 |
I have always believed the government should be flexible enough to take action in a crisis, no matter what it is, and admire this president for taking on the debts of his predecessor and addressing the problem. There was no quick fix. More action still needed.
Yes swift action to abolish all discetionary spending until the budget is brought into surplus.
2012 Discretionary Spending Breakdown | pgpf.org
DATA, DATA,more DATA!
Unfortunately that won't do the trick . Entitlements and debt service is the real issue . But haircuts on discretionary spending is a good startQuote:
Yes swift action to abolish all discetionary spending until the budget is brought into surplus.
And defense spending reductions, and raising the wage cap on SS taxes.
you think SS is welfare It isn't... it isn't a benefit either ;its earned income! Not only did we contribute to Social Security insurance , but our employers did too.
It totaled 15% of our income before taxes .
If you averaged $30,000 per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security. If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both your and your employer's contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved!
Upon retirement, if you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $39,318 per year, or $3,277 per month. That's almost three times more than today's average Social Security benefit of $1,230 per month.
And your retirement fund would last more than 33 years (until you're 98 if you retire at age 65)! I can only imagine how much better most average income people could live in retirement if our government had just invested our money in low risk interest-earning accounts.
Instead, we were robbed ,and the government pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did.
Yes that debt service is a real whammy particularly as your credit rating keeps dropping, better not to have the debt. So you start with no wars that weren't started by someoneelse and putting a threshold on SS, Medicare and Medicade, as well as discontinuing money wasting activities, such as War on terror, War on Drugs, EPA, Renewable Energy, Agricultural subsidies and staplesQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The problem with SS isn't the people who earn and contribute but those who don't
Again... if SS is a welfare program then it was fraudulently sold to the American people.Quote:
The problem with SS isn't the people who earn and contribute but those who don't
Tom you should know things change over time, what was a great idea in the 1930's get's changed. We used to have something called a social security contribution, must have got the idea from you, but it got rolled into the general tax rate and now everyone is entitled. I expect that something similar has effectively happened over there. We had a politician called Keating who decided to solve the problem, he sold the workers a real bill of goods, superannuation as a tradeoff for wage increases, I wonder where he got the idea, anyway contribution is now 12% in a designated account. No work, no pensionQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I checked the history... it was a fraud from the get go. I'm familiar with superannuation.. If the Dems get their way ;they plan to seize our private 401-K plans and convert them to government managed superannuation accounts.
Any proof of this? It's quite an allegation.Quote:
If the Dems get their way ;they plan to seize our private 401-K plans and convert them to government managed superannuation accounts.
The repubs only science is profit. By any means necessary. That's why Wall Street manages your 401k.
Did you read the article? It has nothing to do with "seizing" your 401(k) savings - it has to so with the eliminating the deduction.
A guy on the other side of town manages my retirement. What, you don't let the experts do it?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
It could eliminate the deduction altogether or just for top earners, further restrict the amount that is deductible (currently $17,500; for those over 50, $23,000), start taxing retirement savings growth, or take back the part that has grown tax-free.
I know what I'm talking about . The Dems held hearings on this in 2008 and it has been on the backburner since... but never far from their minds. What part of "take back " don't you understand ? It was NEVER theirs to begin with ;so in effect ,the plan is to seize. There are other links that detail the plan originally floated by Teresa Ghilarducci in Congressional hearings in 2008.She is a professor at the New School of Social Research ,and author of 'When I'm Sixty-Four:The Plot against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them'.
In place of 401-K s , she would transfer the accounts into government created "guaranteed retirement accounts"(GRA) . The government would deposit $600 every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have a mandatory contribution of 5 percent of pay into the accounts .The government would allow a 3 % return .
Do you really think that would happen? That would be political suicide. Even calculating that would be a PITA. I find it hard to believe that was brought up by anyone.Quote:
take back the part that has grown tax-free
Oh and.. FactCheck.org : IRAs, 401(k)s and You
Quote:
Teresa Ghilarducci, Nov. 18: It is utterly ridiculous [to suppose] that I advocate seizing 401k assets.
Ghilarducci has long proposed limiting tax deductions for money put into 401(k) and similar retirement accounts and setting up a new type of account instead.
Ghilarducci: If people put money into 401(k)s they could keep it there, and taxes would continue to be deferred until withdrawn. It is unthinkable that Congress would take a tax break away for activities already undertaken.
As opposed to state goverments raising your pension contributions (Wisconsin) or employers that file bankruptcy and wipe ALL your loot out (Hostess)? Or the government being shut down and tanking Wall Street (debt ceiling)?
What part of the capitalist business model being BROKEN is it we are not understanding? All those financial products we keep inventing is subject to change or failure.
Yet states like Texas, Indiana and Florida are going into the year with a budget surplus and strong economies. Something must be working right.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I know what she advocates .She can spin it anyway she wants when confronted . Of course she doesn't call it 'seizing '... duh .
This is all one needs to seriously object to this plan... When I die ;the 401-K becomes part of my kid's inheritance. When one dies under her plan ;the benefit ceases.
Your 2008 Factcheck is obsolete...Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
The Dems still want our retirement.Quote:
Republicans Sound Alarm on Administration Plan to Seize 401(k)s
By: Connie Hair
5/4/2010 01:00 AM
In February, the White House released its “Annual Report on the Middle Class” containing new regulations favored by Big Labor including a bailout of critically underfunded union pension plans through “retirement security” options.
The radical solution most favored by Big Labor is the seizure of private 401(k) plans for government disbursement — which lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement scheme. And, of course, the Obama administration is eager to accommodate their buddies.
Vice President Joe Biden floated the idea, called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts” (GRAs), in the February “Middle Class” report.
