Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #141

    Jan 9, 2013, 07:55 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by NeedKarma View Post
    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.

    Oh and.. FactCheck.org : IRAs, 401(k)s and You
    Your 2008 Factcheck is obsolete...

    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)
    The Dems still want our retirement.
    NeedKarma's Avatar
    NeedKarma Posts: 10,635, Reputation: 1706
    Uber Member
     
    #142

    Jan 9, 2013, 07:57 AM
    When I die ;the 401-K becomes part of my kid's inheritance. When one dies under her plan ;the benefit ceases.
    Where can one find that information?
    NeedKarma's Avatar
    NeedKarma Posts: 10,635, Reputation: 1706
    Uber Member
     
    #143

    Jan 9, 2013, 07:59 AM
    Your 2008 Factcheck is obsolete...
    No it isn't. Your info validates what I have written. Thanks.
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #144

    Jan 9, 2013, 08:29 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by NeedKarma View Post
    No it isn't. Your info validates what I have written. Thanks.
    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?
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #145

    Jan 9, 2013, 08:45 AM
    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

    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.
    Texas comptroller declares economic recession over | Texas Report

    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.
    Expected surplus won

    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.
    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.
    We should be grateful for the resources we have that others do NOT.
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #146

    Jan 9, 2013, 09:01 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    We should be grateful for the resources we have that others do NOT.
    Yep, and be thankful we don't have delta smelt so we can still use those resources.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Can you suggest a topic for my science investigatory project in life science? [ 0 Answers ]

Can you suggest a topic for my science investigatory project on life science for high school?

Science investigaroty project title-physical science category [ 1 Answers ]

I want to look for our title defense for tomorrow in research

Boyfriend moved stuff in, then broke up with me. Do I get to keep the stuff? [ 1 Answers ]

My boyfriend and I decided to move in together. He brought stuff to my apartment, and I got rid of a lot of my stuff to accommodate for his stuff (i.e, bed, TV, etc). Then he decided that we needed a new couch, so I got rid of my couch and he bought us a new one. Few months later and we are broken...


View more questions Search