How it adds up


To the Editor:

A recent letter to the editor from Colleen Kelly Mellor of Warwick was rather mind-boggling to say the least. She maintains that there is no quick fix to the pension problem, to which I agree. She then states that she retired after 30 years of teaching in 1967 when her salary was $43,000 and she received a pension of approximately $32,000. Where did she teach? The reason I ask is that the salaries in the city of Warwick for teachers were nowhere near that amount in 1967. In fact, I retired in 1986 and my highest salary was not as high.

Her argument concerning the pensions in the private sector is equally as perplexing, considering the fact that she has benefited by having her pension increased by 3 percent each year for about 40 years since she retired. A quick calculation shows that, if she, in fact, received a pension of $32,000 in 1967, her pension today is approximately $104,385. I have my doubts that a person in the private sector has achieved that level in their pension fund.

Robert Coker


1 comment on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment

OK, Robert Coker, I admit it--I erred...I retired in 1997--not 1967 (I always get the 6 mixed up with the 9), but hats off to you for pointing my mistake out. Of course, that calculation was wrong; it was prediated on faulty number...Plus, if I'd retired in 1967, God knows how old I'd be, if even alive today...No, the nos. are 'retired in 1997" after 30 years of teaching, and yes, the salary was correct. But don't throw the baby out with the bath water..the rest of my argument was correct, in terms of what I realized in my real estate career...So, recrunch the nos. and relax and furthermore, will you be my editor for future work?

To clarify for all: I retired in 1997, having begun in 1967 (that's where that no. comes from!)

Wednesday, November 30, 2011