You don't suppose there's any little problem with the bolded section here, do you?

"Investment returns for Oregon's public pension fund exceeded 14 percent in 2012, driven by strong returns from stocks and bonds, as well as big markups in the estimated value of illiquid private equity and real estate holdings.

Btw, this was imo a great editorial from a newspaper not known for them.

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/01/hiding_the_pers_problem_agenda.html

"The very same governor and legislative leaders who won't stick their necks out in support of PERS openness will determine the fate of PERS reform this year. We hope they grow some backbone by then."

And the Charlie Brown editorial board keeps hoping Lucy won't yank the football this time.

Debt has it's own way of increasing itself: a lower credit rating makes it more expensive to borrow. http://wgntv.com/2013/01/26/illinois-credit-rating-downgraded-state-drops-to-worst-in-the-nation/

I hope they understand that all those great "gains" only apply if you sell and get the cash.

I am not holding my breath for "big markups in the estimated value of illiquid private equity and real estate holdings"

That sounds like an Enron-type scam.

I know I'm really old and curmudgeonly, back back in the dark ages when I studied this stuff both in accounting classes as an undergraduate as well as in securities regulation class in law school, I see to recall a rule (whether GAAP or SEC I do not now recall) requiring that fund valuations of assets had to be either cost or current market price / value, whichever was LOWER.

"Write up" to a new higher "estimated value" for an illiquid asset?

Shades of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, not to mention various investment and commercial banks.

What could possibly go wrong?

Exactly.

But the state treasurer is a Democrat, and surely a Democrat is completely trustworthy and has only our very best interests at heart.