On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 03:03:24PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
The mean length of the investment is just under 7 years from the site I
quoted. BTW, I tried clicking on my own reference, and it didn't work
properly. You need to go one level up to
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 10:41:28PM -0500, The Fool wrote:
If you consider 38years 'not too many years'.
Yes, I do. If you are investing is stocks now, 38 years isn't that
long because the market is at historically quite high valuations. For
example, I would NOT advise 100% equities for anyone
I explictly stated that.
(This calculation, BTW, includes both the company and the
individual contributions)
So, the answer is yes.
Second, and this
helps his argument, what are the historical 30 year returns since 1935? I
was to a retirement seminar last week and the speaker was using 11%
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 06:08:50AM -0400, Kevin Tarr wrote:
But future retirees will not have that benefit, and the money going in
now, or at least since the seventies, should be invested.
It is already invested. The government borrows from those accounts and
uses the money, for example, to
- Original Message -
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 5:52 AM
Subject: Re: Dan says SS = SSA
But we don't need to lower interest rates further and encourage
corporate balance sheets to become even more
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 08:14:37AM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Actually, its government bonds right now. On paper, the SS trust fund
includes the money it makes from the interest accumulated from the
government bonds it has invested in.
All of it? I've never seen a clear explanation for how
Dan says that WWII Nazi stormtroopers are gay?
The Mapping From Abbreviations To Their Meanings Is Not A Function Maru
-- Ronn! :)
Professional Smart-Aleck. Do Not Attempt.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 10:32:48AM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
US Government Bonds are considered the only riskless assets in the
financial world -
Actually, T-bills would be lower risk. Because unless you are talking
about TIPS, bonds can lose a significant amount of capital during
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 11:06:35AM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
And interest rate and inflation risk should be taken into account in
this situation, which is why I mentioned it. The SS trust fund will go
negative in not too many years.
If you consider
At 05:51 PM 4/4/2004, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: Welcome to life in George W. Bush's America
At 04:01 PM 4/4/2004 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
I wouldn't really
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 9:41 PM
Subject: Dan says SS = SSA
At 05:51 PM 4/4/2004, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion
11 matches
Mail list logo
