Michael Coslo wrote:
bb wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

bb wrote:


Mike Coslo wrote:

safer places to park your money.

Look at the Federal retirement system.

Look at your state retirement system.

Look at your teacher's retirement system.

Is is all in the market?

Is it all out of the market?

Or is it a balance of the two?

Greed, that potential bad character that we have tapped and used
for
good in out semi capitalist system, is an almost irresistible pull
on
some people.

I'm sure that greed doens't exist in semi-socialist sytems, so why
don't we just get it over with and switch?

Huh? I don't understand.

"Social" security. Get it? And some of the greediest people were
socialists.

I know quite a few people who during the mid to late '90's were so
impressed by the stock market goings on, that they put all or most
of
their retirement investments in risky, high yielding investments. A
couple invested exclusively in Tech stocks. Guess how much money
they
have today? (answer - not a whole lot) They won't be retiring early
*or* soon.

Were those retirement investments outside of a conventional pension
plan?

No. Where I am at, there are two retirement plan options. One is with

the state, and the other allows you to "customize" your plan with
your
investment options.

Do they limit your options to somewhat wise, conservative investments?

Or are you options wide open? Probably not.

The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion. No gold and
platinum futures, for example. As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available. Gosh!

But that's just me thinking out loud. I heard from Al Franken that
Bush doesn't want any ideas on this matter.

On the other hand, I was very careful with my retirement
investments,and didn't lose anything. All I did was take a hit in
my
earning rate.

Until the bubble burst though, Len wasn't the only person that
thinks
I'm a dimbulb!

Aren't you a University of PA employee?

Penn State. U of Pa is the one in Philadelphia.

The point is that you do have a government pension plan.

Just how much control do you have over your state employee and
school
employee retirement funds?

Those two plans. We also have an additional TDA possibility from
various companies. On the state plan, there is not a lot you can do.
On
the other plan, there are more investment options.

TDA? Is that like a supplemental, tax-deferred investment option?
Ohio has a 457, "deferred compensation," plan, which is in addition to
the public employees retirement system.

http://nrsretire.nrsservicecenter.co...ome/?Site=Ohio

Ohio also has five (5) public employees retirement systems for some
reason.

http://ohio.gov/Retirement.stm

If you want to see something scary, look at the Federal Employees
Retirement System. They tell you right up front that SS is "the rest
of your retirement." Not the so called safety net that Jim and FDR
described it as.

bb wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

bb wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:


bb wrote:



Mike Coslo wrote:


safer places to park your money.

Look at the Federal retirement system.

Look at your state retirement system.

Look at your teacher's retirement system.

Is is all in the market?

Is it all out of the market?

Or is it a balance of the two?

Greed, that potential bad character that we have tapped and used

for

good in out semi capitalist system, is an almost irresistible pull

on

some people.

I'm sure that greed doens't exist in semi-socialist sytems, so why
don't we just get it over with and switch?

Huh? I don't understand.


"Social" security. Get it? And some of the greediest people were
socialists.

Greed is not limited to any one group.


I know quite a few people who during the mid to late '90's were so
impressed by the stock market goings on, that they put all or most

of

their retirement investments in risky, high yielding investments. A
couple invested exclusively in Tech stocks. Guess how much money

they

have today? (answer - not a whole lot) They won't be retiring early
*or* soon.

Were those retirement investments outside of a conventional pension
plan?

No. Where I am at, there are two retirement plan options. One is with


the state, and the other allows you to "customize" your plan with

your

investment options.


Do they limit your options to somewhat wise, conservative investments?

No.

Or are you options wide open? Probably not.

I'm not on the system with lots of options, so I'm mentally paraphrasing
here a bit:

There are a number of options in which you can spread percentages of
your money. Those options run the spectrum from blue chip to high yield,
high risk. Your retirement income is based on your contributions and how
well the investments did.

The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion.

Ho-boy, another Federally controlled system. 8^)


No gold and platinum futures, for example.

Probably a good idea.

As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available. Gosh!

One of the people I know that lost a lot of money was thinking that. He
said that two years before retirement, he was going to pull his money
out of the high risk stuff and put it into the "safe" stuff.


But that's just me thinking out loud. I heard from Al Franken that
Bush doesn't want any ideas on this matter.


On the other hand, I was very careful with my retirement
investments,and didn't lose anything. All I did was take a hit in

my

earning rate.

Until the bubble burst though, Len wasn't the only person that

thinks

I'm a dimbulb!

Aren't you a University of PA employee?

Penn State. U of Pa is the one in Philadelphia.


