Author Topic: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions  (Read 1815 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chris_

  • Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46845
  • Reputation: +2028/-266
New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« on: December 02, 2010, 08:20:14 AM »
Quote
New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more "fairly" distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a "fair" pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions.  This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

From written hearing testimony submitted by Economic Policy Institute (EPI) Vice President Ross Eisenbrey:

     â€œWe need a comprehensive solution that addresses interrelated problems. For example, a system that places most of the burden for retirement saving on individuals will always have to wrestle with the problem of pre-retirement loans and withdrawals (simply plugging these leaks will not work, because many workers would stop contributing to the system). A system that relies on tax incentives to promote individual retirement savings will necessarily tend to favor high-income workers who can afford to save more and who benefit the most from these tax breaks. Conversely, a truly universal system would need to shield low-income workers from out-of-pocket costs or wage cuts. EPI has published and advocated what we feel would be an excellent national supplemental retirement plan, the Guaranteed Retirement Account which was authored by Prof. Teresa Ghilarducci, Director of the Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis at the New School for Social Research. "

The EPI is housed on the third floor of the building occupied by the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress, a hard-core leftist group whose flavor of socialist policy has brought you the current blend of elitist socialism and crony capitalism bankrupting the American economy.  Which speaks volumes about EPI and the Democrat leadership's choice of witness.

(more...)
Human Events
If you want to worship an orange pile of garbage with a reckless disregard for everything, get on down to Arbys & try our loaded curly fries.

Offline Carl

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19742
  • Reputation: +1491/-100
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2010, 08:27:02 AM »
I am not one to talk about things like this but touch 401k`s and you will have blood in the streets.

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2010, 08:36:30 AM »
I am not one to talk about things like this but touch 401k`s and you will have blood in the streets.

I have to agree, if SS is the 'Third rail,' this is like breaking into the local the local power substation dressed in steel wool and pretending it's a mosh pit.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline Ptarmigan

  • Bunny Slayer
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23676
  • Reputation: +932/-225
  • God Hates Bunnies
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2010, 11:44:58 AM »
I am not one to talk about things like this but touch 401k`s and you will have blood in the streets.

Oh yes, that's asking for trouble.
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte

Allow enemies their space to hate; they will destroy themselves in the process.
-Lisa Du

Offline Evil_Conservative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7845
  • Reputation: +553/-194
  • Oh snap!
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2010, 12:31:35 PM »
Quote
Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more "fairly" distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

How is this not consider stealing?

If they touch my husband's 401k, yeah, they will regret it.  It's bad enough neither one of us will ever see a dime from social security.  Don't even put your filthy little hands into our HARD EARNED MONEY!
You may call me Jessica or Jess.

Offline true_blood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
  • Reputation: +652/-817
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2010, 01:09:42 PM »
That is over the line. Communism is what comes to mind. Gubberment taking over one's private money? :hammer: :hammer:
How can that be? More than likely, I'd pull my money out so fast. Even though I will lose money for early withdrawal. I'd take it all out.
**On other note. That was a great post Chris. Someone needs to "sneak" that post onto the DUmp. Let them see what happens to their savings and who's behind it all. Soros and the Center For American Progress. I bet that would work most of the DUmmies into a frenzy, cause some chaos on there.

Offline Evil_Conservative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7845
  • Reputation: +553/-194
  • Oh snap!
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2010, 01:40:27 PM »
That is over the line. Communism is what comes to mind. Gubberment taking over one's private money? :hammer: :hammer:
How can that be? More than likely, I'd pull my money out so fast. Even though I will lose money for early withdrawal. I'd take it all out.
**On other note. That was a great post Chris. Someone needs to "sneak" that post onto the DUmp. Let them see what happens to their savings and who's behind it all. Soros and the Center For American Progress. I bet that would work most of the DUmmies into a frenzy, cause some chaos on there.

I told my husband about this threat and told him to take out his money ASAP.  I've never had a 401k.  I'd rather just take the money and save it myself.  Not invest in a 401k.  My husband has a few thousand dollars in there.  It would really suck to see that money disappear because someone else only had $200 saved.  That's not our problem.
You may call me Jessica or Jess.

