Plans To Seize 401ks

[vector7]

Is Obama Going To Nationalize 401k Plans?

By Mike Rowan on March 20, 2009 | More Posts By Mike Rowan | Author's Website

This proposal is in the 2010 Budget and may be a start of a Government take over of the American 401k and Retirement Account system. Obama is giving retirement, IRA, and 401k savers something to monitor closely….

President Barack Obama is calling for establishing automatic workplace pensions and expanding unemployment insurance as part of his spending plan for the U.S. Labor Department next fiscal year.

We liken this to an “Obama 401k Plan”

The budget “lays the groundwork for future establishment of a system of automatic workplace pensions, to operate alongside Social Security, that is expected to dramatically increase” retirement and personal savings, Obama’s Office of Management and Budget said in its outline, without giving details on the costs.

Obama 401k Plan: What it entails
The plan would force employers that don’t offer retirement plans to enroll employees in a “direct-deposit IRA account,” with the option for workers themselves to opt out. Currently, 75 million working Americans, or about half the workforce, lacks employer-based retirement plans, according to the administration.

The troubling thing to me is that the government would pay a 3% fixed interest rate on the accounts as opposed to the diverse mutual fund offerings in a traditional 401k plan. In effect, this would create a “Social Security” type structure to your retirement, IRA, or 401k.

The lack of equity options in your 401k plan would dramatically affect the possible returns, especially over an extended period of time. Just think, the average equity return over the stock market’s history is somewhere between 9-11%. Do you think that you would be happy with 3%?

A traditional 401k Savings Plan vs. an Obama 401k Plan

$10,000 invested over a 30 year period at a 3% interest Rate

Final Savings Balance:$ 24568.42

$10,000 invested over a 30 year period at a 8% rate of return

Final Savings Balance:$ 109357.30

That is a $84,789 Difference!

$10,000 invested over 30 years with an annual contribution of $2,000 at 3%

Final Savings Balance:$ 121302.74

$10,000 invested over 30 years with an annual contribution of $2,000 at 8%

Final Savings Balance:$ 356756.97

That is a $235,454 Difference!

As you can see.

Your 401k plan offers you a drastically higher return than Obama would give you at 3%. The nationalization of the nations retirement system could cost you a pretty penny.

Is an Obama 401k Plan what you want?
The proposal “raises more questions than it answers,” said Representative Howard “Buck” McKeon of California, the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee.

“We need to take a step back and question this ever- expanding role for the federal government,” he said in a statement.

[Ryan Ruck]

Class Warfare's Next Target: 401(k) Savings

By Newt Gingrich, Peter Ferrara
02/17/2010

You did the responsible thing. You saved in your IRA or 401(k) to support your retirement, when you could have spent that money on another vacation, or an upscale car, or fancier clothes and jewelry. But now Washington is developing plans for your retirement savings.

BusinessWeek reports that the Treasury and Labor departments are asking for public comment on "the conversion of 401(k) savings and Individual Retirement Accounts into annuities or other steady payment streams."

In plain English, the idea is for the government to take your retirement savings in return for a promise to pay you some monthly benefit in your retirement years.
If the government keeps punishing responsibility and rewarding failure, society ends up with a lot less responsibility and a lot more failure, destroying prosperity in the process.

They will tell you that you are "investing" your money in U.S. Treasury bonds. But they will use your money immediately to pay for their unprecedented trillion-dollar budget deficits, leaving nothing to back up their political promises, just as they have raided the Social Security trust funds.

This "conversion" may start out as an optional choice, though you are already free to buy Treasury bonds whenever you want. But as Karl Denninger of the Market Ticker Web site reports: " "Choices' have a funny way of turning into mandates, and this looks to me like a raw admission that Treasury knows it will not be able to sell its debt in the open market--so they will effectively tax you by forcing your "retirement' money to buy them."

Moreover, benefits based on Treasury bond interest rates may be woefully inadequate compensation for your years of savings. As Denninger adds, "What's even worse is that the government has intentionally suppressed Treasury yields during this crisis (and will keep doing so by various means, including manipulating the CPI inflation index) so as to guarantee that you lose over time compared to actual purchasing power."

This proposal follows hearings held last fall by House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., of the Ways and Means Committee focusing on "redirecting (IRA and 401 k) tax breaks to a new system of guaranteed retirement accounts to which all workers would be obliged to contribute," as reported by InvestmentNews.com.

The hearings examined a proposal from professor Teresa Ghilarducci of the New School for Social Research in New York to give all workers "a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government" in return for requiring workers "to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration."

Argentina provided a precedent in 2008, taking over that country's private retirement accounts for forced investment in government bonds to cover spiraling deficits. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard editorialized at the time in Britain's Daily Telegraph that this may be "a foretaste of what may happen across the world as governments discover . . . that the bond markets are unwilling to plug the (deficit) gap. . . . My fear is that governments in the U.S., Britain and Europe will display similar reflexes."

This is just the latest chapter in what is developing into a war by the left on America's seniors. All that class-war rhetoric about "the rich" ends up targeting seniors, who tend to have accumulated the most in savings and investment on average because they have been around the longest.