The point is that you do have a government pension plan.

Yup.


Just how much control do you have over your state employee and

school

employee retirement funds?

Those two plans. We also have an additional TDA possibility from
various companies. On the state plan, there is not a lot you can do.

On

the other plan, there are more investment options.


TDA? Is that like a supplemental, tax-deferred investment option?
Ohio has a 457, "deferred compensation," plan, which is in addition to
the public employees retirement system.

Yup, that's it.


http://nrsretire.nrsservicecenter.co...ome/?Site=Ohio

Ohio also has five (5) public employees retirement systems for some
reason.

http://ohio.gov/Retirement.stm

If you want to see something scary, look at the Federal Employees
Retirement System. They tell you right up front that SS is "the rest
of your retirement." Not the so called safety net that Jim and FDR
described it as.


I see they have three different plans, Social Security, a basic benefit
plan and a thrift savings plan. Looks pretty much like a typical plan group.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:
bb wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

bb wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:


bb wrote:



Mike Coslo wrote:


safer places to park your money.

Look at the Federal retirement system.

Look at your state retirement system.

Look at your teacher's retirement system.

Is is all in the market?

Is it all out of the market?

Or is it a balance of the two?

Greed, that potential bad character that we have tapped and used

for

good in out semi capitalist system, is an almost irresistible
pull

on

some people.

I'm sure that greed doens't exist in semi-socialist sytems, so why
don't we just get it over with and switch?

Huh? I don't understand.


"Social" security. Get it? And some of the greediest people were
socialists.

Greed is not limited to any one group.


I know quite a few people who during the mid to late '90's were
so
impressed by the stock market goings on, that they put all or
most

of

their retirement investments in risky, high yielding investments.
A
couple invested exclusively in Tech stocks. Guess how much money

they

have today? (answer - not a whole lot) They won't be retiring
early
*or* soon.

Were those retirement investments outside of a conventional
pension
plan?

No. Where I am at, there are two retirement plan options. One is
with


the state, and the other allows you to "customize" your plan with

your

investment options.


Do they limit your options to somewhat wise, conservative
investments?

No.

Or are you options wide open? Probably not.

I'm not on the system with lots of options, so I'm mentally
paraphrasing
here a bit:

There are a number of options in which you can spread percentages of
your money. Those options run the spectrum from blue chip to high
yield,
high risk.

No bonds? Any balanced funds?

Your retirement income is based on your contributions and how
well the investments did.

Is there a "guaranteed return" selection? Of course, even that won't
work if the government devalues its currency.

The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion.

Ho-boy, another Federally controlled system. 8^)

Oh, I forgot. Social Security is a Township Trustee run system.

No gold and platinum futures, for example.

Probably a good idea.

As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available.
Gosh!

One of the people I know that lost a lot of money was thinking that.
He
said that two years before retirement, he was going to pull his money

out of the high risk stuff and put it into the "safe" stuff.

Did he? Or did he think the market was still going good and left it in
riskier investments?

But that's just me thinking out loud. I heard from Al Franken that
Bush doesn't want any ideas on this matter.


On the other hand, I was very careful with my retirement
investments,and didn't lose anything. All I did was take a hit in

my

earning rate.

Until the bubble burst though, Len wasn't the only person that

thinks

I'm a dimbulb!

Aren't you a University of PA employee?

Penn State. U of Pa is the one in Philadelphia.


The point is that you do have a government pension plan.

Yup.

In Ohio, our Governor has put some political appointees on the
retirement fund board, and he wants to make the fund invest in Ohio,
which is a losing prop.

Just how much control do you have over your state employee and

school

employee retirement funds?

Those two plans. We also have an additional TDA possibility from
various companies. On the state plan, there is not a lot you can
do.

On

the other plan, there are more investment options.


TDA? Is that like a supplemental, tax-deferred investment option?
Ohio has a 457, "deferred compensation," plan, which is in addition
to
the public employees retirement system.

Yup, that's it.



http://nrsretire.nrsservicecenter.co...ome/?Site=Ohio

Ohio also has five (5) public employees retirement systems for some
reason.

http://ohio.gov/Retirement.stm

If you want to see something scary, look at the Federal Employees
Retirement System. They tell you right up front that SS is "the
rest
of your retirement." Not the so called safety net that Jim and FDR
described it as.


I see they have three different plans, Social Security, a basic
benefit
plan and a thrift savings plan. Looks pretty much like a typical plan
group.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Looks nothing like the former SCRS. Does Penn State contribute 1% of
your income to your plan, then tell you that SS is the rest of it?

