Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/29/2012 2:59:15 PM PST by DontTreadFred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: DontTreadFred

How about pay for your house AND save for retirement?


2 posted on 11/29/2012 3:03:28 PM PST by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

This is about the ninth article regarding 401k’s that I’ve seen in the last few days.

What’s that saying? “Setting us up for the bomb.”?

(It would be interesting to search the frequency of health-care articles prior to the take-over).


3 posted on 11/29/2012 3:06:34 PM PST by 21twelve (So I [God] gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. Psalm 81:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

I have been in one (401K’s and IRA’s) for the past 30 years, and had always thought they were a great deal. Now that there are rumblings of Obama confiscation of these accounts for funding a national pension / SS fortification.............. Not so much


5 posted on 11/29/2012 3:07:32 PM PST by catfish1957 (My dream for hope and change is to see the punk POTUS in prison for treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred
Ray Fisman says that the Fed should end the 401(k) because it is not helping people to save more money

I've got nearly a million bucks that says you're full of it, Ray.

Would be more if Obama hadn't been elected in 2008.

6 posted on 11/29/2012 3:08:12 PM PST by grobdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

The old defined benefit pension is better for employees, but the government regulations have made them so expensive to maintain that only a few businesses and the government have maintained them.

The 401(k) makes saving for retirement the responsibility of the employees. This is not a judgement on them. I’ll leave that to each individual to judge. I’m just presenting facts.

The risk involved in a defined benefit pension involves the health and survival of the sponsoring company, which bears the investment risks. while the risks of the 401(k)/403(b) are the usual investment risks, and are born by the participant employees.

For government employees - the risks are all born by the taxpayers.


8 posted on 11/29/2012 3:10:46 PM PST by Daveinyork (."Trusting government with power and money is like trusting teenaged boys with whiskey and car keys,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred
Personally I've not had a 401k or any other type of retirement vehicle for the last 25 yrs.

I direct/manage my own retirement funds...and I've done just fine. No rules, no fee's...no locked in crap.

13 posted on 11/29/2012 3:25:33 PM PST by Osage Orange ( Liberalism, ideas so good they have to be mandatory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

My 401K is basically the same value at was 12 years ago. Wonder how much money the traders made off of that money?


16 posted on 11/29/2012 3:41:15 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

I agree. As of now I have about 9,000 in my 401K and I really need that money since I have been laid off last October. That money can help me. I received a letter asking what I wish to do with it since I am no longer working for the company. From my understanding there will be a 10% plus another 20% that will be taken. I am now regretting for ever have to open a 401K I would rather keep my money in my bank, mattress or bra. At least I can get access to my money with no penalty or regulation. If I cash out I will get little out of the 9000 leaving me about what 2,000 while Obama and the government keep the rest. Never again will I open anything similar.


17 posted on 11/29/2012 3:50:58 PM PST by Patriot Babe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

401K’s are a financial disaster that your usually locked into untill your retirement.

It didn”t help tha the market crashed every ten year or so.Though you would probably do worse putting the money in the bank.


18 posted on 11/29/2012 3:52:37 PM PST by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

The only people that 401(k)s don’t help are the ones who don’t participate. I participated to the max almost every year I had it available to me and am very glad I (and my wife) did.


20 posted on 11/29/2012 4:05:59 PM PST by clintonh8r (Happy to be represented by Lt. Col. Allen West)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred
Well, DTF, I see you just signed up on FR on 11-08-2012 and this is your first post/thread. Welcome to FR.

The reason they're going after the 401K's is because it's just not fair that the privileged can work and save while the, um, underprivileged cannot. It's all in fairness...leveling the playing field, redistributing your wealth.

Shame on you for taking advantage of a program that, while allowing you to save for your retirement, kept the government from their fair share of your income.

24 posted on 11/29/2012 4:17:34 PM PST by Jane Long (Philippians 2:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

Rush talked about this today.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/29/details_the_plan_to_steal_your_401_k


31 posted on 11/29/2012 5:39:45 PM PST by sweetiepiezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

Mr. Fred - Your assertion regarding 401(k)’s is woefully lacking in hard data.

Just sayin’ . . .


34 posted on 11/29/2012 6:15:14 PM PST by Arm_Bears (The MSM lies about conservatives; and it lies about liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DontTreadFred

I think that maybe I did not explain my beliefs well enough. I am in favor of keeping the 401(k): anything that helps me lower my taxes and saves me money is okay for me. However, I think that the average American would be better off being able to pay off his mortgage with pre-tax dollars. There would have to be a limit on the amount of money people could pay because we wouldn’t want to encourage people to buy bigger and bigger houses. But, if people owned their homes, they would be much better off.


40 posted on 11/30/2012 5:57:36 AM PST by DontTreadFred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson