[lit-ideas] Re: Bush taking apart SS
- From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 22:41:40 -0400
Brian: I'm of an age where the SS money I was
forced to pay will not be there when my retirement arrives. I'm
fully capable of planning for my own retirement and do a lot better
than the buffoons who are spending my interest-free loan
profligately.
Eric: I asked where you were coming from and you have explained that you
were "red baiting." That helps to know.
I also have two major personal objections to privatizing SS.
(1) Personal preference: though I have worked on Wall Street, I am not
interested in money management or finance and would prefer not to be
burdened with having to manage my retirement savings. In the rather
short life we are granted, I would prefer to devote more time to
pursuing learning and things I love, rather than be forced to play stock
picker and fund analyst. Freedom from having to think about money
management would be worth more than any small incremental advantage that
might result from managing a retirement account.
(2) Personal experience: I had a 403(b) plan invested active at a firm
for years during 1994-2003. When it was rollover time, I had a net loss
of almost $10k over the amount invested by the company.
In other words, for that period of time, if I had simply put the 403(b)
money in an escrow account without interest, I would have made almost
$10k more than I ended with in the balanced, conservative, respected
fund managing the 403(b) account. If it were a 2 percent government
account, I would have made much more than $10k over what the funds accrued.
In short, I don't like to be forced into money management, and it didn't
work for me in the past.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
