Democrats to Consider Nationalizing Personal 401k Plans (http://mpinkeyes.wordpress.com/2008/10/24/democrats-to-consider-nationalizing-personal-401k-plans/)

Posted on October 24, 2008 by Mr Pink Eyes
You may not care about William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Tony Rezko. You may not care about Obama palling around with terrorists and calling a racist, hate filled, American hating reverend his spiritual adviser. You may not care about Obama not wearing a flag lapel pin (and by the way, when did McCain stop wearing his? He didn’t wear one during any of the debates, while Obama did.) You may not care that Obama is a socialist and you may not care that the economy has been socialized and you may also not care that the government has no business socializing health care.
But you damn well should care about this (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122477680834462659.html). Congress is considering taking the money away from you that you put in your 401k plan voluntarily and nationalizing it.
The market turmoil has some politicians on Capitol Hill eyeing the end of the 401(k) as we know it
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.
You would be required to contribute 5% of your pay and it would go to the Social Security Administration. This account would gain 3% interest as opposed to the gains that you would receive when the market turns around. This would replace your 401k account. In other words the government is going to take away the money that you voluntarily decided to invest in the stock market for your retirement.
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.”
This amount to a tax increase on everyone who has a 401k plan. Most Americans would lose this tax break. Losing a tax break is the same as a tax increase. It is a semantics game Democrats are playing.
her plan would amount to a tax increase on workers making more than $75,000–considerably less than the $250,000 Barack Obama has said would be his tax-hike cutoff.
And it gets even better.
workers would be able to pass on only half of their account balances to their heirs; presumably the government would seize the remaining half.
If you die, the government will keep half of the money that you voluntarily decided to put towards your retirement. Your family will only get half.
You wanted change, you are going to get it.

Point 1:
A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York,

I wasnt aware that Obama's victory empowered non elected educators to enact legislation.

point 2:
It is by no means a certainty that Congress or a President Obama would embrace such a proposal,

Oh Snap! did the article you posted just de-rail your doom and gloom intentions? that whole reading comprehension thing will Fubar you every time.

Oh yes. The sour grapes.

Face it, Osg. You lost. The people have spoken and your party did not have the answer. Perhaps the popular vote reflected a fairly close race, but the chips still fell where they fell. The country just did not want more of the same ole same ole, especially considering that at the eve of the Republican's watch, we are still mired in 2 wars and the economy is uncertain at the VERY BEST right now. The people who lost their jobs in the past year might put a bit more faith in a Democrat led government looking out for their best interests as opposed to the Republicans who could have taken steps to avert the crisis over the past 8 years but were too busy making bank off of it.

The Republicans can either pout and brood or they can do their jobs as members of this country's government during tough times. They can turn their backs and possibly let the dam break just so they can blame it on the other guys or they can start filling sand bags. Either way there is way WAY too much work to be done for good of everyone to allow time to be wasted. As the old saying goes, there has never been a more important time to either shit or get off the pot.

If that comes to fruition I will be pissed. I would pull all my money out of all my 401's at what ever penalty it costs to keep them from managing my money.

If that comes to fruition I will be pissed. I would pull all my money out of all my 401's at what ever penalty it costs to keep them from managing my money.

The proposal is simply one more college professor's prepared theses which can be found in abundance at most campus libraries. Surely many economists and varied academics will be tossing out their proposals in the hope of becoming a part of this wave of 'change', and putting themselves at the same time into the newly developing political 'in-crowd'.

We would likely as not never heard of this person and the proposal if it were not such great fodder for the losing side of the election. And, actually, it is more in line with policies of the Republican party leaders, who have not been shy, going back as far as Reagan and Bush Sr, when it came to tampering with the retirement funds of federal employees.

Hint: Teresa Ghilarducci wrote a book in 2008 called "When I'm Sixty-four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them".
http://teresaghilarducci.org/about/

What's a common way of generating publicity for a book, in order to increase sales?

No such thing as bad publicity?

No such thing as bad publicity?


Nope there is not!