Government Grab of Retirement Accounts a Matter of ‘Social Justice’
Uncle Sam wants your retirement money.
The Obama administration has just solicited public comment on their proposal to take money from Americans’ private 401(k) retirement accounts and convert it into government-backed annuities. In other words, they want to take your money now to purchase U.S. Treasury bonds, then pay you a monthly sum later after you’ve retired.
Although this proposal is being initially portrayed as a voluntary choice, Americans already have the ability to purchase Treasury bonds with their retirement money. Moreover, the Obama administration is considering making these annuities the default option. And as analyst Karl Denninger noted, “‘choices’ have a funny way of turning into mandates.” Nor is his concern unjustified.
In 2008, Professor Teresa Ghilarducci of the New School of Social Research testified before Congress proposing a similar scheme to convert private 401(k) accounts into government-run “guaranteed retirement accounts” that would pay a 3% return. And in 2008, the Argentinian government attempted to nationalize private retirement funds to help cover its runaway deficit.
As the U.S. Social Security system moves ever closer to bankruptcy, the billions of dollars Americans have saved in their private retirement accounts will become an increasingly tempting target for our politicians.
A government raid on private retirement funds wouldn’t necessarily take the form of outright confiscation. It could take the form of mandatory conversion into government accounts, where the government would determine how much money retirees could receive. Or it could take the form of, for example, a 40% surtax on disbursements from 401(k) balances over $1 million — on the grounds that it would only harm wealthy “millionaires.”
But regardless of the precise method employed, the basic principle would be the same: Your money would no longer be your money. Instead, the government would claim the right to redistribute your wealth to pay for others’ retirement on the grounds that they needed it more. In essence, the government would be implementing the Marxist principle: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
Many Americans are predictably alarmed at this prospect. One of my friends who I’ll call “John” is a hard-working middle-class professional who has lived frugally, saved enough to send his two children to college, and has carefully built up a nest egg sufficient to ensure that he and his wife will have a comfortable retirement. In contrast, his neighbor George making the same salary has chosen to spend his income on fancier vacations and a more extravagant lifestyle, rather than saving for the future. John is understandably outraged that the government might someday tax or confiscate his nest egg to guarantee George’s retirement income regardless of George’s bad choices.
“…To each according to his need.” I don’t got much ability, but I got lots of needs.
Ryan, you made concessions to the Left. Gosh, I’d never have guessed. Really? Maybe my first clue was the gross unconstitutionality of it. Do these guys just not ever read the Constitution? Or do they just not care? Just how big a cluebat is required, here?
Several of my acquaintances are of the opinion that this would be the tipping point into violent revolution. I’m not so sure; we’ve already put up with so many other confiscatory measures, and people are so exercised about federal deficit spending, that we might just sit still for it.
The Democrats would love it, of course. It has all the “virtues” of Social Security: it eliminates the citizen’s independence, undermines his security, and renders him more amenable to further expansions of government, while providing Washington with a huge new pool of funds for its schemes. They might be turned out of office en masse for their brass, but I’d bet the mortgage money that the Republicans would not overturn it. They’d come up with some facile excuse for retaining it, and set to work exploiting the new funds for their own purposes. Indeed, a number of Republican legislators are probably already smacking their lips over the prospect.
I’m not hopeful about this.
It’s past time to re-elect no one…they all want to take from those who do and give to those who won’t.
“One of my friends who I’ll call “John” is a hard-working middle-class professional…”
“John” possibly didn’t give a damn about politics some eighteen months ago. The subject could have quickly bored him to tears. He may have almost flipped a coin when voting in the 2008 elections. “John” might have even voted for Barack Obama! Such individuals are now the backbone of the Tea Party movement—and he has every intention to stick it good and hard to the Democrats and their “moderate” Republican allies. It’s a little late in the game, but it’s better to be late than entirely absent.