Offline Chris_

  • Little Lebowski Urban Achiever
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46845
  • Reputation: +2028/-266
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2010, 01:41:34 PM »
As far as I know, the only benefit to a 401k is an employer-matching contribution.
If you want to worship an orange pile of garbage with a reckless disregard for everything, get on down to Arbys & try our loaded curly fries.

Offline Evil_Conservative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7845
  • Reputation: +553/-194
  • Oh snap!
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2010, 01:46:33 PM »
As far as I know, the only benefit to a 401k is an employer-matching contribution.

My husband's company was doing that two years ago.  They matched up to 3% of what he contributed.  He was throwing money into his 401k like crazy during those "good" times.  The company stopped matching, so my husband stopped contributing.  But there's still money sitting in there. 

I just don't see how this could even be legal though.  I can't walk into a bank and take money from Joe Schmoe's account because he has more than me.
You may call me Jessica or Jess.

Offline NHSparky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24431
  • Reputation: +1278/-617
  • Where are you going? I was gonna make espresso!
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #9 on: December 02, 2010, 01:46:50 PM »
As far as I know, the only benefit to a 401k is an employer-matching contribution.

Depending upon the employer, you can pick several hundred funds.  

And if you're smart picking them, you can make a (compared to SS or IRA) mint with very minimal risk and fairly low fees.
“Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian.”  -Henry Ford

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #10 on: December 02, 2010, 01:54:32 PM »
I told my husband about this threat and told him to take out his money ASAP.  I've never had a 401k.  I'd rather just take the money and save it myself.  Not invest in a 401k.  My husband has a few thousand dollars in there.  It would really suck to see that money disappear because someone else only had $200 saved.  That's not our problem.

I would suggest you don't do anything rash like that until there is really legislation pending with some chance of actually passing, you could end up hosing yourself on taxes if you get all hasty over scuttlebutt and trial balloons.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline thundley4

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40571
  • Reputation: +2222/-127
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #11 on: December 02, 2010, 01:56:15 PM »
I would suggest you don't do anything rash like that until there is really legislation pending with some chance of actually passing, you could end up hosing yourself on taxes if you get all hasty over scuttlebutt and trial balloons.

I wouldn't wait until it passes though. It might be too late. They'd likely incorporate some sort of freeze into the law.

Offline Evil_Conservative

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7845
  • Reputation: +553/-194
  • Oh snap!
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #12 on: December 02, 2010, 01:57:26 PM »
I would suggest you don't do anything rash like that until there is really legislation pending with some chance of actually passing, you could end up hosing yourself on taxes if you get all hasty over scuttlebutt and trial balloons.

^5

I should have added, "if it passes" to the taking the money out ASAP.  Not like he will even if it were to pass because it's too much of a "hassle"
You may call me Jessica or Jess.

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #13 on: December 02, 2010, 01:58:52 PM »
I wouldn't wait until it passes though. It might be too late. They'd likely incorporate some sort of freeze into the law.

True, but it also obviously isn't going to be raised and passed in both houses this month, and it should be DOA in the next Congress.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline thundley4

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40571
  • Reputation: +2222/-127
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #14 on: December 02, 2010, 02:06:31 PM »
True, but it also obviously isn't going to be raised and passed in both houses this month, and it should better be DOA in the next Congress.

FIFY

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #15 on: December 02, 2010, 02:16:55 PM »
Dude, if it isn't, Carl's prediction is probably an understatement.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline zeitgeist

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6195
  • Reputation: +391/-44
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #16 on: December 02, 2010, 02:29:20 PM »
I have to agree, if SS is the 'Third rail,' this is like breaking into the local the local power substation dressed in steel wool and pretending it's a mosh pit.

I seem to remember posting something on this with Uncle using the 'big lie' about stabilizing rates and preventing people from great losses like the last market meltdown.  The public clamoring for protection or some such rubbish.

How do they get a foot in the door?  Tax treatment of 401k's.

Does this even need legislation?  It is the IRS afer all. :argh:

It would probably be folly to try and pull money out at this point, taxes and penalties would apply.  And so the trap is set.
< watch this space for coming distractions >

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2010, 02:44:48 PM »
Does this even need legislation?  It is the IRS afer all. :argh:

Yes; their current tax treatment is a creature of statute, not just IRS interpretation.

