Should 401k TAX EXEMPT DONATIONS be capped at $2400 instead of the current $18,000 per year?

[Skull Pilot]

Why cap it at all?

People are being responsible and saving for their future. The taxes will be paid when it is withdrawn.

Because that would cut too much into the government's cash flow now.

 

[usmbguest5318]

We should give the money to the government to safeguard for our retirement?????????????????????????????????????????????? Fuck no!

??? Do you know what a 401K is and what it is not?

Income taxes are deferred on your 401k contributions, so you make money on both your money and the deferred taxes. Also when you do retire and begin withdrawing money from your 401k you are likely to be at a lower tax bracket, again resulting in more money for your retirement. That bozo Pelosi doesn't want to wait for people to retire to get her hands on the income tax money, she want's it right now so she can spend it.

Christ people DC has already spent every dime you sent them, plus borrowed another $20 trillion and spent that. They have forced us to contribute HUGE sums of money to Social Security, which they have raided multiple times and have no way of paying us back OUR money. So now they want to screw us out of the social security benefits we were forced to purchase via raising the retirement age and hoping most people die before they can collect a dime.

That's the line if you believe it but in reality you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in. The government tell you what you MUST withdraw every year so if you were a diligent saver you might end up in a higher bracket than you think.

And if you don't take out what the government tells you to you get fucked up the ass without lube by 50% penalties.

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

 

[Skull Pilot]

??? Do you know what a 401K is and what it is not?

Income taxes are deferred on your 401k contributions, so you make money on both your money and the deferred taxes. Also when you do retire and begin withdrawing money from your 401k you are likely to be at a lower tax bracket, again resulting in more money for your retirement. That bozo Pelosi doesn't want to wait for people to retire to get her hands on the income tax money, she want's it right now so she can spend it.

Christ people DC has already spent every dime you sent them, plus borrowed another $20 trillion and spent that. They have forced us to contribute HUGE sums of money to Social Security, which they have raided multiple times and have no way of paying us back OUR money. So now they want to screw us out of the social security benefits we were forced to purchase via raising the retirement age and hoping most people die before they can collect a dime.

That's the line if you believe it but in reality you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in. The government tell you what you MUST withdraw every year so if you were a diligent saver you might end up in a higher bracket than you think.

And if you don't take out what the government tells you to you get fucked up the ass without lube by 50% penalties.

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

 

[Geaux4it]

I would of preferred to have paid the tax when I was working. Roth IRA's do just that

-Geaux

 

[Zander]

Why cap it at all?

People are being responsible and saving for their future. The taxes will be paid when it is withdrawn.

Because that would cut too much into the government's cash flow now.

Like these idiots need more......

 

[usmbguest5318]

Income taxes are deferred on your 401k contributions, so you make money on both your money and the deferred taxes. Also when you do retire and begin withdrawing money from your 401k you are likely to be at a lower tax bracket, again resulting in more money for your retirement. That bozo Pelosi doesn't want to wait for people to retire to get her hands on the income tax money, she want's it right now so she can spend it.

Christ people DC has already spent every dime you sent them, plus borrowed another $20 trillion and spent that. They have forced us to contribute HUGE sums of money to Social Security, which they have raided multiple times and have no way of paying us back OUR money. So now they want to screw us out of the social security benefits we were forced to purchase via raising the retirement age and hoping most people die before they can collect a dime.

That's the line if you believe it but in reality you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in. The government tell you what you MUST withdraw every year so if you were a diligent saver you might end up in a higher bracket than you think.

And if you don't take out what the government tells you to you get fucked up the ass without lube by 50% penalties.

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Aside:

There is also the fact that among people I know well, nobody really stops working until they're in or near their eighties. "Average" folks have this notion of retiring in their 60s or 70s. I don't really know why.

To wit, I will retire from my firm no later than when I'm 60. Shortly thereafter -- maybe a year or two, however long it takes me to get bored with not doing something productive that I want to achieve/do -- I'm sure I'll take on some new work role(s), though I haven't settled on just what it'll be....teaching, writing, researching, running an association or other non-profit organization, start another business of my own, or perhaps even taking a non-equity management position in my current firm of a different one are some of the paths I'm currently considering.

