- This topic has 1,770 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by GH.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 15, 2011 at 7:47 PM #696779May 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM #695594paramountParticipant
And while were at it: In my experience 401k’s suck, but are great for Wall Streeters.
May 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM #695682paramountParticipantAnd while were at it: In my experience 401k’s suck, but are great for Wall Streeters.
May 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM #696282paramountParticipantAnd while were at it: In my experience 401k’s suck, but are great for Wall Streeters.
May 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM #696429paramountParticipantAnd while were at it: In my experience 401k’s suck, but are great for Wall Streeters.
May 15, 2011 at 7:49 PM #696784paramountParticipantAnd while were at it: In my experience 401k’s suck, but are great for Wall Streeters.
May 16, 2011 at 1:34 AM #695629CA renterParticipantWhat’s funny, paramount, is that I don’t disagree with anything written there, with the one exception of raising the retirement age for public safety workers to 60. Most of them cannot work past 55 because of the nature of their work. OTOH, I’ve said time and time again, that the 3% formula for their retirement is too generous.
May 16, 2011 at 1:34 AM #695717CA renterParticipantWhat’s funny, paramount, is that I don’t disagree with anything written there, with the one exception of raising the retirement age for public safety workers to 60. Most of them cannot work past 55 because of the nature of their work. OTOH, I’ve said time and time again, that the 3% formula for their retirement is too generous.
May 16, 2011 at 1:34 AM #696317CA renterParticipantWhat’s funny, paramount, is that I don’t disagree with anything written there, with the one exception of raising the retirement age for public safety workers to 60. Most of them cannot work past 55 because of the nature of their work. OTOH, I’ve said time and time again, that the 3% formula for their retirement is too generous.
May 16, 2011 at 1:34 AM #696464CA renterParticipantWhat’s funny, paramount, is that I don’t disagree with anything written there, with the one exception of raising the retirement age for public safety workers to 60. Most of them cannot work past 55 because of the nature of their work. OTOH, I’ve said time and time again, that the 3% formula for their retirement is too generous.
May 16, 2011 at 1:34 AM #696818CA renterParticipantWhat’s funny, paramount, is that I don’t disagree with anything written there, with the one exception of raising the retirement age for public safety workers to 60. Most of them cannot work past 55 because of the nature of their work. OTOH, I’ve said time and time again, that the 3% formula for their retirement is too generous.
May 16, 2011 at 7:18 AM #695639scaredyclassicParticipantIs it possible there is a relationship between the lack of sustainability of our resource use and the lack of sustainability in our economic system?
May 16, 2011 at 7:18 AM #695728scaredyclassicParticipantIs it possible there is a relationship between the lack of sustainability of our resource use and the lack of sustainability in our economic system?
May 16, 2011 at 7:18 AM #696327scaredyclassicParticipantIs it possible there is a relationship between the lack of sustainability of our resource use and the lack of sustainability in our economic system?
May 16, 2011 at 7:18 AM #696474scaredyclassicParticipantIs it possible there is a relationship between the lack of sustainability of our resource use and the lack of sustainability in our economic system?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.