401(k) and union retirement
Via Alan, I’ve seen this mentioned before:
In February, the White House released its “Annual Report on the Middle Class” containing new regulations favored by Big Labor including a bailout of critically underfunded union pension plans through “retirement security” options.
The radical solution most favored by Big Labor is the seizure of private 401(k) plans for government disbursement — which lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement scheme. And, of course, the Obama administration is eager to accommodate their buddies.
I rather doubt it. I’ve not seen any sort of bill or push to make this happen but it seems enough people are concerned that it’s an option. But it seems to be a big bogeyman that a lot of folks float out there. These claims are usually tied to some proposal.
This would be catastrophic for a few reasons. First, a good portion of funds invested in the market are now government property. Second, if you tried to take money from folks’ plans, they’d just take their money out of the plans. And third, they’d probably kill you for trying.
May 5th, 2010 at 9:59 am
I’m thinkin’ that third option might be the real stickler for these idiots… although given what they have done so far I would NOT be suprised to see them try.
May 5th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Agreed. I know I’d just take the tax penalty for the withdrawal and put it someplace else. It does make me wonder where that would end up if challenged for constitutionality. No doubt the commerce clause or something as illegitimate would be applied.
No doubt they would try justifying under the fifth amendment, but I just can’t see that. But hell, I couldn’t see Kelo either.
May 5th, 2010 at 10:25 am
They did it in Argentina recently..
But yes, if someone tried to steal my retirement savings that I’ve sacrificed my body, my time, and current happiness for it’s like they are killing a part of me. If I didn’t contribute 10% to my 401k and then after-tax to the roth, how much better of a standard of living could I have? More vacations, better housing, food, I could give more to charity, send my kids to better schools. But I recognize that I’m not a savage who only lives hand to mouth, and that I must prepare for the future. Yes, bullets would start flying.
May 5th, 2010 at 10:52 am
Funny how it’s a never an option to raid the libtards trust funds, eh?
May 5th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Rule 303 would certainly be put into effect. Variations include rules 556 and 762 (with subsections 39, 51 and 54).
Breaker Morant.
May 5th, 2010 at 11:22 am
This stuff is old hat for the “progressives”. I remember way back in the early Clinton days some mid-level undersecretary for stupidity or something gave a speech advocating taxing savings. Not income but the principle. The Dems still do that occasionally. The taking of the 401Ks is just a modified version of that to avoid the vengeance of the trust fund babies.
May 5th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
They already have started the first steps. There is a rule making comment period currenty open to comment on requiring an annuity for all retirement plans and accounts.
May 5th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Fourth would be the hit that the stock market takes as everyone’s retirement nest egg leaves the stock market at once. Either my retirement fund would be used to forcefully buy US savings bonds to keep the scam going a little longer or I’d get it out and take whatever penalty was meted out.
When that happens, I think you will see some upset Tea Party people.
Regardless, I’d never view the stock market as good an investment as say physical possession of gold or steel or lead.
May 5th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
I just completed the process of taking mine out. As stock markets are government-run and manipulated gambles, and the odds were against me …. Yes, I took a temporary hit on the taxes, but, at the same time, rescued myself from the mortgage theft in process by using proceeds to pay off mine. Now I can put those ex-mortgage payments aside for old age, while keeping my money safer from grasping government thieves. Or I can just use them to live for today becasue tomorrow we die. The flip of a coin …
May 5th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
I suspect this rumor is based on a plan hatched in the diseased mind of one Barney Frank, CongressCreep from Taxachusetts.
During the dying days of the last Congress CC Frank (D-MA) proposed seizing all savings accounts of all sorts, giving the current owners a “Handsome rate of return – 1 percent” and upon the eventual demise of the owners the savings would become the property of the state.
But, CC Frank (D-Ma) that is not “confiscation” because the savers “would get a fair rate of return for their lifetimes.”
Thankfully, nothing has been heard of Frank’s malign plan so far this Congress – and Democratic turnout was so far down in yesterday’s primaries I doubt that Frank will have enough influence to pursue the plan in the next.
Stranger
May 5th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
I second the suggestion by Bob R.
This is why, since I was 18, I’ve been a consistent and loyal investor in Lead and Steel. It always increases in value (as long as you keep it covered with a light film of oil), it cannot be taxed when sold, and it has the added benefit of protecting your other assets. It even allows you to acquire assets from government stockpiles in the event of an economic collapse.
May 5th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
Don’t forget subsection 63 (also known as rule 30-06).