Reply #16: I agree [View All]

[karynnj]

There also were people who took the risk by proxy as their pensions were invested by others.

The thing is that there is a risk to stock - but people have thought that there was very little if they had a diversified portfolio. Since I left college in 1972, there has not been a LONG interval where you would have done better just keeping your money in the bank. I also know people who did have a huge amount of their own companies stock - and lost most of their savings when it tanked - Lucent for instance. The government did not replace a portion of that money.

I definitely agree that putting back regulation - many that FDR put in because of the crash that led to the great depression is the way forward. There is NO WAY to have only the stockholders impacted - as you say the down stream effects have hit millions - here and overseas.

I do see that there will be a fight to determine how much stake the government gets for the money it puts in. What I see is that Kerry is on the side of giving more to the government - diluting the % owned by the current stockholders more than the Treasury people would do. This is likely not a case of win/lose, rather a case of where on the spectrum we end up.