We're Lowering Your Wages

[sealybobo]

My wife and I had no safety net when we started our business. I have no family to rely on and my wife's mom is in no way able to help us at all. We risked everything to run our own business. If it failed we were going to be sleeping in our car with our 3 dogs. We worked, and saved every dime for years, took personal loans, pulled money out of our IRAs and used credit cards for start up capital and equipment.

Once again you assume too much and use broad brushes to simplify the world so that you can understand it.

What about welfare? Was that available when you started your business?

Would you like to do away with welfare entirely?

Because it was there for you when you started your business.

It's called a safety net.

And most business owners do have someone they could fall back on.

And did you get government loans? I guess it is really hard to get loans today, unless you are a high roller like you clearly are.

 

[sealybobo]

Well you want to give the government even more control in the private sector, so yes I'm saying you want to increase the power of the government. Alexander Hamilton would be proud of you, so would Lincoln for that matter.

I don't care what FOX News says, I don't watch trash. They certainly did grow it.

Nope, I sure don't want the government interfering in the private sector, especially since they have no Constitutional authority to do so. It actually didn't happen between 2000-2008, and only a fool would believe that it did.

I must be, for trying to educate you.

Do you differentiate between private companies and publicly traded companies? In other words, should government interfer in publicly traded companies?

Here is a perfect example of what's been going on.

Mr. Zell financed much of his deal’s $13 billion of debt by borrowing against part of the future of his employees’ pension plan and taking a huge tax advantage. Tribune employees ended up with equity, and now they will probably be left with very little.

As Mr. Newman, an analyst at CreditSights, explained at the time: “If there is a problem with the company, most of the risk is on the employees, as Zell will not own Tribune shares.” He continued: “The cash will come from the sweat equity of the employees of Tribune.”

It is unclear how much Zell will lose, but one thing is clear: when creditors get in line, he gets to stand ahead of the employees.

it is worth remembering all the people who mismanaged the company beforehand and helped orchestrate this ill-fated deal — and made a lot of money in the process. They include members of the Tribune board, the company’s management and the bankers who walked away with millions of dollars for financing and advising on a transaction that many of them knew, or should have known, could end in ruin.

(See, this stuff was allowed for 8 years. It's happening with the banks, mortgage industries, oil and auto industry. It's almost as if it was done on purpose. All the rich people at the top made out like bandits. It's the employees/labor that's getting fucked. Pensions GONE! So if government doesn't interfer, and Bush's government didn't, then Corporations will continue to do shit like this)

It was Tribune’s board that sold the company to Mr. Zell — and allowed him to use the employee’s pension plan to do so. Despite early resistance, Dennis J. FitzSimons, then the company’s chief executive, backed the plan. He was paid about $17.7 million in severance and other payments. The sale also bought all the shares he owned — $23.8 million worth. The day he left, he said in a note to employees that “completing this ‘going private’ transaction is a great outcome for our shareholders, employees and customers.”

Tribune’s board was advised by a group of bankers from Citigroup and Merrill Lynch, which walked off with $35.8 million and $37 million, respectively. But those banks played both sides of the deal: they also lent Mr. Zell the money to buy the company. For that, they shared an additional $47 million pot of fees with several other banks, according to Thomson Reuters. And then there was Morgan Stanley, which wrote a “fairness opinion” blessing the deal, for which it was paid a $7.5 million fee (plus an additional $2.5 million advisory fee).

On top of that, a firm called the Valuation Research Corporation wrote a “solvency opinion” suggesting that Tribune could meet its debt covenants. Thomson Reuters, which tracks fees, estimates V.R.C. was paid $1 million for that opinion. V.R.C. was so enamored with its role that it put out a press release.

But what about those employees? They had no seat at the table when the company’s own board let Mr. Zell use part of its future pension plan in exchange for $34 a share.

Mr. Newman, the analyst who predicted the trouble, said in an interview on Monday, “The employees were put in a very bad situation.” He added that while boards are typically only responsible to their shareholders, this situation may be different. “There has to be a balance,” he said, “to create sustainability for all the stakeholders.”

Dan Neil, a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for The Los Angeles Times, led a lawsuit with other Tribune employees against Mr. Zell and Tribune this fall. The suit contended “through both the structure of his takeover and his subsequent conduct, Zell and his accessories have diminished the value of the employee-owned company to benefit himself and his fellow board members.”

If the employees win, they will become Tribune creditors — and stand in line with all other creditors in bankruptcy court.

