Good evening, Frank... Frank Reichert wrote:
> The limitations the President seeks for imposing restrictions on the > number and type of securities taxpayers will be forced to choose from > is scary given the track record of political under the table deals > that politicians make all the time to prop up and pour government > corporate welfare into often failing or under capitalized enterprises. My point exactly, Frank. > As I understand it, there will be "approved" stocks and mutual fund > portfolios 'allowed' in which taxpayers will have the option of > choosing one or more of the approved ones. All other investments, not > so approved, would be off limits insofar as the transfer deduction to > a retirement account with the social security offset in place. > > Now, how many politicians do you really trust, not to mention the > bureaucrats running the programme, with your retirement investment > funds? I would suggest that the ones giving the most lucrative > campaign contributions might very well be on the government's overall > 'approved' list of securities, while upstart young corporations that > might show more promise, would be left out. Talk about a government > subsidy to the rich and famous! Not just a subsidy to the rich and famous, but very *specific* rich and famous friends and contributors of whatever President is in office at any given time, starting with the Bush family. Come to think of it, wasn't Enron a heavy contributor to the Bush re-election campaign? Dave -- Dave Laird ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) The Used Kharma Lot Web Page: http://www.kharma.net updated 11/24/2004 Usenet news server : news://news.kharma.net Fortune Random Thought For the Minute If they were so inclined, they could impeach him because they don't like his necktie. -- Attorney General William Saxbe _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