Anyway, the only benefit to being in SS is if you have a life changing
injury or illness and can no longer work. If you take it to 65 (or 67
depending on the whims of the democratic party) the ROI is slim to
none. Savings bonds beat it.

bb wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

snippage

There are a number of options in which you can spread percentages of
your money. Those options run the spectrum from blue chip to high
yield, high risk.


No bonds? Any balanced funds?

Yup. A lot of people don't take that approach though. They listen to the
investment mantra that "Over the long term, the market always goes
up". Unfortunately their advisor neglects to tell them that what matters
is where the stock market is when they retire.

And for whatever reason, they don't figure that out for themselves.



Your retirement income is based on your contributions and how
well the investments did.


Is there a "guaranteed return" selection? Of course, even that won't
work if the government devalues its currency.

The most conservative investments have an interest rate that gets
adjusted every so often.


The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion.

Ho-boy, another Federally controlled system. 8^)


Oh, I forgot. Social Security is a Township Trustee run system.

No gold and platinum futures, for example.

Probably a good idea.


As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available.

Gosh!

One of the people I know that lost a lot of money was thinking that.
He said that two years before retirement, he was going to pull his money
out of the high risk stuff and put it into the "safe" stuff.


Did he? Or did he think the market was still going good and left it in
riskier investments?

He chose to believe that things were going to get better and to stay
the course. By the time he got wise, it was too late.


But that's just me thinking out loud. I heard from Al Franken that
Bush doesn't want any ideas on this matter.



On the other hand, I was very careful with my retirement
investments,and didn't lose anything. All I did was take a hit in

my earning rate.

Until the bubble burst though, Len wasn't the only person that
thinks I'm a dimbulb!

Aren't you a University of PA employee?

Penn State. U of Pa is the one in Philadelphia.


The point is that you do have a government pension plan.

Yup.


In Ohio, our Governor has put some political appointees on the
retirement fund board, and he wants to make the fund invest in Ohio,
which is a losing prop.

Sounds like a bad idea. Not specifically about Ohio, but limiting
investments to a particular area is almost like investing in only the
high risk areas.


Just how much control do you have over your state employee and

school


employee retirement funds?

Those two plans. We also have an additional TDA possibility from
various companies. On the state plan, there is not a lot you can
do. On the other plan, there are more investment options.


TDA? Is that like a supplemental, tax-deferred investment option?
Ohio has a 457, "deferred compensation," plan, which is in addition
to the public employees retirement system.

Yup, that's it.



http://nrsretire.nrsservicecenter.co...ome/?Site=Ohio

Ohio also has five (5) public employees retirement systems for some
reason.

http://ohio.gov/Retirement.stm

If you want to see something scary, look at the Federal Employees
Retirement System. They tell you right up front that SS is "the
rest
of your retirement." Not the so called safety net that Jim and FDR
described it as.


I see they have three different plans, Social Security, a basic
benefit plan and a thrift savings plan. Looks pretty much like
a typical plan group.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Looks nothing like the former SCRS. Does Penn State contribute 1% of
your income to your plan, then tell you that SS is the rest of it?

Nope.

Anyway, the only benefit to being in SS is if you have a life changing
injury or illness and can no longer work.

I pretty much agree.

If you take it to 65 (or 67
depending on the whims of the democratic party) the ROI is slim to
none. Savings bonds beat it.

Republicans are in power now. They have assumed the mantle of
responsibility. It is now their whims that count.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:
bb wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

snippage

There are a number of options in which you can spread percentages
of
your money. Those options run the spectrum from blue chip to high
yield, high risk.


No bonds? Any balanced funds?

Yup.

Holy Cow! And I thought they only had highly risky investment choices.
At least that's the way you and Jim have made it sound.

A lot of people don't take that approach though. They listen to the
investment mantra that "Over the long term, the market always goes
up".

That's a fact.

Unfortunately their advisor neglects to tell them that what matters
is where the stock market is when they retire.

Sounds like you you could open your own Jones office.

And for whatever reason, they don't figure that out for themselves.

There you go. If you ever get tired of working at the school, you
really could open that Jones office.

Your retirement income is based on your contributions and how
well the investments did.


Is there a "guaranteed return" selection? Of course, even that
won't
work if the government devalues its currency.

The most conservative investments have an interest rate that gets
adjusted every so often.

Is that vehicle capable of losing its principle?

The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion.

Ho-boy, another Federally controlled system. 8^)


Oh, I forgot. Social Security is a Township Trustee run system.

