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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ggersh who wrote (215999)	8/17/2009 9:56:32 AM
From: James Hutton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Just had a discussion on this subject the other day. The question seems to be whether you print enough $$$ to make up for the pension losses - which just makes the pension $$ worth less - or whether you create a situation where people have to work longer and keep unemployment up. I suspect our government will just print more money.

To: ggersh who wrote (215999)	8/17/2009 10:09:07 AM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

This is a sad story and reminds me on many newly minted European pension plans for employees. Begs the question if less consumtion hurts the ilk at all? Or just consumer discretionary companies. While one would normally assume that contributing 300-500 per month would do that job (it is only a supplemental pension to the still existing public retirement payments) it turns out it does not work. My own plan drifted 30% from its planned yield in three years, and since it is a mix of stocks treasuries and corp. bonds, it doesn´t easily recover either. We often said here, pension plans turned common folks into gamblers.