« Liberal Blogs »

12/01/2004

This Could Be YOUR Retirement

That lovable Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has "lost almost $460,000 in stock market investments since 2000 and now does not have enough to cover a sizable bank loan, according to federal election records and the manager of the Frist account. "

Even as Tom Daschle is leaving office he is still looking out for us. Daschle aid Todd Webster sent out an email raising questions about Republican's plan to allow you to put part your Social Security in the same stock market that Frist lost a half-million dollars in during the last four years. "He still thinks we should put seniors' Social Security funds in the stock market?!"

For everyone that voted for Thune and Bush, be careful, you may just get what you asked for.

4 Comments:

At 12/02/2004 08:14:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you not believe the stock market will outperform the federal government over time? My guess is I will be bailing your sorry ass out in 40 years because you didn't save a dime, instead relying totally on the federal governemnt you love so much to provide for your well being in your "golden years". Wouldn't you rather control your own destiny that have someone else control it?

 
At 12/02/2004 09:18:00 AM, Blogger Trent Dlugosh said...

Thanks for your offer to bail my sorry ass out, but I'm OK. Here is what I think. Is it possible that market will outperform SS? Sure. But what if I was 58 years old four years ago, had $460,000 saved for retirement and had it invested in the same type of funds that Frist invested in? Now I'm 62 and have nothing. Sure, over a 30 year span the market shows an increase, but God help you if you try to retire at the moment the market goes down. By the way, is gov't keeping you from saving on your own now? I save every paycheck, 401k, company stock options, my personal IRA, my childrens college IRA's and yet I still pay into SS, maybe you could look into that.

 
At 12/02/2004 03:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That is all find and dandy, but, they do not tell us what he invested in. Look at the Enron debacle. Would you put all your eggs in one nest like many of those employees did? Only a fool would do that. Maybe Frist is a fool at that level, I doubt it but you never know. Diversification is the key, and I don't think anyone is talking about 100% investment in the stock market. I'm not sure where the magic dividing line is, but I know the gov does not know what is best for me.

 
At 12/02/2004 08:53:00 PM, Blogger Trent Dlugosh said...

But see that is the point. Not everyone is a fortunate as you and I. Not everyone can provide for their families needs and still have money left over to save independently from SS. Some people actually spend all the money they earn from paycheck to paycheck. Now you are talking about them risking 2% of their SS in the market where they may hit it big, but they also may lose it all. Would it make sense for you and I to gamble our 2% in the market? Sure. We can still make it if we lose that 2%, but it is still a gamble. For someone who has no saving except SS that 2% is a huge loss if they do lose it. You say the government doesn't know what is best for you, but the fact is you probably do feel the government should tell a woman what to do when it comes to reproductive rights, and you probably do believe the government knows best who can and can't be married, so I just don't believe that you actually believe the government doesn't know best in some cases. The difference really is, in your mind anyway, that in matters of "morality" the government should tell everyone what to do, but when it comes to matters of money everyone should just be left alone. Well, I have news for you, financial matters are a matter of morality as well. When CEO's steal from their investors leaving them with nothing while they get a slap on the wrist, that is a matter of morality. All I'm saying is I believe that we, all of us, have an obligation to the least fortunate among us. Liberals are willing to live up to that obligation, conservatives are not. We will never agree on it I guess.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google