No gold and platinum futures, for example.

Probably a good idea.


As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available.

Gosh!

One of the people I know that lost a lot of money was thinking
that.
He said that two years before retirement, he was going to pull his
money
out of the high risk stuff and put it into the "safe" stuff.


Did he? Or did he think the market was still going good and left
it in
riskier investments?

He chose to believe that things were going to get better and to stay

the course. By the time he got wise, it was too late.

Was it really? Why?

But that's just me thinking out loud. I heard from Al Franken
that
Bush doesn't want any ideas on this matter.



On the other hand, I was very careful with my retirement
investments,and didn't lose anything. All I did was take a hit
in

my earning rate.

Until the bubble burst though, Len wasn't the only person that
thinks I'm a dimbulb!

Aren't you a University of PA employee?

Penn State. U of Pa is the one in Philadelphia.


The point is that you do have a government pension plan.

Yup.


In Ohio, our Governor has put some political appointees on the
retirement fund board, and he wants to make the fund invest in
Ohio,
which is a losing prop.

Sounds like a bad idea. Not specifically about Ohio, but limiting
investments to a particular area is almost like investing in only the

high risk areas.

Yep.

Just how much control do you have over your state employee and

school


employee retirement funds?

Those two plans. We also have an additional TDA possibility from
various companies. On the state plan, there is not a lot you can
do. On the other plan, there are more investment options.


TDA? Is that like a supplemental, tax-deferred investment option?
Ohio has a 457, "deferred compensation," plan, which is in
addition
to the public employees retirement system.

Yup, that's it.




http://nrsretire.nrsservicecenter.co...ome/?Site=Ohio

Ohio also has five (5) public employees retirement systems for
some
reason.

http://ohio.gov/Retirement.stm

If you want to see something scary, look at the Federal Employees
Retirement System. They tell you right up front that SS is "the
rest
of your retirement." Not the so called safety net that Jim and
FDR
described it as.


I see they have three different plans, Social Security, a basic
benefit plan and a thrift savings plan. Looks pretty much like
a typical plan group.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Looks nothing like the former SCRS. Does Penn State contribute 1%
of
your income to your plan, then tell you that SS is the rest of it?

Nope.

Anyway, the only benefit to being in SS is if you have a life
changing
injury or illness and can no longer work.

I pretty much agree.

If you take it to 65 (or 67
depending on the whims of the democratic party) the ROI is slim to
none. Savings bonds beat it.

Republicans are in power now. They have assumed the mantle of
responsibility. It is now their whims that count.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike, how quickly you wish to forget the democrat legacy. I can't
blame you. But apparently I've been brainwashed by the dems for the
past 30 years that SS will be bankrupt by the time its my turn to feed
at the trough. Ask anyone in their 40's if SS will be there for them
when they retire, and you'll not get a lot of positive answers. Or do
you disagree?

bb wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

bb wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

snippage

There are a number of options in which you can spread percentages

of

your money. Those options run the spectrum from blue chip to high
yield, high risk.


No bonds? Any balanced funds?

Yup.


Holy Cow! And I thought they only had highly risky investment choices.
At least that's the way you and Jim have made it sound.

Through all this thread, I have noted that there were multiple choices
of investments. And my comments have ben that many people are not
capable of resisting the "big bucks" risky investments. I account for
human nature in my assessments of how people should be treated.

Fact is, an awful lot of people NEED some fiscal restraint. Otherwise
they make stupid choices and become a drain on society. It is how it is.
It is why people on welfare buy lottery tickets when they should be
buying food or paying their rent. It is why people think they can make
risky investments, and somehow retire to make more money than when they
were working.



A lot of people don't take that approach though. They listen to the
investment mantra that "Over the long term, the market always goes
up".

That's a fact.

It sure is. But it is like saying that the average voltage of our
household outlet is 0 volts. I'll pass on grabbing bare wires of that 0
volt average system if ya don't mind.


Unfortunately their advisor neglects to tell them that what matters
is where the stock market is when they retire.

Sounds like you you could open your own Jones office.

I'm dense. What's a Jones office?


And for whatever reason, they don't figure that out for themselves.


There you go. If you ever get tired of working at the school, you
really could open that Jones office.

I'll make an assumption that this "Jones office is some kind of
investment outfit. I probably wouldn't make so much money because I
wouldn't try to talk people into investing their money in things that I
think they would lose it with. But then again, I don't think Mr.
investment advisor is my friend.


Your retirement income is based on your contributions and how
well the investments did.


