PDA

View Full Version : Your 401K...or theirs?



Goose
11-07-2008, 10:38 AM
Does anybody take seriously the reports that the government is actually doing studies to consider nationalizing all pensions, 401K's, IRA's, etc. and replacing them a government IOU similar to social security.

Wonder if Obama would go along with this.

Marvin S
11-07-2008, 10:47 AM
The government is looking for every available source of revenue. The latest definition of rich is now down to $50K, this comes from Obama land. As they have done with SS benefits under Clinton, if someone has income they will look to extract their share of your hard earned wealth even though you may have been previously taxed.

They are again punishing those who mind their assets & do not live beyond their means.

K.Bullock
11-07-2008, 10:54 AM
Does anybody take seriously the reports that the government is actually doing studies to consider nationalizing all pensions, 401K's, IRA's, etc. and replacing them a government IOU similar to social security.

Wonder if Obama would go along with this.

I haven't looked into it because I am not looking at my 401k again until June. But I did hear something about the government proposing to insure 401k's.

I do not understand the full nature of that, but what I heard along with that is that the banks were not fond of the idea because the interest on the smaller accounts would be minimal compared to what could be gained from a 401k.

If I am off in left field I plead ignorance. :)

I would be interested to hear from someone who knows though.

Bob Gutermuth
11-07-2008, 11:00 AM
One news broadcast I heard involved the Govt taking them over, limiting the interest to 3% an then paying them back to the owner as part of the SS check, with tax taken out on the interest.

thunderdog
11-07-2008, 11:04 AM
From what I understand, your 401k would be placed under control of the government and invested in government bonds with a 3% return rate. At the time of retirement, you would get one check from the government that would include your Social Security and your 401k. There is also talk of eliminating the pre-tax contribution that currently exists. At your death, your heirs would be entitled to 50% of your 401k value and the government would pocket the rest.

Sounds just like good old socialism at it's finest. I wonder how long it would take for the government to squander all their new found wealth and bankrupt the system just like they have done with Social Security.

Joe

Buzz
11-07-2008, 11:32 AM
This is all based on a plan presented to congress by a Teresa Ghilarducci. I have not read nor do I understand the plan. I don't favor making changes to 401k laws, I have a self directed IRA that my company can put up go 25% of my income into each year, and I see that plan plus social security replacing 100% or more of my pre-retirement income. I would be seriously upset if after working all these years to save for retirement if the government pulled the rug out from under me.

Here is this lady's website. You can find and read her plan there:

http://www.nd.edu/~tghilard/

What really gets my goat is to hear that congressmen refer to tax breaks for IRA contributions as government investment. What they need to understand is that these are only deferred taxes, and that taxes will be paid on the money when it is withdrawn after retirement.

Joe S.
11-07-2008, 11:34 AM
A link to a discussion on this subject:

http://www.publicradio.org/columns/marketplace/gettingpersonal/2008/10/nationalizing_401k_assets.html

Kind Regards,

Joe S.

badbullgator
11-07-2008, 11:40 AM
From what I understand, your 401k would be placed under control of the government and invested in government bonds with a 3% return rate. At the time of retirement, you would get one check from the government that would include your Social Security and your 401k. There is also talk of eliminating the pre-tax contribution that currently exists. At your death, your heirs would be entitled to 50% of your 401k value and the government would pocket the rest.

Sounds just like good old socialism at it's finest. I wonder how long it would take for the government to squander all their new found wealth and bankrupt the system just like they have done with Social Security.

Joe

I am hoping they give a one time out thing with little to no penalties on early withdrawal for those wishing to not participate in such a program. I will take my chances investing my own money or burying it in the back yard before I will give what is left of my 401 to the gooberment. The way they are trying to sell this is to reinstate the value to what it was in August. Read that giving those of us who have 401’s money from those of us who pay taxes. Not sure how that works exactly, because pretty much anyone who has a 401K must be working and paying taxes in the first place so the government is going to give us back the money lost since August by using our tax money….what good guys they are. I do however find the reinstatement of the August value to be hard to believe because why would they want to give the “rich” anything. Could there be a limit on the amount they roll back to the August date to keep someone with 500K in their 401 from getting more than someone who has 5K in their 401? Nationalization SUCKS!!!!!! Gold and guns my friends, gold and guns…..

dixiedog
11-07-2008, 12:15 PM
I would be seriously upset if after working all these years to save for retirement if the government pulled the rug out from under me.


