GM to move all salaried workers to 401K plans

[sarcasmo]

Snip < General Motors Co. is eliminating traditional pensions for all U.S. salaried employees, but the automaker is softening the blow by giving all salaried workers an extra week of vacation.



Snip < Starting Oct. 1, the approximately 19,000 U.S. salaried employees hired before 2001 will be moved to that plan as well. However, they will retain the traditional pension benefits they earned up to that date.




http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120215/AUTO0103/202150397/GM-move-all-salaried-workers-401-k-plans?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

[wilt the stilt]

1. 401K's suck n/t

[dmallind]

6. I've never worked anywhere more than 6 years. If I didn't have a 401k I'd have no employer help

with retirement at all. Not everybody sits in the same job for decades these days.

[truebrit71]

14. Why?

I personally think they can be very good, especially if there's a company match...I'm curious as to why you think they "suck"..?

[me b zola]

31. I'm old enough to remember that retirement funds used to be a sure thing

Gambling on Wall Street...not so much.

Just another sign of the world upside-down imo. When did regular people become convinced that they were part of the investor class?

[nobelaries]

62. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[JDPriestly]

21. They sure do.

[JoePhilly]

30. My 401k, and my wife's 401k, beg to differ.

First ... your 401k is only as risky as your choices. Most 401k plans allow you to be very conservative, or very agressive, or anywhere in between ... but YOU have to make those decisions.

Second ... employer matches. Many companies will match contributions up to certain levels.

Third ... contributions to a 401k, and the associated matches are tax deferred.

This is the rub ... you need to start a 401k early in your career so that you never MISS the money that you contribute into it. I started mine in the early 90s, and anytime I got a raise or promotion, I increased the contribution level until I reached the max.

I never want to see SS privatized ... but I also do not want to have that, or a company pension, be the only retirement savings I have.

[nobelaries]

59. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[JoePhilly]

64. No Summary?

What will this book tell me?

That I should be buying Gold?

What I learned via my own 401k is that I have to make my own investment decisions. I took it upon myself to learn about the various alternatives long ago.

I now hold some individual stocks, a broad 401k, a few IRAs, some real estate, a few CDs, and college funds for the kids. And I manage it all regularly.

And what I do know is that my net worth between the early 90s and today has grown significantly because I paid attention.

[RobinA]

53. They Don't Have To

suck, but they should not be considered an alternative to a pension. I've had a 401K since 1986 and never once had a match. I did manage to save some half decent money, but since I am not a highly paid employee, I can't begin to save my way to a comfortable retirement. For that I need a pension, which is one reason I joined public employment several years ago. If it weren't for the pension I'd be gone by now. Or maybe not - public employment and private employment are equally horrible these days.

I think that once the people with decent pensions are through the system and people without are the rule, there will be a lot of businesses, those that depend on retirees, that are going in the trash can. Think nice retirement homes and other retiree living arrangements. Those things are bought, for most people in them, with pension money.

[nobelaries]

63. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[nobelaries]

58. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[TBF]

2. Chip, chip, chip ...

they've already reduced all the workers to minimum wages, now they're coming after the managerial class. Wonder when folks will wake up and realize a very small percentage of folks in this world have taken all the wealth.

[harun]

3. The purpose of the 401k is to make people believe that given enough time, they too will be a 1 %'r.

It is to take peoples focus away from a state that protects them and their interests and put's it in to thinking Corporatism and Cut Throat Capitalism (free markets) will protect them and their interests.

It is probably the most fruitful idea the Right has ever come up with for advancing their ideology and causes.

[nobelaries]

60. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[Bennyboy]

4. DOOMED. 401Ks are a sham

Seriously. Got four million? that is what it takes NOW to retire. By the time new workers retire it will be 10 million. And the republican will have already gotten their hands on it anyways.

