Quote:
Originally posted by Mister_Ruysbroeck
1. It wasn't the businesses, it was the unions. This all started happening when the unions were in their prime. You act like the companies could actually bargain back then. Now that the power of the unions is waning, most companies are scaling back their pensions.
2. Admin costs saved? What costs more - paying hundreds of thousands of stock brokers a cut of your portfolio to interface with traders or paying base salaries to the few thousand people who are employed in the administration of institutional pension plans? Economies of scale, my friend. Adminstration costs per participant go down drastically as the number of people in the plan goes up. It costs me significantly less in admin fees to invest in my 401(k) than it would if I did it on my own through an IRA.
3. Huge assumption from someone who clearly doesn't know jack shit about pension plans.
Anyway, stop trying to justify your own choices by trying to make other people's retirement planning seem "crazy" (especially considering you seem to know very little about what you're demeaning). The fact is 401(k)s are probably the best retirement savings mechanism ever invented.
|
1. Thats not what I said, but I agree with your non-reply.
2. The admin costs should be born by the person who holds the investment, rather than an employer. If the business was not manging a pension, it would have ZERO expenses, right? You got an option that beats $0.00 in admin expenses?
3. I'm not justifying my own choices at all. IRAs are a good way for people to save. But its goddamned sad thing that business has to play nanny.
