* Gary Denton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Perhaps Erik can point me to these mutual funds with management fees > less than 0.18% that an individual investor can participate in?
Sure. Here are three: --------------- Expense TICKER Ratio =============== 0.09% ETSPX 0.10% FSMKX 0.10% FSTMX --------------- Of course, if Americans decide that saving a few basis points outweighs having a little bit of individual choice in their investments, then the best thing to do would be to invest the money in a large instutional type fund. Then you can get down to 0.05% or below, for example: --------------- Expense TICKER Ratio =============== 0.05% VITBX 0.03% VIIIX 0.03% VITPX By the way, VIIIX is an S&P500 index fund that actually beat the S&P500 index, AFTER ALL EXPENSES, by an average of 0.06% a year over the last 10 years. In other words, VIIIX has a net NEGATIVE expense ratio! (This is because Gus Sauter and his team are skilled at transactions involving bid/ask spreads and S&P500 index futures) > The other argument that Erik is making are that the the $2 trillion > transition cost is simply making explicit the unfunded obligations of > the SS fund. Not quite. A good argument if true but the $2 trillion > is simply additional federal borrowing to replace the money diverted > from going to SS to meet current obligations from individuals. You > can recognize that Erik realizes this when he states the unfunded > obligations of SS is over $10 trillion. No, you are quite confused. The SS deficit is somewhere between $3 trillion and $10 trillion, depending on how you measure. The $2 trillion in borrowing is simply transferring $2 trillion of that deficit from an implicit obligation to an explicit one on the books. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