[dmallind]

7. If it takes millions for each worker to retire, how are pensions viable?

[Sherman A1]

25. It takes 3 legs to the stool

Social Security
Defined Benefit Pensions And
IRA/401k's

[24601]

35. Federal Government moved Civil Service to this for all workers who entered

service 1984 or later - with voluntary conversion for those already in. The old system, CSRS, had no social security componenmt and no Investment match. It did accrue benefits at almost 2% per year. A worker retiring at about 42 years would max out at 80% of the average high three earning years. For a worker today averaging $100K the high three years, the retirement pay would be $80,000 per year. Workers contributed (or still contribute if still on duty) a percentage of their pay into the CSRS fund.

The newer system, FERS reduces the primary annuity to 1.1% per year of military service. We pay into Social Security as well and can contribute about 15% of our pre-tax salary to the 401K-like Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). The government will match up to 5% - but gives 1% even if you contribute nothing.

The same hypothetical average high-three $100K would yield retired pay of $46,200 per year at 42 years service. The rest depends on Social Security (and it's not wide to draw it at age 62 because of the 30% reduction from full retirement age) and whatever you put away in the TSP.

TSP has five basic funds from which to Choose - and we determine their mix unless we select a lifestyle fund where the time to projected retirement guides the administrators to pick the mix. The funds are C (Mirrors the S&P 500), F (Fixed Income), G (Government Securities) S (Small Cap) and I (International).

I entered Civil Service in 1997 and back then, had to wait almost a year to joine TSP. I put in close to the max and as of market close on 2/14/2012, my account sits at $338,549.61. Last year, for a while is dipped quite a bit before coming back. Dollar-cost averaging has worked so far.

Social Security estimates my monthly annuity at full retirement at $2376/month. At that point, I would have credit for 28 years service and estimate my annuity at approx $3593/month. ($5969/month, $71,632 per year) compared to $78,400 per year that it would have been under CSRS.
TSP, like the market will go up and down, but should have no problem making up the difference between FERS and CSRS. I conservatively estimate that TSP should be $600,000 +/- $100,000 at retirement.

When Congress changed all new (1984) employees to FERS, those already serving were grandfathered if they didn't want to change. FERS also applies to members of Congress elected in 1984 or later - but even those members grandfathered in CSRS were required also to participate in Social Security - unlike grandfathered civil servants.

[marybourg]

15. Most people retiring now are doing

so on FAR less than 4M. Probably less than 10% of that and they'll manage just fine. P.S. I've been retired for 26 years, very comfortably, on comparatively little money. The sky hasn't fallen yet & probably won't in the near future.

[socialindependocrat]

28. I'll add to that...

I retired 1.5 years ago and have $350K but you can't get a lot of interest. I have 2 annuities that give back some money.

I get $2000/month in retirement.
Minus taxes
Minus health insurance
Now I'm down to $1,300/month

My banker asked if I was satisfied with my standard of living at this rate. I laughed and said, "I wasn't happy with my standard of living when I was working full time!"

We squeek by till Soc. Sec kicks in.

The main difference is this:
I get a check every month, even if I live to be 110 years old.

With a 401K - you may get $400K and you have to say, "How long am I going to live?" "Will I live to 75 or 85?"

Then there are all those people who won't want to leave anything behind and split their 401K over 10-15 years and run the pot dry.
Then we have all these people who say, "Gee, I spent all my retirement money. What do I do now?"

What then???

We'll need a government safety net (unless the Repubs are in office and they'll just say. "Gee, that's too bad. You should have planned better.&quot

Scarey, ain't it??!!

[HockeyMom]

16. If the market crashes in the next 20, 30, 40 years

how much will you have in your 401K?

[JoePhilly]

33. Depends on what investments you put it in ... and how you manage them ...

Lots of folks who don't have a 401k think that the entire balance of a 401k is invested in the riskiest investments that exist. But that is not the case at all.

Most 401k plans include a very wide array of investment choices. If you want to be risky, you can do that ... if you want to be very conservative, you can do that too.

Most plans include more than one option that is basically just like your savings account ... the interest rate is about the same, and there is very little risk ... about the same risk as your savings account might have ... however ... because a 401k is tax advantaged, you can't just transfer the money from that 401k to your checking account, like you might from a savings account. But that's the only downside. Money you have in a 401k in this kind of model is very safe.

