A little over a year ago I had posted More taxes … IRA’s and 401k retirement accounts are soon to be ripped off as well. In that post I mentioned … the government is strongly considering pilfering the retirement accounts of all Americans. At the end of 2010, there was an estimated 17.5 trillion dollars in United States retirement assets, including 3.1 trillion in 401k’s and 4.7 trillion in IRA’s. If anyone thinks for a second the government doesn’t have its eye on that, they are living in a fantasy world.
Okay, four years ago to the month this piece came out Retirement Alert: The Government Has Plans for Your 401(k) and IRA.
In the near future, the government may be planning to take over your 401(k) and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA) and managing it on its own. Why, you ask? Well, mainly because there is an unprecedented trillion-dollar deficit that needs to be taken care of.
So this is the deal: somewhere out there is a major deficit that is struggling to lower despite the government’s efforts. However, there are tons of 401(k) and IRA accounts floating around with tons of money (well, at least what’s left after the financial crisis).
So now, according to BusinessWeek, the Treasury and Labor departments are asking for public comment on “the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individuals Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams.”
How Would the Conversion Work?
Basically, in order for the conversion to work, the government would take over you retirement savings. In return, it would promise to pay you some type of monthly benefit in your retirement years.
One suggestion from Teresa Ghilarducci of the New School for Social Research in New York, who was a part of hearings last fall held by the House Education and Labor Committee, was to give all workers “a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government.”
In exchange, the workers would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account that would be administered by the Social Security Administration.
However, this guaranteed retirement account would actually be an investment in U.S. Treasury bonds that would go toward paying down the huge trillion-dollar budget deficits.
MORE RIGHT HERE
Well, that was written four years ago. The liberal mind set .. “Hey, if the government was going to take your retirement it would have already happened!” prevails in very intellectually challenged people. But now that it’s upon us and actually being set in motion, the liberals will simply say that the government will provide a better retirement system with your money than what you have right now, so it’s okay.
During his 65 minute State of the Union drivel Barack made some notable statements of which people should have been paying attention. I know, that’s extremely difficult if you’re like me and can’t stand to hear the sound of his voice for more than … oh … 60 seconds. Most of what he said was the same old stuff just a different day. But then he started talking about how he found a way to bilk the American public out of more of their money by setting up a government run retirement program. This program essentially will not be voluntary. I’m sure it will force employers to pull a percentage of your pay check to buy into “your future”.
Now, I’m not sure why the government thinks they need to force the public into some kind of retirement account beyond the fact that they want more of your money. Eventually, soon enough, they’ll grab the existing $17 TRILLION in private retirement accounts and “invest” it wisely into government run “nest eggs”.
I’m not all that savvy on this sort of thing and Dan Steinhart, Managing Editor of the The Casey Report can explain it better than I can.
Via: Casey Research
Obama Fires the First Shot on Your Retirement Account
Did you watch the State of the Union address?
I didn’t, because, well… I didn’t want to.
But I did read the transcript the morning after. And boy is there a doozy in there. A lot of news outlets are talking about it. But very few dissected Obama’s tricky language enough to understand its significance.
I’m talking about his unveiling of the “MyRA,” which is ostensibly a new retirement account for working-class Americans. Sounds innocent enough.
But read a little closer, and… well, rather than put words in his mouth, let’s let the skilled orator tell us about the MyRA himself, word for word from his State of the Union address.
Take it away, Barack. (His words, verbatim, are in bold.)
“Let’s do more to help Americans save for retirement. Today, most workers don’t have a pension. A Social Security check often isn’t enough on its own.”
Can’t argue with that. The personal savings rate has been declining since the 1970s. Reversing that trend would help get America back on track to prosperity. Tell me more.
“And while the stock market has doubled over the last five years, that doesn’t help folks who don’t have 401(k)s.”
Good point. It’s hard for lower-income earners to save enough money to invest in the stock market. Helping them access stocks is a great idea, provided they enlist a competent advisor.
Granted, it’s not a perfect solution. But allocating a portion of one’s savings to stocks is smart—certainly better than allowing inflation to bleed one’s savings account to death.
“That’s why, tomorrow, I will direct the Treasury to create a new way for working Americans to start their own retirement savings: MyRA.”
Actually, Mr. President, working Americans already have access to IRAs. You’re giving the impression that lower-income Americans don’t have access to tax-advantaged retirement accounts, but that’s not true at all. Even if my employer doesn’t sponsor a plan, I can start one on my own. Anyone under the age of 70½ can open a self-directed IRA, and plenty of brokers allow people to enroll with as little as a $500 initial contribution.
So where are you going with this?
“It’s a new savings bond that encourages folks to build a nest egg.”
Whoa, hang on there. You were just talking about the stock market. How do savings bonds help the average Joe tap into stocks?
“MyRA guarantees a decent return with no risk of losing what you put in.”
Stop it. First of all, bonds neither guarantee a decent return nor protect people from losing their principal. In fact, with interest rates still near historic lows, buying bonds today and holding them for the long term virtually guarantees they’ll lose money.
Second, a bond is not a one-sided transaction. Whoever issues the bond is borrowing money from the buyer. The US government would be issuing these bonds, so that would mean… wait a minute, you wouldn’t be trying to covertly confiscate workers’ earnings to fund the government, would you?
AND THE REST RIGHT ABOUT HERE
Original Post: Cry and Howl