Jackson Jambalaya

The average inflation rate for the last 97 years has been 3.35%. The average has been 2.42% for the last decade. But if you go back 3 decades to 1979 the average jumps to 3.86%. I am ok with the 3% COLA. I am also ok with connecting the COLA to the actual inflation rate, but only if there is no maximum cap attached, and the calculation is based on the actual rate (13.5% in 1980, 5.4% in 1990). I got these rates from www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

So, in summary, taxpayers are not entitled to know how much money (in total) they are paying for 13th checks? Or how each person is receiving? My state salary is apparently a public record - why should the retirement amounts be secret?

I don't know where the large amount for the 13th check came from, but my father's 13th check is equal to an additional month's pay.

I've got some ocean front property in Arizona I will sell you.

I may just be very simple minded here, but since PERS will not cooperate with the PERS Commission, then its time for PERS Commission to go to the State Auditor. State Auditor has access to this info, whether PERS wants to hide it or not.

As I understand the history of the 3% COLA, originally the COLA was based on the annual inflation rate. At a time when the inflation rate was high (say 5 or 6%) and had been high for several years, the legislature decided to make it a straight 3% to save money. Many of the long-time retirees have a relatively large 13th check because of the earlier high percentage COLAs. I think most retirees, myself included, would be happy with a COLA based on an inflation index, like social security uses. Social Security recipients received no COLA for the last several years because there was no inflation. This year social security payments were increased because the inflation index was higher in 2011.

It seems to me that the current figures identify the problem quite nicely without speculation about individual differences.

That said, it appears that the State benefits from the current method when inflation is high and loses out when inflation is low.

It would be useful for the opponents of the current plan to suggest alternatives for discussion of the advantages and disadvantages and I'm grateful for10:05am suggestion . I wonder how tying COLA to the SS Index would have worked differently.

A retiree may elect to receive their entire benefit, or have 1/12 retained monthly and paid as a
13th check.

I think state employees should simply work for free.

I looked at the PERS Web site. They post Annual Financial Reports going back to 2005. I reviewed the 2011 report and the info on how much PERS pays out in COLA is in the report. So it appears to me that PERS is not hiding anything and there are just a bunch of really lazy people out there that just want to have something to whine about. It took me only 10 minutes to find the info on the COLA in their report.

Then why do you even read here February 29, 2012 11:05 AM?

No one is disputing the amount paid out. They are trying to figure out how much it is for actual retirees per retiree.

What would that info serve?? Just to be nosy?

"Average" wouldn't matter anyway. Someone with higher pay and longer service would be above average, since they would have paid more of their income into the fund. This is not a "gift" to the employee. The politicians are prima donnas, the employees are grunts.

They should have access to the same retirement system private sector working stiffs in Mississippi get. And don't give me the "I could be making so much more if I was in the private sector" spiel. If that's true, no one is stopping you.

Well. 12:46 pm, sounds like you have pension envy. Nothing is stoping you from getting a job that has a pension.

2/3 of jobs in Hds. Co. are city, county, state or federal employees,. What retirement system does the stiff have? social security. Other than govt., work for yourself or work for a piss ant.

then the stiff should get a government job.

State employees should work for free and be required to wear a tshirt that says "I am a low down government employee that is lazy and stupid, but I have a better retirement system than the rest of you".

If we all worked for the government and fed off the taxpayer, like 2:24 recommends, who would be left to actually make the money to pay the long-suffering, noble, yet put-upon, government employee? Whatever happened to that quaint notion that the government worked for the citizen?

PERS is a very, very corrupt retirement system and they think they are so big and powerful that no law applies to them. They're a bunch of arrogant bullies!

2:51 PM Back up your accusations with facts.

SIGH on the government vs private sector comparison whining. If any of you find that perfect job as an EMPLOYEE rather that individual contractor/owner, let me know.

I know. The grass is always greener. Grow up.

Some of the problem exist today because back when the stock market was doing so well PERS, in their infinite wisdom, decided to give retirees additional benefits rather than saving the money for a rainy day. That rainy day will be soon.

To the comment, go get a pension: the private sector has been dismantling them for the past 10 years. The government is behind the times. Change must happen for solvency to be maintained for the existing pensioners.

One only has to look at the decisions over the years against riding the market vs. the preservation of capital as a goal. It is not any one person's fault, it is the complexity of the monster called PERS and to some degree poor oversight.

The 13th check is a big issue and an average number could probably be had by analyzing the reports again, but i've gone practically blind reading them. I haven't looked at it in a while. PERS not providing the number doesn't bode well when it comes to those who want to understand PERS. I find it interesting that the 13th check is made up of COLA adjustments and grows at an accelerated rate. I'd like to see the actual dollars year over year on an individual basis.