But the vile plan being rumored is much, much bigger and more sinister than just changing 401K tax treatment, it involves seizing all of them, making contributions mandatory, and setting up an entire new benefit system with the stolen money in the name of 'Fairness.'  That would take a lot of legislation, though I'm sure the AFSCME, SEIU, Teamsters, and NEA would just love to help write it.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline Carl

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19742
  • Reputation: +1491/-100
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2010, 02:51:58 PM »
I put 10% off the top,the employer matches that with 1% plus an additional 10% of gross as part of a pension program.
Technically it is all considered a 401K and I can`t believe I am unique in that situation.

Doing something like that would be a declaration of war on the citizenry.

Offline zeitgeist

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6195
  • Reputation: +391/-44
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #19 on: December 02, 2010, 05:50:25 PM »
Yes; their current tax treatment is a creature of statute, not just IRS interpretation.

But the vile plan being rumored is much, much bigger and more sinister than just changing 401K tax treatment, it involves seizing all of them, making contributions mandatory, and setting up an entire new benefit system with the stolen money in the name of 'Fairness.'  That would take a lot of legislation, though I'm sure the AFSCME, SEIU, Teamsters, and NEA would just love to help write it.



Federal employees hired after '86 or there about were put into a retirement program, FERS, which utilizes mandatory, voluntary, and, federal matching contributions to a 401k type vehicle plus Social Security.  

It has been some time since I have reviewed that program [I am retired under the former CSRS] but as memory serves me there is limited flexibility in the investment of the non-voluntary portion.  
 
There have been numerous proposals to do something like this in the private sector or to encourage private sector people to annuitize their 401k's.  Government does not trust the little guy with his own money

Then too there is the Argentina model. :fuelfire:
Here:
http://www.behindbluelines.com/2010/01/09/the-feds-hungrily-eye-your-401k/

and for all the du voyeurs there was this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4425651

Quote
11. It's pure spin. I ran across it late last month.  
 Edited on Sun Nov-09-08 09:33 PM by WePurrsevere
It stems from 2 Dem House Committee Chairmen holding HEARINGS to look into POSSIBLE solutions and the IDEA presented by Ghilarducci seems to be the one they're in a tizzy over.

Considering the timing of the spin I'd guess it had something to do with the election.. guess it didn't work.
Quote
From the source I was given (FWIW I know nothing about it):
http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.ph...

House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-California, and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, are looking at redirecting those tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute.

A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. She testified last week before Miller’s Education and Labor Committee on her proposal.

<snip>

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”
« Last Edit: December 02, 2010, 05:53:57 PM by zeitgeist »
< watch this space for coming distractions >

Offline true_blood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
  • Reputation: +652/-817
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #20 on: December 02, 2010, 07:32:52 PM »
As far as I know, the only benefit to a 401k is an employer-matching contribution.
Yes. That does help A LOT. I haven't had the pleasure of having that feature. (I wish I did. I would have "capitalized" on it. :naughty:)
But, I will tell you, for the amount I have in there, I do pretty good when the market is going well. Without making any additions to it as well.

Offline Freeper

  • Topic Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17779
  • Reputation: +1311/-314
  • Creepy ass cracker.
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2010, 10:40:29 AM »
What's next will we be seizing 8 year old kid's piggy banks?
This is just insane we have a possible 10% increase in our taxes if you combine the new 401k tax on top of the tax cuts expiring.
 :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

I may not lock my doors while sitting at a red light and a black man is near, but I sure as hell grab on tight to my wallet when any democrats are close by.

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28493
  • Reputation: +1707/-151
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2010, 12:19:43 PM »


Federal employees hired after '86 or there about were put into a retirement program, FERS, which utilizes mandatory, voluntary, and, federal matching contributions to a 401k type vehicle plus Social Security.  

It has been some time since I have reviewed that program [I am retired under the former CSRS] but as memory serves me there is limited flexibility in the investment of the non-voluntary portion.  
 
