Breaking windows will stimulate the economy, according to a leading public pension advocacy group. Skeptical? The National Institute on Retirement Security (NIRS) has not literally endorsed breaking windows, but a report recently published by the organization relies on the same economic fallacy.According to NIRS-whose membership consists principally of...

It is unlikely that increases in federal employee pension contributions or reductions in pension benefits for future federal retirees would lower total compensation below federal workers’ reservation wage, which represents the minimum pay at which a worker will accept a particular type of job.

Using fair-market valuation, Nevada PERS’ unfunded liabilities would rise from about $10 billion to almost $41 billion. Shifting PERS to a defined-contribution, 401(k)-type structure would ensure that benefit obligations are fully funded going forward and that everyone is clear regarding the pensions promises the government has made and its ability to fulfill them.

Does a pension plan that takes more investment risk become better funded? Both the current accounting standards and the proposed revisions answer yes, while economic theory and real-world financial markets say no. Until and unless this central question is answered correctly, both the size of pension liabilities and the steps that could address them will be misunderstood.

If Washington pension plans were judged by the standards that private-sector pensions are required to follow, they would face unfunded liabilities exceeding $50 billion. The costs of truly fully funding public-employee pensions could swamp the state budget, and at more than $20,000 per household, taxpayers too.

Market-based measures of public pensions funding may better informstate governments and taxpayers of the liabilities and risks they face.

Many public workers are overpaid relative to their private sector counterparts, especially in large, unionized states such as Wisconsin, Ohio and California. This may sound like a controversial claim, but it shouldn't. A consensus is building about the need for reform.

Sound retirement security policy for future retirees requires planning. Workers need to be engaged; employers need to be responsible; and policymakers must ensure that pension law, tax law, and the Social Security system operate in a manner that promotes opportunities for private saving, appropriate retirement asset management, and sustainability and predictability.