Our financial system is crumbling this week.

[Popeye_Card]

They're not as sympathetic figures as a farmer losing the farm, but they are losing their livelihood nonetheless.

Hey, these folks went to Columbia and Wharton. Surely they can find a new job somewhere. Maybe even one where they don't have to get their hands dirty or wear a hairnet.

[AdmiralKird]

I don't know where to begin.

Education and skill sets aren't entitlements, they're personal assets. It's what you do with them that counts.

[Arthur Dent]

This response seems pretty normal to me. They've been living in a bubble -- which is part of the reason we're in this current mess -- and they've got a lot of emotional investment in their financial net worths and their annual salaries. The realization that they're not different from the Sysco delivery guy can't be an easy thing for them, especially since Wall Street has never been particularly interested in hiring people with perspective. Then there are the more tangible anxieties they face, such as losing some or maybe all of their income and, in all likelihood, a good chunk of their retirement savings too. They're not as sympathetic figures as a farmer losing the farm, but they are losing their livelihood nonetheless.

I agree. I'm sure it is traumatic, and I'm guessing these people haven't the first clue how to live on the delivery guy salary. What gets me is the belief that having gone to Columbia or Wharton means that they should automatically get a huge salary and the utter contempt for the people who bring them their food. I'd be willing to bet that this executive is in favor of "entitlement reform" too.

[Freed Roger]

Whoaa -as of yesterday, our 401K is in the black with change in market value for 2009. one hundred and eleven dollars!

Now if it can hold until 3pm central - time to move about about 15% of the stock mutual funds into money market fund.

look what I caused last Friday by moving a chunk of the vast Freed retirement funds Major market indexes down 3%+ . Sorry folks.

Along that line - I stopped stocking ABInbev products in the Freed fridge. We had our first major get-together of the year and we offered no A-B products, which is unusual for a picnicky type event. Nobody complained. Not really a boycott, but just voting with my dollar.

Now Emerson Electric has a memo doing the same. I sense a growing discord against A-B Inbev. Before long - AB will be nothing more than a brand name with ever-diminishing value. Sure -Inbev may be able to milk the brand for profits as it dismantles the old AB. But the future of the King of Beers as we knew it - is bleak. Sorry again.

[Popeye_Card]

Did you know: People making over $250k/year are not well-off?

I like this part:

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com, says data show that over the last 10 years, education costs have risen 5.91% annually, and health- care expenses have gone up 4.16% annually, while wages and income have risen only 3.7% over the same time span. That means many families are seeing a greater percentage of their income going toward those two areas.

Education costs, which are far outstripping wages and income, are especially worrisome for this income bracket because upper-income earners are much less likely to receive the kind of financial aid that lower income levels can expect.

Hey guess what? These costs are escalating for people making less than $250k too. And they probably have worse health insurance. And I doubt you will have that much trouble affording (*shiver*) a state school even without need-based scholarships. If your kid is smart, there's plenty of merit-based scholarships.

I also like this part:

For the Parnells, their perception of themselves is based on the math. The value of their house is down $60,000. Ms. Parnell says the couple's gross income last year was about $260,000. Taxes, premiums for medical care and deductions for Social Security and their 401(k) contributions cut the gross to about $12,000 per month. The family tithes $1,300 a month at their church. Their mortgage, second mortgage and payment on land they bought is nearly $4,000 a month. Other expenses, including their family car payment, insurance and college funds, as well as basics like food, utilities and donations to charities, leave them with about $1,200 left over each month.

"I'm not after sympathy. We are blessed. What I want is a reality check on what rich means," Ms. Parnell says. "I can pay my mortgage and I can buy some clothes. I'm not going without, but I'm not living a life of luxury."

So you're telling me that you have $1200 a month left over after all the bills are paid. Oh my gosh--you must be suffering! Maybe buy a different house that doesn't cost you a $4k a month mortgage payment.

We're also talking a 3% increase in income tax. It's not like the government is taking 10% more.

[Leroy]

They should stop giving to the church because they are going to hell for being rich anyway.

[cpebbles]

So you're telling me that you have $1200 a month left over after all the bills are paid.

And $1300 a month is thrown away...

[thrill]

So you're telling me that you have $1200 a month left over after all the bills are paid.

And $1300 a month is thrown away...

but tax deductible.

[greenback44]

What gets me is the belief that having gone to Columbia or Wharton means that they should automatically get a huge salary and the utter contempt for the people who bring them their food. I'd be willing to bet that this executive is in favor of "entitlement reform" too.

I'm picturing Dan Aykroyd's character from "Trading Places" here.

I see this kind of obnoxiousness as the investment banker equivalent to a certain poster accusing me of not being a real fan. It's just what I expect from these folks (and after much effort I think I've learned to ignore it). Their mindset probably didn't just start when they joined Lehman Brothers or even when they went off to college; many have been fed the Ayn Rand stuff, in one form or another, since they were in grade school. When they're told they're failures after years of hearing nothing but the opposite, they're going to lash out. Let 'em, because that form of coping isn't nearly as damaging as calling up their buddies in the Treasury Department or on Congressional staffs.

[cpebbles]

Incidentally, can we stop just implicitly agreeing with these reporters that the backlash against bonuses to bailed-out executives constitutes "populist rage?" They were heading to bankruptcy and these obligations were going to be wiped out anyway. The government stepped in to prevent defaults that were going to destabilize the world economy. The taxpayers are not obligated to pick up the tab for every last obligation the companies had (Or in some cases obligations they came up with after they got their hands on government funds), and my one big problem with this administration is still that they tried to shame AIG into accepting that instead of playing legal hardball to set precedent.