Is there a "guaranteed return" selection? Of course, even that

won't

work if the government devalues its currency.

The most conservative investments have an interest rate that gets
adjusted every so often.

Is that vehicle capable of losing its principle?

No.


The Federal Government would likely put limits on the types of
investments you could make with your SS diversion.

Ho-boy, another Federally controlled system. 8^)


Oh, I forgot. Social Security is a Township Trustee run system.


No gold and platinum futures, for example.

Probably a good idea.



As you graduate to an older age group,
they would probably change the investment vehicles available.

Gosh!


One of the people I know that lost a lot of money was thinking

that.

He said that two years before retirement, he was going to pull his

money

out of the high risk stuff and put it into the "safe" stuff.


Did he? Or did he think the market was still going good and left

it in

riskier investments?

He chose to believe that things were going to get better and to stay


the course. By the time he got wise, it was too late.


Was it really? Why?

He lost his principle. It can happen on that plan.

snippage for trying to keep track


Republicans are in power now. They have assumed the mantle of
responsibility. It is now their whims that count.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Mike, how quickly you wish to forget the democrat legacy. I can't
blame you. But apparently I've been brainwashed by the dems for the
past 30 years that SS will be bankrupt by the time its my turn to feed
at the trough. Ask anyone in their 40's if SS will be there for them
when they retire, and you'll not get a lot of positive answers. Or do
you disagree?

There are many different time frames on exactly *when* the system will
run out of steam or money. A lot of this depends on how much money is
taken out by non-standard usage. (read robbing the till)

I don't care WHO took the money out. Be it Democrat or Republican. One
of the side effects of being in power is that when it is your group, you
reap the benefits as well as the brickbats.

If all the Pubs can do is continue to blame the Dems for every problem
on the face of the planet, then it means that they are *weak*, because
they can't do anything about the Democrats even when they are in power.
Funny how things work! 8^)

Proud to be an independent. ... - Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
bb wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

bb wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

snippage

Through all this thread, I have noted that there were multiple
choices
of investments. And my comments have ben that many people are
not
capable of resisting the "big bucks" risky investments. I
account for
human nature in my assessments of how people should be treated.

Fact is, an awful lot of people NEED some fiscal restraint.
Otherwise
they make stupid choices and become a drain on society. It is
how it is.
It is why people on welfare buy lottery tickets when they
should be
buying food or paying their rent. It is why people think they
can make
risky investments, and somehow retire to make more money than
when they were working.

There's also the fact that investment information isn't always on the
up and up. Despite all the regulations, we still have messes like
Enron. Even if those responsible for the Enron debacle go to jail for a
while, it won't bring back the money investors lost.

A lot of people don't take that approach though. They listen to
the
investment mantra that "Over the long term, the market always goes
up".

That's a fact.

It sure is. But it is like saying that the average voltage of
our
household outlet is 0 volts. I'll pass on grabbing bare wires
of that 0
volt average system if ya don't mind.

Sort of. The problem is that unless you buy nothing but index funds,
you're not investing in "the market". And even if you do buy index
funds, you're investing in a particular index.

Y'know what's funny? The same folks who say we don't need restraint
when investing life savings are the same ones who want to restrain stem
cell research, recreational chemicals (except tobacco and alchohol),
contraception, and a bunch of other things.

work if the government devalues its currency.

The most conservative investments have an interest rate that gets
adjusted every so often.

Is that vehicle capable of losing its principle?

No.

Principle or principal? There's a big difference.

He chose to believe that things were going to get better and to
stay


the course. By the time he got wise, it was too late.


Was it really? Why?

He lost his principle. It can happen on that plan.

He lost both his principle (move to lower risk as you get older) and
his principal (original investment)

There are many different time frames on exactly *when* the
system will
run out of steam or money. A lot of this depends on how much
money is
taken out by non-standard usage. (read robbing the till)

Yep. Of course if one administration takes it out and promises
to put it back, and a following administration run by the
other party breaks the promise, who is to blame?

I don't care WHO took the money out. Be it Democrat or
Republican. One
of the side effects of being in power is that when it is your
group, you
reap the benefits as well as the brickbats.

There's also the concept of responsibility. Which means that
the folks in power, red, blue or purple, cannot simply blame
everything on their predecessors and do nothing to fix the
problems.

If all the Pubs can do is continue to blame the Dems for
every problem
on the face of the planet, then it means that they are
*weak*, because
they can't do anything about the Democrats even when
they are in power.
Funny how things work! 8^)

Exactly! Well said, Mike.

73 de Jim, N2EY