If as you report: “In fact Ryan openly admitted to the New York Times, ‘I make a lot of concessions here to the left.’”
And then you write: “If Republicans truly wanted to respect the principles of individual liberty and limited government, they would respect Americans’ rights to save or spend their money as they wished.”
So if there were enough Republicans, they wouldn’t have to make concessions, and since they were concessions, they weren’t what Ryan wanted to do, but what they thought they had to do to make any progress at all.
Elect Tea Partiers where you can and fiscon R’s when you can’t. Do it enough and this problem will be handled well enough.
I had read there was talk of this months ago. I thought at the time that this was such a violation of everything this country was founded on that it would never happen. I know better now. There is no stopping the left. They are nakedly stealing and lying from one end of this country to the next. They have crossed a big bright red line and the big question will be do the majority of Americans see then for what they are and not just the “victims” of a right wing smear and conspiracy? To demand that Americans take THEIR PROPERTY and hand it over to the government will be the last straw. Our savings is OUR PROPERTY. This violates the Constitution on so many levels that is defies belief. We are at a tipping point in America which is why I believe Obama was bought and paid for. That is his job. That explains why he couldn’t care less about public opinion or being elected again. As far as I am concerned he appears to be a man who can’t wait to get the job done so he can retire to a life of opulent wealth and fame knowing he destroyed what he loathed for an entire lifetime. He actually looks weary and impatient for the end to be near. If Americans are outraged that their health care will become a dictat, can you imagine what will happen when they are told they no longer own their savings? Bring it on.
If the statists think that the health care fiasco is causing problems now, just wait until this is trotted out into the full light off day. There will be blood in the streets.
Dr. Hsieh:
To sell the confiscation of private wealth accumulated in retirement funds, what conditions would be necessary?
A widespread and deeply held mistrust of the investment and securities market as a whole, right?
And how could the government influence events to ensure that such an environment would prevail?
By flooding the financial market with “cheap” money, agreeing to taxpayer underwriting of all liabilities and risks, and encouraging corruption by lax enforcement of the securities and trading laws. Does this sound at all familiar?
Consider what course the government might take in order to seize your property.
It would do everything in its power to encourage the ghettoization of your neighborhood, so that when they pulled eminent domain on you, and deeded your property over to their favored cohorts,(citing Kelo v. New Haven), the public would more easily swallow the “urban renewal” or “slum clearance” line that would be the PR component of the caper.
This is what Castro did with the Cuban’s savings. He claimed all bank accounts for the state. The Cuban people never imagined that communism would be imposed on them. So we will need to get our pitchforks ready cause we are out of countries to escape into.
As the article states, Ghilarducci’s been working on this for quite awhile – initially while at Duke University. She appeared on Capitol Hill again in 2009.
Check out her briefing paper from 2007:
http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204.html
Here is an opinion piece posted at Investor’s Business Daily.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=521423&Ntt=ghilarducci+gingrich
Folks, this one’s not going away.
tipping point? boy are you naive.
You can put a frog into water and turn on the heat and he’ll GET OUT, regardless of the myths.
You can put the stupid American public, dumbed down by teachers and media for the last 50 years, under the ever increasing pressure of the government and they’ll act just like Germans in the 1930s, not as smart as frogs.
Mad Max is here.
That explains why Obama determined I don’t need a motorhome or trip to Vegas.
He has other plans. Central planning. He doesn’t want me to spend His inheritance.
@1. Marc Malone: – Ryan, you made concessions to the Left
Marc, it would be wiser to examine Ryan’s plan directly rather than respond to sound bites about it. Ryan is one of the very few members of the GOP who are actively trying to beat the so-called “progressives” at their own game. He’s a one-step-at-a-time pragmatist who knows what he’s dealing with in D.C. and is looking for ways to force the left to compromise, for a change. The important aspect of his pragmatism is that his Roadmap turns us back in the direction of the Republican Form of Government guaranteed by the Constitution, rather than pushing us further to the totalitarian left. At this point, ANY degree of SS privatization is a win for republicanism and smaller government.
