"Keith nuttle" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:38:10 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

If the assets are "taken out" and the taxes are paid, then what becomes
of the reduced assets is a loss.

Why? You haven't sold them. Under your theory, no sale, no loss. And
what's
with this "reduced assets?" You moved $10,000 in assets, let's say, from
your 401K to a taxable account at your broker's, wrote a check from your
checking account at the bank for the taxes on that $10,000, and continued
to
hold the $10,000 in assets in your account at the broker's. No loss,
right?
Another way of looking at it is if you must withdraw say 1000 a year from
you 10000 retirement fund to live. Your 1000 is 10% of you retirement
account. If the market drops by half you must now with draw 20% of the
account to get the same 1000 required to live. If the market has
historically returned 10% per year the return on the first scenario will
match what you need to live. In the second scenario the return is only
half of the 20% you need to with draw. In this scenario your retirement
fund runs out in less than 10 years. Who is going to support these people
when their retirement is gone.


You've identified the problem, basically. Now, I don't know your situation,
but for me, I don't have to touch anything. I can wait out the return in
value without taking a loss, since nothing in my portfolio will change.

Who's going to support these people? The taxpayers of course! We already do
that for millions of people. We do that via programs like welfare, medicare,
social security, etc. It's a good and bad thing. It's good because we (well,
most of us) care about our fellow citizens. It's a bad thing (especially
now) because the price is so high and we can't continue forever at such a
high price.

We need to find solutions, and claiming, as Dave does, that it's solely the
function of the private sector is a fantasy at best. The ultimate "private
sector" scenario transfers all social programs, including police and fire to
those who can afford them, which is a non-serious argument.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com