Filing bankruptcy in retirement may not be such a bad idea

LadyJazzer wrote: Oh, I keep forgetting... "They should have known"... As investors/savers, people looking to put their retirement savings in a "safe place", they should have seen through the lies in the Prospectus and the financial statements and seen that their investments were "risky"... How stupid of them... If they were told that their investments "weren't risky" by an entity or a broker that they trusted, well they should have known anyway.

And, of course, the 700,000 people who were laid-off by the top 25 companies responsible for the layoffs, "should have known" in advance that their jobs were in jeopardy...(Many of whom had probably worked there for decades...While the executives got $hundred-million bonuses...) They just stupidly went to work for the "wrong companies". Of course, there are millions more like them, and since the economy lost 693,000 jobs in December, 2008, alone, they should have all seen it coming... Ignorant twits...

693,000 Jobs Lost in December 2008
January 8, 2009

Source: WSJ

Private sector jobs fell 693,000 in the U.S. in December, according to a revamped national employment report published Wednesday by payroll giant Automatic Data Processing Inc. and consultancy Macroeconomic Advisers. That’s far higher than the 515,000 loss forecast in a Dow Jones Newswires survey. Manufacturing employment dropped 120,000 in December, while service sector jobs fell 473,000.

I keep forgetting that EVERYONE is supposed to be as smart and savvy as the trickle-down supply-siders... Silly me. Yes, mtntrekker, I'm sure you "have a problem with lots of people." They should just get off their arses and go find jobs.

:faint: :Sick:

Yes, people should know that if you invest in the stock market you are taking a risk. Especially people with life experience heading into retirement, which is what I think we are talking about here (unless one is senile and being taken advantage of by a crook). The recession of 2000 should of been a reminder.

And you should know that if someone promises you a 10% return during this economy on his special investment, that you have a good chance of losing your money.

And yes you should know that you might get laid off during a recession. And you should save money to help cover your expenses in case you do lose your job. But few do.

pineinthegrass wrote: Yes, people should know that if you invest in the stock market you are taking a risk. Especially people with life experience heading into retirement, which is what I think we are talking about here (unless one is senile and being taken advantage of by a crook). The recession of 2000 should of been a reminder.

And you should know that if someone promises you a 10% return during this economy on his special investment, that you have a good chance of losing your money.

And yes you should know that you might get laid off during a recession. And you should save money to help cover your expenses in case you do lose your job. But few do.

And how about the millions of people that WEREN'T promised a "10% return" by a shady banker, but invested it in something "solid" with a reasonable rate of return, but got wiped out anyway? (Boy, it's a good thing that Bush's idea of moving Social Security into private investments failed... A lot MORE of our parents and grandparents would have been wiped even more by the Wall Street slime.)

And yes, all those people who should have done the "perfect thing" (like I'm sure all of the neocons did) and saved their money, but instead got hit with expenses like kids going to college, and unexpected health problems, elderly parents getting sick and having to move in, etc., made a mistake. In the world of the neocons, everyone in the whole US should be as perfect as they are. Must be nice to be so prescient.

pineinthegrass wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: Oh, I keep forgetting... "They should have known"... As investors/savers, people looking to put their retirement savings in a "safe place", they should have seen through the lies in the Prospectus and the financial statements and seen that their investments were "risky"... How stupid of them... If they were told that their investments "weren't risky" by an entity or a broker that they trusted, well they should have known anyway.

And, of course, the 700,000 people who were laid-off by the top 25 companies responsible for the layoffs, "should have known" in advance that their jobs were in jeopardy...(Many of whom had probably worked there for decades...While the executives got $hundred-million bonuses...) They just stupidly went to work for the "wrong companies". Of course, there are millions more like them, and since the economy lost 693,000 jobs in December, 2008, alone, they should have all seen it coming... Ignorant twits...

693,000 Jobs Lost in December 2008
January 8, 2009

Source: WSJ

Private sector jobs fell 693,000 in the U.S. in December, according to a revamped national employment report published Wednesday by payroll giant Automatic Data Processing Inc. and consultancy Macroeconomic Advisers. That’s far higher than the 515,000 loss forecast in a Dow Jones Newswires survey. Manufacturing employment dropped 120,000 in December, while service sector jobs fell 473,000.

I keep forgetting that EVERYONE is supposed to be as smart and savvy as the trickle-down supply-siders... Silly me. Yes, mtntrekker, I'm sure you "have a problem with lots of people." They should just get off their arses and go find jobs.

:faint: :Sick:

Yes, people should know that if you invest in the stock market you are taking a risk. Especially people with life experience heading into retirement, which is what I think we are talking about here (unless one is senile and being taken advantage of by a crook). The recession of 2000 should of been a reminder.

And you should know that if someone promises you a 10% return during this economy on his special investment, that you have a good chance of losing your money.

And yes you should know that you might get laid off during a recession. And you should save money to help cover your expenses in case you do lose your job. But few do.