Whatever I choose to do, it'll be a job because people are willing to compensate me for the skills and abilities I bring to the table. I imagine I'll continue to perform volunteer activities much as I do now, but maybe I'll do more volunteer work than I do now, though I cannot imagine doing less, unless I'm genuinely unable to contribute thus.

Why folks think they should just stop doing something gainful is beyond me. That said, it's clear that many people do indeed aspire to doing just that.​

 

[Zander]

I would of preferred to have paid the tax when I was working. Roth IRA's do just that

-Geaux

I love the Roth.

Problem is, I have always earned too much to contribute.

Government needs to stop social engineering.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's the line if you believe it but in reality you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in. The government tell you what you MUST withdraw every year so if you were a diligent saver you might end up in a higher bracket than you think.

And if you don't take out what the government tells you to you get fucked up the ass without lube by 50% penalties.

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

 

[Geaux4it]

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

 

[Brain357]

Why or why not?

No. Way too low. We will have enough trouble as it is.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Still won't reduce the federal income tax you will be forced to pay in retirement.

After tax investing will reduce your tax burden in retirement and allow you more control over your money.

 

[bendog]

In theory it is taxed at a lesser rate however. I don't really see an retirement necessity of economic advantage to the higher cap.

 

[Geaux4it]

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Still won't reduce the federal income tax you will be forced to pay in retirement.

After tax investing will reduce your tax burden in retirement and allow you more control over your money.

Not if POTUS tax plan passes. Maybe we'll get a break

-Geaux

 

[usmbguest5318]

AVERAGE retirees will be in a lower bracket. Yes some may end up paying in a higher bracket, we all should be so lucky to make more money retired than when working. And yes at some point government forces you to make withdrawals so it can get its greedy hands on the money.

I'd fix governments ass on the 401k's, I'd pass legislation making them tax free then government won't get jack shit how'd they like that, fuckers.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Plenty of the folks who are retired and living in D.C. I mean, really. The COL in D.C. is such that if one is unhappily retired in D.C., one can very easily move.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther. But as I said these plans are designed to squeeze every tax dollar possible out of retirees

Look a qualified plan is not as good as the government makes it out to be. In fact you'd be better off investing that money after taxes at least then you would actually have control over your own money

if you think you can live on 30K and the fucking government tells you that you have to withdraw 50K you better do it or get penalized up the ass and you wind up paying taxes on money you don't need to use and you miss out on the growth of that money that might help you stretch your retirement even farther.

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

then you would actually have control over your own money

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Like I said you have no control over what tax bracket you will be in

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Say what you want of it, but my retirement aim is to maximize utility, and doing that requires that I live in city like D.C., NYC, London, Paris, Rome, or some other major city that appeals to me culturally and geographically.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Should 401k investments be capped at $2400 instead of the current $18,000 per year?

Were I to have my way, there'd be no cap at all, so I must answer your question no.

Why do I think there should be no cap?

• Because I see no good reason to place limits on the means, modes and sums one opts to save to finance one's retirement. Yes, there are other ways of saving for retirement, but most of them that offer returns comparable to those one can obtain via 401K plans also require either a good deal of effort on one's own part or that one engage a financial advisor.
  
  Few people have the time, to say nothing of the technical know-how to, for themselves, do the requisite research and maintain an keen understanding of and ongoing awareness about host of things, not the least of which include specific investment opportunities, tactics, trends, indicators, etc. One's need to know and aptly apply that type of knowledge is dramatically reduced by one's ability to avail oneself of financial investing experts' doing that on behalf of millions of people at one time. For the average person, that's a good thing.
• Because the cap, for many people, serves as an implied indicator of the maximum they actually need to invest to fund their dotage. It doesn't really matter whether that be so, what matters is that people do in fact make that inference without confirming whether it is so. What also matters is that for some people, the maximum they can invest in a 401K will not support their retirement lifestyle and the cap necessarily forces them -- at the cost of a lot of their time and/or money -- to pursue additional avenues for doing so. Why should they have to do that when simply putting more into their 401K would do the trick?

Damn...you could have saved a lot of time by just saying...most people are not savy enough, or willing to take the time to invest wisely.

 

[Geaux4it]

That is an implausible scenario, not only because living comfortably on $30K is unlikely, but also because $20K is more than enough to reinvest that money in a non-401K-connected investment, thereby allowing the money to "grow."