The only sane alternative to a plan like Ryan’s is a wholesale dismantling of the SS and Medicare systems. I’m all for that… as soon as someone figures out how to do it. In the meantime, a stepwise approach AWAY from socialism is a very healthy alternative.
If Republicans were actually conservatives, they would have repealed all taxes on savings (income and cap gains). Then we would not need to lock our savings into 401k’s and IRA’s where they can be targeted by greedy socialists.
I believe that such a move would get the revolution going. It would also be preceded by a run on investment firms as people cash out their retirement accounts (even with the tax penalties). Hiding my savings under the mattress or smuggling cash to the Cayman Islands are preferable to government seizure. The first shots will be exchanged between revenuers and civilians trying desperately to recover the accumulated wealth of a lifetime of labor.
How will frugal citizens feel about people stealing their life savings? HATE is the only word that comes to mind. That deep hatred will quickly be followed by violent action.
Thank you for this article. As you so rightly note, much of the upcoming battles in politics will center on the issue of rights and justice. Since both are deep philosophical concepts, defending a rational philosophy will be key to making any political headway.
This would be justification for open revolt in this country
Dr. Hsieh eloquently criticizes the latest attempts by the right and left to enshrine injustice in our legal system. It is important to defend the fundamental principle if individual rights here, something that unfortunately our current politicians seem entirely unfamiliar with, schooled as they are in the cult of compromise. I agree strongly with the thoughts expressed by Dr. Hsieh’s:
We must reject the notion that one man’s “need” gives him an automatic moral claim on another man’s wealth. Instead, we must respect and affirm the principle that the person who has earned his wealth deserves it — and that it is his rightful choice (not the government’s) to decide whether and how he should save it, spend it, or give to others as charity.
Perhaps, if enough of the people in the country refuse to accept politicians who violate such basic principles, then a better batch of statesmen will eventually arrive on the scene.
The President of Argentina did that last year and a Judge here in the State put a stay for a while but she won and 600 billion dollars where “nationalized” in that country. Hown nice that Obama and his radicals are following Kichner’s economic route of progressive prosperity and here we are sitting in our arses doing nothing but taking it.
Have a great day Camrades!
This comes down to theft, pure and simple! BOHICA! (Bend over, here it comes again). They already spent social security and medicare. Now they want to spend the money we earned and blow that too. Time to voice our concerns and vote them ALL out of office, right and left!
He who controls your pursestrings controls your life.
Theft, pure and simple. And you better believe it’ll be time for armed resistance.
You’ve got to know that this is exactly what the Evil One wants, too.
Anything the government gets into turns to sh*t. The prospect of them seizing my private retirement funds for their own distribution makes my blood cold. I’m a retired teacher and I took a pension after twenty years of service. Its not a great pension but it really helps. I also put in about twenty years in the private sector which qualifies me for Social Security. Under normal circumstances I would receive a full Social Security pension. However, because I was a teacher, I can only receive a partial pension from Social Security which is greatly reduced. Others I know draw from as many as three full pensions which includes Social Security. Having been a teacher penalizes me. That means that all the work I did for reduced wages, risking my life teaching in inner city schools means nothing. I did put away money in a private retirement account, now the government wants that too. It may be time to leave this country.
This is right in line with what Obama wants in his health care proposal. His whole goal is to tax passive income as much as he can! It’s right on the WH website. 2.9% (equal to both sides of HI) on all dividends, interest, royalties, and rent. This is out of control! What do we have to do to stop this insanity?!
Several of my acquaintances are of the opinion that this would be the tipping point into violent revolution.
In other words, it would be a “third rail”. Funny how people on the Left used to describe Social Security in such terms when faced with the idea of abolishing it… but when it’s actual savings, instead of a government Ponzi scheme, anything goes.
I’d not put it past them to do this, but I still expect them to confiscate retirement savings the same stealthy way they confiscate all savings, even those stashed under a mattress: by devaluing the currency via inflation.
March on the Capitol, 20,000,000 strong, and bring your pitchforks and the pillory stocks.
Obama declares bank holidays – including investment banks – so that the populace cannot get its money. Banks reopen and everyone’s accounts have been pillaged. Obama understands this is not going to be, how shall we say, popular and is ready to roll with martial law. After sufficient cooling-off period, government begins to satisfy the needs of the citizenry. People don’t like it but what’s to be done. Don’t get me wrong, I hate this with every fiber of my being. It’s just that I believe that for most in this country so long as they’re being fed and entertained, they’ll accept anything. I sincerely hope to be proven wrong about this.
I remember something along these lines: Back in the early Clinton years, Jesse Jackson, among others, proposed a one-time (ha!) 15 per cent tax grab on every private retirement account in the nation. Obviously leftists have honed their scheme.
I agree Darby. We could line the Beltway, shoulder to shoulder, and march towards the center. Analogous to the military “pincer” movement, we could call it a “sphincter” movement. Might be what it takes to clean the place out.
Government Grab of Retirement Accounts
a Matter of ‘Social Justice’
Confiscating the savings of the Middle
Class will not pay the bills for long,
but will guarantee a peaceful, legal,
tax revolt; Texas leads the way !
If you, personally, expect to be taxed
out of house and home, move to the SW,
the Sunbelt, now; Land on your feet,
not your head. The Homestead Exemption
will protect you during the Tax Revolt.
Those of you who wish to fight, or watch,
should also find a new residence in a
large NE city.
I really like your fine-tuning of my suggestion; it gives D.C. despots the not-so-subtle message that our protest is well-organized, unified, disciplined, and relentless. And we’re not going to take their crap.
I SEE YOUR GOVERMENT THIEVES ARE GOING TO STEEL ALL YOUR MONEY TOO OURS HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO IT IN CANADA FOR SOME TIME NOW DON,T LET THEM DO IT YOU WILL BE SORRY
Before this happens, we all need to withdraw enough, to finance a shopping trip to the nearest ‘gun show’. I’m not going down without a fight.
As a prelude to the take over Home Depot should offer discounts on all torches and pitchforks
The dirty secret is that anybody that has diligently saved in their 401k type account will see 20% to 35% disappear as it is taxed on its drawdown. Most people have far less on which to retire than they think.
Watch for simple moves like bigger minimum withdrawals and special tax treatment for this “unearned” income.
The current message to savers is that you are crazy to be frugal. Take a look at the negative real interest being earned thanks to current policies. Save any money and you are not eligible for the “free” money available from the government. Example: One of the worst things you can do to make college “affordable” is to prudently set aside money. You get to pay for all the freeloaders and subsidize the worst behavior. meanwhile prices are driven up as the government hands out or guarantees massive amounts on behalf “scholars.”
I give Ryan a bit more credit for his idea. Private retirement accounts can work and become popular once the majority concedes that the social security system is completely broken. Chile is one of the best examples and it worth knowing how accounts evolved from “private” accounts that carried many restrictions and limited investments to a fairly dynamic engine of local capital that keeps even the lefties aware of the need for profits. It is typical in the privatization effort to force some of the money into government bonds since there is a related deficit when the government stops getting its hands on the social security contribution. In the real world, you have to deal with cash flows. A virtuous circle is created though and even baby steps like Ryan’s are in the right direction.
I forgot to add this earlier. The State Teachers Retirement is broke. I’m not even going to get the teacher’s pension I worked for.
Welcome to a world where up is down, right is wrong, and left is “right”.
I forgot to add this earlier. The State Teachers Retirement is broke. I’m not even going to get the teacher’s pension I worked for.
Welcome to a world where up is down, right is wrong, and left is “right”.
