Obama and nationalizing 401K plans....

[MonkeyK]

Might schmight.

show me an actual relevant proposal from Obama before you go speculating on how he is going to do all this crazy stuff.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: Genx87
SS is an entitlement program. If it were an insurance program it would require one to qualify for its benefits. The only qualification is age. And what besides disability does it insure?

This is incorrect. To recieve SS retirement benefits one needs at least 40 quarters of qualifying employement. Disability/widow/orphan benefits.

Answer the second part, what exactly besides disability does it insure exactly?

I did. SS provides widow and orphan benefits. It also provides old age benefits and old age survivors benefits, but I assumed you already knew that.

Edit: As I pointed out previously, to get those old age benefits, you have to have met the 40 quarters requirement. Folks really should read up on the program they are positive is broken.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Besides the obvious being it is a blanket program that is doomed to failure due to demographics?

A welfare like system would serve us better. Make people qualify for benefits.

What you propose is a slippery slope and it all depends on who is running the show and the details of those qualifications. I am not sure where I stand on that one because it is opening Pandora's box so to speak. You can start out with a reasonable set of qualifications but if those are ever changed too much to appease conservatives with a lot of money then it could get really nasty.

All I know is that I want something consistent, solid, and little to no risk. It must to be a backup plan for everyone that needs it and everyone that needs it must not find it troublesome to get it.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
He is NOT going to nationalize them, that would be a disaster of epic nature. After that the Democrats would never win another race in 20+ years. It would essentially amount to the government stealing the money from everyone with a 401k.


What they MAY do though is tax peoples 401k in ways they have not been taxed before. 401k are tax free to some degree and they could take that away. Or if they got bold, and crazy, they could go after past gains that were not taxed. But again, that would be a death blow to the party.

Think about this... in 1993 Democrats passed a tax increase that was retroactive back to the first of that year and there was HUGE outrage and lawsuits over it. Now imagine they try passing a bill to tax 401k gains seen in prior YEARS. People would go nuts over it.

I'm playing devil's advocate, but IF the party wanted to they could go after that stuff as you say and give it back to the people. Afterall, there's that quote about democracy being valid until the people realize they can vote themselves the riches, right? I doubt it will happen, but since poor and middle class people don't have much in 401ks and they do have most of the votes, in a worse case scenario it could happen.

in 1993 Democrats passed a tax increase that was retroactive back to the first of that year

That's brutal.

I think SS should be limited to people who truly need it, so that it can be streamlined. I'd rather fend for myself with a potentially better investment approach, if I could save some SS contributions. A lot of people my age would benefit from that, but somehow keep SS around for people who through bad luck like health or just basic stupidity did not setup any retirement give them some basics so that they're not homeless at 75.

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
He is NOT going to nationalize them, that would be a disaster of epic nature. After that the Democrats would never win another race in 20+ years. It would essentially amount to the government stealing the money from everyone with a 401k.


What they MAY do though is tax peoples 401k in ways they have not been taxed before. 401k are tax free to some degree and they could take that away. Or if they got bold, and crazy, they could go after past gains that were not taxed. But again, that would be a death blow to the party.

Think about this... in 1993 Democrats passed a tax increase that was retroactive back to the first of that year and there was HUGE outrage and lawsuits over it. Now imagine they try passing a bill to tax 401k gains seen in prior YEARS. People would go nuts over it.

Both sides are stealing from anyone under 40(SS) and still get elected. Hell they might claim this is the only way to save SS is to steal evil rich peoples 401k money. I would not put anything past the unholy trio of Obama/Pelosi/Reid with a filibuster proof senate.

I agree it is not Obama's plan but he has yet to stand up to his party. I see nothing that would show that Obama would be nothing more than a rubber stamp to Pelosi/Reid. Its not like Obama has ever show he is a stronger leader willing to take on his own party when they are wrong like on Freddie and Fannie.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont know if this is an Obama plan. However a democrat senator was talking about a plan to move people onto a program like Federal Thrift plan. There was a thread about it maybe 3 weeks ago.

I laughed my fucking ass off at it as well since that is exactly what many on the right have been advocating as a replacement for the current SS system. They pissed and moaned about doing any kind of privatizing of the system then change their mind when a democrat majority + democrat president will be in power.

Then you were so busy laughing you didnt bother to read about the differences because the R version and D version are so far apart as to be almost opposites.

The R version in fact was a government sponsered 401k whereas the D version is nothing more then a government controlled savings account.....Almost identical to SS in fact......

 

[Vic]

Our daily FUD.

 

[Thump553]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
He is NOT going to nationalize them, that would be a disaster of epic nature. After that the Democrats would never win another race in 20+ years. It would essentially amount to the government stealing the money from everyone with a 401k.


