NY Times - Pension Accounting Editorial - Comments?

[mwyatt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/20/opinion/20SUN2.html

[MGB]

Why is it that we didn't see these editorials when the actual return was two to three times greater than the assumed return. When the chips are down, everyone starts looking for evil in the closet. What they don't stop to realize is that reported earnings over the past few years (including the present) would be much GREATER than it had been reported if actual earnings were used, as called for here. Currently, most plans still have net actuarial gains that are being amortized. All of that would have already been reported through earnings instead of spread under these radical approaches. These editorials have a very myopic viewpoint and do not look at the bigger picture.