There have been numerous proposals to do something like this in the private sector or to encourage private sector people to annuitize their 401k's.  Government does not trust the little guy with his own money

Then too there is the Argentina model. :fuelfire:
Here:
http://www.behindbluelines.com/2010/01/09/the-feds-hungrily-eye-your-401k/

and for all the du voyeurs there was this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4425651


Yeah, half my gov't time is military so I came into it under FERS.  All the bitching about Federal retirement being incredible is grossly misplaced, the defined benefit part under FERS for most employees is just 1% of basic pay pre year of service, so you get 1/3 of your salary if you work for them for 33 years.  It's really nothing like the state and municipal defined benefit programs that pay 80% or more of pre-retirement salary that have been in the news.

The 401k-like part is called 'TSP' (Thrift Savings Plan); you can contribute up to 10% to it, the gov't matches the first 5% (Not a purely linear relationship).  There are about eight veeeeeery broad investment options you can select, the lowest-payoff/least-risk one is a US Fed bond fund (G Fund) that pays less ROI than a savings account, the highest-risk/highest return one historically has been an S&P index fund (C Fund).  You can only change twice a month so a lot of the last 2-1/2 years has been pretty gut-wrenching for anyone trying to maximize value of their fund in the last few years before retirement and recoup the losses of 2008. 

If you're a Federal employee under FERS, even with a fairly aggressive approach to TSP as your career and life situation allowed it, you really better have either extraordinarily modest plans and a paid-off house, or another income stream like military retirement or a part-time job lined up, if you want to retire before age 67, when you would start getting the near-max on your SS.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline zeitgeist

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6195
  • Reputation: +391/-44
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2010, 04:39:49 PM »
Yeah, half my gov't time is military so I came into it under FERS.  All the bitching about Federal retirement being incredible is grossly misplaced, the defined benefit part under FERS for most employees is just 1% of basic pay pre year of service, so you get 1/3 of your salary if you work for them for 33 years.  It's really nothing like the state and municipal defined benefit programs that pay 80% or more of pre-retirement salary that have been in the news.

The 401k-like part is called 'TSP' (Thrift Savings Plan); you can contribute up to 10% to it, the gov't matches the first 5% (Not a purely linear relationship).  There are about eight veeeeeery broad investment options you can select, the lowest-payoff/least-risk one is a US Fed bond fund (G Fund) that pays less ROI than a savings account, the highest-risk/highest return one historically has been an S&P index fund (C Fund).  You can only change twice a month so a lot of the last 2-1/2 years has been pretty gut-wrenching for anyone trying to maximize value of their fund in the last few years before retirement and recoup the losses of 2008. 

If you're a Federal employee under FERS, even with a fairly aggressive approach to TSP as your career and life situation allowed it, you really better have either extraordinarily modest plans and a paid-off house, or another income stream like military retirement or a part-time job lined up, if you want to retire before age 67, when you would start getting the near-max on your SS.


Most of the folk still under CSRS will be out soon then it will be all FERS.  If you max your contribution and get lucky in the market you might be able to match the old CSRS.  I seem to remember the SS component being touted as providing more portability for folk being laid off. 

When you got laid off under CSRS you could not convert it to SS quarters so many people ended up having to take a very reduced annuity. And yes, Federal employees can and do get laid off.  Many I worked with over the years who got hit in RIFs, some got other government jobs through priority placement, others were not so lucky. 

There is no government match to CSRS people who contribute to TSP but you do get the tax deferral of income.  Money paid into SS for CSRS is heavily offset ( I like to think my SS is going to support illegal immigrants  :argh:), it was the back lash to double dipping. 

All in all the TSP / 401K has been a great program for individual savings for retirement.  There have also been abuses and losses.  I was talking to a GM salesperson recently who was still down 60K in his account.  I didn't ask if it was due to owning pre bankruptcy GM stock or not.  The current GM stock had just gone public. 
< watch this space for coming distractions >

Offline Wineslob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14455
  • Reputation: +788/-193
  • Sucking the life out of Liberty
Re: New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2010, 10:34:28 AM »
As far as I know, the only benefit to a 401k is an employer-matching contribution.

Employer matching

Stock investment

Muni's

Tax deferred


just to name a few.

They touch 401 K's and they are ****ed.
“The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced, if the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”

        -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 BC (106-43 BC)

The unobtainable is unknown at Zombo.com



"Practice random violence and senseless acts of brutality"

If you want a gender neutral bathroom, go pee in the forest.