SI
SI
discoversearch

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: TigerPaw who wrote (10111)1/27/2006 6:34:15 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541896
 
OK at least we have something specific now. Specific mandates that I would consider unjust, unfair, and likely negative for practical reasons, but at least we don't have to worry that we are talking about two different things without understanding what the other person is talking about.

You aren't really pushing inheriting salaries directly (which would make no sense) but turning the salary or part of it, in to an asset.

Of course people can do that themselves. They can buy stocks, bonds, real-estate ect. with their salary.

Or they might decide that they need current income more than they need assets. If so they would rather get the money now. If you give it to them as shares they could just sell it. Your first idea (an inheritable defined benefit pension of some sort) wouldn't allow for that, so it would work better in terms of imposing your ideas, but I don't think most workers would want to replace part of their salary with such a pension.

Also it has all the other problems that defined benefit pension plans have had. If the company goes under do the feds step in to pay it?

The stock that the employees receive would also revert back to the next generation of employees over time

So it would not be permanently inheritable. I suppose if someone wanted to pass a more durable asset to their heirs they could take the proceeds from the "repayment", or just sell the shares, and take the money to buy real estate or perhaps foreign stock that isn't subject to the same rules, or some other asset.

Tim



To: TigerPaw who wrote (10111)1/27/2006 7:08:08 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541896
 
The stock that the employees receive would also revert back to the next generation of employees over time, but hopefully slowly enough to provide that inheritable asset base of which we have discussed.

I thought you wanted to pass that money to the heirs. Now you want to pass it to the successor employees. So they can pass it along to THEIR heirs? Huh?


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News