Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

starbucks4ever (65.10)

If your 401K were invested in Capone's business, would you still support his trial?



September 29, 2009 – Comments (6)

Apparently not, judging from this article.


"Now, single-payer proponents will argue that these companies aren't adding value to the health-care system anyway. They're toll collectors, paying the bills and taking their cut anytime a sick person visits a doc. Allow someone else (Obamacare) to pay the bills, and there's no reason for the insurers to exist. So what's wrong with letting them follow the horse-whip tanners and buggy manufacturers into the dustbin of history?

It's not fair to them. It's not fair to us. Companies won't stand for it. Investors won't stand for it. We won't stand for it. Who you callin' "we," buster? I'm calling you "we." And before you disagree, pull that mutual find statement out of the trash, shake off the coffee grinds, and give it a good read-through. You may be surprised to learn just how big a stake you already have in the health-care insurance industry. Same deal with your 401(k). Same thing for your pension plan. "


A side note: that 401K also includes some shares of defence contractors. Maybe we should stay in Irak after all...



6 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 29, 2009 at 8:29 PM, devoish (82.63) wrote:


Thanks for the links. 

Rich Smith's first article is interesting. I had wondered about the value to pensions/investors of the Insurers.

Presuming Rich's estimate of 100bil is low, probably 200bil is closer, divide that by 310million Americans and we each have $650. at stake in their survival. One time, plus growth. Of course the executives with billions (collectively) in stock options get enough to lower that number quite a bit.

In exchange, Single Payer could save 450 billion/year in healthcare costs (price) without affecting or healthcare at all. So if I give up a onetime payment of $650 plus equity growth, I could instead have $1450, every year forever. Plus "whatever I invest it in" growth.

I've decided.

Sometimes the best investment is not an equity.

Report this comment
#2) On September 29, 2009 at 8:44 PM, starbucks4ever (65.10) wrote:

The whole "but we own shares" thing is silly (as I pointed out in a comment to that article), but that's really a poor counterargument. It implies that had we owned enough shares, we would then have to support this fraudulent system. But the only correct way to think of it is by saying that Carthage has to be destroyed, period. Otherwise we would inevitably find ourselves supporting any gangster who is able to sell enough of his shares to the public.

Report this comment
#3) On September 30, 2009 at 8:46 AM, lemoneater (57.24) wrote:

I agree with you, zloj, we have consciences and we are responsible to use them even if it goes against our monetary profit. The ends should not justify the means.

Report this comment
#4) On September 30, 2009 at 8:57 AM, BMFPitt (91.16) wrote:

I indirectly own shares in many companies (through SPY, and through involuntary taxpayer equity) that I would love to see fail.  If I had to ake a 5% hit to make AIG, Citi, Fannie & Freddie wiped off the face of the Earth, I'd be thrilled.

Report this comment
#5) On September 30, 2009 at 9:38 AM, catoismymotor (< 20) wrote:

I would have to support the trial. With most 401ks your money is spead over dozens of companies. If Capone's company makes up something like 5% of the holdings in my 401k then it will only effect me for a short while. It is best that justice be served and the filth removed from my holdings.

Report this comment
#6) On September 30, 2009 at 10:06 AM, starbucks4ever (65.10) wrote:


exactly my feelings.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners