Obama Pushes For 'National Retirement System' That Would Eliminate 401k's And IRA's (solution, how much)

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by bchris02

This would require us to contribute 5 or 10% of our income or how much the government mandates into a retirement program. It would be like a huge tax during our working years but it would pay off in our later years.

Maybe. Maybe not.

It's really stupid to put all of your eggs in one basket. You need a diversified retirement scheme that provides you with three sources of potential retirement income: from your employer as part of your benefits, from yourself and from a third guaranteed independent source.

Hedging....

Mircea

Originally Posted by mohawkx

This is actually a win for Obamacare. The more businesses that short change their workers by denying health care, the more people become elegible for subsidized health care. Since the original intent of Obamacare was UHC, this brings us closer to it with each business who decides to relinquish that responsibility.

Healthcare is not your employer's responsibility; it is yours.

And no, you cannot afford UHC.

"In the past 20 years, our over-riding philosophy has been that the health system cannot spend more than its income." --- Franz Kneips, German Ministry of Health - 2009

Other countries spend less on health care than the US, because they budget less for health care than what Americans and the government spends.

You could simply mandate that no person can spend more than $2,500 per year on health care, and then you could say you spend less per person than any European country.

Americans spend more, because Americans get more health care than other countries.

Budgetarily....

Mircea

Originally Posted by freemkt

I think the standard for earning one Social Security 'credit' (or 'covered quarter') should be a specific number of hours of work, and not a specific number of dollars earned. If that number turns out to be 40 per week, I'm fine with that, but not with a dollar amount of earnings.

Why? Sometimes I worked 20 hours a week and got $1,500. Sometimes I worked 10 hours a week and got $4,000. Not every who works few hours earns significantly less.

Originally Posted by freemkt

Isn't that "falling out of the sky" revenue ephemeral and unsustainable...i.e. weren't the revenues driven largely by taxpayers taking advantage of the (temporarily) low CG tax rates in anticipation of beating higher tax rates later? (sell now and pay a known low tax rate, or hold and accept uncertain but probably higher tax rates down the road)

And like the Reagan years, I didn't see any financial boom for burger flippers under Clinton either.

Originally Posted by BigJon3475

For fact-finding purposes:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40411.pdf

If you look at Figure 3, it's quite sustainable.

Originally Posted by freemkt

Congratulations, you have just thrown millions of Obamacare 'losers' under the bus...the burger flipper who now works 29 hours a week is screwed - pays in without getting anything back - while the $20/hr worker with 29 hours is still covered.

Then get a better job.

If you want to flip burgers, fine, but don't expect a ticker-tape parade, a statue in your likeness and a middle school named after you.

Congratulating....

Mircea

Originally Posted by malamute

Okay -- but if someone works for 20 hours at minimum wage for just 10 years, why should he then be able to retire at age 62 and live to 98 getting a social security check?

What, for $12/month?

The minimum monthly Social Security check is $1.

That's right, $1.

The amount of your Social Security retirement benefits has nothing to do with the amount you've paid. It has to do with your averagely monthly wage/salary. People who don't pay a lot into the program did not earn a lot, so they get practically nothing.

Like I said, if you worked only minimum wage jobs your entire life, your monthly benefit would only be $763/month.....if you worked 40 hours per week every week. Averaging 20 hours per week, you'd get about 1/3 of that, maybe $268/month or so.

Originally Posted by malamute

Is it fair that many of us started paying in at age 15 or 16, worked at least full time and even worked two jobs and won't retire until we're 70 while others worked as little they possibly could and for as short a time possible?

Who cares if it's fair? It's not really about "fair" which is quite subjective.

Originally Posted by malamute

I think too many are paying in far too little but expect a long retirement.

I think upping the age of retirement is fine, but also they need to require more than 10 short years of working part time to get in on this ponzi scheme.

The guy who works 50 years flipping burgers 40 or more hours a week of course should get his social security checks. Not the one who works just 20 hours a week for 10 years.

It's not a flat fee. Someone who works 20 hours a week for 10 years is going to get abut $63/month.

Are you jealous?

Wondering....

Mircea

Originally Posted by Rakin

A Federal police force (not FBI) would scare the crap out me. Police should be at the local level

You already have federal police. They currently work at federal buildings and court houses, and often at military installations.

But, yes, a federal police force would be a goddam scary thing.

Afraid...