The latest news on mergers and acquisitions can be found at nytimes.com/dealbook.

 

[Bern80]

Oh you possess them. Don't pretend. If you are arguing with me, you possess.

And even if I'm getting the little details wrong, you're opinions/ideas are still bad.

So what did I assume? I assumed you defended Bush? Big deal. You certainly defend a lot of his policies.

Anyways, if you are not an Obama supporter, I assume you are an idiot or wrong.

I like SOME of what Ron Paul says, but the rest is shit. Every man for himself.

And the GOP might sound good, but too bad they don't do anything they say.

So whether you are a libertarian or conservative or republican, it's all the same to me.

The little shit I assume/accuse you of really isn't important.

And don't think you guys don't lump us liberals all together.

Anyways, if you aren't with me, then you are against me.

I dont' even remember what the argument is about. Say, did you see that story about the Tribune? PERFECT example of corporations and rich owners buying companies, raiding the pension funds and now the employees are getting FUCKED!!!!

But I guess government has no role in regulating that.

But keep in mind that BUSH is the one that passed the law back during his FIRST recession that allowed companies to dip into their pension funds.

But I guess in your mind, government should have never passed the law preventing companies from dipping into their pension funds so it was ok that Bush undid that regulation.

But now the government will have to back those pensions. What do the CEO's or Bush care about the government or treasury? They view government as the enemy, right?

Face it sealy. you're a chicken shit. It's why people like you do what you do. You lump people into one category or positions regardless of it's accuracy to make yourself right. It's analogous to winning through cheating. If you cheated, you didn't win, it's that simple. then amazingly you have the balls to accuse me of lumping you into a group, implying that it is indeed a bad thing, all the while admitting you do the same yourself. What a grown up you are to essentially say what I'm doing is wrong, but since you believe (incorrectly) that i'm doing it you're going to do it as well.

I'm sure we could have a grand debate on the actual issues, the pros and cons of each etc., but clearly you can't do that. You're stuck in Bush bash mode.

None of what I have debated in this thread as even touched this party or that parties policies, again because to me they are completely irrelevant. the reason for that is simple. When it comes to people who are motivated to accumalate wealth or people that simply want to be financially independent, you will find in terms of reaching that goal what political party is in power, or which one did this or that is irrelavant. If there are obstacles in their way they understand as I have said, that figuring out who is to blame for said obstacle is waste of time in overcomeing it.

This is more about basic human nature than any policy bobo. People rightly or wrongly attribute success to their own efforts. Conversely the tend to blame external sources for failures. Look no further than a mirror for evidence of that.

 

[sealybobo]

Face it sealy. you're a chicken shit. It's why people like you do what you do. You lump people into one category or positions regardless of it's accuracy to make yourself right. It's analogous to winning through cheating. If you cheated, you didn't win, it's that simple.

I'm sure we could have a grand debate on the actual issues, the pros and cons of each etc., but clearly you can't do that. You're stuck in Bush bash mode.

None of what I have debated in this thread as even touched this party or that parties policies, again because to me they are completely irrelevant. the reason for that is simple. When it comes to people who are motivated to accumalate wealth or people that simply want to be financially independent, you will find in terms of reaching that goal what political party is in power, or which one did this or that is irrelavant. If there are obstacles in their way they understand as I have said, that figuring out who is to blame for said obstacle is waste of time in overcomeing it.

This is more about basic human nature than any policy bobo. People rightly or wrongly attribute success to their own efforts. Conversely the tend to blame external sources for failures. Look no further than a mirror for evidence of that.

Look at what I wrote to Kevin Kennedy right below your reply to me.

Please tell me what the employees at the Tribune did wrong in life.

And, please defend what that Zell guy did, along with the CEO who walked away with millions, and the bankers who knew buying the Tribune was a bad buy, but they all stood to profit. And they used the employees pension fund to buy the garbage company, and now all those employees are getting fucked!

And that's just one company of many that can tell this exact story during Bush's time in office. And during Delay's rule.

Again, it's almost the exact same story of hedge fund, sub primes, speculation, gouging, assessing companies worth to be way more than they are actually worth, golden parachutes, oil exec's, phara execs, big 3 CEO's, etc.

And not only did the employees take the hit, but these top 1%'ers took the entire economy down.

How you defend what the top 1% have done to the country is beyond me. Selling off America to foreign countries, selling ports to arab countries.