In conjunction with the report’s release, the Obama administration jointly issued through the Departments of Labor and Treasury a “Request for Information” regarding the “annuitization” of 401(k) plans through “Lifetime Income Options” in the form of a notice to the public of proposed issuance of rules and regulations. (pdf)
House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and a group of House Republicans are mounting an effort to fight back.
The American people have become painfully aware over the past year that elections sometimes have calamitous consequences. Republicans lack the votes (for now) to reign in the Obama administration’s myriad nationalization plans for everything from health care to the automobile industry.
Now the backdoor bulls-eye is on your 401(k) plan and the trillions of dollars the government would control through seizure, regulation and federal disbursement of mandatory retirement accounts.
Boehner and the group are sounding the alarm, warning bureaucrats to keep their hands off America’s private retirement plans.
Just when you thought it was safe to come up for air after the government takeover of health care.
The entirety of the House GOP Savings Recovery Group letter outling the issue that was sent last night to the Labor and Treasury secretaries:
The Honorable Hilda L. Solis
Secretary
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20210
The Honorable Timothy Geithner
Secretary
U.S. Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Secretaries Solis and Geithner:
As members of the Republican Savings Solutions Group, we write today to express our strong opposition to any proposal to eliminate or federalize private-sector defined contribution pension plans, such as 401(k)s, or impose burdensome new requirements upon the businesses, large and small, who choose to offer these plans to their employees.
In the Annual Report of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, Vice President Biden discussed at length the creation of so-called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts, (GRAs)” which would provide for protection from “inflation and market risk” and potentially “guarantee a specified real return above the rate of inflation” — presumably at taxpayer expense. In the Report, the Vice President recommended “further study of these issues.”
The Vice President’s comments are troubling, insofar as they come on the heels of testimony before Congress from supporters of GRAs proposing to eliminate the favorable tax treatment currently afforded to 401(k) plans, and instead use those dollars to fund government-invested GRAs into which all employees would be required to contribute a portion of their salary — again, with a government subsidy. These advocates would, essentially, dismantle the present private-sector 401(k) system, replacing it instead with a government-run investment plan, the size and scope of which remain to be seen. This despite data showing that 90 percent of households have a favorable opinion of the existing 401(k)/IRA system.
In light of these facts, we write today to express our opposition in the strongest terms to any effort to “nationalize” the private 401(k) system, or any proposal that would dismantle or disfavor the private 401(k) system in favor of a government-run retirement security regime.
Similarly, and more recently, the Departments of Labor and Treasury have jointly issued a “Request for Information” regarding the “annuitization” of 401(k) plans through “Lifetime Income Options.” While we appreciate the Departments’ seeking guidance and information from all parties and stakeholders in advance of regulatory activity, we strongly urge that the Departments not proceed with any regulation in this area before they have carefully and thoroughly considered all of the information received.
More specifically, we urge that the Departments take no action to mandate that plan sponsors — often, small businesses — include a “lifetime income” or “annuitization” option if they choose to offer a 401(k) plan to their employees, or that beneficiaries take some or all of their retirement savings in such an option. Data shows that 70 percent of Americans oppose the concept of a mandated annuity or government payout of their 401(k) plan. On a more fundamental level, Congress should not be in the business of choosing “winners” and “losers” among retirement security stakeholders. Instead, we urge the Departments to make it easier for employers to include retirement income solutions in their savings plans and to help workers learn more about the value of their retirement savings as a source of retirement income. Finally, to the extent new mandates and bureaucratic red tape from Washington push small employers out of the business of offering these plans to their employees, we would submit such an effort weakens, rather than strengthens retirement security.
We appreciate your consideration of our views in these important matters and stand ready to work with you and the Administration to promote secure and adequate retirement savings for all Americans.
Sincerely,
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Rep. John Kline (R-MN)
Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI)
Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX)
Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV)
Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)
Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH)
Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH)
Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN)
Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS)
Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA)
Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA)
Where can one find that information?Quote:
When I die ;the 401-K becomes part of my kid's inheritance. When one dies under her plan ;the benefit ceases.
No it isn't. Your info validates what I have written. Thanks.Quote:
Your 2008 Factcheck is obsolete...
It takes a really weird sense of logic to conclude your 2008 fact check on Teresa Ghilarducci invalidates what Biden and Obama did 2 years later. You didn't believe The Minority Report was real did you?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Projected surplus as even our state has said they didn't pay the bills from the past fiscal year.
State Could See Budget Surplus by 2013 | KUT.org
Texas comptroller declares economic recession over | Texas ReportQuote:
A surplus wouldn't necessarily mean the state is flush with cash. The budget was balanced in part by underfunding programs like Medicaid, with the intention of adding additional funds in the 2013 legislative session.
Expected surplus wonQuote:
In the last two budget cycles, lawmakers were forced to slash government spending and tap the Rainy Day Fund to make up for budget deficits. For 2012-2013 they cut $4 billion in funding for public schools and shorted $4.8 billion for Medicaid, the health program for the poor and disabled.
Quote:
AUSTIN — Shortfall and sacrifice: that's how the Texas Legislature two years ago defended gutting $5.4 billion from public education, laying off thousands of public workers with slashed spending and stripping Medicaid to the bone.
We should be grateful for the resources we have that others do NOT.Quote:
The Texas economy is humming. Unemployment is at a four-year low of 6.2 percent, sales tax receipts are skyrocketing and money is pouring in to state coffers behind a new energy boom, fueled by oil gushing in West Texas and a fracking frenzy from North Texas to San Antonio. Even the Rainy Day Fund, the state's emergency piggybank, has replenished most of the $3.2 billion borrowed during the last session after much hand-wringing by reluctant conservatives.
Yep, and be thankful we don't have delta smelt so we can still use those resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:24 PM. |