Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So is it fair to say that the income stream it gets converted to is independent of personal market returns and that upon death either before or after retirement your contributions go where?
It is like any other 401k or IRA out there. It is dependent on what you put on your beneficiary form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Well we already know that from previous articles on these plans..1/2 goes to the government
Get rid of the 401K and everyone get on the Federal gravy train.
Goodness gracious, is that what people are like in Texas? So bent on saying that the entire government is evil? Why do you look for reasons to hate something that is just being proposed?
You know there is a need. Folks just don't save enough. Even to freemkt I can tell you that if you do not want to contribute I am sure no one is holding a gun to your head. We already have that in SS. I am sure that the Tea Party conservatives in Congress will block that part, but I would like to see at least some accommodation in a proposal that gives some sort of retirement plan in addition to SS and that they teach kids in school that it will be a benefit to them if they use it.
I think the program should be voluntary, I don't want government to force me into anything. We already have one such program. There is no need for two forced programs.
Absolutely. But also allow workers to get into it regardless of whether your employer at the time feels like allowing you.
It is like any other 401k or IRA out there. It is dependent on what you put on your beneficiary form.
Goodness gracious, is that what people are like in Texas? So bent on saying that the entire government is evil? Why do you look for reasons to hate something that is just being proposed?
You know there is a need. Folks just don't save enough. Even to freemkt I can tell you that if you do not want to contribute I am sure no one is holding a gun to your head. We already have that in SS. I am sure that the Tea Party conservatives in Congress will block that part, but I would like to see at least some accommodation in a proposal that gives some sort of retirement plan in addition to SS and that they teach kids in school that it will be a benefit to them if they use it.
I am flabbergasted.
I'm surprised that you are surprised.
How has SS worked out ? Mandatory monies taken out (FICA).
Have you not followed these national retirement plans that go back to 2007-2008 ?
They all go back to one person...Teresa Ghilarducci
How has SS worked out ? Mandatory monies taken out (FICA).
Have you not followed these national retirement plans that go back to 2007-2008 ?
They all go back to one person...Teresa Ghilarducci
Sorry TSP goes back quite a bit more than that. And who the hell is Teresa Ghilarducci? Is she rich because she gets all the 401k money or SS money? I read the paperwork on TSP and didn't see her name in it. Come on! l am not a Hillary supporter by no means nor am I democrat at all. I barely resemble a Republican in name only. Your argument is that the whole idea is preposterous because it is being pushed by some people that you find distasteful. Well I am one of those people that is pushing for it. I just know that it is a good idea. I wish that schools would teach this ****. I knew something on compounding interest but in terms of real world applications hardly. Yeah they probably wouldn't listen with parents who won't even consider the option that a person can get a reasonably cost retirement fund on the 401k rules that would allow an employer (if they want to) can also join in. It would save them costs of setting one up on their own.
You know who will hate this? Fidelity or Morgan Stanley that's who. They will fight tooth and nail against this because they want a piece of the action too. Well maybe they should do a better job and charge less for fees on their funds. Maybe they should allow smaller starting amounts to their funds. Maybe McDonalds can even put a percent towards their worker's retirement fund that they can take to General Electric who then would be able to put less in because they are not responsible for the company plan.
Oh and it seems that SS is not at issue here either. I would say that the problem is Congress has raided that fund to pay for other social programs namely Medicaid. Seems to me that instead of complaining about this that you roll up your sleeves and contact your congressman/congresswoman and get them to stop raiding SS for other money.
As for how it has worked out, talk to the folks out there who if they didn't have it at all would be SOL.
Sorry TSP goes back quite a bit more than that. And who the hell is Teresa Ghilarducci? Is she rich because she gets all the 401k money or SS money? I read the paperwork on TSP and didn't see her name in it. Come on! l am not a Hillary supporter by no means nor am I democrat at all. I barely resemble a Republican in name only. Your argument is that the whole idea is preposterous because it is being pushed by some people that you find distasteful. Well I am one of those people that is pushing for it. I just know that it is a good idea. I wish that schools would teach this ****. I knew something on compounding interest but in terms of real world applications hardly. Yeah they probably wouldn't listen with parents who won't even consider the option that a person can get a reasonably cost retirement fund on the 401k rules that would allow an employer (if they want to) can also join in. It would save them costs of setting one up on their own.
You know who will hate this? Fidelity or Morgan Stanley that's who. They will fight tooth and nail against this because they want a piece of the action too. Well maybe they should do a better job and charge less for fees on their funds. Maybe they should allow smaller starting amounts to their funds. Maybe McDonalds can even put a percent towards their worker's retirement fund that they can take to General Electric who then would be able to put less in because they are not responsible for the company plan.
Oh and it seems that SS is not at issue here either. I would say that the problem is Congress has raided that fund to pay for other social programs namely Medicaid. Seems to me that instead of complaining about this that you roll up your sleeves and contact your congressman/congresswoman and get them to stop raiding SS for other money.
As for how it has worked out, talk to the folks out there who if they didn't have it at all would be SOL.
This is exactly right, this program takes money away from banksters and gives it back to their rightful owners, by cutting out the middleman.
Well we already know that from previous articles on these plans..1/2 goes to the government
Get rid of the 401K and everyone get on the Federal gravy train.
That's why it's not a good idea. It's another way for government to grab your money under false pretense.
Not true. If you look at the investments G C S F and I you will find that they are all indexed funds. The only one that the government actually can get is the G fund since it is actually investing in Government securities. All the others are invested in index funds.
The C Fund invests in the 500 large and mid-cap companies that comprise the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index.
The F Fund purchases securities that exactly match the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index.
The S Fund holds the securities that comprise the Dow Jones U.S. Completion Total Stock Market Index. This index is composed of the 4,500 companies outside the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index that make up the rest of the Wilshire 5000 Index, which is the broadest of the stock indexes.
The I fund invests in securities that mirror the Morgan Stanley Capital International EAFE (Europe, Australasia, Far East) Index.
The G Fund invests in a special nonmarketable treasury security issued specifically for the TSP by the U.S. government.
Now yes the company in charge of the funds is Blackrock. Yes they do get a fee but as people here point out that fee is very minimal to some of the fees paid by the general population out there. Do those funds sold by Fidelity make more money? Maybe. Are they worth the fee? Sure if you want personal attention. If you desire to have Karen or Frank at TD/Ameritrade to call you and tell you of a new fund they are promoting please be my guest.
Look I don't say that those other investments are bad. What is being proposed here is another option for the people that don't have other options. If you are a mom and pop operation with say 3 employees running a convenience store you just don't have the time or money to set up a 401k. The proposal is not taking the option to opt out or in away from people. It is giving them the option to opt out or in. It gives people a start in investing like MYRA is now but takes it a step further. It at least should be considered and not dismissed out of hand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am flabbergasted.