It's not just the GOP, it's the baby boomers. They're going out with a bang. They don't care about future generations or the American middle class.

And clearly you are cocky enough to think you are immune from being affected by all this. Maybe you are. Good for you. But I think it has also made you blind to what's going on.

If a baby cries, sometimes you let them cry until they stop. But when a baby (me) cries for 12 hours, you better go see what's wrong, because something is clearly wrong!!!

 

[Bern80]

Look at what I wrote to Kevin Kennedy right below your reply to me.

Please tell me what the employees at the Tribune did wrong in life.

And, please defend what that Zell guy did, along with the CEO who walked away with millions, and the bankers who knew buying the Tribune was a bad buy, but they all stood to profit. And they used the employees pension fund to buy the garbage company, and now all those employees are getting fucked!

And that's just one company of many that can tell this exact story during Bush's time in office. And during Delay's rule.

Again, it's almost the exact same story of hedge fund, sub primes, speculation, gouging, assessing companies worth to be way more than they are actually worth, golden parachutes, oil exec's, phara execs, big 3 CEO's, etc.

If you can show this is standard operating procedure for the majority of business owners, you would have a case. But there are MILLIONS of businesses and business owners in this country. That coupled with the FACT that the a vast majority aren't subjected to trying to live of this living wage is evidence that this isn't the rampant disease you think it is. No one is saying this stuff doesn't happen, and I'm certainly not defending what happened, but pretending it's the way most business owners operate is ridiculous.

And clearly you are cocky enough to think you are immune from being affected by all this. Maybe you are. Good for you. But I think it has also made you blind to what's going on.

If a baby cries, sometimes you let them cry until they stop. But when a baby (me) cries for 12 hours, you better go see what's wrong, because something is clearly wrong!!!

No one is totally immune to anything. Some people simply take it upon themselves to better insulate themselves from economic conditions.

 

[Bern80]

Not more, the same control they had before Bush got into office. Just like I want the tax rates to go back to before Reagan got into office.

Does it say somewhere in the constitution that the government has no right regulating the private industry? So private industry can do whatever they want? Please explain.

The government is WE THE PEOPLE. The Government does what we need it to do. If corporations are doing something that hurts we the people, then government steps in.

This is just a rediculous argument. Government has no authority? That's a rediculous thing to say.

Can you show me where the Constitution specifically says gov. should stay out of private industry?

Don't know the constitution real well do you. In a nutshell, it was written such that if isn't specificlally spelled out inthe constitution, government can't do it. That' why we have constitutional amendment process, so exactley stuff like that can't happen. Are you seriously so stupid that you want our government to have the ability to say 'hey they constitution doesn't say we can't do that, so let's do it."?

 

[RodISHI]

This is more about basic human nature than any policy bobo. People rightly or wrongly attribute success to their own efforts. Conversely the tend to blame external sources for failures. Look no further than a mirror for evidence of that.

The other basic nature of humans is greed too Bern.

Without adequate protection people cannot be assumed to be self reliant, it is that simple.

That statement should clarify that other question you asked of me.

Any nation/community unwilling to protect those who do not have the education/ability to protect themselves from corporate bullies and raiders does not deserve to be blessed with wealth.

 

[Zoomie1980]

The other basic nature of humans is greed too Bern.

Without adequate protection people cannot be assumed to be self reliant, it is that simple.

That statement should clarify that other question you asked of me.

Any nation/community unwilling to protect those who do not have the education/ability to protect themselves from corporate bullies and raiders does not deserve to be blessed with wealth.

If you are too stupid or lazy to get an education in this country or to figure out how to protect yourself, tough, too bad. It's your own fault, deal with it.

 

[Bern80]

The other basic nature of humans is greed too Bern.

Without adequate protection people cannot be assumed to be self reliant, it is that simple.

That statement should clarify that other question you asked of me.

Any nation/community unwilling to protect those who do not have the education/ability to protect themselves from corporate bullies and raiders does not deserve to be blessed with wealth.

You're phrase is simply wrong and rests on faulty presumption (been a lot of those around here of late). The presumption whether you realize it or care to admit is that without government people would basically just be mean to each other. Pretty ridiculous. I continue to suggest you do little introspection and find out if perhaps your singular experience has caused you to paint an inaccurate picture of the rest of business and business owners.Your phrase is more accurately stated, Without adequte SKILLS people can not be assumed to be self reliant, it's THAT simple. Your mandate that business be responsible for maintaining a person's minimum standard of living renders the acquisition of skills pointless. And protecting people from corporate bullies, which I would agree to, is a far cry from corporations being required to provided your basic necessities.