Not if you invest in Equity Indexed Annuities. No risk at all.

The Viking wrote: Not if you invest in Equity Indexed Annuities. No risk at all.

Well there you are accepting the word of an insurance company. That is probably OK, except they might go out of business as AIG almost did, leaving you with nothing. And even if you weren't with AIG, had AIG gone under there probably would of been a trickle down effect where other insurance companies went under as well.

Some of you whiney evolutionist leftists should do society a favor and consider the age old Inuit retirement plan called senilicide. When food and other resources ran short, the old and sick were looked upon as drains on the community. Sometimes they were killed - thrown into the sea, buried alive, locked out in the cold, or starved to death. Far more commonly they were simply abandoned to die. The victim might be taken out in the wilderness and left there, or the whole village might pick up and move away while the old person slept. If the villagers were unexpectedly restored to prosperity, they might go back to rescue those left behind. An abandoned person would also be welcomed back as a full member of the community if he could manage to make his way back to the village on his own. But usually he couldn't.

Darwinism at its finest. The strong and smart survive.

JusSayin wrote: Some of you whiney evolutionist leftists should do society a favor and consider the age old Inuit retirement plan called senilicide. When food and other resources ran short, the old and sick were looked upon as drains on the community. Sometimes they were killed - thrown into the sea, buried alive, locked out in the cold, or starved to death. Far more commonly they were simply abandoned to die. The victim might be taken out in the wilderness and left there, or the whole village might pick up and move away while the old person slept. If the villagers were unexpectedly restored to prosperity, they might go back to rescue those left behind. An abandoned person would also be welcomed back as a full member of the community if he could manage to make his way back to the village on his own. But usually he couldn't.

Darwinism at its finest. The strong and smart survive.

Who knew conservatives ran society back then.

LadyJazzer wrote: And how about the millions of people that WEREN'T promised a "10% return" by a shady banker, but invested it in something "solid" with a reasonable rate of return, but got wiped out anyway? (Boy, it's a good thing that Bush's idea of moving Social Security into private investments failed... A lot MORE of our parents and grandparents would have been wiped even more by the Wall Street slime.)

And yes, all those people who should have done the "perfect thing" (like I'm sure all of the neocons did) and saved their money, but instead got hit with expenses like kids going to college, and unexpected health problems, elderly parents getting sick and having to move in, etc., made a mistake. In the world of the neocons, everyone in the whole US should be as perfect as they are. Must be nice to be so prescient.

What do you mean by "something solid with a reasonable rate of return"? That could mean a bank account or CD, but the returns have been low lately. At least you wouldn't of lost anything during the 2007/2008 recession.

Otherwise, most usually go with mutual funds (stocks and bonds). Better return on average, but risk is much higher. And anyone that lived through the 2000 recession should of learned that.

So far as having savings to cover an emergency goes, I do understand it can be tough to do. But many do live beyond their means when they could or should be saving instead.

My main point was that you seemed to make seem like they should be surprised if they lost their job during a recession. To that I can only say "Duh".

My main point is that the right-wingers don't care. If they fell on hard times, through no fault of their own, so f**king what? It's their fault anyway...They should have known...All several-million of them should get off their duffs and go find a job...(except there are about 10-20 job-seekers for every actual job out there....INCLUDING flipping burgers.)

...and the Party of Selfish rolls on....

Starbucks coffee enjoys annual net sales revenues of around $9-billion dollars. Assuming approximately 80% of that comes from coffee sales, that’s $7.2-billion. If the US represents approximately 70% of that, then American’s spend $5-billion on Starbucks coffee. If a cup of Starbucks coffee costs 2.5 times the cost of a cup of coffee at places like Cutthroat or DW’s 285—for example—then Americans are wasting $3-billion on crappy, overpriced coffee alone. That’s $3-billion that could go toward retirement savings.

And that’s just coffee.

pineinthegrass wrote:

The Viking wrote: Not if you invest in Equity Indexed Annuities. No risk at all.

Well there you are accepting the word of an insurance company. That is probably OK, except they might go out of business as AIG almost did, leaving you with nothing. And even if you weren't with AIG, had AIG gone under there probably would of been a trickle down effect where other insurance companies went under as well.

The AIG Insuance side was never close to going under. They are one of the strongest insurance companies out there. Not sure if you know but they have two sides that cannot comingle funds. The Mortgage and lending side out of New York is the one that almost went under. The Insurance side out of Texas is going strong and was never in danger of bankruptcy. There has never been money lost in an annuity. And when we were in the depression in the 20's and 30's, the government borrowed from the insurance industry. The insurance industy in the strongest industy in the world and isn't going anywhere.

For every dollar invested in an annuity they are required to set aside $1.17 so as to never be in the over extended in their investments. To be clear: AIG's regular insurance division -- the part that is actually regulated by the states -- is just fine & was never in trouble. The part that is in trouble & therefore dragging down the company is the unregulated division that provided insurance against debt default.