by Walter Burien - 08/07/13
Scott Baker from NY wrote a very detailed 8-section article per "Detroit is not Broke!".
He sent the article to me for my review.
His communication and the CAFR1 reply is copied below.
Sent FYI from,
Walter Burien - CAFR1.com
____________________________________________________
From: "Scott Baker"
Subject: Re: Is the CAFR just a "look backward"
Date: Wed, August 6, 2013 12:16 pm
To: "WalterBurien@CAFR1.com"
_____________________________________________________
Walter -
I quoted you and Clint Richardson in my latest article:
Detroit is Not Broke!
Thanks for the feedback. I am going to try and get some Detroit media to pick this up too.
Best,
Scott Baker -
President: Common Ground - NYC; NY State Coordinator, Public Banking Institute; Opednews Blogger/Senior Editor; Huffington Post Blogger; Author
_______________________________________________
CAFR1 IN REPLY TO SCOTT BAKER
_______________________________________________
Subject: Re: Is the CAFR just a "look backward" [Scott - FYI]
Date: Wed, August 7, 2013 6:27 am
To: "Scott Baker"
________________________________________________
Scott:
Good read, all 8-sections.
I make the following suggestions:
1. An example of 30-years projected income to hold in mirror view of their "30-year+" of projected liability. That switches the view clearly from the red into black.
2. Per actuarial pension projections, keep in mind the "factors used". If an employee is making 50K a year now, they project out what he will be making in 30-years at retirement and what the extra benefits (medical / health care) will cost at the time of retirement. So, the actual funding today is based on that projection. The employee making 50K is now allotted a pay scale at retirement of say for example 200K per year and maybe a benefits cost (medical / health care) at retirement projected of say 30K per year, or a projected allocation from the fund at time of retirement to have a base amount that will "generate" the payout 30-years from now. Some of the standards they use is that 80% of the employees will make it to the 30-year retirement point. Most funds pay out 80% of employee's last years pay also. So, the guy making 50K today at retirement: 200K + 30K = 230K at 80% of last year's pay = 184K or at a 10% rate of return from the fund an allocation of base revenue to be 100% funded for that one (1) employee of $1,840,000 (1.84 million). Now if they changed the actuarial projected rate of return to 5% that would mean a base figure of $3,680,000 (3.68 million) to be 100% funded. Here in changing the actuarial projection of rate of return from 10% if being fully funded, at a stroke of a pen to 5% they are now 50% underfunded. Did you just have one of those: "Oh, Damn moments?" Now multiply that by 7,000 or maybe 15,000 employees.. Talk about an investment power-base..
3. If you look at the last 10-year average employee contributions and taxpayer contributions to the pension, the total almost meets payouts. The 10-year average investment return now added did not make up the difference but generated well in excess of the payouts. If the difference "in the shortfall" over the difference between contributions and payouts was made from the fund's balance if "No investment return other than 1%" was coming in, the difference being paid from the standing balance would take place on a cash and carry basis "indefinitely" with minor adjustments in contributions made to keep the balance in line and performing as needed.
Bottom line? What has developed over the decades is not about paying employees at retirement, it is about the power-base of investment capitalization growing and thus utilized. The grease on the skids there is the game of wealth generated for the inside players and the employees just being a distant thought strictly as the justification to maintain the power-base..
Consolidation of "all" of the government's domestic and international investment power-bases under what I call TRF (Tax Retirement Funds) fiduciary trust accounts, from the investment return generated therefrom, it would and could replace all taxation (one revenue source "investment income" replaces another "tax income") and all pension payments could be satisfied on a cash and carry basis. With taxation phased out the economy thrives to a level of no equal, rates of investment return are at proportionally enhanced levels, government's non-tax income (investment / enterprise operation contributions to the TRF accounts) satisfies their budgetary needs without taxation. Win-Win for one-and-all. Additionally it creates the circumstance where all (population, industrial / financial cartels, and government administration) for the first time in history are on the same page in that Win-Win that is self perpetuating for the next thousand years and beyond.
The way things have developed over the last century with the greed and opportunity principle playing out unrestrained and exponentially increasing from government's ever increasing take through taxation has created a 300 car freight train going at 400 MPH towards a 1-mile thick concrete wall. The collision will not be a pretty site and all will loose. The TRF funding principle for government firmly taking root and being solidly implemented for government funding transition at this time will avert that inevitably collision.
I am working on attempting an extended trip to DC to address the Senate during open session for one hour, and the house for one hour if I am able to arrange it. Also meeting with as many committees and groups as time will allow while there. Objective? Put all on the same page for the first time in history where in doing so, all willingly and with enthusiasm will maintain that same course for the next thousand years and beyond. In biblical terms they call that the Millennium: A thousand years of prosperity for one and all.. Additionally, it is not just a US application. The same principle of operation can become the same standard for any and all countries globally.
Yours truly,
Walter Burien - CAFR1.com
P. O. Box 2112
Saint Johns, AZ 85936
Tel. (928) 458-5854
__________________________________
AS NOTED IN THE FOOTER THAT GOES OUT ON MY EMAILS: Did you ever notice how a local government projects their liabilities out 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30-years but project their income only 1-year out? THINK ABOUT IT! Do the math and see the selective presentation game you are being spoon fed to buy hook - line - and sinker!
___________________________________