Are you simply afraid to admit to admit to your contradiction? It should not be this hard to to explain yourself in simple english. You haven't even bothered to deny the accuracy of the positions attributed to you so I am forced to remaine convinced that somehow you manage to hold at the same time two beliefs that can not be. I repeat

YOU CAN NOT BE OF THE POSITION THAT THE BURDEN FALLS EQUALLY ON ALL OF US TO PROVIDE FOR EACH OTHERS BASIC NEED AND AT THE SAME TIME HOLD THAT IT IS BUSINESSES RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE FOR BASIC NEEDS. THE LATER NEGATES THE FORMER. COMPRENDE?

PUT YET ANOTHER WAY, YOU CAN NOT ON THE ONE HAND Say YOU SHOULDER SOME BURDEN FOR YOUR BASIC NEEDS, THEN BE FOR A MANDATE WHICH WOULD PUT LITTLE TO NO BURDEN ON YOU FOR MEETING THOSE SAME NEEDS.

And we aren't talking about people unable to provide for themselves and I have no problem helping people that truly need help. That is a far cry from a perfectly able bodied individual putting up and endless stream of excuses as to why they bare little responsibility in providing for themselves.

 

[editec]

If you are too stupid or lazy to get an education in this country or to figure out how to protect yourself, tough, too bad. It's your own fault, deal with it.

If only society were remotely that simple, eh?

We wouldn't need any government if it were.

 

[Zoomie1980]

If only society were remotely that simple, eh?

We wouldn't need any government if it were.

We don't need government. At least not for those purposes.

 

[RodISHI]

If you are too stupid or lazy to get an education in this country or to figure out how to protect yourself, tough, too bad. It's your own fault, deal with it.

I see so these people deserve to be raided by government too!

SWAT team raid Amish organic family food cooperative.


Is it that they are not smart enough to protect themsleves by asking ODA what they need to do to comply with the law? Or is it just your take that they have no right to pursue freedom and happiness in living without chemically altered foods? Tell me if you do not know how to grow a garden or raise a cow or if you do not have any land to do this, should we say just eat whatever your education, ability will allow you to eat just because you were to stupid to by a farm or your family did not previously own that farm?

Are you calling them lazy too? What is your policy for freedom? People like yourself indoctrinated into taking whatever life feeds you deserve to eat whatever corporate america will feed you. These people do not deserve to be forced to live under the likes of sellouts to the system. Just as people who do daily every day mudane jobs do not deserve to be treated as third world country slaves that work for corporate masters.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What about welfare? Was that available when you started your business?

Would you like to do away with welfare entirely?

That depends. I'd like to get rid of the frauds on welfare. I'd like to change the laws so that people can't keep having kids while they're on welfare. but that's a different thread.

Because it was there for you when you started your business.

Personally, I would clean floors on my hands and kness before taking a dime from welfare.

It's called a safety net.

And most business owners do have someone they could fall back on.

And you know this because you persoanlly know most business owners right?

If it's so easy to start a business and it's "no biggie" as you say if it fails, then why don't you give it a try? You'd be in for a rude awakening.

And did you get government loans? I guess it is really hard to get loans today, unless you are a high roller like you clearly are.

No i did not get government loans. I took a personal mortgage for the property, a personal 50K loan for start up capital, found an investor to buy a 10% interest and be a silent partner, took money from our IRAs, an annuity was cashed in and we used credit cards and leases for the rest.

You are so fucking pathetic. You think that everyone NEEDS the fucking government just to survive.

We didn't take a dime of government money, in fact we saved and sacrificed for years to be able to open our business, but you wouldn't understand that because you think it's so easy to start a business.

Well go ahead BooBoo start a business and get back to me when you start forking over tens of thousands of dollars a year to the fucking government and let me know how easy it is and how happy you are to see the government wasting your money.

 

[editec]

If you are too stupid or lazy to get an education in this country or to figure out how to protect yourself, tough, too bad. .

Street Crime and political corruption are ALSO forms of the social darwinism, too, Zoomie.

So next time you are screwed by a politician, or robbed by somebody at gunpoint, or you're swindled in a business deal, just remember:

It's your own fault, deal with it.

 

[sealybobo]

\


No i did not get government loans. I took a personal mortgage for the property, a personal 50K loan for start up capital, found an investor to buy a 10% interest and be a silent partner, took money from our IRAs, an annuity was cashed in and we used credit cards and leases for the rest.

You are so fucking pathetic. You think that everyone NEEDS the fucking government just to survive.

We didn't take a dime of government money, in fact we saved and sacrificed for years to be able to open our business, but you wouldn't understand that because you think it's so easy to start a business.

Well go ahead BooBoo start a business and get back to me when you start forking over tens of thousands of dollars a year to the fucking government and let me know how easy it is and how happy you are to see the government wasting your money.

I don't think it's sooo easy. You have a bug up your ass. Lighten up. I worked with a guy who started his own company. I was going to be a partner. I went without pay so the business could continue, bla,bla, etc. Don't act like what you did is so fucking rare or unique. It's not. And to me, it's not worth it. I'd rather work for someone else. Unless it really took off and we were wealthy from it. But most of my small business owner friends make as much as I do and they work 6 days a week. I get sick days, vacation days, healthcare and weekends off. You wouldn't believe how many days off I get.

Oh, the government is stopping you from being successful. Stop whining you little bitch.

PS. You had a partner. Safety net. Checkmate bitch!!!

 

[sealybobo]

If you can show this is standard operating procedure for the majority of business owners, you would have a case. But there are MILLIONS of businesses and business owners in this country. That coupled with the FACT that the a vast majority aren't subjected to trying to live of this living wage is evidence that this isn't the rampant disease you think it is. No one is saying this stuff doesn't happen, and I'm certainly not defending what happened, but pretending it's the way most business owners operate is ridiculous.

No one is totally immune to anything. Some people simply take it upon themselves to better insulate themselves from economic conditions.

I didn't say it was standard operating procedure. I asked you if the government should step in and maybe pass a law that prevents companies from doing what this Zell guy did with the Tribune pension.

After Enron, the government passed Sarbanes Oxley to prevent that from ever happening again.

And people all across the country have lost their pensions due to shady practices like this. But thanks for downplaying people's tragedies. It is what I have been accusing you people of all along. You are callous to anything that hasn't happened to you.

So all the 50 year olds at the Tribune who counted on that money to retire should have opened a business. We should all open business'.

Funny, that is what Bush was supposed to be all about. A pro start your own business president. I bet more people went out of business under bush than any other president, including Carter.

And most of my small business friends are smart enough to admit that the GOP did NOTHING for them. They'd gladly pay $2k more in taxes if people would just come back and start spending again.

Gotta feed the pig. In America, people are more imporant than business. So if we have to pay taxes, so does your shitty struggling business.

 

[sealybobo]

We don't need government. At least not for those purposes.

You have no clue how important government is in your life.

Who are we if we are not the USA? Isn't that a government?

Where do you live? What state? What do you do?

You guys act like government is the enemy or problem.

No wonder you can't govern. You can't govern if you don't believe in government.

 

[Care4all]

We are all individuals and we all have our own certain circumstances that have lead us to where we stand in life....

It's too arrogant and presumptuous in my opinion, to LUMP ALL the business owners together in to uncaring, GREEDY BASTARDS.....not giving a poopie about their own employees surviving and making a living so that they can take home more of the loot....

As well as it being arrogant for their opposition to LUMP ALL the people that are making the least among us, in to LAZY BASTARDS....not giving a poopie about themselves and stuck in their own POOR status, merely because they are lazy.

Everyone, comes to where they are today, through the circumstances and environment in which they reside, and how they are able to respond to it.

Of course, one guy is going to have the heads up, on some other guy....someone that was able to go to a good public school and afford to be able to go to a good college if accepted in to it, MOST CERTAINLY have a heads up on the person that was reared in a ghetto, with crappy public schools and uneducated, poor, parents.

so, their environment gave one an easier road than the other, to succeed and have the "American life", with food, family, and the income to put a home over their head....without the gvt dole.

Things are not equal for everyone, and ALL shouldn't be equal for everyone....

but certain things, to give those disadvantaged from the beginning, SHOULD be in place to give them a leg up on being able to provide for themselves with the "American Dream"...and this to me would be a very strong, and good Public education system, no matter where you live, even in the ghetto or in a Farming community in the middle of nowhere land....

