Wednesday, October 12, 2011

****PERS UPDATE**** - There's an important update to Monday's highly-read article

Monday's post entitled "Proof that the Republican attack on PERS is from a national playbook to shift PERS management into private hands" has caused a great stir at the Capitol Complex. I have updated that article today to include links to posts covering the bombshell that exploded last night, the legal brief prepared by the Mississippi Center for Public Policy for the PERS Study Commission.

The fallout from this has Republicans at high levels scrambling to respond to what has been a decidedly "un-Barbour" moment for Republicans as they attempt to enter the Phil Bryant era.


Kingfish said...

OK, now you are actually backing up what you claim. A little. So a think tank in Mississippi proposes moving to a defined contribution plan. Still hard to impute that to Barbour. How about waiting and seeing what the actual recommendations are? Then if moving to a defined contribution plan is one of them, you can play little Scooter on Wheelie and Chopper Bunch and say I told ya I told ya I told ya all day long.

In the meantime, why don't you answer some of the specific questions about PERS i've asked? You still haven't. Could it be because you can't and are clueless about PERS? Did you sell your soul to be a Democrat hack and avoid all realms of honest inquiry?

Kingfish said...

Well well well. Your argument was PERS will be fine when the markets recover. Well, PERS got a 25% rate of return in the year ending June 30, 2011. A VERY good rate as PERS bet heavily on stocks, 50% assets are in stocks. SO the most recent actuarial report released this week said despite that, the funding level DROPPED two points from last year. Well Matt, you told me you were an expert on this. Said reading reports and going to meetings meant nothing. I of course understand that because as a lawyer, you think facts are something to be manipulated and there is no such thing as truth but tell me, if the markets did so great how come the funding level continued to drop? In fact, you and your friends were bragging about the 25% return and how PERS didn't need no fixing because it was doing so well.

So tell me, how come the funding level dropped on a 25% return? By the way, MPACT had a 21% return and raised its funding level from 75% to 83%.