And please tell me what math i can do to come to the conclusion that the pension fund has been underfunded for the past 20 years?

And further, promises being broken is a direct result of the way the system has been set up. It will be highly unfair to leave X amount of employees on a DB plan where they are guaranteed a chite load more than new Y employees who are brand new to a DC plan. The fundamental difference between them: with DB, the benefit (pension payments) is predetermined and contributions are made each year to make that goal, whereas with DC the money that is accrued throughout the contribution period is used to make pensions payments regardless of how much it is. take a look here:

There’s a basic difference in the ways in which Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution plans accumulate retirement benefits. This issue is the key to identifying the value of each type of plan. A Defined Contribution plan deposits an amount of money on a periodic basis to an employee’s account; the contribution may be determined as a percentage of pay or as a flat dollar amount. Then, the employee invests this money to earn investment income on the deposited contributions. The account grows with future contributions and further investment income until such time as the employee elects to retire and take the account balance. Some Defined Contribution plans also allow the employee to convert the account balance into a periodic form of payment such as an annuity.
The Defined Benefit plan works in exactly the opposite way. An account balance isn’t accumulated for the employee, but instead, each year the employer’s aggregate contribution to the Defined Benefit plan “purchases” a periodic payment at retirement for each employee. An accrued benefit builds up for the employee that is then paid out periodically to the employee upon retirement. Some Defined Benefit plans allow conversion of the periodic payment to a lump sum balance at retirement so that the employee may take the entire interest from the Defined Benefit plan.
This distinction between Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution plans may not seem important on the surface, but it’s critical in terms of how retirement income accumulates for an employee.

Which one do you think, in todays economic climate, is more sustainable??

More sense than the PLP’s economic decisions.

Fast forward to today and we’re in a close to zero interest rate environment and the country is burdened with an absolutely massive debt.

Canada isn’t afraid to force a reduction in their dollar value and the UK does it too. WHY – because it drives the cost of living down and allows for the existing salary base to be pumped back into the economy and allows for the deficit to be decreased and soon after the “books” get balanced and guess what the dollar value raises steadily and the cost of living remains and the cycle has a rebirth.

Reducing the employee base and salaries in the islands essential services is the worst idea and OBA plan thus far.

Doesn’t the Government know what essential means???????

These are essential to the economic stability of Bermuda. To say the least.

When is the last time Customs were “allowed’ to hire? Last I heard they were 30% understaffed……………. How much paraphernalia has slipped through our less than protected boarders. How much GOVERNMENT REVENUE has been uncollected.

Customs generates 1/3 of the countries revenue….. So why are we broke……
Prisons and Police have been on a higher than normal recruitment drive……… WHY …… Weaker boarders generates higher crime rates.
Fire Department has been hiring as well. I wonder how many DUI accidents have been attended. People drink ahahahahhahhahahalcohol when they are broke………..

Unfortunately, as I understand, most are putting in (have put in) much less than they will take out (are taking out). Therefore, it is not suitable.

It needs to move to a contribution based plan; you get out what you put in (plus profit/loss from how you directed the investment). This is the only sustainable plan; particularly with a shrinking population.

Who will fund the pensions for the majority of the people that are taking out more than they put in?

Ride

Yet another major defect only spoken of but yet to be rectified.

Change the dang school system back………

Neither the civil servants nor other taxpayers are on the hook to cover any shortfall in my private pension account. Why must the taxpayers, outside of the civil service, be on the hook for the pensions of the CS?

It runs into problems when it’s not funded and the people responsible for funding it ignore warnings for years until there is a crisis – again, if people want someone to blame for the loss of their benefits and pensions it’s the previous Finance Minister.

People in this country sure as hell need some weed so they can Chill TFO!

So here we get “Cannonier”.

further to that, I swear the PLP don’t understand economics. How on earth is the Civil Service meant to sustain itself if it’s bloated? A bloat that was created under David’s party too!

That’s a simple question so please give a straightforward answer.

If Burt is proved to be a liar can the PLP afford to keep him? I think not.

Illogical. They are already eroding… Hence the need for the initiative.