Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, the big difference is coproratism...here in the US, trailer dwelling conservatives seem to be in lock step with Wall St....they've all been tricked into the idea that they can get rich quick too....you won't find a lot of that in Europe.
My 401K sure looks a lot better when Wall Street does well. The 401K has replaced pensions for most of us. What is good for corporations is good for most Americans.
My 401K sure looks a lot better when Wall Street does well. The 401K has replaced pensions for most of us. What is good for corporations is good for most Americans.
Actually most Americans do NOT have 401ks of any significant size.
My 401K sure looks a lot better when Wall Street does well. The 401K has replaced pensions for most of us. What is good for corporations is good for most Americans.
Less than half of workers have a 401k and of those that do the average 401k balance is a paltry $90k, which is actually a record high (it was ~$50k just a few years ago). Wall Street doing well does not really benefit most Americans, though that is mostly their fault for their profligacy.
As an avid investor/trader, I love the government's asset bubbles. Make money on the way up, then make money on the way down, then make a whole lot more money on the way back up. It's not very good for income inequality, labor utilization, productivity, or the country as a whole, however.
As an avid investor/trader, I love the government's asset bubbles. Make money on the way up, then make money on the way down, then make a whole lot more money on the way back up. It's not very good for income inequality, labor utilization, productivity, or the country as a whole, however.
Yes, I am sure you are one of them brilliant people who always is able to forecast the direction of the stock market. Why don't you do the masses a favor and tell us all when to take our money out and when to put it in. The capital gains taxes from such wealth gains on a widespread scale will put a dent in our deficit.
Since many of us work for corporations even without a 401K what is good for Wall Street is good for America.
Sine the vast majority live paycheck to paycheck, and put a substantial amount into social security as the ONLY thing they can depend on when they get older, you let me know how that works out for our country.
Seriously, my dad was told this too-and oh look, its there for him.
Less than half of workers have a 401k and of those that do the average 401k balance is a paltry $90k, which is actually a record high (it was ~$50k just a few years ago). Wall Street doing well does not really benefit most Americans, though that is mostly their fault for their profligacy.
That average balance looks low because it includes young people still decades from retirement. From Fidelity:
Quote:
BOSTON – Fidelity Investments® - the nation’s
largest 401(k) provider1 - today announced the average 401(k) balance
continued its growth trend to end the fourth quarter of 2013 at a new record
high of $89,300, up 15.5 percent from one year earlier, and nearly double what
is traditionally considered the market low of March 2009 when it was
$46,2002. For pre-retirees age 55 and older, the average
balance is $165,200.
I am betting the average balance for someone age 65 is close to 200K. Most likely, even if they are not brilliant investors such as yourself, they can take out 10K a year for life. With an SS check added to that you won't starve.
Of course many Americans are like myself and have worked for multiple employers and have rolled their previous 401Ks into an IRA. These Americans have both 401Ks and IRAs that are dependent upon Wall Street doing well.
Yes, I am sure you are one of them brilliant people who always is able to forecast the direction of the stock market. Why don't you do the masses a favor and tell us all when to take our money out and when to put it in. The capital gains taxes from such wealth gains on a widespread scale will put a dent in our deficit.
I can't call tops or bottoms very accurately and never claimed to be able to, and nor can anyone else, but there are certain points in time where the odds of the market heading in one direction are far higher than it heading in the other direction. Smart investors take advantage of these opportunities and position themselves accordingly, the average person does not. The average person buys in after long run-ups because it appears "safe" and then sells after crashes because they panic, resulting in wealth distribution from the middle class to the .1%.
Quote:
Since many of us work for corporations even without a 401K what is good for Wall Street is good for America.
Stocks selling higher on the secondary market doesn't really benefit corporations much unless they're issuing a lot of new shares to raise capital, which companies don't like to do because it erodes the stock price and pisses off shareholders who will remove the CEO. For the most part corporations doing well causes higher stock prices, higher stock prices don't cause corporations to do well. The tail does not wag the dog.
If Wall Street is doing well because the economy is doing well, that's one thing. If Wall Street is doing well because an asset bubble is being inflated, that's another thing. People were doing great in 2000 and 2006 before the bubbles popped. They weren't doing so great in 2008 when they lost their job and had to borrow from their 401k to make payments on their underwater mortgage.
So we can infer that whatever political ethos is gaining traction must have merit, right?
Right?
It's pathetic how anyone who disagrees with a liberal is automatically a Nazi, or associated with Nazis to you people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet
Also, I'm am independent.
But you wouldn't be trying to inject partisan banter to discredit me. If so I would be shocked.
Right, sure you are. Just because you aren't a tattooed, registered Democrat doesn't mean you're really independent or not a liberal. You discredited yourself as soon as you brought Nazis into the discussion.
you said neo-nazis. any reasonable person equates that with 'racist.'
but in my view it is seems like third-world immigration is increasingly perceived to be "the" problem. it seems that in many parts of europe, if a person stands up and says, "Immigration is OK, but I do not want large numbers of Africans and Muslims emigrating to my country," left and moderate people often unfairly respond, "You are a racist, you are a neo-nazi, etc."
European nations need an influx of immigrants to sustain their benefits because the birth rates are too low. The problem is it's changing their culture. American culture is multinational, so it's not as hard for us to have immigration. But we're talking about countries with thousands of years of their own culture, so it's much harder for them to adjust.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not very good for income inequality, labor utilization, productivity, or the country as a whole, however.
