Democrats eye juicy 401K's (Again)

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Democrats just cant seem to find enough money to satisfy their spending desires. But stealing your 401k from you would allow them to gorge on potatoes for a few more years.

Hope and Change.

Remember back in 08 when there was talk to it?

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

Well, its back.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...tiatives-limiting-401-k-choices-ici-says.html

Americans Oppose Initiatives Limiting 401(k) Choices, ICI Says

Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. investors oppose federal initiatives that would force them to give up control over their 401(k) accounts, the Investment Company Institute said.

Seven in 10 U.S. households object to the idea of the government requiring retirees to convert part of their savings into annuities guaranteeing a steady payment for life, according to an institute-funded report today.

“Households’ views on policy changes revealed a preference to preserve retirement account features and flexibility,” the institute, which represents the mutual-fund industry, said in the report.

The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.

The institute’s member companies manage $11.6 trillion of assets in mutual funds, including employer-sponsored 401(k) accounts. Some lawmakers have questioned the public-policy value of the tax benefits for people investing in retirement accounts, the ICI said in a report today.

The average 401(k) fund balance dropped 31 percent to $47,500 at the end of March 2009 from $69,200 at the end of 2007, according to a Fidelity Investments review of 11 million accounts it manages. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index tumbled 46 percent in that period. The average balance of the Fidelity accounts recovered to $60,700 as of last Sept. 30 as the stock market rebounded.

Senator Herb Kohl, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, proposed legislation on Dec. 16 to require fund companies to do more to ensure 401(k) options are appropriate for workers. The Wisconsin Democrat cited reports that target- date funds designed for people retiring in 2010 invested in high-yield, high-risk corporate bonds.

Representative George Miller, a California Democrat, is advocating legislation to require more disclosure about 401(k) fees paid by investors. The Education and Labor Committee, which Miller leads, approved a bill requiring more disclosure about fees in June.

The ICI survey was based on a telephone survey of 3,000 households from Nov. 20 to Dec. 20 and had a sampling error of plus or minus 1.8 percent.

http://market-ticker.org/archives/1830-401kIRA-Screw-Job-Coming.html



Now this is a guaranteed rape job.

In a short conversation this noontime that CNBC apparently has omitted from their archives (Why's that folks?) Rick Santelli was talking about a potential to effectively force money into the Treasury market.

Where would they get this?

From your 401k and IRA accounts!

From Businessweek:

The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.

Let me tell you what this is - it is an attempt to prevent the collapse of the Treasury market!

Forcing people into Treasuries as an "annuity" is exactly what Social Security allegedly is. Except that Treasury stole the money that was collected in FICA taxes and spent it!

Guess what? They'll do that here too - you're going to "invest" in Treasuries which of course are effectively a CALL option on the future taxing ability of the government.

The problem is that with an aging population and the immigrant problem (illegal immigrants that is), along with offshoring, the aggregate wage base will drop and thus this is the most dangerous investment of all!

What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI - the "inflation index" - as they have for the last 30 years) so as to guarantee that you lose over time compared to actual purchasing power.

THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE THE 1980s AND IT WILL NOT CHANGE!

I have been talking about this for quite some time and recall writing a Ticker on it a year or more ago, although I can't find the entry immediately.

Let me be clear:

I have no quarrel with the government mandating that you have a choice in your IRA or 401k account to buy short-duration Treasuries - much like the "G" fund that government and civil-service workers have.

But - "choices" have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market - so they will effectively tax you by forcing your "retirement" money to buy them!

This may be the only way for Treasury to hold down interest rates to something reasonable in the intermediate term, but doing so will instantaneously remove a major source of funding for the stock market - that is, the monthly and quarterly inflows from retirement accounts.

You can bet this won't be good for you, the ordinary American.

You can also bet that once such an "option" is made available there is a very high probability of the government doing things that either promote or simply don't stand in the way of another stock market crash as a means of "herding" your money into Treasuries - so they can blow it - all under the guise of being allegedly "safe".

Of course this begs the question - what if the government can't pay down the road when you retire, just as they can't pay on a forward basis with Social Security and Medicare?

This "proposal" can only mean one thing - Treasury smells smoke. Maybe you should pay attention to what they're huffing!

And before you say "oh they'd never do that" I want you to read this:

Here is a warning to us all. The Argentine state is taking control of the country’s privately-managed pension funds in a drastic move to raise cash.

...

My fear is that governments in the US, Britain, and Europe will display similar reflexes. Indeed, they have already done so. The forced-feeding of banks with fresh capital – whether they want it or not – and the seizure of the Fannie/Freddie mortgage giants before they were in fact in trouble (in order to prevent a Chinese buying strike of US bonds and prevent a spike in US mortgage rates), shows that private property can be co-opted – or eliminated – with little due process if that is required to serve the collective welfare.

Any questions?

PS: If the video shows up I'll update this ticker.... and if you're wondering what hammered the dollar starting at about 9:00 today, this is probably it. Such a "move" would free the government to further abuse the issuance of Treasuries rather than take necessary austerity steps and places us even further down the road toward a political and economic collapse.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
In the government's view your too stupid for your own good and it must force you to act as it pleases. On the surface it "seems" like a good idea, closer to retirement your distribution should be heavily vested in guaranteed returns anyway. But not by the force of law. It's getting awfully close to fo time.
 
