[Howlin]

John Edwards is lying. Enron employees were NOT required to keep their stock.

He's a liar. And I hate the way he talks. He makes us ALL sound like rednecks.

[Howlin]

Ha ha ha..........CNN is now debunking what John Edwards just said. 89 percent of the employee stock was bought VOLUNTARILY!

[OldFriend]

By now all the demonrats and their cohorts in the media are just hoping this goes away....far away!!!

[Torie]

Here's a bit on the 401k thing on the Anderson thread (it appears Edwards may be correct, at least as to the matching contributions):

Can 401(k)s be protected?

There has been some movement in congress for reform, spurred by the plight of Enron workers who had, on average, 62% of their 401(k) savings tied up in Enron stock. Those savings were largely wiped out because the plan offered little opportunity to diversify. Like many corporate plans, Enron's didn't allow participants to transfer stock that had been given to them as part of a matching contribution until age 50. And Enron officials actively encouraged workers to buy Enron stock. In a memo in August, Lay told employees he'd "never felt better about the prospects of the company. Our growth has never been more certain." Enron workers were further hamstrung by Enron's switching of plan administrators and freezing of all asset shifting within 401(k) accounts for at least 10 days, just as Enron stock was taking its dive. The result was ruin, as Enron sank from $90 to under $1.

[Sueann]

"Enron employees were NOT required to keep their stock"

You're right, and that's true! You see - the funds were frozen (because of an administrator of the plan changeover) and the employees could not sell their stock. Only the top employees could do any selling. It's not fair, but until the rules are changed, it's legal.

My question is: is there any proof the Enron higher ups did this on purpose in order to keep the employees from selling??