than Fidelity’s. What exactly they’re allowed to do with that money, I’m unsure.
Pension funds are carefully regulated and cannot be in risky investments. IBM cannot invest in IBM, they have to invest in various bonds. Before pension regulations a few pensions invested in the.company and employees discovered that was a bad idea when the company went bankrupt just before they were set to retire and their pension value went to zero.
I'm not sure if this is legally a pension, if not assume it is worth nothing. If it is the US government backs it and so if you work for IBM for 30 it is a great deal, pensions are defined income so you don't have to worry about if you will live to 66 or 120. (If like most you switch jobs it is terrible)
Pension funds invest in risky assets, just at a lower percentage than say a hedge fund with accredited investor status. The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan lost $100m to the FTX bandits last year.
If you manage a pension fund, especially a public pension fund, putting any of the money in crypto should be grounds for immediate termination at the very least, and possibly civil and criminal penalties. There's no excuse for touching that radioactive shitpile with other people's money after the countless demonstrations of fraud and incompetence.
> Our investment represented less than 0.05% of our total net assets
> Naturally, not all of the investments in this early-stage asset class perform to expectations, however, since inception, TVG has delivered solidly on intended objectives.
Legally, I believe this is a pension fund. Still, they have to be pocketing the difference somewhere because why else would they make such a controversial decision that also increases administrative overhead?