The upsides in the 401k version of a "savings account" is that (a) the income you put in becomes deferred income, you don't pay tax on it now but only when you remove it later, and (b) many companies will match some percentage of what you put in and this is also "deferred income".

Let's consider the 2008 crash ... in 2007, the stock market was hovering around 11,000 - 12,000. Then we had the collapse and the market fell to about 6500 ... and now it is back to about 12,500 or so. The only people who really lost money were those that (a) sold in panic, or (b) sold because they absolutely needed the money right now!!!

If you invest in a 401k, and you think you might need that money FAST ... you need to make sure that your portfolio has lots of investments that are CONSERVATIVE ... and you should have done so prior to 2007.

So the idea of a market crash in 20, 30, or 40 years is not the issue ... the real issue is ... how am I investing today ... and what is my time horizon for needing this money. As I get closer to retirement, I need to become more conservative in how my 401k is invested.

[spartan61]

5. This is exactly what

American Airlines is planning to do with its employees during bankruptcy. During negotiations, prior to bankruptcy, this was one of the items that was a sticking point, Now they are planning to do it.

[msongs]

8. Mitt Rmoney can come in and strip the plan naked and send it to his offshore accounts nt

[nobelaries]

61. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[stockholmer]

9. the banksters are laughing as more & more are forced into their gulag casino (aka the rigged market)

Welcome to the wonderful world of ZIRP and financial repression. Next stop, Confiscation Town! All aboooooooard!!! Conductor Bernanke will be HAPPY to punch your ticket and Engineer Dimon will be your train driver today.


Enjoy your trip to 1% Ville (1% rate of return that is, as the 5 year T-Bill yield is now less than 0.8%)

[nobelaries]

65. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[Robb]

10. Not enough information to say which is better, actually.

How long is GM's vesting period? Could workers move benefits at retirement into something else (IRA etc.) or not? How young is the workforce?

[TahitiNut]

11. ERISA requires 5-year 100% vesting

[annabanana]

50. hey hi TN

long time no see

[TahitiNut]

56. High!

I've been lurking.

[earthside]

12. Forcing people into the stock market.

401Ks are the biggest bubble of all time.

This also highlights how precarious is this economy -- in the good old days you could retire on your Social Security and the interest off your savings. But with interest at virtually zero, you're left with SS and the crap you sell out of your 401K. With the stock market the way it has been, who can build-up the capital to live on for twenty-plus year after you retire?

Forcing more workers' retirement funds into 401Ks will certainly drive up the market in the short-term ... but we have now learned that over the long-term the stock market is a wash.

[Snake Alchemist]

17. What are pensions invested in? nt

[JDPriestly]

23. Pension funds have a huge advantage when they invest because they are larger

and have more money to "play" with than the single person with a 401(K).

401(K)s are really useless. It puts individuals with a few thousand dollars on the sea of Wall Street with no leverage, very little information and a prayer.

Wall Street vultures make a fortune off those of us who have 401(K)s.

It's bad enough when you are working and are too busy to follow your "investments," so the companies or funds you "invested" in go broke while you are trying to raise a family and work long hours at your job.

Then you retire, and the 1% really gets to cheat you as you become more confused, more easily tired and less capable of following your so-called "investments."

401(K)s are one big garbage dump for the rats on Wall Street.

[Snake Alchemist]

26. Several things wrong here

While you are technically correct, a 401k has huge amounts of money, too, especially since the contribution usually goes to a mutual fund. And if your employer matches your contribution, that’s free money.

How many funds have you seen go completely broke?

A pension manager is just another name for a hedge fund manager.

And then there is the issue of what happens when your pension fund goes bankrupt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/business/central-falls-ri-faces-bankruptcy-over-pension-promises.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/05/somethings-got-to-give-ma_n_525860.html

[JDPriestly]

29. I am utterly overwhelmed as a 401(K) investor.

As are most 401(K) investors.

