Jackson Jambalaya

PERS supporters want to ignore that the FUTUREis the problem. Even the worrisome condition on the books today is based on an 8 percent return. With interest rates low and some assumed allocation to bonds the needed equity return is unrealistic. This board needs outside professionals.

As if it already wasn't defensible in light of the past decade+ of shit poor IRR Operation Twist further trashes the PERS 8% growth assumption.

PERS is swirling the bowl and from all appearances the PERS Board plans to go down with the with the Callan turds.

It doesn't take a commission to study PERS, it takes a damn board with some integrity to make the changes that should have been made long ago.

Throw the bums out employees and retirees.

Taxpayers aren't to blame for your woes.

A 25% return is a nice cushion. And to have gotten that result last year could be viewed as an indication of good management which includes getting " outside professional" advice. Wasn't Tim Medley " in the room"? His track record is solid and if there's a criticism of him, it's that he's " too conservative" with investments .
And, since I know Pat, I expect she was the smartest and hardest working person in the room .Like most brilliant AND attractive Southern women, she's smart enough not to step on the Southern male's ego . She uses, not just her brains, but her sense of humor and appeal to her advantage in the acceptable ways to get the job done and done well.
You are all be underestimating her abilities and experience if you imagine she doesn't more about pension funds and the current market risks than the bloggers on this site.

Too bad Pat's track record doesn't back up your praise.

I'm not disagreeing that she is smart and capable. However, I have a problem when the PERS people come up there talking about the great 25% return and don't mention the sharp declines this year that have been in the double digits for the S&P. 50% of assets are in US Equities.

The Board is who should be held responsible. The same people keep getting elected over and over. Lester Herrington was a state employee representative for ages, THEN got elected as a retiree rep multiple times. Same thing with Virgil Belue. When Herrington finally resigned as retiree rep, his position was taken by Richard Miller, who served for ages as the Higher Education rep.

One of the reforms they ought to look at is limiting the number of TOTAL terms any one person can spend on the Board. They also should consider some sort of financial literacy test for anyone on the Board, because some of them can't answer questions when you ask them. Approach some of these men on the street some time and ask them the kinds of questions that get asked on this board and watch about half of them struggle to understand you.

KF, considering that this Congress continues to place politics ahead of our national interest,we could face economic collapse, but I think PERS , like the average investor whose money is in 401Ks and IRAs has few options . Taking the long view that PERS has positioned themselves with the most solid investments available to them so as tolerate a double dip recession and that the remarkable gains will average out losses is a rational position.

What other legal option do they have? They don't make laws and don't make policy.

It seems unnecessary nit picking to beat up on one of the few who have performed well and responsibly within the perameters they have.

It's one thing to argue that state employees shouldn't have to contribute to a pension fund, that the legislature shouldn't be a part of it in the way they are, or that our current method of pooling investment opportunities is flawed and quite another to criticize a pension fund that is performing remarkably well given their restraints.

I'd be happy to have a discussion about how our financial/economic system has become horribly flawed and how there are too many money managers ( middle men) between the investor/consumer and investments/goods and services, but Pat et.al are dancing as fast as they can and they aren't the problem.

Taking the long view that PERS has positioned themselves with the most solid investments available to them...

You'd be hard pressed to argue that some of the funds in which Callan has PERS invested are the "most solid investments available" because they aren't.

Occasionally, let's agree to redirect the discussion to the antics of Heir Barbour and his thinly veiled reasons for coming up with this impotent study commission three months before he leaves office.

My suggestion is he did it for purely political reasons. He wants it on his resume that 'While governor of the poorest state in the nation, I took the hog by the reins and put in place a commission that would deal with the ox in the ditch and the democrats who drove it there', or something to that effect.

He could have (and perhaps should have) appointed the same study committee, in fifteen minutes, eight years ago, right after Larry Gatlin concluded his coliseum performance.

For what period did pers return 25%?

Fiscal year ending June 30. Its in the stuff I posted a few weeks ago from the investment committee. I don't like one year snapshots on these things for this very reason. I can say they earned 25% and leave out the markets the last few months or do the reverse and it looks like the whole plan is getting pounded in the markets.

KF,every plan is getting pounded in this market.

Some rock solid stocks ( Calmaine is a good example that should be familiar to your readers) go up and down without explanation save that of being part of a bear market.

GE may lose stock value in a total market collapse but the corporation will still exist when the dust settles and will recover eventually.

It's the quality of the investments PERS has made that is the ONLY relevant factor.

So if 9:10 has some specific investments that are poor/high risk investments ( that are not part of a fund that is otherwise solid as money managers lump a few high risk in with low risk when the high risk is profitable for THEM...hate them for it,but it's reality), list them.

Indeed, just list the entire portfolio.

There are really only two ways for most of us to manage our portfolios these days. We either follow fund managers with stellar track records from fund to fund or we examine the content and changes in each fund as managers change.

You are correct.

Have a cousin that worked 10 years in the government PERS system. Never made more than $25k/year. Total collected from her paycheck INTO the system was $23,451.

She received a letter from PERS last week, and called me all giddy as she was informed (by PERS) , that next year (when she reaches 60), she can start drawing "retirement" from the PERS system.

SHE WILL GET, OR HER HUSBAND, $428/MONTH, FOR THE SET OF THEIR LIVES.

$5000/YEAR, when all she put into the system was a little over $23K.

FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES, EVEN IF SHE DIES FIRST.

I applaud Governor Barbour for attempting to END this bullshit.

4:10, Please explain to us how your "cousin" paid in $23451 in 10 years and never broke 25K as you stated. Pers employee contribution rate was 7.25% from 1991 until the recent increase? Sounds like the only BS is your lie and terrible math skills. Waiting on your response.....