Is your 401K safe from the Democrats?

[Doc91678]

Is your 401K safe from the Democrats?​

By Kingfish
November 29, 2012

Suddenly within 24 hours three articles appeared in the NYT, Atlantic Monthly, and Time discussing a Danish "study" about the tax breaks for the 401K plan. Naturally they all discussed whether the government should abolish the tax break for them. What was it they said about never wasting a crisis?


The NYT published the story "Study Questions Tax Breaks’ Effect on Retirement Savings" on November 25:

"Every year, the government spends more than $100 billion on tax breaks to encourage Americans to save more for retirement. But a new study suggests such provisions may have little effect on the amount Americans save.

The finding has particular relevance as Congress looks for ways to raise revenue by reducing tax breaks as part of the year-end budget negotiations..." Article

That was the opening jab. The Atlantic Monthly followed up with the haymaker with the headline "The 401(k) Is a $240 Billion Waste" and the sub-headline "Why subsidize retirement saving if the subsidies don't work?". The Atlantic argued:

See:
Jackson Jambalaya: Coming after your 401K?

 

[Dreamy]

Definitely something that I have been watching and reading about here and there. And fuming when I read some of the stuff.

Why the Government Wants to Hijack Your 401(k) – Money Morning - Only the News You Can Profit From

These rumors come around every few years but I still worry. I don’t see the government seizing retirement funds but I would not be surprised to see them make changing the quantities and scope of the plans. Maybe decrease 401k contribution amounts. When the government is hurting because of mismanagement none of us are safe from their greed.

 

[rdean]

Remember, Republicans wanted to "invest" it in the stock market just before the "big crash". Could you imagine the devastation? Even worse than their OTHER fiascoes.

 

[Rozman]

I have been posting here for over a year now that I feel so strongly that
the Left, the Democrats will have no choice but to grab our 401 k plans.
This is a huge source of revenue.

The longer they wait the more money you and I will have grown our "fortune"....
And who the fuck do we think we are stashing money that the government wants to spend now.
How dare we deny government what they crave most....cold hard cash....

I am sure they will be going after our 401k plans pretty friggin soon..
Go ahead Libs keep voting these pricks in office.



http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/The-Adam-Smith-Institute-Blog/2011/0102/European-nations-begin-seizing-private-pensions

 

[Jroc]

I have been posting here for over a year now that I feel so strongly that
the Left, the Democrats will have no choice but to grab our 401 k plans.
This is a huge source of revenue.

The longer they wait the more money you and I will have grown our "fortune"....
And who the fuck do we think we are stashing money that the government wants to spend now.
How dare we deny government what they crave most....cold hard cash....

I am sure they will be going after our 401k plans pretty friggin soon..
Go ahead Libs keep voting these pricks in office.



European nations begin seizing private pensions - CSMonitor.com

It's only fair why should some have more than others

 

[Mac1958]

.

My gut reaction is that there's no freakin' way the Democrats would try this.

On the other hand...

.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Is your 401K safe from the Democrats?​

By Kingfish
November 29, 2012

Suddenly within 24 hours three articles appeared in the NYT, Atlantic Monthly, and Time discussing a Danish "study" about the tax breaks for the 401K plan. Naturally they all discussed whether the government should abolish the tax break for them. What was it they said about never wasting a crisis?


The NYT published the story "Study Questions Tax Breaks’ Effect on Retirement Savings" on November 25:

"Every year, the government spends more than $100 billion on tax breaks to encourage Americans to save more for retirement. But a new study suggests such provisions may have little effect on the amount Americans save.

The finding has particular relevance as Congress looks for ways to raise revenue by reducing tax breaks as part of the year-end budget negotiations..." Article

That was the opening jab. The Atlantic Monthly followed up with the haymaker with the headline "The 401(k) Is a $240 Billion Waste" and the sub-headline "Why subsidize retirement saving if the subsidies don't work?". The Atlantic argued:

See:
Jackson Jambalaya: Coming after your 401K?

There are no tax breaks for a 401k. In fact you pay more in taxes on income from a 401k than you would from a private investment account.

Sure you can defer taxes while you are working but believe you me the government gets all that back within the first few years of your retirement because the gains in a 401k are taxed as regular income and not as capital gains. And the government tells you how much you have to take out every year or else get raped with penalties.

