Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: Here you all go... Hope you saved your money

  1. #1

    Here you all go... Hope you saved your money

    [url]http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=5081[/url]

  2. #2
    crazy,they are on their high horse.let them have their fun.it'll never happen.just left-wing hot air.you'll be hearing alot of crazy stuff in the next year or so.

  3. #3

    this is the soviet union redux..

    first they will take your retirement account, then they will take your house-after all it's unfair that some people have houses larger than others, the if you protest they will lock you up, all for fairness sake... It's coming folks...

  4. #4

    no comments?

    no comments from the left?

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,453
    [QUOTE=dermlord;2846099]no comments from the left?[/QUOTE]

    Don't expect any. It would require defending their party.

    The fact that this conversation is even happening is horrifying.

  6. #6
    I didn't read the full article, but from what I read isn't this just fact finding?
    Is it horrible to try to better something or guarantee your retirement?

    I belong to a federal TSP and it is not too bad.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,453
    [QUOTE=cr726;2846104]I didn't read the full article, but from what I read isn't this just fact finding?
    Is it horrible to try to better something or guarantee your retirement?

    I belong to a federal TSP and it is not too bad.[/QUOTE]

    It is horrible when it starts with taking my savings.

  8. #8
    >>>Is it horrible to try to better something or guarantee your retirement?

    That's called Social Security. To take away from people what they saved and then to prevent them from leaving it to their heirs is truly horrifying.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=Piper;2846103]
    The fact that this conversation is even happening is horrifying.[/QUOTE]
    I hate this idea, hate it, but I don't mind the conversation frankly.

    We have a real problem here with the aging population and a society whose citizens by and large refuse to save for retirement.

    Conversation breeds ideas which breed solutions...

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    I really hope they try to pull this off, as well as push for the fairness doctrine. Then I will laugh at the midterm elections in 2010.

  11. #11
    Nicely slanted artcle by the John Locke Society. (Funded by Republicans)

    Exactly ONE invited speaker talked about this.:zzz:

    I'm not real worried.
    Last edited by FF2®; 11-06-2008 at 07:19 PM.

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,949
    Much ado about nothing. Talk to me if/when they are actually trying to push this through.

    Personally, I think this is a terrible idea and I highly doubt it comes under serious consideration.

  13. #13
    >>>Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”

    This is like 1984. No individual responsibility. Let the Government control your life.
    Welcome to the liberal controlled USA. These are the same people who complained about Bush usurping power. The same people whgo yell and scream about the AHbeus Corpus of some terrorists at gitmo, are perfectly happy to take your hard earned money and share it as they see fit...

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Fairfax Va
    Posts
    7,842
    Two words; "Floor Safe"

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Montville, NJ
    Posts
    5,473
    [QUOTE=CTM;2846111]I hate this idea, hate it, but I don't mind the conversation frankly.

    We have a real problem here with the aging population and a society whose citizens by and large refuse to save for retirement.

    Conversation breeds ideas which breed solutions...[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE=parafly;2846139]Much ado about nothing. Talk to me if/when they are actually trying to push this through.

    Personally, I think this is a terrible idea and I highly doubt it comes under serious consideration.[/QUOTE]

    I agree

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=cr726;2846104]I didn't read the full article, but from what I read isn't this just fact finding?
    Is it horrible to try to better something or guarantee your retirement?

    I belong to a federal TSP and it is not too bad.[/QUOTE]

    Besides the principle of stealing what is not theirs, my 403b has averaged 13% per year for 85 years. This would be beyond horrific.

    I would immediately stop contributing.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2846123]I really hope they try to pull this off, as well as push for the fairness doctrine. Then I will laugh at the midterm elections in 2010.[/QUOTE]

    absolutely

  18. #18

    The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

    Sorry guys, the gov't may actually want to help the 401k, unlike your employer who doesn't care.

    [QUOTE]Will 401k(s) be facing changes?

    08:01 AM CDT on Friday, October 31, 2008
    Associated Press

    The 401(k) retirement savings system has come under considerable scrutiny since the U.S. economic meltdown pushed stocks lower, costing retirement plans an estimated $2 trillion in the past 15 months.

    Some economists are calling for changes to the current 401(k) savings system. Some ideas wouldn't affect workers much while others would force everyone to save and would have a broad impact on the retirement planning industry.

    Those who watch these things closely believe it's unlikely that a complete overhaul will be seriously considered, and any reform is likely to wait for next year's new Congress. Similar ideas were floated during the Carter and Clinton administrations without success. However, some changes may get serious consideration.

    The House Committee on Education and Labor has heard from economists on both sides of the issue. Some defend the 401(k) as the best opportunity for workers to save for retirement when companies are dumping defined benefit or traditional pensions, which guarantee retirees a specific monthly income for life.

    The possibility of 401(k) reform is important because the responsibility of managing retirement accounts has shifted from the employer to the worker.

    The number of individuals covered by defined contribution plans – 401(k)-type plans – increased from 18.9 million in 1980 to 52.2 million in 2004, in the most recent statistics available.

    During the same period, the number of workers covered by a defined benefit pension has fallen 30 percent from 30 million in 1980 to nearly 21 million in 2004.

    This year, even more companies may scale back traditional pension plans because of steep losses.

    Dozens of companies may see profits fall as they divert millions into their pension plans to meet government funding requirements. Under the 2006 Pension Protection Act, a company must have in its pension fund 92 percent of the money needed to meet its obligations this year.

    That rises to 94 percent next year, 96 percent in 2010 and 100 percent by 2011.

    Witnesses before the House committee, including University of Massachusetts professor Christian Weller and UCLA professor Shlomo Benartzi, said retirement security has been declining for several years because most people don't make good investment choices and are likely to pull money out of the market in turbulent times.

    [B]Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., has proposed changes that include:

    •Providing complete disclosure of all 401(k)-related fees and increasing transparency.

    •Providing independent management advice to help people better manage their plans.

    •Waiving the current tax penalty for seniors over 70 ½ who don't take a minimum withdrawal from their retirement accounts.

    •Prohibiting privatizing Social Security.

    Mr. Miller said his committee is preparing to present ideas to strengthen 401(k) and other retirement plans to the next Congress[/B].[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/personalfinance/stories/DN-401k_31bus.State.Edition1.99fb1d.html[/url]

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=cr726;2846229]Sorry guys, the gov't may actually want to help the 401k, unlike your employer who doesn't care.



    [url]http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/personalfinance/stories/DN-401k_31bus.State.Edition1.99fb1d.html[/url][/QUOTE]

    If the REALLY cared, they would let 401 K contributions stop and increase the limit on IRA contributions. But no, they would hurt corporations too much.

  20. #20
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,976
    I could care less. I don't save money...I spend money...so it won't effect me.

    Maybe you should think about things like this when arguing against the electoral college. Leave a decision like this to the masses and guess what? We're gonna take your ****ing money.

    Whining about retirement accounts like a bunch of women. So sad....

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us