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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: richardred who wrote (634)	6/10/2005 8:36:19 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541430

>What about companies that don't have pension plans (or who get rid of them) and only make a small (or 0) contribution to employees 401K plans? I'd say they would be at risk in loosing employees. True but there still will be some who choose to do this anyway. Maybe they wind up with less desireable employees or maybe they compensate the employees in other ways (higher salary, better medical benefits, better working conditions, bonuses, whatever). But my original question doesn't matter as much as I thought it did because you are apparently only asserting your ideas as being good ideas, not ideas that have to be implimented or ideas where you think implementation should be requried by the government. >Change the rules on pension funding while also increasing the premiums for federal insurance of pensions. Eventually you probably phase out the insurance. I'm not familiar with federal pension plans, but as far as private sector plans. I was talking about federal insurance of private pension plans, not private insurance plans for things other than pensions or federal pension plans. Tim