What they MAY do though is tax peoples 401k in ways they have not been taxed before. 401k are tax free to some degree and they could take that away. Or if they got bold, and crazy, they could go after past gains that were not taxed. But again, that would be a death blow to the party.

Think about this... in 1993 Democrats passed a tax increase that was retroactive back to the first of that year and there was HUGE outrage and lawsuits over it. Now imagine they try passing a bill to tax 401k gains seen in prior YEARS. People would go nuts over it.

Thank you PJ for speaking with common sense.

Incidentally the paranoid part of me agrees with your second paragraph as well-but not limited to Dems (as opposed to GOP) and not limited to 401ks. For example, I do not trust Roth IRAs. People are making long term investment decisions based on the assumption that the tax law will be the same in their golden years as it is now. I can see a future President and Congress, years down the road, reacting to a national crisis (ie, government is broke) by changing the tax laws from then forward-for example, by making future withdrawals from a Roth IRA taxable. I go with a conventional IRA, taking the known tax benefits now versus the potential benefits sometime down the road.

I don't have access to a 401k. If I did I would probably use it, at least to get the employer matching, but I would keep a close eye on proposed changes in the tax law which may affect me adversely.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Genx87
Besides the obvious being it is a blanket program that is doomed to failure due to demographics?

A welfare like system would serve us better. Make people qualify for benefits.

What you propose is a slippery slope and it all depends on who is running the show and the details of those qualifications. I am not sure where I stand on that one because it is opening Pandora's box so to speak. You can start out with a reasonable set of qualifications but if those are ever changed too much to appease conservatives with a lot of money too much then it could get really nasty.

All I know is that I want something consistent, solid, and little to no risk. It must to be a backup plan for everyone that needs it and everyone that needs it must not find it troublesome to get it.

It isnt difficult. How do people currently qualify for Welfare? The funny thing about SS is since it is a blanket program people who dont need it recieve its benefits. That cost hurts the people who need it the most. For an example a friend of mine's grandmother died. His grandpa recieved her SS benefits at 2K\month. The guy owned a multi-million dollar supply company. Does he need a SS check every month?

Implement a qualifying litmus test and you can lop off a nice % from the system. Use it as a safety net, not as a thank you for 40 years of service blanket retirement system.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont know if this is an Obama plan. However a democrat senator was talking about a plan to move people onto a program like Federal Thrift plan. There was a thread about it maybe 3 weeks ago.

I laughed my fucking ass off at it as well since that is exactly what many on the right have been advocating as a replacement for the current SS system. They pissed and moaned about doing any kind of privatizing of the system then change their mind when a democrat majority + democrat president will be in power.

Funny the government workers don't even pay into social security. You're right, they pay into the thrift program. It's much better than SS.

Wrong. Only people under the old plan that went away in the early 80's don't pay SS. Even then they still paid the same % for their retirment plan. So their check was the same as if they did pay SS.

I and most do pay SS like everybody else.

 

[TheDoc9]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: Genx87
I dont know if this is an Obama plan. However a democrat senator was talking about a plan to move people onto a program like Federal Thrift plan. There was a thread about it maybe 3 weeks ago.

I laughed my fucking ass off at it as well since that is exactly what many on the right have been advocating as a replacement for the current SS system. They pissed and moaned about doing any kind of privatizing of the system then change their mind when a democrat majority + democrat president will be in power.

Apples and oranges. 401ks are retirement accounts, SS in an insurance program. Folks tend to forget that when comparing SS returns to stock market returns. They are two different animals. When's the last time you heard someone complain about the return on their auto insurance? Note that I don't support the idea of a TSP for all program.

SS is not an insurance program. it was sold as that originally but it is no longer one. it's a forced savings account at a crappy rate that you may not have access to if congress changes its mind.

SS is a ponzi scam. It's the biggest one ever created. Normally these are illegal and whatever made the legislators believe they could operate one without consequence is a true mystery.

you don't reform ponzis and save them, they collapse on their own its only a matter of time.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Genx87
Besides the obvious being it is a blanket program that is doomed to failure due to demographics?

A welfare like system would serve us better. Make people qualify for benefits.

What you propose is a slippery slope and it all depends on who is running the show and the details of those qualifications. I am not sure where I stand on that one because it is opening Pandora's box so to speak. You can start out with a reasonable set of qualifications but if those are ever changed too much to appease conservatives with a lot of money too much then it could get really nasty.

All I know is that I want something consistent, solid, and little to no risk. It must to be a backup plan for everyone that needs it and everyone that needs it must not find it troublesome to get it.