Let's not overlook the fact that 401Ks and IRAs have suffered major loses as well. Those who are living off their retirement investments aren't doing so well.

Do some of you imagine that we should do away with pooling money for retirement investment? You do understand what that would mean in terms of return on investment options, don't you?

You are comparing apples and oranges. PERS gets a guaranteed payout. Not so with IRA and 401K. In other words, PERS bears no risk of return even if the principle is miserably funded like it is now.

Nice try.

Sounds like the old tortoise and hare story. The 401-K’s (the hare) enjoyed handsome returns over the years, except for the past few years while state employees elected to serve at least 25 years of service, at below average pay. In return state employees have a “contract” with PERS that they will receive retirement benefits plus an additional payment (13th check) that begins compounding annually after the age of 55. I believe PERS has to live up to their contract obligations. For that reason I do believe the tortoise (state employees) is gonna win this race.

It is that kind of I'll-informed thinking that got PERS in trouble. Why not equate it to the water in a toilet, while a turd circles the bowl?

11:17

Sounds to me like you may be a welfare recipient that doesn’t want to get his payments reduced. Why not get a JOB.

Looks to me like the legislature is going to have to make a choice of who is going to bail the state out, the poor or the state retirees. I have my money on the state retirees since all state legisture will be state retirees one day.

11:17 here, I was responding to the comment directly above me that equated turtle/hare. You should read closer.

You're shooting down 401k plans based on a two year stretch in the stock market is just as ignorant as those who try to use the same logic as PERS. In case you didn't read the audits, PERS lost several billion dollars in the same period as well and guess what? The markets bounced back. You judge performance on the longer periods as they are more accurate. If you didn't dump everything in your 401k a few years ago because you panicked, then your accounts should have come back.

I'll give up on this one now. No way KF will allow anything critical of Kangaroo's continued idiotic rants re PERS. Kudos to myself for attempting, tho'.

Shadow, while I commend you for actually reading, I have to ask what do think is idiotic?

I speak from experience on a lot of the issues I see with PERS and the realities of investment principles.

I also speak from experience about sharing my understanding of solid investment to folks who don't even know what the hell to do with a 401k and they tend to be years my senior. I'm not trying to build my ego here. I'm just trying to expand other's understanding of what they are facing.

If you would like to go point by point, I'm sure KF will and should call me out if he disagrees. I can't remember the last time we really spoke about the situation with PERS. We agreed a long time ago, years perhaps.

With the publishing of the documents recently, I decided to waste a bunch of time and try to understand the situation and provide my opinion. If you want to discuss what you see with some semblance of knowledge, do it.

Before you do though, I'm sure I'm sounding redundant at this point, go read the archives. There is a very rich discussion of PERS and some of my opines (right or wrong) are there for the perusing.

The problem I have with your posts re PERS is that I always come away with a view that you have a significant abhorence for people employed in the public sector. It's one thing to critique the savings plan they are roped into; however, it's quite another to make them the culprits as if they're somehow affflicted with some Biblical scourge.

I give you the ultimate due credit for your knowledge in the investments arena; however...well, I won't be redundant.

What is truly annoying me this morning is the fact that deputy circuit clerk, Loretta, who cost the Sweet firm nearly ten thousand dollars in trying to get an appeal filed, will benefit from state retirement and quite possibly the 13th check option.
And if anyone believes Barbara Dunn's pitiful claim that she'll "have to borrow the money" to pay the court's fine then they don't know what portion she keeps of filing fees that she pockets on top of her $84,000.00 salary. Other than the cost of the paper the certificate is printed on, she pockets all fees on marriage licenses.

Never criticized public service. You are wrong in "your take-away."

@anon 7:33. Stupidity and incompetence find their way into more than a few public sector jobs. The same is true of private sector jobs.

Are you suggesting that the clerk's right to retirement should be withdrawn due to her performance on this occasion?

As is the case in any job, public or private sector, she can be dismissed or the situation can be ignored....or anything in between, up to and including termination.

I'm not advocating for one or the other since I'm not her employer and don't have sufficient facts upon which to decide. I would think (and hope) that if she is found by her employer to have been negligent, she will receive appropriate discipline. That's the way things work. Sorry if that annoys you this morning.

i don't know exactly how many tax dollars goes into pers but I know damn well how much pers takes out of MY check each month for MY retirement.. i know pers takes $600.00 - $700.00 a month out of MY check for MY retirement.. So over my 30 years if my pay doesn't increase, I would have put around $252,000.00 into PERS... Maybe instead of complaining about state retirement, get a damn Job and start your own retirement Get a damn life people