Mircea

Originally Posted by wehotex

That source seems too biased for me. Are there any neutral news source articles concerning this? What would be the difference between this and Social Security? Seems like more of the same. Government takeover of individual savings accts (IRAs) does not sit right with me since we've already seen what Gov't has done to social security ponzi scheme.

Well, the reality is that the government has been trying to take over your retirement accounts since the Clinton Administration when they crow-barred everyone into 401(k) plans.

And at the same time, you had the tobacco litigation taking place and this massive redirection of Capital as State, city, local police/fire/teacher, union and corporate pension plans all divested from Big Tobacco and reinvested somewhere else in the economy.

That, coincidentally was the same time your housing bubble started.

I don't believe in coincidences.

Anyway, you all would be fools to let them grab your retirement funds, but you know what? They will eventually.

Coinciding...

Mircea

[bluesjuke]

Government has a plan for your money;

[amerifree]

I can hear Obamas reasoning now, "We need this program to avoid an economic catastrophe". " Your money will be safer and not subject to additional taxes".
" Payouts will be guaranteed, and It's The Right Thing To Do for our senior citizens".

[bluesjuke]

There is no "lock box".

[freemkt]

Originally Posted by amerifree

I can hear Obamas reasoning now, "We need this program to avoid an economic catastrophe". " Your money will be safer and not subject to additional taxes".
" Payouts will be guaranteed, and It's The Right Thing To Do for our senior citizens".

Is it the right thing to do for the adult children of workers?

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by Mr. White

I think this will upset a lot of retirees and other people who have established 401k's over the years. I see it as the government not giving you flexibility to do what you want with your own money that you earned over your career at work or by some other means. I think the president will be met with a lot of resistance with this proposal.........Again, since I am new, the forum won't let me post the link in full. Please add the http to the first part of the link................nationalseniorscouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89%3A obama-begins-push-for-new-national-retirement-system&catid=34%3Asocial-security&Itemid=62

After reading your post and trying to get your link to work, which I didd, I also found a chance for seniors to sign a petition against what they are trying to do now. Of course, what they want is to take our IRAs and 401ks and split the money with those who haven't saved anything. Many of us have done without some thinks that those to be distributed to bought instead of saving.

The link to the petition is:

https://seniorscouncil.activistmanag...6-9d0cf65a64d0

I signed the petition because I feel we must fight them. When you get the Treasury Department and the Labor Department working with the unions you will see some rapid work especially since there are enough Republican RINOs to make it work. We must deal with out House of Representatives people to keep this thing from passing.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by bluesjuke

Right click on the link and copy, come here, right click then paste.

Can you believe that those of us that have never used anything but IMac really don't make any sense of that PC method.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by Mr. White

The Latest move can be found in the Obama Administration`s, 256 page- FY 2013 Budget Proposal. The revival of his 2008 presidential run, the “Automatic IRA” which has now “Evolved” into two proposals: Secure Choice Pension & Government Retirement Accounts (GRA’s), both of which automatically- “Mandate” 5% - 6% contributions into Government Run Pension funds.

I think we must keep track of where this attempt originates. It amounts to a tax and must originate in the House and I don't think they will pass anything like this for another 2 years. However, how many people who could benefit from this kind of crap wouldn't vote against Reps that won't let them have the money.

Old people just have to show that they don't intend to have this money stolen and redistributed to all those who were willing to vote for Obama this time around.

The leaners who are suggesting that these old things aren't still in the works just want people to think that a grass roots group like this one are serious and can't believe that it is happening. Hang in there in case some of us get side tracked.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by mohawkx

Yeah, republican governors in 4 states have tried to take away government worker's like union firemen, teachers and police pensions and their ability to collectively bargain. Does Wisconsin ring a bell?

Plus the link claims that Obama personally will confiscate all private pension funds. what a load of Right wing republican scare tactic, crapola. No way would he or could he do such an outragious thing. Anybody who believes this is truly deaf, dumb and blind to the truth.

I guess you have missed out on some other things they have done or tried to do just these kinds of things. As I said earlier we must keep our eyes on which house of Congress this attempt comes out of since this would amount to tax law and only the Senate would originate such a law these days. Have you seen me mention that the Constitution says that revenue bills must originate in the House. That makes revenue bills that originate in the Senate unconstitutional.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by Mr. White

Do you think we need a government run 'police force'?

Don't waste time with that poster. She is only trying to deflect from what is going on. Deflection is the favorite tool of the left leaners.