Posted on 09/01/2010 5:56:28 PM PDT by Orange1998
On August 26, the US Department of Labor issued a news release It lists the agenda for the joint hearings being held with the Department of Treasury September 14-15, 2010 on what is euphemistically called “lifetime income options for retirement plans.” The hearings are being conducted by the Labor Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration.
I don’t like speaking in tabloid-style terms, but the unstated agenda of these hearings, as I understand it, is to push for the US government to eventually nationalize (confiscate) all assets in private Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and 401K plans!
The US government is desperate to get its hands on private assets to help cover soaring budget deficits and debts, and this is simply the largest and easiest piggy bank that could be seized. The Investment Company Institute estimates that at the end of 2008 that there were $3.613 trillion of assets in IRAs and $2.350 trillion of assets in 401K plans.
For more than the past ten years, I have warned readers that the US government was eventually going to go after private retirement accounts. I considered that as the most important reason to avoid establishing precious metals IRAs. Very few other writers (Ron Holland being one) have picked up on this issue as early as I did. In fact, the mainstream media pretty much ignored the subject even after a House Committee held hearings on the issue in October 2008.
Obviously, an outright seizure of assets would meet stiff resistance from the public. So the confiscation will never be described as such by government officials. Expect to see terms such as “retirement income protection” thrown around. It is highly likely that such a program would be implemented in steps to help overcome public opposition.
The US government plan is to eventually take ownership of all assets in IRAs and 401K accounts and replace them with US government “Treasury Retirement Bonds.” In the October 2008 hearings, it was proposed that these bonds pay a 3% interest rate. Another major change is that, upon retirement, the individual’s retirement account would be converted into an annuity. Once the individual is deceased, the individual’s heirs would not inherit anything (similar to what happens now with Social Security “accounts”).
EXCERPT
http://news.coinupdate.com/us-departments-of-labor-and-treasury-schedule-hearing-on-confiscation-of-private-retirement-accounts-0431/
I want them to leave me the hell alone. Once one agrees to the premise that this is a proper are for Federal intrusion into my life I've lost the argument.
I'm sick of these bastards. I don't trust them any farther than I could throw them with my penis.
With them it's never about me, it's always about them. So I hope you'll forgive me for spouting off in your general direction. It's nothing personal, it's just that I no longer trust any of them no matter how much they claim their actions are going to benefit me somehow.
No where in the US Constitution is "regulating how Americans invest their own money for their own retirement" mentioned as a specific, enumerated power of Congress. So I hope you'll forgive me when I say "back the hell off".
Have a nice evening.
I think that if the stock market had remained seriously down after O took office that this plan would have been implemented as a government bail out of private retirement plans such as 401k, 403b and TSA. So, yes, it could still happen, lame ducks are getting ready to quack.
Love your soft-headed ‘analysis.’
We’ve seen this kind of crap before.
> “Right now, the government is not proposing to do anything more than make it easier for you to buy an annuity with your 401(k) or IRA balance.”
.
And why would anyone want to do that? (much like relying on social suckurity or jumping off the rim of the Grand canyon)
Then what are you complaining about?
Unlike the rest of the people that are screaming that the sky is falling (and the linked blogger, who has an axe to grind), I've actually read the Dept. of Labor's request for information about this issue.
They aren't proposing anything that would interfere with your relationship with your investment advisor. This is about whether the 401(k) administrators should be required to offer more options and provide more information to their account holders.
There's nothing that says you have to listen to them. In fact, you aren't even in the target demographic that the DoL is concerned about. If you have an investment advisor, you are already way past the point that you need to worry about this.
Their target demographic is the guy that has a 401(k) account that has built up over the past couple of decades and he's ready to retire. He has no clue what he needs to do to make that money last for the rest of his life. He doesn't even know if he has enough to live on.
So, I'll repeat exactly what I said in my first posting to this thread: stop hyperventilating and calm down. This is being blown out of proportion by people that will profit if you panic and pull all your money out of your 401(k) to avoid this non-existent threat.
If every 401k became worth say 30% of what they were previous people would beg for a government bail out. 2008 proved that.
Buying a lifetime annuity would give you a guaranteed income for the rest of your life. It wouldn't be subject to the whim of Congress. It's a contract with a private company to pay you a monthly income, in exchange for a single upfront premium.
You don't pay taxes on the IRA/401(k) withdrawal to buy the annuity. However, you do pay income taxes on the monthly income, in the year you receive it.
You can get annuities that are joint survival -- i.e. payments until both you and your spouse die. You can also get ones that are guaranteed to pay to your heirs for 10,15,20, or 25 years -- even if you die prematurely.
You can get annuities that pay the same amount monthly for life, or have a cost of living increase each year, or a fixed increase each year.
Are they the best deal? No. But, if you don't know how to manage your money to make it last for the rest of your life, it might be a safe option for you.
“It wouldn’t be subject to the whim of Congress. “
Really. 401K’s and SS are at the whim of Congress. And since they are at it, so is bailing out the bankrupt banks with OUR tax dollars, just a whim of congress. sigh.
“But, if you don’t know how to manage your money to make it last for the rest of your life,..”
THE ONLY reason that this is the case is because on a whim of congress, we DON’T have a sound monetary system, we have a fiat system. Under a fiat system, it has ALWAYS been the case people can NOT plan for their retirements because there is NO WAY to predict the inflation of the future.
Your attempt to be breezily unconcerned is just mind boggling.
We were told the point of the 15% of our income paid to SS tax was for this purpose...to insure us an income til death. But now the fed, wants what folks saved and invested with the pennies the fed left them after taxing.
Pennies that grew to dollars, dollars that grew to hundreds of dollars, hundreds of dollars that grew to thousands of dollars over the decades. Billions of dollars someone somewhere somehow just recently raided in some sort of global grand theft scheme. And now the fed wants control over what’s left of these accounts? To dispense to us our savings and investments at their set rates? I don’t think so scooter.
Don't think that they wouldn't like to do just that. Take a listen to the words of the hard-left college professors some time. Or even John Lennon for that matter...
"Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world..."
As it stands now, I can defend my house and car with violence. I'm armed and I've developed a particular dislike for communists and the like. But, it's hard to defend an account at Fidelity or T. Rowe Price when the physical asset can't be held in one's hand.
I didn't say I was unconcerned. I said that I wasn't worried about this particular issue.
You have interjected a completely tangential rant into the discussion. If you have a specific concern about the Dept. of Labor's proposals, let's talk about it.
Otherwise, you can go argue with the mirror.
Presuming that we are talking about the same thing: one of Clinton's appointees suggested that a "one-time" assessment be made against IRA's and 401(k)'s. I don't remember her reason, but I do remember it was pretty lame.
What I do remember is what happened shortly afterwards: she was gone, as in summarily dismissed. The Clinton administration quickly disavowed any support for her proposal.
And that's exactly why this particular guy (in the linked article) is making a stink about this.
The guy owns Liberty COIN Service. He wants you to panic and convert all of your financial assets into hard assets that you can hold in your hand. He has a vested interest in stirring things up and convincing you that your financial Armageddon is near.
I didn't have time to dig this up last night, but here's the actual request for information from the Dept. of Labor:
Before anyone posts another word about what the government MIGHT do, take a few minutes to read through this RFI and see what they are actually asking. The questions start on the third page of the linked PDF.
If you can read through that document and identify specific questions that concern you, then post them and let's discuss it. But, stop listening to people with a vested interest in your panic.
You can also see the comments that have been submitted in response to the RFI here:
http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/regs/cmt-1210-AB33.html
Scroll down a bit. If you read through some of them, you'll notice that most are inflammatory comments from people that didn't even bother to read the RFI and got sucked in by the same alarmist crap that started this thread.
> “If that’s the case, they will take everything (houses, bank accounts, cars, ...) anyway.”
.
That’s the plan.
Its not just O and Pelousey, either; the GOP elite are in lockstep with them on this Godless Global Oligarchy.
.
> “He has a vested interest in stirring things up and convincing you that your financial Armageddon is near.”
(which we can all see is true, the topic of this thread not withstanding)
.And you have a vested interest in deflecting that fact.
.
> “Buying a lifetime annuity would give you a guaranteed income for the rest of your life.”
.
I think at this point, most of us are well aware that such promises will never be kept.
Social Security has been diluted, and the return on the vested dollars is about 1/5 of what even an amateur could have achieved on their own, so there is the evidence for the reliability of the promise.
Medicare is being yanked out from under all that trusted in it, to put the icing on that cake.
And the value of our real property has been deliberately diluted by the Community Reinvestment Act, and Benanke’s printing press.
Glad am I that we have gold, and guns.
.
That’s the point. They also want you to liquidate the accounts (the Feds collect a hefty penalty when you liquidate...). They want you to stop saving and spend your money.
Best of all, this creates a new “retirement crisis” for the Federales to exploit.
Oh, fer crying out loud. Read the rest of my posting.
You buy an annuity from a PRIVATE company, not the government. It's not subject to the whims of Congress or bureaucrats.
Annuities have been around for a long time. All you have to do is buy it from a reputable, stable company. And there are lots of resources for you to determine the company's rating.
For once, stop projecting what you think will happen onto what is actually being proposed here. The sky is not falling. It's not even starting to rain.
The reality is that your Social Security almost certainly will be reduced, and is subject to change at anytime. If you buy an annuity with your own assets, you own that annuity, and the stream of income from it. If you are content with a fixed income, it's a lot safer than the smoke-and-mirrors of Social Security
As I suggested to another poster, if you want to complain about this proposal, go read it. If you find one of their questions is a cause for a specific concern, post it and we will discuss it:
But, if you want to complain about something else that might or might not happen, go argue with the mirror and stop trying to scare people over something that hasn't even been proposed.
Wow, aren’t you touchy.
Worried instead of unconcerned?
The Dept of Labor is missing the entire issue that you claim is the main argument for their so called by you necessary action.
The inability for the average American who is unable to plan a retirement.
The REASON that the planning for retirement is sooo hard is because we have fiat money. A dollar today does not equal a dollar next year. Period. Want to bet that 3% is going to be robbery if the US dollar doesn’t just blow up altogether??? Can you say 1970’s???
It is entirely specious of you to ignore the main point of this issue.
It is YOU who is arguing with a mirror of fiat money.
And you forget, or just don’t know that fiat money HISTROICALLY has ALWAYS imploded on it self.
I would NOT want to own US dollar denominated annuities, EVER!!!
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.