Buzz,

Haven't you been an advocate on this site for Obama for the past few months?

Goose
11-07-2008, 12:39 PM
Sadly we've reached the point in this country where it's every man for himself. You simply must try to protect your 'stuff' from those in government who want to make it their 'stuff'. I would certainly want to opt-out of letting the government steal my pension.

I suppose President-elect Obama would call me selfish.

Buzz
11-07-2008, 01:03 PM
Buzz,

Haven't you been an advocate on this site for Obama for the past few months?


First of all, this isn't an Obama plan. It is a plan put together by some economist at Notre Dame. She presented to to congress. I don't really understand the plan, but I like the one I have right now. The company I work at is partially mine, so I'm sure whatever happens I'll be able to take that 25% of my income that currently goes into my 401k and do something else with it.

Just because I favored Obama over McCain doesn't mean that I have to agree with or support him when he does something I think is stupid and destructive.

SueLab
11-07-2008, 04:01 PM
http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

My advice to my children is to spend it all now and live high on the hog. Doing without so that one can save for a more confortable retirement doesn't work - so don't bother! Savers are the minority and the majority wants what you have managed to save...

It is "patriotic" to pay more tax and to let the government "redistribute" your 401K savings...

Terry Britton
11-07-2008, 05:16 PM
http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

My advice to my children is to spend it all now and live high on the hog. Doing without so that one can save for a more confortable retirement doesn't work - so don't bother! Savers are the minority and the majority wants what you have managed to save...

It is "patriotic" to pay more tax and to let the government "redistribute" your 401K savings...

In an engineering econ class that I took over a year ago, the professor did go over that there are times when it is best to spend all of your dollars than to save them. Of course, you can spend it on stuff like Barton and Reed Francis 1 sterling silver that will go up in value, or be worth something if the dollar fails.

Pete
11-07-2008, 06:34 PM
Teresa ghiladuchi is a economist proffessor. And thats what a giant brain comes up with. Educated idiots are a dime a dozen these days. The only problem is they have way to much influence. I wonder who ties their shoes in the morning.
Spend less than you take in....... Thats my theory. I came up with it all on my own.
I have spent 50 years attending the finest educational facility in the world.

The School of Hard Knocks
It makes Harvard and Yale graduates look like a bunch of retarts.
Pete

J Hoggatt
11-07-2008, 06:54 PM
I really don't know anything about if this is being discussed or just rumored. But I would think that everything is on the table right now due to the uncertainty of the future and should be. All of this stuff is repulsive to a free enterprise system....stuff like buying up mortgages, reducing mortgages to the value of the asset etc., etc........but we are in unchartered waters my friends.

I fully expect to see the Dow at around 4500 and an unemployment rate of 12% at the end of the first quarter. Just for a moment put your mind around those numbers and now assume you are 1 of the one's unemployed.......does that change your perspective any????

It is impossible to stop a train on a dime, turn it around, and resume speed......that is an analogy to the direction of the economy right now.

Every citizen and family is going to have some pain, and no one knows what the pain medicine is since we are in unchartered waters.



Bruce

Bruce - now you talking - but you will still blame W for this - When it is WELL DOCUMENTED that Congress (mostly Democratic) that has a TON OF BLAME/Responsibility. All well, you and I started to agree on something.

But the turn around won't happend until about 4 years from now - when we get rid of what we just voted in - BIGGER GOVERNMENT - SPEND SPEND SPEND......and don't throw the cost of the war on top of this -No matter who was in office that expense we can not afford to avoid. Can you say DEPRESSION !!! NOT recession...- If the Dem's are not kept in check with their spending..... taxation.........

Good Luck - no need to talk Dogs any more - Only about two people on this board will be able to travel to the events.

PS( please answer my pm to you on ken's forum)

Terry Britton
11-07-2008, 10:41 PM
Don't worry too much about this. The lobbists will keep Washington in check. The big brokerage firms have too much to lose if the 401K fees were taken from them.

Bruce MacPherson
11-07-2008, 11:02 PM
I really don't know anything about if this is being discussed or just rumored. But I would think that everything is on the table right now due to the uncertainty of the future and should be. All of this stuff is repulsive to a free enterprise system....stuff like buying up mortgages, reducing mortgages to the value of the asset etc., etc........but we are in unchartered waters my friends.

I fully expect to see the Dow at around 4500 and an unemployment rate of 12% at the end of the first quarter. Just for a moment put your mind around those numbers and now assume you are 1 of the one's unemployed.......does that change your perspective any????

It is impossible to stop a train on a dime, turn it around, and resume speed......that is an analogy to the direction of the economy right now.

Every citizen and family is going to have some pain, and no one knows what the pain medicine is since we are in unchartered waters.



Bruce

And your comfortable with the fact that it's on the table? If your quite sure that the Dow and the unemployment numbers are going to be where you think they are then a few people are going to hedge their bets by investing in commodities like gold and make a bundle off the mess. There are tons of opportunities out there just got to have the guts to take a flyer once in a while.

M Remington
11-08-2008, 09:06 PM
This one's as rich as "he'll take our guns away." Elections can't be won by espousing conspiracy theories.

Terry Britton
11-09-2008, 12:47 AM
This one's as rich as "he'll take our guns away." Elections can't be won by espousing conspiracy theories.

I think they throw that stuff out there so the people on the otherside donate to the cause stopping it, and everyone in Washington makes proffits through the percieved fight and lobbyists.

SueLab
11-09-2008, 07:27 PM
Don't worry too much about this. The lobbists will keep Washington in check. The big brokerage firms have too much to lose if the 401K fees were taken from them.

I don't take any news on confiscating 401Ks lightly...social security is in the hole because the funds are in the general fund and the monies are spent freely.

Pelosi wants to tax capital gains at 45% (I think that I remember that correctly) - again to redistribute income. It is just killing some in Washington that there are trillions of dollars in 401K's that the big spenders can't get their hands on unless they reinvent how government can tax those funds and when they can be taxed...

Allowing the government to manage anyone's retirement would be a disaster considering it's track record with SS and how that money is distributed to many who have never contributed a dime and for many purposes that do not include retirement for citizens...

K G
11-09-2008, 09:10 PM
Bruce, since you've posted "all we are saying is give change a chance" (with all apologies to the late John Lennon, who wrote the word "peace" where you put the word "change") on at least five different threads, I'm beginning to believe that you think that you can make it so.

I'm all for giving the new administration a chance. I've said that from the beginning, but BHO made a TON of promises in order to get elected Bruce and I can assure you that the American people, especially the people who voted for him that are waiting for that "sharing of the wealth" that was promised, won't wait an unreasonable length of time to see movement in the correct direction (I didn't say "right" instead of "correct" 'cause I didn't want you to become apoplectic).

And as a point of order, it's "uncharted" not "unchartered" waters. You can chart them, but I'm not sure that you can charter them.....;-)

kg

K G
11-09-2008, 10:19 PM
I am not waiting for "sharing the wealth".

Nor did I say you were...but there are MILLIONS out there who are. You know it and I know it.


No presidential candidate has been able to keep all their promises due to the 2 or 3 party system as it should be.

So you're saying that we shouldn't expect BHO to keep to the words that got him elected? Aren't YOU the one who said he "connected" with more people than McCain? Does this mean that select of his promises were BS just to get him elected? :eek:


Yes, I believe that BHO can make positive change and make difference. There are issue right now that the private sector cannot solve alone by just letting the markets handle it......

Here are some items on the "short" list......

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama

What Podesta says goes regards, :cool:

kg

Hew
11-09-2008, 10:26 PM
From KG's article...