Last edited:

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Great idea, but the only question I have unanswered is whether it comes with no-name lubricant or we get a marquee lubing from KY-brand first.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Great idea, but the only question I have unanswered is whether it comes with no-name lubricant or we get a marquee lubing from KY-brand first.

Govt run operation. THe first 5% get some shitty lube. The other 95% of us no lube at all.
 

totalnoob

Golden Member
Jul 17, 2009
1,389
1
81
I came to the conclusion last year that my tax free retirement accounts would not be safe when I retire in 20 years, so I cashed everything out. The current trend of government growth and welfare state philosophy seems to make it inevitable that politicians will eventually say "If you were rich enough to save thousands of dollars you're rich enough to pay a few extra taxes now"..and they will remove the 0% tax rate on Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks. Only a minority of the population has Roth accounts and we all know politicians have no problem going after the "rich" minority who made wise decisions over the years.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I came to the conclusion last year that my tax free retirement accounts would not be safe when I retire in 20 years, so I cashed everything out. The current trend of government growth and welfare state philosophy seems to make it inevitable that politicians will eventually say "If you were rich enough to save thousands of dollars you're rich enough to pay a few extra taxes now"..and they will remove the 0% tax rate on Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks. Only a minority of the population has Roth accounts and we all know politicians have no problem going after the "rich" minority who made wise decisions over the years.
You may be right. I half agree with it, which is in fact why I'm hesitant to start a Roth account. I really am. I see a great chance of them getting "modestly" taxed in the future. A normal IRA/401k you will pay taxes on, and taxes will probably go up, but with a roth you've already paid them and I just really see a great chance of them being forced into some less attractive picture, and if it covers existing money already taxed, well that would be a bitter pill.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
I came to the conclusion last year that my tax free retirement accounts would not be safe when I retire in 20 years, so I cashed everything out. The current trend of government growth and welfare state philosophy seems to make it inevitable that politicians will eventually say "If you were rich enough to save thousands of dollars you're rich enough to pay a few extra taxes now"..and they will remove the 0% tax rate on Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks. Only a minority of the population has Roth accounts and we all know politicians have no problem going after the "rich" minority who made wise decisions over the years.

Sorry, you sound like a guy who decides he just knows his girlfriend will cheat on him eventually, so he dumps her.

Then, he's furious at her, because he lost his girlfriend, and it's all her fault for making him dump her because he knew she'd cheat.

You have cost yourself how much because you 'just knew' the government would do this? In the meantime, you're furious at the government for not giving you a good IRA because you just know they'll break it.

The girlfriend and government are both right to think you're nuts and can't be pleased.

You have taken a nugget of truth and exaggerated and distorted it. The government can go after people with money a lot better ways than taxing Roth.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Sorry, you sound like a guy who decides he just knows his girlfriend will cheat on him eventually, so he dumps her.

Then, he's furious at her, because he lost his girlfriend, and it's all her fault for making him dump her because he knew she'd cheat.

You have cost yourself how much because you 'just knew' the government would do this? In the meantime, you're furious at the government for not giving you a good IRA because you just know they'll break it.

The girlfriend and government are both right to think you're nuts and can't be pleased.

You have taken a nugget of truth and exaggerated and distorted it. The government can go after people with money a lot better ways than taxing Roth.

You really are completely out of touch with reality arent you?

You do realize the Federal government is BROKE right? Its all just a matter of fancy accounting these days to keep that can going down the road a bit further.

The simple fact is the .gov is spending more than its making, by a large margin, and this isnt going to change anytime soon. The 2 options, realistically, are to either start taxing the everloving shit of out the productive members of society or let the bottom feeders fall on their asses.

Now who do you think will get preferential treatment from the government? I assure you its not the ones with a paycheck......
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
You really are completely out of touch with reality arent you?

You do realize the Federal government is BROKE right? Its all just a matter of fancy accounting these days to keep that can going down the road a bit further.

The simple fact is the .gov is spending more than its making, by a large margin, and this isnt going to change anytime soon. The 2 options, realistically, are to either start taxing the everloving shit of out the productive members of society or let the bottom feeders fall on their asses.

Now who do you think will get preferential treatment from the government? I assure you its not the ones with a paycheck......

The government has been spending more than it was making long before 01/20/09. Where were your protests and doom/gloom between Clinton and Obama? Feel free to link you're frequent critical posts, mkay?
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
The government has been spending more than it was making long before 01/20/09. Where were your protests and doom/gloom between Clinton and Obama? Feel free to link you're frequent critical posts, mkay?

Been saying it for a long time. Everyone always points out the plight of the poor and how we have to be giving them all kinds of money due to all the terrible hardships they have suffered.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Put up or shut up. Let us know when/where so we can laugh.
I truly wish, I truly do, that I could go through life trusting everything the government does and says.

Would you really sit still while the government forced you to convert your IRA, 401K or both, into a form of investment that would give them access to your money?