Pension funds are supposed to be regulated so that they do not go bust. I'm more likely to invest badly than is a pension fund that answers to the employees and a union of the employees.

[former9thward]

32. Not really.

The Teamsters lost millions in their pension funds when they 'invested' in projects favored by the mafia. Even honest unions lack the financial education to invest properly.

[nobelaries]

67. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[ieoeja]

19. And if putting money in drives up the market, what happens when Boomers retire and are pulling out?

Now that they have ensured a massive sell of stocks to fund Boomer retirement, when that tipping point is reached, I can think of only one way to avoid a stock market crash that will make the Great Depression look like a mild bump.

They will have to severely limit 401(k)s withdrawals so funds can survive on dividends alone.

Or, they could not and let the crash occur. I'm sure smart money will be on "puts" by that time ensuring the right people come out just fine.

[JDPriestly]

24. That is the part about our current recession that nobody wants to talk about.

That was my first thought when the Wall Street crash occurred.

1945-2008 is precisely 63 years. Eligibility for Social Security begins to tick in.

The baby boomers were starting to retire, and Wall Street panicked. It's not the only reason for the crash, but it is the least talked about of the many reasons.

[PassingFair]

27. That's why they've walled them off from being "assets".

They want to keep the floor for the market.

I know SEVERAL people that have gone through bankruptcy
and foreclosure and still have thousands of dollars in their
401K's.

Hell, I LOANED money to a couple of them before I found
out that they had MUCH more money than I do!!!

But they "can't touch THAT money".

Seriously, I had one friend that was eating over at my house
to save money, I gave her money for stuff for her kids at
school, etc....

One day she tells me she's got SIXTY THOUSAND in her 401K!!!

And I felt SORRY for her!

[Incitatus]

52. Some companies allow you to take out loans against your 401k.

I know someone who did recently and got a rate of 3.5%.

[nobelaries]

66. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[Knight Hawk]

13. The trick is.................

Fees.Over the long run the fees the 401K managers charge eat up a lot of the money.We are in a New World folks and it is NOT Repub vs. Demos as much as it is those with money and power(the haves and the have and want more)against all the rest.From the middle class on down you are going o be left at the station.You do not have a ticket to ride and it is going to be very hard to get one.

[TBF]

54. Very good comment. nt

[airplaneman]

18. pensions vs esop vs 401k

I had an ESOP for 20 years that only gave me 6 months of pay in value and I had no say in anything they did. Before that was a pension plan that cost the company considerably but paid a good retirement. We have had a 401K for 12 years now. Its better thant the ESOP because I can contribute which has made me think about it and get involved which is good. They do not match anything and occationally put a trivial amount in (never more than 1%).
The cost to the company is trivial and the high paying CEO gets to put 20% of his income tax free into the account which is far better protection for him in addition to saving the company a bundle as compared to an ESOP or pension plan. I see the 401K as better than the ESOP and I do believe in responsibility and doing something for yourslelf if you can but I believe companies are motivated to do it to help themselves and not the employee.
-Airplane

[yup its me]

20. Ugh. The starting salaries have been reduced

and now this...

Does anyone know how pensions are invested?

[sulphurdunn]

22. If employers

move away from defined benefit to defined contribution plans then they should be structured like the one for federal employees (FEERS), regulated and managed in like manner, with multiple, flexible investment options and for the sole benefit of the employees.

[SteveG]

36. 403b's

are essentially 401k's that were designed to be primary retirement replacements for defined benefit plans. My employer contributes 11% of my annual salary and I contribute up to that amount. I have a range of options on how that money is invested. The downside is that participation is limited to non-profit educational and research institutions and their employees.

[Sgent]

47. That's the way 401-k's work

Multiple, flexible investment options... check
Sole benefit of the employee's... check

The real problem historically has been that HR departments didn't always look out for the best interests of their employee, or didn't have the size to demand the best options -- whereas the federal system does. Items such as free administration of the plan, or other incentives tended to cloud their judgement.

