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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (670081)	1/28/2005 1:27:06 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Only 'three to five' investment choices in the 'privatized' Social Security plan???????????? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That sounds more like a plan to prop up the profits on Wall Street, and the federal government's deficit-making capabilities... rather then allowing people to truly maximize the long-term growth potential of investments. [Under the Thrift Savings Plan - which Bush's SS advisors say his proposal will be based on, federal workers have five investment options, including government and corporate bond funds, a stock fund that tracks the S&P 500, an international fund and other stock funds.] So, the options will be: 1) US corporate bond index fund. 2) US government bond index fund. 3) S&P 500 index fund. 4) 'International' fund (most likely a large cap, big developed market fund mostly drawing on the US, developed Europe, and with a smidge of Japan tossed in). 5) 'Other' US equity fund choice.... Dare we suggest that the #5 'other' choice' might allow a small or mid-cap option? A value or growth option? A Bear Market option??????? What about capturing some of the growth potential of the rapidly emerging markets? What about currency risk with the dollar? What if --- as many believe because of demographics and macro trends --- we are entering a decades-long period of 'below average' potential for equities and rising pricing pressures... perhaps verging upon a stagflation experience like the 1970's for the US, or the 1990's for Japan, but at best a 'muddle-through' decade for equities and low real yields for bonds? If the government WON'T allow people to target their investments (with what the government claims is the people's own money) to areas that have been able to perform well in historically similar circumstances (real assets, natural resources, hard currencies, more rapidly growing economies, etc., etc.) then this whole exercise stands exposed as a SHAM.