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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (54572)	9/6/2009 11:20:00 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218880

A bit morbid, but no doubt profitable if correctly calculated.

To: TobagoJack who wrote (54572)	9/7/2009 2:36:12 AM
From: Canuck Dave	Respond to of 218880

Don't forget big houses' other new revenue source coming soon: Buying and selling of carbon credits. With them front running the trades and the government issuing edicts to make the trades profitable beyond belief. Another multi-billion dollar windfall awaits. CD

To: TobagoJack who wrote (54572)	9/7/2009 4:00:10 AM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Respond to of 218880

Hi TJ, this is a business that sprung into legitimacy with the spread of the AIDS virus. At the time, there where reasonable underpinnings for a person with aid to receive the money ahead of time trough private equity firms who where buying the life policy of the aids affected person to give him money to sustain himself until the bitter end. The insurance companies where collecting billions now WS wants a piece of the game - you should not wonder if research in finding drugs for terminal ill people will slow to a crawl and this is my point in my previous posts – all the thieves and swindlers have it, only have enough money to pay the attorneys, PR people and bribe heavily!

To: TobagoJack who wrote (54572)	9/7/2009 4:50:29 AM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218880

When pondering how much money I might need before my demise, the better to decide when to quit working and increase enjoying, some imponderables soon became dominant. Life is notoriously subject to change without notice even for apparently healthy people, though there are some good statistics on known knowns. It's clear that some insurance and collectivism is needed so that more people can do more relaxing at a younger age instead of all working like slaves until they are 80 on the chance that they will be the lucky one to live to 100 and maybe even 110. When everyone works like slaves until 80, most of them are dead before they quit working [or, more precisely, they die at the same time that they quit working]. That means fewer get to be SKIing parents [Spending Kids Inheritance] and more money goes to useless layabout spendthrift beneficiaries of the estates while the old geezers work themselves into their graves. There is a major business opportunity for securitization of such bundled actuarialism. It is not only not evil, it is a great good waiting to be done. If I wasn't so lazy, I would have started such an insurance company a decade ago. People could quit earlier, secure in the knowledge they'd have funds available until their demise, be it tomorrow or in 60 years time when they are 123. It's a $trillion opportunity. Mqurice PS: When elderly, it would be wise not to go for walks too close to the offices of the company which has bet that you will die sooner rather than later.