Some 401(k) and 403(b) plans had absolutely terrible investment choices -- variable annuities inside a tax advantaged plan, funds that charged 2% / year management fees or had loads, etc. Some were excellent, and most were in between. That being said, I had a 401(k) plan 15 years ago that allowed investments a large number of very high quality mutual funds at institutional prices, bank CD's, fixed income investments, etc.

There have been some recent changes in regulations which should go a long way to helping. In addition, HR is now on the line for providing reasonable investment choices.

Also, HR now has the ability to provide limited investment advice (previously they were essentially prohibited), which should give better balance to the information than having the stock broker try to setup your plan.

[sulphurdunn]

49. FEERS

has a range of investment options from very conservative bond funds to very risky stock funds. An employee can choose to allocate and move money between these funds or not. The most conservative funds virtually guarantee not to loose money even if they don't make any.

[harrose]

34. And how long before GM loots all those 401(k)s as other companies do?

n/t

[hughee99]

55. How do they do that?

Whereas an employer can declare bankruptcy and NOT make it's required pension payments, in a 401K it's not the employer's money anymore.

It's in a separate account that belongs the the employee. The employer can't take money out of someone's 401k, and if the company folds, the 401k is still in tact (unless the employee invested the 401 IN the employer, in which case they took the same losses as any other investor).

My company, "company X" allows you to invest NO MORE than 30% of your 401K in "company X", with no requirement that I even invest a dime in them at all. If my company folds tomorrow, the full value of my 401K is still in tact (minus the losses I would have taken if I had invested in "company X", which could range from 0-30% of the value). They CAN'T take a dime of it. In bankruptcy, it's not an "asset" of theirs. In a corporate takeover, it can't be raided. To say that a company can loot your 401K is like saying a company can raid it's employees personal bank accounts.

[nobelaries]

69. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[sendero]

37. The pension as it was once known..

... is dead and buried, a victim of globalization.

I don't know why so many folks here think that auto workers should have them when only about 15-20% of the working population still does, and that number is dwindling daily.

Also, the number of people who THINK they have a pension but don't because it will be wiped out by bankruptcy (AA anyone?) is rising daily also.

Personally, at least you have some control over a 401K, if you have a pension from a company that decides to declare bankruptcy (which they can do without being remotely broke (AA anyone?)), then you can wind up with NOTHING.

All of the surprise and outrage around here gets tiring. This is what is happening. It is going to continue. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. Because there is nothing you can do.

[stockholmer]

38. there IS something you can do,(not political)-make informed investments aimed at wealth preservation

All global fiat currencies are being utterly debased and destroyed right before your eyes. A modest 3.5% rate of annual true inflation (not the bullshite, hedonically adjusted and twisted number the Fed and other central banks spew out these days) will steal HALF your wealth in just 20 years, 75% of it in 40.

Throughout history, every single fiat currency has collapsed in a violent plummet. Every one. This time will be no different.

Even If you were ONLY buying into the teeth of the manic parabolic gold bubble of January/February 1980, you would have been in the black since 2007, if you were buying in 1977, 1978, and the first half of 1979 you were ALWAYS in the black, and if buying in 1982 to 1985 (and almost all of the rest of the 1980's), you were in the black from 2005 onwards. If you had been buying from the end of 1997 up until 2005, you would have seen huge profits of over 300 to 600 percent already, just in gold. Silver is even more dramatic in its rate of return, even with the recent pullbacks from $47/$49 an ounce to $34 an ounce.

Gold has increased by double digits as a percentage gained for the last 11 years in a row. Can you say the same of the NASDAQ? The Dow? The S&P? The US dollar? US Treasuries? The average US IRA? LOL! How about your paycheck? How about the value of the average American house?


I have been long gold AND silver since 1998 and 1999 (in physically-held, allocated non-bank secure vault accounts), when the US trashed the Glass–Steagall Act and legalized derivatives under the Clinton/Rubin/Greenspan troika. I have an average gain of over well over 350%, whilst the Dow is utterly stagnant when measured from from the tech bubble crash of early 2000 till now. In fact, it is off greatly, due to inflation, and many who were crushed in the stock crash of 2008-2009 pulled out, locking in huge losses that they could have somewhat recovered in the QE 1 and QE 2 and soon QE 3 induced bubbles. These bubbles, will, as all bubbles do, come to an end yet again. Check back with me in 3 or 5 years when those 350% figures in PM's are closing in on 1000+% profits.