One always has complete control over one's unobligated funds. Having control over how one uses one's money and there being no consequences to the choices one makes about what to do with that money are two different things.

Well, that's just not entirely so. In a quantitative sense, yes, one cannot predict what will be the endpoints of future tax brackets. Qualitatively, however, middle income and higher earners have a lot of control over what bracket they will be in, though, obviously, the higher one's earnings, the more control one has.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Say what you want of it, but my retirement aim is to maximize utility, and doing that requires that I live in city like D.C., NYC, London, Paris, Rome, or some other major city that appeals to me culturally and geographically.

OK- Sounds like you're going to have to work until you die

-Geaux

 

[usmbguest5318]

Should 401k investments be capped at $2400 instead of the current $18,000 per year?

Were I to have my way, there'd be no cap at all, so I must answer your question no.

Why do I think there should be no cap?

• Because I see no good reason to place limits on the means, modes and sums one opts to save to finance one's retirement. Yes, there are other ways of saving for retirement, but most of them that offer returns comparable to those one can obtain via 401K plans also require either a good deal of effort on one's own part or that one engage a financial advisor.
  
  Few people have the time, to say nothing of the technical know-how to, for themselves, do the requisite research and maintain an keen understanding of and ongoing awareness about host of things, not the least of which include specific investment opportunities, tactics, trends, indicators, etc. One's need to know and aptly apply that type of knowledge is dramatically reduced by one's ability to avail oneself of financial investing experts' doing that on behalf of millions of people at one time. For the average person, that's a good thing.
• Because the cap, for many people, serves as an implied indicator of the maximum they actually need to invest to fund their dotage. It doesn't really matter whether that be so, what matters is that people do in fact make that inference without confirming whether it is so. What also matters is that for some people, the maximum they can invest in a 401K will not support their retirement lifestyle and the cap necessarily forces them -- at the cost of a lot of their time and/or money -- to pursue additional avenues for doing so. Why should they have to do that when simply putting more into their 401K would do the trick?

Damn...you could have saved a lot of time by just saying...most people are not savy enough, or willing to take the time to invest wisely.

OT:
I could have written that, but the sagacity of one's investment choices, or lack thereof, isn't all why I think the cap should not exist; thus I didn't, as you suggest, write "people are not savy [sic] enough, or willing to take the time to invest wisely." I stated why I think it should not exist, and the wisdom of the choices one or most people might make are but tangential to those reasons.

The tools and information needed to become investing-savvy are readily available.; thus by my reckoning, most people are unwilling to take the time to become investment-savvy. I'm quite confident they are or would be willing to take the time to invest wisely upon becoming knowledgeable about investing. So, you see, what you suggested I might have written instead of what I did write and what I think are not the same things.

 

[usmbguest5318]

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Any qualified plan is designed to force you to withdraw all your money before you die. Don't believe it? then look at the required minimum distribution formula and you'll see that it forces you to take a higher and higher percentage of your money out as you age. The only reason for that is to squeeze every cent of taxes from your savings

You have no control over your money.

A retired couple with no debt can live on 30K a year.

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Say what you want of it, but my retirement aim is to maximize utility, and doing that requires that I live in city like D.C., NYC, London, Paris, Rome, or some other major city that appeals to me culturally and geographically.

OK- Sounds like you're going to have to work until you die

-Geaux

Well, that will depend on when I expire.

 

[Geaux4it]

Try doing that in D.C. You'll find that one can exist, but one cannot live a pleasant lifestyle in D.C. on that income. I doubt that anyone's point of retirement saving and planning is so they can merely exist until something ends their life. I mean really, the whole point of retirement saving/planning is to save to enjoy the fruits of having worked for some 30 or more years. If merely existing is all one is going to achieve, why, absent disability, stop working?

Who the fuck wants to retire in DC?

Move to a state where your income is maximized relative to cost of living

-Geaux

Say what you want of it, but my retirement aim is to maximize utility, and doing that requires that I live in city like D.C., NYC, London, Paris, Rome, or some other major city that appeals to me culturally and geographically.

OK- Sounds like you're going to have to work until you die

-Geaux

Well, that will depend on when I expire.

Indeed. We are not promised tomorrow

-Geaux