Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (112871)	12/17/2000 1:51:09 PM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

"401ks used to offset the negative savings" I think one point many miss when thinking that 401k's replace savings is that they are really replacing defined benefit pensions. Folks used to be able to count on a steady stream of income from their employer when they retired. So if I saved 10% of my income over and above that I was saving. Now if I put 10% of income in the 401k and it's just replacing what would have been an income stream from the employer I'm not saving unless I'm putting aside another 10%. OK, that's not the clearest explanation but I hope you get my meaning. Regards, Barb

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (112871)	12/17/2000 3:55:44 PM
From: Mark Fowler	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

ohn, your right, stock market money isn't "real" until removed from the markets. that is why the negative us saving rate is so dangerous. 401ks used to offset the negative savings. now they don't. therefore, folks have to save even more to get where they thought they were. more savings = less spending.<< I'll tell you why the savings rate is so poor it won't keep up with inflation. You can thank your Uncle Sam. Remember when they taxed in interest on savings accounts? End of story.