That implies a 2.4 percent rate of real growth in a hyperinflationary era, so assume a 4.4 real rate of return in normal circumstances. That is the number we should be basing projections on, as it correlates more closely to real dollars in the retirement age years. 8-12 percent estimates are bs, and red herrings because they don't relate real returns.

Historic data is not good enough to base a long term policy on. Not without precise risk valuation at least.

No, but it generally makes sense to talk about expected investment return over the rate of inflation. Hence, the raw number is meaningless - a 12% return rate in an environment with inflation of 9% is almost as reasonable as a 3% return rate in an environment with inflation of 0%.

That's one of several things to bear in mind - but it's not a straightforward one - the various causes of high inflation tend to mitigate against matching investment rates.

Leaving that aside - even at the time it seemed ridiculous - so learning 20 years later that the "professionals" involved have essentially bet everybody's future, on projecting those kinds of returns for 40 years...

... because we all understand I hope. When this thing blows up - its not going to be pretty.