|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hello ira,
come on, Ira. you know that isn't what has been proposed--at least by
anyone with half a brain. The Bush plan was limited to single digit %
allocation to other investments, at the individual's direction, and
the government wasn't the decision maker (one of the scariest things
imaginable!).
You might also do the math over a 20 to 40 year period to see what say
5% in equities and the rest in 1-2% return government securities would
have returned vs 100% in government securities. I dare say it would
be better.
Best regards,
Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Saturday, November 9, 2002, 10:20:58 AM, you wrote:
i> The stock market is no place for social security investment. What would
i> have happened to the pool the last 3 years? How do you think those on
i> social security would like a 30% cut in there income. Many would be living
i> under bridges right now. If you were 70 to 75, no social security, depended
i> upon your assets to live on, how much of your assets would you have in the
i> market? Consider that the majority of the investment geniuses are losing
i> money and have been in any market except a one way up market. Who would
i> they get to run it? Some idiot from academia, an economist or someone with
i> a lot of letters after their name. Then they would proceed to lose the
i> equity and blame everyone and everything but themselves. There are 800 +/-
i> in this group and I would be willing to bet that there is less then 20%
i> that can consistently make money and the rest are trying to glean a way to
i> do it.
i> In the financial statements of the big brokerage firms. I don't believe
i> that any of them made anything in their trading accounts. Look at the firms
i> that do billions of dollars worth of business in their own arena and their
i> investment accounts are all suffering.
i> The first thing that the government would do is what they did with IRAs and
i> retirement accounts and say that you can't own puts, you can't short, you
i> can't do anything that would allow anyone to think that stocks could go down
i> and hedge against it. You are a traitor and un-American if you bet against
i> the stock markets rise. Sorry didn't mean to get carried away, but I have
i> never seen anything that the government does end up with a benefit for the
i> people it is supposed to govern. Look at the congresses retirement package
i> and look at ours. Look at who benefits from most of the legislation. The
i> lobbyists with the most money to wave around get their clients the laws that
i> benefit them. If Merrill or Goldman lobbied hard enough, who do you think
i> would end up managing Social Security? Not with my money.
i> ----- Original Message -----
i> From: "dom1_1998" <dominick@xxxxxxx>
i> To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
i> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 7:43 PM
i> Subject: Re: [RT] One dummy down, more to go....
>> Hi Ira:
>>
>> Privatization of Social Security does not have to be a disaster.
>> Limits to what one can invest in and percentages can be in place to
>> protect the investor.
>>
>> For ex:
>> - Limit of 30% of SS for investing.
>> -Investment products are limited to CD's,Treasuries, Spy, QQQ and DIA.
>> -up to 100% in Treasurys and CD's
>> -up to 25% in any of the other products.
>>
>> No mutual funds or brokers are favored, no money managers and no AMTRAK.
>>
>> Dominick
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- In realtraders@xxxx, "ira" <mr.ira@xxxx> wrote:
>> > Privatizing Social Security would be a disaster. I don't want some
>> slick
>> > Enron or Anderson type exec. handling anything I could depend on. The
>> > government is bad, but most privately run agencies are a disaster. With
>> > luck Social Security could be lucky like Amtrac
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Kent Rollins" <kentr@xxxx>
>> > To: <realtraders@xxxx>
>> > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:43 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RT] One dummy down, more to go....
>> >
>> >
>> > > Exactly what is so bad about W's economic team? I would like to
>> hear some
>> > > specifics from Simms and Johnson. Specifics.
>> > >
>> > > They got a massive tax cut though a Democratic Senate and they are
>> working
>> > > to make them permanent and enact some more. They are working to
>> privatize
>> > > Socialist Security. They are working to expand free trade.
>> > >
>> > > Those are positives. What are the negatives?
>> > >
>> > > Kent
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Jim Johnson" <jejohn@xxxx>
>> > > To: "M. Simms" <prosys@xxxx>
>> > > Cc: <realtraders@xxxx>
>> > > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:29 PM
>> > > Subject: Re[2]: [RT] One dummy down, more to go....
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Hello M.,
>> > >
>> > > I do agree with you that W's domestic team, esp the econ team, is weak
>> > > and ineffectual. I hope he cleans house for the good of the US and his
>> > > administration. But your assessment of there pressure on W is wishful
>> > > thinking. He is bullet proof for longer than 6 months. The Pitt
>> > > resignation would have had more political advantage for Bush had it
>> > > been done the <day before> the election. It would have shown W to be
>> > > concerned about corp corruption and all that blather the libs spout.
>> > >
>> > > In my opinion W is perfectly situated for re-election. Market has
>> > > declined in first two years, rates get slashed. year 3 of election
>> > > cycle clicks in soon, maybe already. market rallies into Nov, 04.
>> > > Dem's will put Pelosi in as minority leader. she will embarrass the
>> > > Dem's every day. Gray Davis will be a persona non grata by Nov, 04
>> > > and W will attempt to retake California. Dem's are already switching
>> > > parties in the Georgia house. This looks to me like a replay of
>> > > Reagan's reign--tax cuts, economy pops, deficit that doesn't really
>> > > matter
>> > >
>> > > W's vulnerability is that the economy is so broken it won't respond
>> > > normally or there's another terror incident that can be traced to
>> > > missteps of his administration.
>> > >
>> > > that's my wishful thinking :)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Best regards,
>> > > Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@x...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
i> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
i> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
i> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|