From: "Mark" 


"Jeff Shultz"  wrote in message
news:pan.2005.02.05.06.22.53.618247{at}shultzinfosystems.com...
> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 21:33:03 -0500, Geo wrote:
>
>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>> news:41fc1036$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>> However, a couple of wheelbarrow's full of regulations for the stock
>> market
>>> were enacted after that event (and a red wagon full's worth after the
>>> October surprise in the late eighties).
>>
>> and even after all that how many retirement plans, insurance company
>> portfolios, etc were lost when the internet bubble burst?
>>
>> The difference is that investments in the market are investments, SS is
>> insurance.
>>
>> Geo.
>
> How many were "lost" vs. how many are just not worth as much
as they were
> at the overly inflated top?

Not to mention how much more the account was worth, even after the drop,
than it would have been sitting in the equivalent of a money market account
(or worse actually) during the same time frame. I was going to mention,
earlier, that dollar cost averaging during the "accumulation"
phase actually benefits the investor even more after a downturn, as they
accumulate more shares than they otherwise would have, but the die is cast
in this thread: investing is bad, you always lose -- so, no point in going
into depth about it.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5