>>IMHO, the shift to defined contribution plans has resulted from the longer life expectancy that we now enjoy. Even social security, when it was introduced, was not meant to be collected by the majority of people, nor was it intended to be paid out to an individual for 30 years. Of course, social security faces the same problems as DB plans - it is not sustainable.
>
>
>That might be a factor, but the shift has also cut employee pension costs to corporations by hundreds of billions of dollars.
>Clearly stated that means that hundreds of billions of dollars previously spent by corporations to fund employee pensions is no longer being spent.
>
>There can only be one of two results:
>a- employees get lower retirement benefits
>b- employees make up for the lost contributions themselves.
>
>In either case the corporations have shifted hundreds of billions of dollars away from employees to corporate profits.

Pretty certain to be true if viewed as integer numbers. But if viewed as percentages, are you certain that the picture is that bleak (re: downturn) or if can be viewed as a measure to stabilize a growing percentage at a calculable level?