Obama Begins Push for New National Retirement System

[wake_up]

Obama wants us all to be equal. The workers, non workers, the lazy, illegal aliens, etc. Isn't that compassionate of him!

http://www.nationalseniorscouncil.or...rity&Itemid=62

Black Americans don't want to work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dB...layer_embedded

[BlandFood]

Good stuff, the video should have run on BET BEFORE the election..... they now reap what they sowed. :shrug:

[SalisburySage]

Not like we didn't know this before the elections. Elections have consequences. Now the Obama voter reaps what it sowed.

[johnpolitics]

Not like we didn't know this before the elections. Elections have consequences. Now the Obama voter reaps what it sowed.

Are you speaking as a former Commander or FEMA lawyer.

[overtaxed]

Good stuff, the video should have run on BET BEFORE the election..... they now reap what they sowed. :shrug:

That video did run. A guy I worked with predicted the 401 takeover try.

[MDvet]

Obama wants us all to be equal. The workers, non workers, the lazy, illegal aliens, etc. Isn't that compassionate of him!

http://www.nationalseniorscouncil.or...rity&Itemid=62

Black Americans don't want to work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dB...layer_embedded

It will come down to folks with private retirement plans vs. folks with private retirement plans.

I have no faith in government annunities from a government with $16 trillion plus deficit and that print its own money.

The government will print more money and government annunities will be worthless

[Sagittarius]

Looks as if I'm going to drain my retirement fund. I'll be damned if I'm going to have the funds I've saved over the years taken by the left to "redistribute."

I'll just take a loan and spend it first.

Sorry children and Grandchildren. I'm leaving you nothing.

Relie on "Uncle Sugar" to take care of you.

[SoSad]

Are you speaking as a former Commander or FEMA lawyer.

What does that have to do with the latest and greatest from Obama?

[SoSad]

Obama wants us all to be equal. The workers, non workers, the lazy, illegal aliens, etc. Isn't that compassionate of him!

http://www.nationalseniorscouncil.or...rity&Itemid=62

Black Americans don't want to work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dB...layer_embedded

Pensions are the problem in California. It's nice to see the President following our failure... The more that government is involved, the sooner we are destined to be bankrupt.

[Candy Pickletoes]

This article is dated 2 years ago. I've been looking and the most recent thing I can find is from February, 2012:

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/e...SA20111653.htm

1.Encouraging partial annuity options. Retirement plan participants often are confronted with a "cash or annuity" decision upon retirement. Given an all-or-nothing choice, many opt for a lump sum and decline the lifetime income stream because they are unaware they have the option to combine approaches. The proposed regulation changes a regulatory requirement to make it simpler for defined benefit pension plans to offer combinations of lifetime income and a single-sum cash payment. This is designed to encourage more retirees to consider partial annuities, which allow for retirees to receive a steady stream of income for the duration of their lifetimes while also keeping a portion of their savings invested in assets with the flexibility to respond to liquidity needs.

2.Removing a key obstacle to "longevity" annuities. Another proposed regulation expands on the combination approach by removing a regulatory impediment to purchasing a deferred "longevity" annuity. This change would make it easier for retirees to use a limited portion of their savings to purchase guaranteed income for life starting at an advanced age, such as average life expectancy. Annuities of this type would provide an efficient way for 65- or 70-year-olds (or even younger savers) to address the risk of outliving their assets by purchasing a predictable income stream starting at age 80 or 85. Once that risk is addressed, a retiree's task of generating income from the remaining assets is more manageable because it is limited to a fixed period of time.

3.Clarifying rules for plan rollovers to purchase annuities and spousal protection rules for 401(k) deferred annuities. Two revenue rulings issued today clarify how rules protecting employees and spouses apply when plan sponsors offer lifetime income options under their plans. The first ruling clarifies how the rules apply when employees are given the option to use a single-sum 401(k) payout to obtain a low-cost annuity from their employer's defined benefit pension plan. The second ruling clarifies that employers can offer their employees the option to use 401(k) savings to purchase deferred annuities and still satisfy spousal protection rules with minimal administrative burdens. Both of these rulings would facilitate the availability of flexible options for employees so that they can better use their 401(k) savings to achieve financial security in retirement.

I don't profess to know that much about my retirement plans, I just know I contribute to my 401k and expect to get that money back when I'm of retirement age. I also expect that I will not ever be able to actually retire, I've come to terms with the fact that I will work until the day I die. Unless I win the lottery or something!

But, you gotta play to win and I don't play so I won't win. Ho Hum...I owe, I owe, it's off to work I go....again, and again, and again!

[bmorepunk]

There's some history to this. Teresa Ghilarducci gave testimony to a Congressional committee just before the 2008 election which is the entire basis for this scare session. She advocated for a mandatory government retirement because she feels that the 401(k) system is too dangerous. This hearing was right before the 2008 election (thus used as a pre-election scare tactic) and right in the middle of a market collapse which had people freaking out about their equities portfolios. People were panicking because far too many older individuals were over-invested in equities for their age (such as my parents).

Since this was a hearing (and lots of stupid things get heard on the Hill) and not even legislation (most of which doesn't even get voted on), the hand-wringing over this is pointless. Does anyone really think that a Republican controlled Congress and a Senate that's pretty balanced is going to generate and pass a bill that would create a mandatory retirement system but also "take over" private financial accounts? Even the President wouldn't sign that bill.

Better start freaking out about a $0.75 tax on every round of ammunition while you're at it.

[johnpolitics]

What does that have to do with the latest and greatest from Obama?

Since you asked the question I'll answer it. In the last month SS has stated he is a retired military Commander and now FEMA lawyer. I am just wondering which breath of experience is he basing his comments on.

[Creekman]

Are you speaking as a former Commander or FEMA lawyer.

LOL...Great joke!

He's speaking as a professional right wing agitator as well as a sore loser.

[reg_indy]

"This hearing was set up to explore why Americans are not saving as much for their retirement as they could," explains National Seniors Council National Director Robert Crone, "However, it is clear that this is the first step towards a government takeover. It feels just like the beginning of the debate over health care and we all know how that ended up."

[jtowne-swim]

As long as I can keep my Reaganphone I don't care!

j/k

[ms maggie]

Anyone who reads this article and concludes the govt is going to seize their 401k IMO should have their savings confiscated. Some people are too stupid to have money.

[jtowne-swim]

Anyone who reads this article and concludes the govt is going to seize their 401k IMO should have their savings confiscated. Some people are too stupid to have money.

agreed

[dsummoner]

Those in Argentina thought the same thing... until their private pensions were socialized. When it comes to US government, no amount of idiotic and failed socialism is too stupid to implement domestically.

[bmore_ken]

Anyone who reads this article and concludes the govt is going to seize their 401k IMO should have their savings confiscated. Some people are too stupid to have money.

agreed

I have to agree. Although that attitude has more to do with being against da brotha in the WH than actually thinking that way, IMO of course

[BlandFood]

That video did run. A guy I worked with predicted the 401 takeover try.

Didn't see it on cable and I'm a TV junkie.