This is a brilliant Trojan horse.
Talk the retirees into buying Treasuries, give them a small annuity, then inflate the money and Bang! steal half their purchasing power. A clever way to confiscate their hard earned wealth!!!
Ultimately this is an issue of property rights. Supposedly the government cannot arbitrarily seize our property. If they can take our savings, they can take our homes, farms, businesses, cars, even our children. We will officially be slaves to the state.
Many Americans would recognize it and meet such a measure with open revolt.
If the left succeeds, and they probably will, the next to be grabbed will be the trust funds.
Watch the left explode then.
Vindico (T bills and inflation) that was my first thought as well. Apparently it’s not so obvious to all, though.
Chris (tax increase on 401K payout) I did not think of that, but you are probably right.
Lest any here think I’m all bluster — about the 20,000,000 man (no PC here) march on DC — I attended, all the way from Arizona, the 9-12-09 march on the Capitol with daughter and granddaughter in tow.
And it was GLORIOUS!
33. Not true. Nobody qualifies for need-based grant money without first exhausting all federal loans and work-study. Thus, a student with no savings will have to work twenty hours a week and take on thousands of dollars in non-dischargable debt before seeing a penny of “free” money. Now, merit based scholarships are another story, and plenty of students, including myself, have paid for their educations in whole or in part with merit scholarships.
Re-defeat Communism in 2010/2012!
I never thought something like this would have a chance but I see now that it definitely does. The systems are all in place. Since all such funds are under the control of custodian banks and companies, the government would have all of the nation’s private 401k money by electronic transfer the very next day after such a law is passed. No cooperation would be required from citizens.
The only recourse would be mass civil disobedience. Large numbers of people must withdraw their money in anticipation of the legislation and fight the taxes and penalties after the fact. You watch – they will freeze or limit withdrawals at some point prior to passage and ratification to prevent this.
It was just a matter of time . Did you ever see any money the government didn’t want to get their hands on ? Get out while you can.
This will bring about a revolution and civil war.
42. Unless, of course, that mass withdrawals of tax deferred investments is exactly what they want, and this is just a Xanatos gambit to force people into doing just that. After all, early withdrawals from 401k’s will trigger federal taxes of up to 45%, while imposing no future liabilities on the government. What more could they ask for to stave off insolvency?
Where has the Obama administration solicited public comment on this outrageous idea?
John Link
All you obama lovers are getting the change you asked for. The rest of us need to lock &load. No wonder they want your guns.Its time people, to take back america.
Ok I am a retired fed employee and it is time to pull my TSP money out and invest in gold or land(bury it in the back yard).
remember to keep America safe…Buy Ammunition.
Instead of taking the savings of private retirement accounts, why doesn’t the government take the huge public pension programs of government employees whose retirement benefits are bucketloads above the private sector?
49. Who says they won’t do both?
If they even try this, we need to contact the French Government and arrange for the loan of that historic heirloom “The National Razor”.
The health care debates may have never shown up of CSPAN – but the “trims” will draw top ratings.
They can’t be that out touch.
Here’s the Federal request for public comment:
“Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in Retirement Plans [2/2/2010] ”
http://www.dol.gov/federalregister/HtmlDis…&AgencyId=8
You can send e-mail comments to:
Include “RIN 1210-AB33″ in the subject line of the message
Here’s the shortened link to the Federal request for comments:
http://bit.ly/bvmlxY
(The link above is truncated.)
You can send e-mail comments to:
e-ORI@dol.gov
Include “RIN 1210-AB33″ in the subject line of the message
Old Soldier, the government already owns our property. All homes and land is taxed. And no one is complaining about that. The government steals homes all the time! Just fall behind on your taxes, get buried under interest and lien fees, and then town legal fees added to your bill, until suddenly you ‘owe’ more than the value of your home in back taxes! Hardly anyone is revolting, and any talk of such revolt is met with “you’re a right wing whacko!”