Would you do that? But let's qualify this question. Do you have any money that would fall under the guise of these potential changes?
 
Last edited:

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
You really are completely out of touch with reality arent you?

You do realize the Federal government is BROKE right? Its all just a matter of fancy accounting these days to keep that can going down the road a bit further.

The simple fact is the .gov is spending more than its making, by a large margin, and this isnt going to change anytime soon. The 2 options, realistically, are to either start taxing the everloving shit of out the productive members of society or let the bottom feeders fall on their asses.

Now who do you think will get preferential treatment from the government? I assure you its not the ones with a paycheck......

Simplied for you.

The government can go after people with money a lot better ways than taxing Roth.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
I came to the conclusion last year that my tax free retirement accounts would not be safe when I retire in 20 years, so I cashed everything out. The current trend of government growth and welfare state philosophy seems to make it inevitable that politicians will eventually say "If you were rich enough to save thousands of dollars you're rich enough to pay a few extra taxes now"..and they will remove the 0% tax rate on Roth IRAs and Roth 401ks. Only a minority of the population has Roth accounts and we all know politicians have no problem going after the "rich" minority who made wise decisions over the years.

I precisely didn't invest in a Roth for this reason. Politicians will see a big chunk of cash and want to raid it.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Been saying it for a long time. Everyone always points out the plight of the poor and how we have to be giving them all kinds of money due to all the terrible hardships they have suffered.

You've been railing on Obama for months. Do you have links to your alleged posts where you protested against GWB's budgets? I'd like to see them.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,617
4,708
136
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you take issue with my statement. Why is that?



You just whine and bitch all the time, and don't really provide any thoughtful, considerate or interesting alternatives.

In short...you are soooooooo boring!

Who the hell would ever miss a person like that if they got the hell out of America?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
I precisely didn't invest in a Roth for this reason. Politicians will see a big chunk of cash and want to raid it.

1. Politicians can go after yiour cash OUTSIDE an IRA more easily than in one.

2. I suspect you don't have the cash where the real attractive targets are.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Simplied for you.

Simplified for YOU.

401k, and the Roth subset, contrain trillions in assets. If you think the Democrats dont just drool over the thought of getting their hands on that you are, as I said earlier, out of touch with reality.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
You've been railing on Obama for months. Do you have links to your alleged posts where you protested against GWB's budgets? I'd like to see them.

The search tool is available. If you expect me to put forth that much time to defend some random drive by claim of yours you are sadly mistaken.

Even during the Bush years I expressed my disdain for the endless tap of social programs and budgets problems.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
I truly wish, I truly do, that I could go through life trusting everything the government does and says.

Would you really sit still while the government forced you to convert your IRA, 401K or both, into a form of investment that would give them access to your money?

Would you do that? But let's qualify this question. Do you have any money that would fall under the guise of these potential changes?

Trusting everything the govt says and does? Um, I don't think I said anything like that but feel free to beat up that straw man.

As far as this topic, I don't believe what is alleged in the OP will come to pass.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I would like to better understand who is behind this effort. This will not be popular, who is to blame?

Looks like Kohl just "proposed" something, I assume it hasn't made it out of committee nor been voted on by the Senate?
Senator Herb Kohl, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, proposed legislation on Dec. 16 to require fund companies to do more to ensure 401(k) options are appropriate for workers. The Wisconsin Democrat cited reports that target- date funds designed for people retiring in 2010 invested in high-yield, high-risk corporate bonds.


Why are we getting public comments now? Are the 401(k) rules to be changed by a method other than legislation? Generally these types of public comment thingys are used when the IRS is gonna propose new regulations on an already existing statute (passed by Congress). If the Senate committee is going to prose new legislation I would expect them to hold hearings. I'm not liking the implications here.
The U.S. Treasury and Labor Departments will ask for public comment as soon as next week on ways to promote the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams, according to Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, who are spearheading the effort.

Really?

Some lawmakers are questioning the public policy value?

Damn, I thought the public policy benefits of ensuring people save for their retirement quite obvious. I could understand if they questioned the limitations on tax benefits - are they too high? I think what they are really "questioning" is how they can get their hands on another pot of money.
Some lawmakers have questioned the public-policy value of the tax benefits for people investing in retirement accounts, the ICI said in a report today.

Seems to me this change would have a lot of bad public policy affects. When the government swoops in and confiscates retirees' savings through taxation, who picks up the check if they end up with inadequate funds?

Annuties are notorious for having high commissions. Being forced to purchase those is not only highly questionable but an obvious windfall for insurance companies and banking/investment firms. Haven't these pigs fed at the trough of public funds enough already?

A forced transfer of capital from the private sector to the public sector will likely have some negative unintended consequences (I'm being generous here): (1) The stock market is largely based upon supply & demand, when those stocks are liquidated to purchase 'steady stream' investments the market may drop further aggrevating the problem of sufficient retirement savings for Amricans. (2) More of what we've seen lately, a flow of capital from the private sector to the government. The USA's borrowing is sucking up funds leaving little for loans which our struggling economy needs. This will just be more of the same and further starve business and the economy.

Fern
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |