>>Like I said, boy are you in for a rude awakening.
>
>Don't think so because I'm listening to the advice of experts,

Auther Anderson? :-) Merriel Lynch? Dick Lay?
Or the hundreds of brokers who make money by churning stocks? (Isn't it nice that they make a commission on the buy and on the sell, and they incourage both. Talk about conflict of interest!)

>not brokers or financial planners or any of these other idiots. I'm well diverisified and sticking to the only thing that is proven to work. Dollar cost averaging- I invest fixed amounts over fixed intervals. It has been proven time and time again the person who does so will have a lower cost per share than the person who tries to time the market.
>
>What else can I do, put my money in mason jars?
>
>Most importantly, the ratio of stocks to bonds in my portifolio is inversely proportational to my age. In the other words, by the time I reach retirement and need to draw down funds, I will have no stocks and thus no risk. At no point was I ever greater than 60% stocks. Now I'm down to about 40% at age 43 and will be down to 0% stocks by retirement.
>
>I feel a lot of compassion for people who lost their savings. But I must say anyone who puts all their eggs in one basket, is not investing, they are gambling. Also, anyone in stock near retirement is a gambler too. To me gambling and greed are the same thing.
>
>I must admit during the past few years I wanted to buy alot of stocks, but I didn't let GREED get the best of me. I settled for a much lower return in exchange for saftey and piece of mind. You must be your own best advocate!
>
>Open almost any Economics textbox. Somewhere in the first chapter it will say "There is no free lunch".
>
>I have full faith in Capitolism and the American way!

So do I. What Enron, (and Microsoft) represents isn't capitalism or the American way, unless robber barrons represent the American Way.

>
>Charlie