Posted on 11/05/2008 6:39:05 PM PST by AmericanMade1776
RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.
Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.
The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at carolinajournal.com ...
Perhaps you should spend a couple of hours watching the hearing ... it’s online at:
http://edwork.edgeboss.net/wmedia/edwork/fc/fc100708.wvx
The general mood of the congress critters is, “We lost $2 Trillion! We have to take action to protect our citizens.”
I can still pull the money out and convert it to hard assets like silver and gold and guns.
The original plan from Teresa Ghilarducci and sourced here states the following in page 13, right hand column.
Accumulations in 401K and other retirement plans that exist before the bill goes into effect will be treated under old tax rules.
FWIW. You know they'd love to get their hands on all of it if they could but even THEY probably understand the uproar that would result from almost all sectors.
What enemies? We were at peace in 1933. The Trading With the Enemy Act that FDR used as the legal basis for his gold confiscation had been enacted into law in 1917 and had expired in 1920. There was no legal basis, period. But FDR ruled by diktat, with a Congress overwhelmingly controlled by his party backing whatever he chose to do. The situation by 1933 was so dire that people were willing to give anyone whatever authority was necessary to fix the problem.
In March 1933, the entire American banking system was about to fold. Roosevelt closed the banks for two weeks, shored them up with federal promises of backing, and confiscated the gold so that people couldn't start an underground economy free of the government and the Federal Reserve. The dollar was severed from gold for domestic purposes. The currency was about to be devalued so that it could be inflated. Keynsian economic theory stated that vast amounts of money had to be spent to "prime the pump" of the econony, and that meant no balanced budgets, significant inflation and poisoning the "watchdog" of gold.
FDR's proclamation ordered people to turn in their gold coins, gold bars and paper gold certificates. If they did not, their names would be published to the world.
But how would the government know who was holding gold? The government didn't. But people believed in the government in those days, and they believed that if the government said something was true, it just had to be true. By "publishing people's names", the government was implicitly threatening mob violence against those who did not comply. My late mother remembered Treasury agents going door to door in South Philadelphia asking if people had gold in their homes.
FDR's executive order also required the sealing of every safe deposit box in America. Boxes couldn't be opened except in the presence of a Treasury agent. This part of his EO was never implemented because of the logistical difficulties of enforcing it.
Didn't he pay people for the gold, and the people were still entitled to own the government-set value in a way that they could still pass it onto heirs?
No. People turned in their gold and received the face value of that gold coinage in Federal Reserve notes backed only by government fiat. The same thing was true for gold certificates. Gold bar owners received $20.67 per ounce. Then Roosevelt immediately devalued the dollar to $35 per ounce of gold, shafting everyone who complied. It was illegal to own gold until 1975.
If you want to know about the business of passing on gold to heirs, run a search on "Wells Fargo Gold". A family in San Francisco held onto their gold in a safe deposit box for 4 generations waiting for the law to change.
FDR didn't just confiscate their wealth and leave them with nothing but a promise of a few dollars more when they turn 65, unless they should die early in which case their heirs get nothing.
Oh yes he did!!
For further research I'm giving you an assignment. Run a search on the "Gold Clause cases" to see how parts of FDR's gold confiscation policies were litigated by the Supreme Court.
In my previous post (#201), I included a link to Ms. Ghilarducci’s testimony in the hearing.
In that hearing, she specifically calls for an option for any existing 401k/IRA to be converted to the ‘new account’ using August, 2008 valuations. Perhaps the initial plan may only make it ‘optional’, but Congress can easily go from ‘optional’ to ‘mandatory’ once they see how the markets react to this initial footprint.
As for myself, I am thinking it will go ‘mandatory’ from the outset.
The bottom line is that the Dems know very well that the tremendous success of 401k/IRAs led to the calls for privatizing social security two years ago, and they are using this downturn to kill off these private retirement plans.
RE: “............Less than half of all American workers have retirement savings of any kind.................”
*************
Yep, and for the most part, that’s the “half” that voted for the big Zero!
marking this post for future reference!
Now excuse me, I'm going to be sick.............
Jim McDermot (from VT) is an avowed Socialist. Guess what party he caucuses with?
That woman testified once - quite some time back. I doubt that the dems are going to take her up on her stupid plan.
The retirement acounts are a government plan. When the plan goes bad the solution is clearly more government plans.
This was well known weeks ago. I think JM grilled Obama about it at least 40 times during the debates. /s
Well I think it all depends on what the word “unreasonable” seizures of property means. I’m sure the dems have a convenient interpretation handy
It is that... armed robbery writ VERY large!
___________________________________________________
The Feds can confiscate your gold too. It's already law.
We are seriously thinking of taking the 10% hit and cashing out then using the money to but income producing real estate in a golf community in the DR. The income stays in the DR and we would have a retirement home just one hour away from Miami and US style health care.
Not if they can't find it.
The purchase of eagles is recorded. They will find you. The purchase of Krugerands is not though. Just buy smaller coins and only a few at a time.
I'm waiting for the announcement of the hiring of thousands of new IRS auditors/agents, so that the wholesale robbery can be carried out more efficiently.
Kind of like Bloomberg's recent announcement that he'll lay off 1,000 cops and hire more meter maids - the beast must be fed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.