In 1970, the average US car cost $3900 and took 114 ounces of gold to buy. In 2012, that same car is around $29,000 yet takes less than 17 ounces of gold to buy. Hello dollar debasement!

Also, I play FOREX markets (not for the light-hearted), I have holdings in dividend paying blue chip stocks (especially essential products, energy resources, certain medical/pharma firms (very picky on these, as I try to never invest in unethical companies), have savings accounts in several nations (Mongolia is currently paying 14% rate of return, all backed by the national government) and commodity based sectors as well such as ag and mining), and a global bond portfolio of national, local and state backed utilty and education issues (many of which are tax free zero coupon type), The USA has many great bond offerings, just check with a good reliable investment advisor.

This site has very informative podcasts:

http://www.financialsense.com/financial-sense-newshour

http://www.puplava.com/ The head of Financial Sense's personal investment firm

as does this

http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Broadcast.html


---------------------------------------------------------------------

storage options for PM's

http://solari.com/articles/Options_for_Storing_Precious_Metals/

This article summarizes some of the better-known custodial, vaulting, and digital gold arrangements available to individual investors in precious metals and provide a list of considerations for those interested in exploring these and other alternatives available to them

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUYING OPTIONS (for Americans)

Gold Money - (highly recommend, one of the best options, IMHO) http://www.goldmoney.com/?gmrefcode=maxkeiser

http://www.sprottphysicalsilvertrust.com/ Eric Sprott's new trust, (he is the biggest individual silver investor in the world)

http://www.silverwheaton.com/ Silver Wheaton, the metals streaming firm (great business model, they're the biggest in the world) here is great interview with the CEO on Mp3 http://www.financialsense.com/financial-sense-newshour/big-picture/2011/03/05/02/peter-barnes/the-silver-wheaton-success-story-50-dollar-silver

http://www.wholesaledirectmetals.com/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

other good sites:

http://www.sprottglobal.com/

http://fofoa.blogspot.com/

http://gordontlong.com/

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/

http://www.chrismartenson.com/

http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/

http://maxkeiser.com/

http://www.zerohedge.com/

http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

http://www.kitco.com/

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/ Nicole Foss's (who spoke here in Stockholm last year) site

http://solari.com/

http://new.gloomboomdoom.com/portalgbd/homegbd.cfm Marc Faber (Switzerland, global)

[sendero]

39. I agree..

... that everyone should have a portion of their assets in precious metals. In PHYSICALLY POSSESSED metals, because the paper is paper, just like currency.

[boppers]

40. Gold is another scam.

Changing from paper to metal does not affect the fact that it is an artificial, market driven, valuation.

Of course, those who buy into an artificial scarcity encourage others to buy in....

But you can't eat, or drink, gold.

[ret5hd]

41. can you eat or drink copper, nickel, or paper?

[stockholmer]

42. gold and silver have been stores of wealth for 6000 plus years, and the price they have vis-a-vis

fiat currencies is simply an indicator of the strength or weakness of those currencies. They also have industrial uses as well. If my portfolio over the last 14 years is a 'scam', then please, by all means, scam me some more.

I do admit, (as with any product) there are scumbags out there who charge outrageous premiums and use bullshit fear tactics (GoldLine who was tied to the scary-crazy wacko Glenn Beck for example in America) but that is why ANYONE in any endeavour in life has to do 'due diligence'. Thus my posting of some links to start with. By all means find your own too. And I do not advocate a PM-only portfolio, thus my posting of some other options as well.