Ex-Clinton hack and current BHO fixer John Podesta (more of that change, eh, Barry?) says, "I think that he feels like he has a real mandate for change. We need to get off the course that the Bush administration has set."

Interesting. BHO wins 52% of the popular vote and that's a "real mandate for change." GWB won 51% of the popular vote and it was "a nation divided." :rolleyes:

Terry Britton
11-09-2008, 10:41 PM
"All we are saying is give change a chance"

Einstein was quoted as saying "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is insanity" or something to that effect. Why would we want to maintain the course we are on?

Regards,


Bruce

Good point, per the MBA / MSETM classes, our companies are already over taxed and over regulated compared to foriegn companies. That is why we are losing so many jobs over seas. Taking into account the differences for wages, companies over seas are twice as profitable as those here in the USA. So, we need to cut back on regulations and taxes if we want to become competitive again.

If we want to become a third world country, we can continue on the current path of more taxes and regulations.

I wish I could figure out how to post some of my lecture materials on here from Greg Watson. Like many, he is no longer working in the USA, and I am lucky to have an instructor that consults directly to CEO's thanks to the power of the internet.

Terry Britton
11-09-2008, 10:46 PM
I am not waiting for "sharing the wealth". No presidential candidate has been able to keep all their promises due to the 2 or 3 party system as it should be. Yes, I believe that BHO can make positive change and make difference. There are issue right now that the private sector cannot solve alone by just letting the markets handle it......

Some of my friends on wall-street believe the healthiest thing to do is let the markets take care of things. IF the banks fail, so be it, others that are more healthy would rise from the ashes. I have already heard of companies taking up the slack of the banks, and creating loans to customers to keep the cashflow and projects rolling.

Innovation and free markets will find a way.

Joe S.
11-10-2008, 08:22 AM
Interesting. BHO wins 52% of the popular vote and that's a "real mandate for change." GWB won 51% of the popular vote and it was "a nation divided." :rolleyes:

Hummm...

President Bush won 50.7% of the popular vote in 2004 and 47.9% of the popular vote in 2000. Neither a decisive victory yet both a victory still. He clearly assumed office without a mandate, especially in the second term, yet many suggest he was effective.

I think when the election is viewed as a whole, it is clear that the majority of the people that voted indicated they desired a course different than the one set by President Bush. I don't know if that translates to a mandate or not but it is clearly an indicator of desired change.

While 52.6% percent of the popular vote provides only a simple majority for President-elect Obama, compared to Senator McCain's 46.1% of the popular vote it represents a pretty substantial victory given Presidential Elections over the last 20 years.

As significant as the popular vote as a bellweather may be the number of states President-elect Obama carried this year that President Bush carried in 2004. I think the number is eight including Virginia and North Carolina. That hasn't happend in a very long time.

If you consider the above plus the number of conservative House and Senate members that lost their seats, it can point to the majority of the folks that voted indicating they want change. If that is seen as a mandate, OK. If it is not seen as a manadate, that is OK, too.

Time Will Tell Regards,

Joe S.

K G
11-10-2008, 08:54 AM
Speaking for myself only, Joe, in voting for McCain I too was voting for change....just not the same sort of change promoted by the Democratic ticket.

As for the margins of victory, look at the major urban counties in virtually every state that was CLOSELY contested.....you'll see BLUE surrounded by RED in a MAJORITY of those counties. That, combined with ultra-liberal California and New England, made the difference in this election. There were more first-time voters in this election than in any previous Presidential election, and I'm not talking wide-eyed 18 year olds from the suburbs, either...........

The "waves" made by a failed Bush administration washed away any chance of ANY Republican presidential nominee winning this election, unless that Republican was a fence-straddling moderate (in which case they'd have NEVER been the nominee). Same goes for the Congressional races.

Yes, time will tell....6% points/7-8 million votes difference in a country with over 200 million voting-age adults does not a mandate make....but we'll see. He's got both houses of Congress behind him; let's see if that "team" has what it takes. I, and a TON of other folks, pray to God that they do.

kg

Marvin S
11-10-2008, 09:55 AM
If you consider the above plus the number of conservative House and Senate members that lost their seats, it can point to the majority of the folks that voted indicating they want change. If that is seen as a mandate, OK. If it is not seen as a manadate, that is OK, too.