It isnt difficult. How do people currently qualify for Welfare? The funny thing about SS is since it is a blanket program people who dont need it recieve its benefits. That cost hurts the people who need it the most. For an example a friend of mine's grandmother died. His grandpa recieved her SS benefits at 2K\month. The guy owned a multi-million dollar supply company. Does he need a SS check every month?

Implement a qualifying litmus test and you can lop off a nice % from the system. Use it as a safety net, not as a thank you for 40 years of service blanket retirement system.

I believe that what you are saying can be implemented correctly. I really do. All I am expressing is that there are possibilities where it can go extraordinarily bad and that it is a slippery slope. However, with the right president in charge who is not afraid to veto anything with a nasty loophole in it, I think that we can do it right.

I still wouldn't mind an honest effort to try and fix the current system first before we implement it though.

 

[JS80]

I hope Obama gets a supermajority congress and starts acting Chavez. That way we can have a real revolution and burn down the capitol. I think history will show that democracy almost inevitably leads to socialist fascism.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
He is NOT going to nationalize them, that would be a disaster of epic nature. After that the Democrats would never win another race in 20+ years. It would essentially amount to the government stealing the money from everyone with a 401k.


What they MAY do though is tax peoples 401k in ways they have not been taxed before. 401k are tax free to some degree and they could take that away. Or if they got bold, and crazy, they could go after past gains that were not taxed. But again, that would be a death blow to the party.

Think about this... in 1993 Democrats passed a tax increase that was retroactive back to the first of that year and there was HUGE outrage and lawsuits over it. Now imagine they try passing a bill to tax 401k gains seen in prior YEARS. People would go nuts over it.

Maybe that's not a bad thing? I'm kind of hoping for Obama + supermajority Congress.

 

[alien42]

the house called in a bunch of economists recently to give their opinion on the economy and specifics such as 401k plans. Teresa Ghilarducci, of Notre Dame, is the specific person who brought up this idea about nationalizing 401ks. the House wanted to here as many perspectives as possible so nothing was missed.

what happened was someone cherrry picked a single statement from one of many people and then said that the Dems and Obama would nationalize 401ks which is utter BS.

the irony is that i received the mis-information from a successful financial planner and had to research the reality for myself.

read about her ideas here - http://www.nd.edu/~tghilard/

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: JS80
I hope Obama gets a supermajority congress and starts acting Chavez. That way we can have a real revolution and burn down the capitol. I think history will show that democracy almost inevitably leads to socialist fascism.

Please tell me you are joking?

If not then fuck you. How dare you or any American hope for that to happen to their own country let alone any other country. You basically said you want this country to be completely destroyed and forced to start over assuming that we even get the chance to start over regardless of the vast amounts of suffering in the process.

 

[AWVigo]

Originally posted by: JS80
I hope Obama gets a supermajority congress and starts acting Chavez. That way we can have a real revolution and burn down the capitol. I think history will show that democracy almost inevitably leads to socialist fascism.

... wow ... keep up that good work there.
You fail at humanity.

Darn I miss the real Republican party, you know the one that offered moderation and true conservatism (when conservatism did not = God/Bail Outs/and baby killer crys).

Will the real Republicans please stand up?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: AWVigo

Originally posted by: JS80
I hope Obama gets a supermajority congress and starts acting Chavez. That way we can have a real revolution and burn down the capitol. I think history will show that democracy almost inevitably leads to socialist fascism.

... wow ... keep up that good work there.
You fail at humanity.

Darn I miss the real Republican party, you know the one that offered moderation and true conservatism (when conservatism did not = God/Bail Outs/and baby killer crys).

Will the real Republicans please stand up?

I bet that's what the British sympathizers said about the American Revolutionaries.

What's your solution if your government goes wild and democracy doesn't fix it? bend over and take it in the ass?

 

[AWVigo]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: AWVigo

Originally posted by: JS80
I hope Obama gets a supermajority congress and starts acting Chavez. That way we can have a real revolution and burn down the capitol. I think history will show that democracy almost inevitably leads to socialist fascism.

... wow ... keep up that good work there.
You fail at humanity.

Darn I miss the real Republican party, you know the one that offered moderation and true conservatism (when conservatism did not = God/Bail Outs/and baby killer crys).

Will the real Republicans please stand up?

I bet that's what the British sympathizers said about the American Revolutionaries.

Let me know when you can find a source for that. Or build a time machine.
Until then, enjoy raging against that machine of yours.

 

[sandorski]

Coming real soon: Obama to Socialize You First Fetus----As part of Obama's Socialist Stemcell Research Program, all first pregnancies will be Aborted and the Fetus will be used for Research!!!