If you don't save and invest wisely, your older age will probably be pretty tough from a financial/lifestyle basis. Inflation is the biggest, most deadly tax in history. Unless, of course, you already had a trust fund or you hit the Lottery, neither of which is likely for 99.9% of us.

best of luck to you

[airplaneman]

44. Gold and Silver has been a mixed blessing for me.

I got interested in gold, silver, and mining stocks of the same in the year 2000. It has been a mixed blessing. For most of the period of 2000 to today I reamined in "lossed my ass" terrirory. The other big hit was the 2008 market crash. In 2010 and 2011 my gold and silver holdings did help me get back to blue but only by maybe 6 months. The other thing that really killed me was that I subscribed to buy and hold. Now I realize if I have a stock I invested $2,000 and its worth $10,000 I had better sell fast (especilly when it leaves the up channel) as tomorrow it can be worth $30.00 which is a lot more likely than finding the stock go to $20,000. A real good help to decide when to buy and sell is Jack Chan and understanting when a stock breaks out of a rising or falling channel. I have averaged down a $40.00 stock all the way to $0. Using a ruler would have shown me that this stock never left a down channel. Gold and silver remain volatile. If you had bought silver when it hit $50.00 per ounce you would have seen your money drop in half and not even be recovered by today. Gold and silver has NOT been a WIN WIN WIN since 2000 and has been significantly more LOSE than WIN. Investing remains something you need to remain educated and active in to be successful. I also believe todays investment banks are parasites to the system. Proprietary trading like where Bear Stearns makes one billion in profit in one year is simpley one billion somebody like you and me will never see as it reduces what we wind up making. Stock as gold and silver are a zero sum game. In the end everyone who gained a doller was offset by someone who lost a doller.
-Airplane

[stockholmer]

45. mining stocks(especial the junior and mid-tier sectors) are a space I only venture into with serious

input from my 2 principal advisors. I have hit some home runs, but also have lost my arse on a couple too. That is the nature of the game. This is but a small part of my overall portfolio, and I am very comfortable with losing all my initial investment, in returns for the chance at huge gains. So far, I am defo in the black overall, and the 2008-2009 correction let me load up on some true deals (also in other stock sectors as well).


Gold bullion, on the other hand, when measured from January to January, has gone up double digits % every year for the last 12 years.

I fail to see a win win there, as I highly recommend a 'dollar cost averaging' purchase plan to just steady accumulate.



cheers

[airplaneman]

51. You are correct on gold.

Thanks for the reply and you have a good point on gold but from looking at the chart I see the start of a down channel breaking out from a parabolic up. Right now does not look like a good time to be getting in until we see a reversal of the down channel. I also see an exception to your January to January for 2008 to 2009 the whole year appears to be a down channel. I personally bought a chunk of gold in 2000 and held without adding and spent too much time and money in gold stocks instead.

P.S. I agree with you on investing and fiat money in principle. Nice to see someone else out there thinking about all of this too.

Cheers again.

Airplane

[SomeGuyInEagan]

43. "... at least you have some control over a 401K ..."

That has been my thinking for a few decades.

I simply do not trust that pension obligations will not be ignored by a company or voided in a bankruptcy declaration, which has become a common business "strategy" in this country, perhaps taught at the elite business schools and law schools specializing in corporate tax law (no first hand knowledge of that, but I have friends who talk of their tax law courses which were essentially tax evasion courses and how great careers are built on starting a personal tax evasio ... er, personal tax "law" practices).

My wife has a defined benefit plan. I have a (much smaller) defined benefit plan. Neither of us expects to see ever any of that money. So we contribute to her 401k (she gets a bit of a match) and to my 403b (no match anymore) as much as we can, taking a long term and broad-based approach to funds and bonds.

[cbdo2007]

46. Good. History has shown us that pensions are more risky and unsustainable than the stock market.

Or else more companies would have them.

At least the stock market is a garaunteed pay off after a certain time period.

[annabanana]

48. Yessiree! EVERYBODY into the wall street pool!

Worst move for the people since, jeez.. (hard to come up with the analogy this side of slavery)

[nobelaries]

68. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[Fearless]

57. GM Posted their HIGHEST PROFIT EVER in 2011.