Time Will Tell Regards,

Joe S.

Joe,

Please post the names of conservative House & Senate members defeated for the rest of us to peruse. Methinks you will struggle to find one name who is truly conservative. Maybe conservative by a lefties standards, but not by those who believe in sound fiscal policy.

I have a list & their voting records, Regards!!!

Hoosier
11-10-2008, 10:32 AM
I would be interested in seeing how actual tax payers voted. I think that would say a lot if we had access to that info. If you don't pay taxes you don't have a vested interest.

badbullgator
11-10-2008, 11:37 AM
"All we are saying is give change a chance"

Einstein was quoted as saying "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is insanity" or something to that effect. Why would we want to maintain the course we are on?

Regards,


Bruce


Yes but he also said "all the experiments over time will never prove me right, but just one may prove me wrong".
BTW- last I checked Einstein was a physicist and not an economist, so I am not sure that applies any more than something Warren Buffet says applies to physics

That is why they call it a theory and not a law regards

Joe S.
11-10-2008, 11:42 AM
Joe,

Please post the names of conservative House & Senate members defeated for the rest of us to peruse. Methinks you will struggle to find one name who is truly conservative. Maybe conservative by a lefties standards, but not by those who believe in sound fiscal policy.

I have a list & their voting records, Regards!!!

Senator Dole, (R-NC), was considered the #10 most conservative Senator by the American Conservative Union.

Now, that might or might not measure up to the your standards of being a conservative, Marvin, but it is at least one as judged by a conservative organization.

Kind Regards,

Joe S.

Joe S.
11-10-2008, 11:53 AM
I would be interested in seeing how actual tax payers voted. I think that would say a lot if we had access to that info. If you don't pay taxes you don't have a vested interest.

Really?

I would venture a guess that over the course of our nation's history at least one person who has died in it's defense came from a family that, for whatever reason, did not pay taxes. I don't know about you, but I'd call that a vested interest.

What's next? You have to be a land owner to vote?

Been There Done That Regards,

Joe S.

Marvin S
11-10-2008, 12:30 PM
Senator Dole, (R-NC), was considered the #10 most conservative Senator by the American Conservative Union.

Now, that might or might not measure up to the your standards of being a conservative, Marvin, but it is at least one as judged by a conservative organization.

Kind Regards,

Joe S.

Please-----Senator Dole is married to former Senator Robert Dole, miserably failed Repub candidate for POTUS, who as a Senator never met a tax increase he didn't like. He championed the special deal for a winery in CA to allow them to avoid inheritance taxes on approx $600 million in potential gains. Her final campaign ad was tacky & showed desperation on her part.

Anyone can call themselves conservative, I could name several names, but that doesn't mean they are. Their performance is where they show they are truly conservative.

You are not conservative if you can only talk about it, you must show through deed that in fact your are a true believer in limited government & fiscal responsibility.

BTW, her name does not appear on my list, but these do with their rating immediately following:

------------------------Defenders of Economic Freedom

-----Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC)-----------------------100%
-----Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)-----------------------97%
-----Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)-----------------------97%
-----Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ)----------------------------92%
-----Sen. James Imhofe (R-OK)----------------------91%
-----Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) -----------------------90%

Pretty short list, isn't it? & that's something the Repubs have to turn around or we will continue as a minority party for some time. Patrick's state did themselves proud.

AUH2O principles Rule

Now, how about those House members.

Hoosier
11-10-2008, 12:45 PM
Really?

I would venture a guess that over the course of our nation's history at least one person who has died in it's defense came from a family that, for whatever reason, did not pay taxes. I don't know about you, but I'd call that a vested interest.

What's next? You have to be a land owner to vote?

Been There Done That Regards,

Joe S.

I personally come from a family that has a lot of non-tax payers in it. I really don't think I want people with that mentality determining the direction of the country. I think most of the people who would put that power in their hands hasn't been around much of it. My perspective comes from growing up in it and working my way out.