Americans have been lulled to sleep by sports, sex, beer and chasing the opposite sex.. the average person cares or is aware of little else. Until soldiers are marching in the streets, they won’t be awake, and by then it’ll be too late.
Good luck obtaining a weapon. With all the gun control laws, it’s nearly impossible to obtain one now, except through illegal underground black market suppliers.
America is headed where Argentina is. The sad thing is there is no place to flee to.
R.I.P Joe Stack
I’d love to see the debate over a proposal like this take place on the merits without lapsing into paranoia and hysteria.
The problem is that almost no employer in America today offers an annuity option as part of its 401(k) plan. I’m an employee benefits attorney, and I never counsel a plan sponsor to offer an annuity option. Just offer lump sums, it’s far simpler, and let people roll over their accounts to an IRA and take periodic distributions from that vehicle, with the assistance of the participant’s own financial advisor.
401(k) plans have routed the field in the world of qualified retirement plans. Conventional defined benefit plans are dinosaurs, and so too are old-style “money purchase” pension plans, which are also required by law to offer an annuity option. 401(k)s fall under the legal category of “profit sharing” plans and don’t have to offer anything other a single sum distribution.
Does that strike any of you as a problem? It does to many. Social Security is headed for insolvency. It is gigantic flippin’ disaster waiting to happen. But as a practical matter that’s become the only bulwark protecting an American who lives too long, and outlives his or her savings. Many experts think that Americans who’ve grown up in the 401(k) world should have better access to annuity (lifetime income protection) products, and one way to do that is to facilitate (on a voluntary basis) the annuitization of 401(k) accounts.
Ultimately, the macroeconomic goal of a proposal like this is to relieve the pressure on Social Security, which could be rendered much more actuarially solvent by cutting the formula-driven benefit increases. Facilitating the ability of Americans to obtain supplemental lifetime income protection from their retirement savings would make such a reform much easier to achieve.
Democracy is majority vote, and the majority are losers. They breed like flies, so they far out number the winners. This government is government of the losers, by the losers, for the losers. So of course they’ll steal responsible peoples 401K via their elected politicians.
The government is not trying to “steal” our retirement savings. That sort of paranoia is the mark of a loser.
Kurt,
Here’s your debate; I am socking money away in 401Ks and IRAs because I don’t trust the government. I have seen the level of responsibity that has resulted in our social security system becoming insolvent, and I know better than to trust them with my future.
The idea that the Government is looking at 401Ks, which are private property, our personal savings, and thinking that this is something they should get involved with is disturbing.
As a benefits attorney, I doubt your objectivity. You try to make the case that this is just a case of a concerned Government looking out for it’s helpless subjects. Nice try, we aren’t buying, we want the government out of our lives. We aren’t shopping for new services, particularly given the disgust we have in their track record.
You like to throw around the term paranoid. If you really want a debate on the government messing around with 401ks, be careful. Just because your’re not paranoid doesn’t mean that people really aren’t out to get you.
We know for a fact that this interest in 401k isn’t motivated by our governemnts concern for us, it’s because there is a huge amount of money out there they would love to get control over, everything else is just a cover story.
Kurt, any retiree who wants to convert his/her 401k into an annuity needs only cash out the 401k and take it to a life insurance company to buy an annuity. Just be sure to set aside the required funds to pay the taxes on the withdrawal.
HoosierHawk,
You may doubt my objectivity, but please don’t doubt my expertise. (For what it’s worth with respect to judging my objectivity, I am a conservative Republican who in no way supports the Obama administration.) Concern about the problems that will be faced by the baby boom generation that will retire with only 401(k) plans for security has been around for years, and are shared by Republicans and Democrats alike who are familiar with the actuarial realities.
Precious few workers have the option of choosing an employer that offers a defined benefit pension plan. Employers don’t offer them for a number of reasons, but administrative complexity and a lack of cost certainty are major drivers.