It ain't a good deal.

My advice to anyone offered a 401k is to contribute just enough to max out your employer's match then put any additional savings in an after tax private portfolio.

 

[Two Thumbs]

The dems are already making plans.

sorry, I just can't recall her name or position, but she's a doctor of economics and she wants to tax the fuck out of them and lay claim to much of the money.

When asked, by Marc Levin, if it's Constitutional, she finally confessed it wasn't

and she didn't care

she also confessed that SS is a ponzi scheme if the Fed didn't use treasury bills.



Has anyone heard of any spending cuts?
no, not from the left

Will they make the 47% pay a penny more in taxes?
no, they won't get re-elected and will lose control.

So guess what?, your 401k is fucked.


I give it 2 years, tops.

 

[Jroc]

Liberal elitist want your retirement money

Americans lost over $1 trillion in their 401(k)s in 2008. Ouch! Evidence, says Teresa Ghilarducci, a New School for Social Research economist, that America needs to radically alter how workers save. She proposes eliminating the tax breaks for 401(k)s and replacing them with guaranteed retirement accounts. Under Ghilarducci's plan, outlined in her book When I'm Sixty-Four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them, all workers who don't have a traditional pension would be required to contribute 2.5 percent of their income to a government account with a 2.5 percent employer match. A 3 percent return above inflation would be guaranteed by the government. U.S. News asked Ghilarducci about her controversial retirement plans

.

Teresa Ghilarducci: The 401(k) Retirement System Has Failed - Planning to Retire (usnews.com)

 

[Freewill]

Remember, Republicans wanted to "invest" it in the stock market just before the "big crash". Could you imagine the devastation? Even worse than their OTHER fiascoes.

Hmmm I thought Obama fixed all that.

Any way 401K is really a vehicle for the traders to rip off the middle class money. Think about all the money going into 401Ks, yet the stock market is relatively flat. Since money going in over money going out drives the stock market with the influx of money I would think that the Stock Market should always be going up. Yet it isn't, they are skimming our money in my opinion.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Remember, Republicans wanted to "invest" it in the stock market just before the "big crash". Could you imagine the devastation? Even worse than their OTHER fiascoes.

Hmmm I thought Obama fixed all that.

Any way 401K is really a vehicle for the traders to rip off the middle class money. Think about all the money going into 401Ks, yet the stock market is relatively flat. Since money going in over money going out drives the stock market with the influx of money I would think that the Stock Market should always be going up. Yet it isn't, they are skimming our money in my opinion.

No it's a vehicle for the fucking government to rip off working people.

 

[The Infidel]

[ame=http://youtu.be/zuLfcROlrSg]Mark Levin interviews Dr Ghilarducci about nationalizing 401K's (Part 1) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Freewill]

Liberal elitist want your retirement money

Americans lost over $1 trillion in their 401(k)s in 2008. Ouch! Evidence, says Teresa Ghilarducci, a New School for Social Research economist, that America needs to radically alter how workers save. She proposes eliminating the tax breaks for 401(k)s and replacing them with guaranteed retirement accounts. Under Ghilarducci's plan, outlined in her book When I'm Sixty-Four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them, all workers who don't have a traditional pension would be required to contribute 2.5 percent of their income to a government account with a 2.5 percent employer match. A 3 percent return above inflation would be guaranteed by the government. U.S. News asked Ghilarducci about her controversial retirement plans

.

Teresa Ghilarducci: The 401(k) Retirement System Has Failed - Planning to Retire (usnews.com)

OMG her answer is another government run SS account. Whole another economist doubling down on failure. This is exactly how SS works except her numbers are BIGGER.

401Ks may not be doing great but with a tax incentive they still save the working man money, in my opinion. I would suppose her plan would also come off before tax contributions not sure I read as far as the first paragraph and stopped. Right now most companies match 6 percent which is quite an return on investment off the top along with the tax incentive. My, large company, said this next year they were only going to match 4 percent. Signs of the economic times more so then the blathering we get on this board.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Liberal elitist want your retirement money

Americans lost over $1 trillion in their 401(k)s in 2008. Ouch! Evidence, says Teresa Ghilarducci, a New School for Social Research economist, that America needs to radically alter how workers save. She proposes eliminating the tax breaks for 401(k)s and replacing them with guaranteed retirement accounts. Under Ghilarducci's plan, outlined in her book When I'm Sixty-Four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them, all workers who don't have a traditional pension would be required to contribute 2.5 percent of their income to a government account with a 2.5 percent employer match. A 3 percent return above inflation would be guaranteed by the government. U.S. News asked Ghilarducci about her controversial retirement plans

.