But anyway, getting back to what i was thinking about when it comes to this thread....on the Business owners...

it is unjust for some of us, to also put ALL Businesses in to the same big lump of people not giving a hoot about their employees who make them richer and wanting to pay them the LEAST AS POSSIBLE so that they can reap the benefits, without thought or concern.

I don't think all employers are that way....i have worked for employers that had entire depts whose duty was to shop the competion on each and every position the company had, to make certain they were paying their employees a fair and competitive salary.

And of course someone sweeping your porch, taking the trash to the dump, mowing your lawn and cleaning your house or serving you a big mac is not WORTH more than let's say, the administrative assistant, or even the sales clerk in a large shoe area in a department store....(i know for a FACT, they bust their butt running back and forth to the stock room to find the shoes and a few others the customer wants to try on, and hopefully buy...), a waitress works harder than the porch sweaper or someone ringing a register, as well.

What the minimum wage argument is, is that the maid, should at least get minimum wage, and the others with low end jobs a Department store sales clerk, should be paid even a little more, because they generated much more in SALES than the maid did.... that's just sensible in my opinion!

At the same time, not all business owners are these greedy mongers, and not all business owners start from the same position or spot....SO NOT ALL of them can afford to have a bunch of employees, all making above minimum wage....some might have only one employee working for them and even that one they can't afford but they know they have to go in the RED paying him so that they can someday grow the business enough that they make it in to the Black....a profit.

Skull's business is different than zoomies or Bern's or Ravi's etc.

To lump skull's small business in to the same category of Burger King's business is UNFAIR, because he is at a different spot in his business than the next guy....

I guess, what i am trying to do, is make all of us realize that some, like skull have a good arguement on keeping minimum wage down DUE TO WHERE he stands in his life with his business, and that we need to recognize this...THOSE OF US that argue for a minimum wage need to be a little less arrogant and narrow minded, to the point that we do not recognize that each person does not have the same circumstance and ability to give raises, as others do.

JUST AS not all poor people or minimum wage workers, are stuck in the spot that they are in for the same reason of pure LAZINESS.

oh and there are exceptions to the rule all over the place, I realize such....the ghetto kid becomes a Yale graduate CEO, and the kid who had everything at his fingertips with every leg up as possible and family money out the kazoo, becomes the skid row, drug / alcohol addict, or a loser....

but remember, these are exceptions, not the rule.

care

 

[indago]

"poopie"???

 

[sealybobo]

If you can show this is standard operating procedure for the majority of business owners, you would have a case. But there are MILLIONS of businesses and business owners in this country. That coupled with the FACT that the a vast majority aren't subjected to trying to live of this living wage is evidence that this isn't the rampant disease you think it is. No one is saying this stuff doesn't happen, and I'm certainly not defending what happened, but pretending it's the way most business owners operate is ridiculous.
No one is totally immune to anything. Some people simply take it upon themselves to better insulate themselves from economic conditions.

First of all, you probably don't even provide a Pension, so don't get your panties in a bunch.

As Americans confront the reality of severely depleted retirement savings, a new financial specter threatening retirement security emerges: the solvency of defined-benefit pension plans. Experiencing their worst historic performance in 2008, both public and corporate pension funds have faced staggering losses, placing enormous financial pressure on state and local governments and corporations that fund them.


Corporate employers face an added challenge in addressing their pension fund losses. The 2006 Pension Protection Act (PPA), effective this year, requires corporate pension funds to be fully funded by the end of 2008. This high threshold will be difficult to achieve for many of the 700 largest corporate plans, which have fallen to an average of 83 percent funding, down from 100 percent at the end of 2007.

Public pension funds also face shortfalls regarding long-term funding of their direct benefit pension obligations. In 2008, Wilshire Associates reported that of the 56 state retirement systems which reported 2007 data, 75 percent were underfunded with an average funding ratio of 82 percent.

Americans have lost $2 trillion in their workplace retirement plans in the past 15 months, threatening the security of millions, according to government data.

While some 401 (k) participants are making unwise investment choices, the "exposure to broad market risk is unavoidable" for nearly all workers, said Peter Orszag, the Budget Office's director. That's partly because investment choices in the plans are weighed in favor of equities.

We all agree CITI, Lehman & The Big 3 CEO's have all done a horrible job running their companies. They acted irresponsible and basically risked their employees pensions. The CEO's all made millions. Even when the economy was bad and their companies were failing, they made sure they paid themselves first.

So to let these corporations and ceo's regulate themselves is out of the question.

Anyways, we're in charge now. REGULATORS! Mount up!