What I like about proposals to encourage the annuitization of 401(k) savings is that, with the decline of traditional pensions, the burden falls squarely on Social Security to provide retirees with income protection. There are two basic models of retirement planning – defined contribution and defined benefit. The former permits a worker to build up savings, which if marshalled wisely translates into wealth, that can be passed on to one’s heirs. But there is an enormous risk that such savings won’t be enough to last one’s lifetime, and individuals will be plunged into poverty. The latter emphasizes lifetime income security and the peace of mind that goes with it. But a lifetime income benefit does not build wealth.
Most experts attribute the Social Security funding crisis on the committments we’ve made to retirees to keep increasing their benefits to keep pace with inflation. Reducing that committment will go a long way to restoring the system to actuarial soundness. So will raising the retirement age at which one can begin to draw benefits. But both of those necessary reforms are politically unpalatable when Social Security serves not as a supplement but as the sole vehicle for income protection. Any efforts to encourage the annuitization of 401(k) savings – on a voluntary basis of course – can help to create a source of supplemental income protection that can permit Social Security’s unsustainable committments to be adjusted. That’s the true, long term value of the annuitization proposals.
60. That still doesn’t answer the fact that there’s nothing stopping them from purchasing annuities with their nest eggs now. AXA Equitable runs ads on TV trying to convince people to buy annuities from them to guarantee their income!
Kurt, I appreciate your clarity on this topic. But I have to agree with HHawk and mb – the notion that the feds want any more control over my retirement nest egg stinks even on fine china. The feds have already more than demonstrated their untrustworthiness and utter lack of foresight and common sense (see also: “affordable mortgages”, credit meltdown, TARP, Spendulu$, etc). Until that changes I don’t want them anywhere near any more of my money than I’m currently legally obligated to put up with. That is not paranoia, it’s just sound economics based on the facts.
That said, this subject brings to my (perhaps addled) mind something tangential, and you hint at it in your last paragraph. That is this: I wonder if it will ever become… let’s call it “fashionable” to just… not retire. Personally, I don’t plan on retiring despite the fact that I’m getting close to the early traditional years of retirement. Rather than sock away every dime so I can “not work” later, I’m schooling to go into a next career – one that I perhaps might have liked to pursue if I’d had the insight and self-discipline to pursue it earlier in life. The thought of being retired simply doesn’t attract me, while the thought of working in an entirely new field excites me to no end. As I talk to more folks my age, I find that sentiment growing.
With people living longer each decade, to the point where an entire cottage industry has grown up around coaching “Third Agers” on how to make their extra / generativity years more personally fulfilling, it seems natural that an increasing number of individuals may soon begin deciding just not to retire – or at least putting it off until it’s a physical or medical necessity. That seems especially reasonable given the prospects of retirement with respect to dealing with the imminent default of Social Security and the full-time job retirees have in dealing with Medicare and the various supplemental insurance(s) they need just to maintain their health.
Kurt you say: “The government is not trying to “steal” our retirement savings. That sort of paranoia is the mark of a loser.” Strip away the creative accounting, and you have a internal government debt of $130 trillion. That’s a million dollars for every working person. Go tell the people who just entered the work place, that their one million dollar share of the debt is not stealing. Also tell them that the government responsible does not lust after everyones 401(k). The story of little red riding hood and the big bad wolf is popular for good reason.
#42 mark G. To the point you make at the end of your post, did anyone else see the on their monthly statement from Citibank that effective April 1, they want 7 days notice on all withdrawals?
Go to google and check it for yourself.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but if the government issues Treasury Bills and can also set the interest rate that the bills make, isn’t there a slight chance that we would lose money?
Kurt is a govt troll/shill
65. The government doesn’t set the interest rates of T-bills; the buyers of those T-bills set the interest rates based on their bids.
Kurt, you are trying to rationalize STEALING other people’s property!
Social justice is in fact, the goal of the communist.