Teresa Ghilarducci: The 401(k) Retirement System Has Failed - Planning to Retire (usnews.com)

OMG her answer is another government run SS account. Whole another economist doubling down on failure. This is exactly how SS works except her numbers are BIGGER.

401Ks may not be doing great but with a tax incentive they still save the working man money, in my opinion. I would suppose her plan would also come off before tax contributions not sure I read as far as the first paragraph and stopped. Right now most companies match 6 percent which is quite an return on investment off the top along with the tax incentive. My, large company, said this next year they were only going to match 4 percent. Signs of the economic times more so then the blathering we get on this board.

A 401k does not save you any money.

 

[beretta304]

Remember, Republicans wanted to "invest" it in the stock market just before the "big crash". Could you imagine the devastation? Even worse than their OTHER fiascoes.

Never worse than Benghazi.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There's no difference between a thief breaking into our home or a Democrat politician trying to take our IRA and 401(k)

 

[Freewill]

Liberal elitist want your retirement money



.

Teresa Ghilarducci: The 401(k) Retirement System Has Failed - Planning to Retire (usnews.com)

OMG her answer is another government run SS account. Whole another economist doubling down on failure. This is exactly how SS works except her numbers are BIGGER.

401Ks may not be doing great but with a tax incentive they still save the working man money, in my opinion. I would suppose her plan would also come off before tax contributions not sure I read as far as the first paragraph and stopped. Right now most companies match 6 percent which is quite an return on investment off the top along with the tax incentive. My, large company, said this next year they were only going to match 4 percent. Signs of the economic times more so then the blathering we get on this board.

A 401k does not save you any money.

Assuming no return on investment. Do you no save money in taxes by having your contributions taken out before taxes?

Plus if you empolyer matches contribution you make almost 6 percent off the top?

Even with the market in the shape it is in my 401 K has been growing. Last I looked it was 11 percent on some funds.

Could you explain your position and why I am wrong in a little bit of detail?

 

[Truthmatters]

dear idiots.

the stock market doesn better under Dems.

check the history.

cant you folks get anything correct?


how did all that Gun Grab crap you claimed work out?


You people just lie and lie and lie some more about everyfuckingthing

 

[Skull Pilot]

OMG her answer is another government run SS account. Whole another economist doubling down on failure. This is exactly how SS works except her numbers are BIGGER.

401Ks may not be doing great but with a tax incentive they still save the working man money, in my opinion. I would suppose her plan would also come off before tax contributions not sure I read as far as the first paragraph and stopped. Right now most companies match 6 percent which is quite an return on investment off the top along with the tax incentive. My, large company, said this next year they were only going to match 4 percent. Signs of the economic times more so then the blathering we get on this board.

A 401k does not save you any money.

Assuming no return on investment. Do you no save money in taxes by having your contributions taken out before taxes?

Plus if you empolyer matches contribution you make almost 6 percent off the top?

Even with the market in the shape it is in my 401 K has been growing. Last I looked it was 11 percent on some funds.

Could you explain your position and why I am wrong in a little bit of detail?

It's the tax treatment of the growth where you are being ripped off. The gains in a 401k are taxed as ordinary income not at the lower capital gains rates.

The employer match is nothing but income as far as the government is concerned and you are not avoiding taxes on your contributions or on the match you are merely deferring taxes until you retire.

The old logic is that you'll be in a lower tax bracket in retirement but that is not necessarily true because the government not you decides the minimum amount you have to withdraw every year.

So again if you can get a match then get it but do not contribute one penny more than you need to max out the employer match then save the rest in an after tax portfolio where you get taxed at a capital gains rate on the growth and you can decide how much to take out every year.

 

[uscitizen]

I predicted this 30 years ago. Why I always preferred post tax saving.

I wish so many of my predictions did not come true, I am pretty pessimistic...