President Obama, House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid targeted seniors for hundreds of billions in Medicare cuts to finance expanded Medicaid for the poor and other new entitlements in the ObamaCare health care takeover legislation. If you liked your health insurance, you were supposed to be able to keep it, except for the 25% of seniors who had chosen Medicare Advantage private health plans for their Medicare coverage.

Even the Medicare actuaries estimated that most of those seniors would lose their Medicare Advantage coverage because of all the ObamaCare cuts for those plans. Obama has even begun rationing for seniors under Medicare by slashing payments to heart and cancer specialists serving seniors under that program.

All of this reflects a fundamental problem underlying socialist economic policies. If the government keeps punishing responsibility and rewarding failure, society ends up with a lot less responsibility and a lot more failure, destroying prosperity in the process.

As former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said, "The trouble with socialism is you run out of other people's money to spend." And now they want to spend our retirement savings.

Congressional Republicans should introduce legislation to block the government from ever proceeding with anything like this. Call it the "Keep Your Hands Off My 401(k) Act of 2010."

[Ryan Ruck]

It's coming... You can't just leave a big, juicy, untaxed target worth trillions hanging in front of the government's nose and not expect them to try and steal at least part of it.

Administration Advances Plan to Federalize Private Pension System

Proposal guaranteeing returns could push many into annuities

June 08, 2010

In February, the U.S. Treasury and Labor departments jointly announced they were seeking public comment on proposed design changes to employer-sponsored 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts that would centralize the private pension system under structures created and administered by the government.

Supporters say these changes are needed to ensure Americans save more for their retirement and have lifetime income options that prevent them from outliving their retirement savings, protecting them from market risk.

At stake for the millions of Americans with private retirement plans: Would they be able to continue making their own investment decisions? Or would Congress mandate both investment options and distribution methods? Government Retirement Accounts also would prevent workers from owning their retirement savings fully, as they could bequeath only half of their remaining account balances to their heirs.

Government officials, labor unions, and some industry groups favor GRAs and mandatory annuitization. Under the proposal being discussed, workers and companies alike would contribute a minimum of 2.5 percent of pay, up to the Social Security earnings cap, to their GRA. In return, workers would be guaranteed a 3 percent return on their investment. This system would not replace Social Security, forcing workers to contribute to both systems.

According to the Department of Labor, 61 percent of all private-sector workers and 71 percent of all full-time private-sector workers had access to an employer-provided retirement plan in 2008, and another 47 million households currently participate in IRAs. Proponents of a government takeover of the private pension system say the housing and financial crises have jeopardized retirement security and left Americans less trusting of the financial system.

However, a survey conducted in fall 2008, even as the financial crisis was unfolding, found strong support for the current system. The Investment Company Institute, a national association of U.S. investment companies that manage about 50 percent of the nation’s 401(k), 403(b), and IRA assets, surveyed 3,000 households and reported nearly nine of 10 rejected the idea that government, not individuals, should make retirement investment decisions. Even households without a 401(k) or IRA did not see a need for drastic changes to the private system.

Effect on private wealth

Government officials vociferously deny any intent to eliminate 401(k) or IRA investments in favor of a government-run system. Joseph Dewolk, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Labor, told Carolina Journal it’s inaccurate to say they’re looking to convert IRAs or 401(k)s to a government-run plan. “I would refer you to the ‘Request for Information’ because it’s just that, a series of questions to gather input from the public and others about our proposed rules. It’s about making sure Americans can make their savings last.”

The “Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in Retirement Plans,” posted to the Federal Register in February, was open for public comments until May 3 (see EBSA-2010.pdf). So how do Americans find out when an issue is up for public comment?

When questioned about the transparency of the public comment system, Dewolk said, “Well, a lot of people did know, and they commented on the website.” Sandra Salstrom, a spokeswoman for the Department of Treasury, told CJ that “it’s [the Request for Information] is on the Federal Register so anyone can read it and comment. Apparently, 700 people cared enough to make a comment.”

As CJ first reported in November 2008, the House Committee on Education and Labor has held several hearings since early 2008 on strengthening pensions. Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School of Social Research in New York, is among those advocating Congress to remove favorable tax treatment for 401(k)s, which opponents say essentially would eliminate any reason for companies to offer these plans, and instead offer GRAs.

In a statement to the committee on Feb. 24, 2009, John Bogle, founder and former CEO of The Vanguard Group, pushed for a new defined contribution plan in the private sector but overseen by a new independent Federal Retirement Board. “If we want to encourage and maximize the retirement savings of our citizens, we must drive the money changers — or at least most of them — out of the temples of finance.”

But others, including Paul Stevens, president and CEO of Investment Company Institute, said the government should “not favor one solution over others, but should nurture a robust and transparent market where innovative products can be developed and understood by retirees.” (Details of testimony are here.)

Two reports referenced in recent Committee hearings and the U.S. Labor and Treasury departments’ joint RFI discussed government-run options. The Annual Report of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, released in February, strongly favors automatic IRAs, annuitization, and GRAs (see Annual-report-middle-class.pdf). A July 2009 Government Accountability Office report on private pensions prepared for the House committee details the advantages and trade-offs of alternative retirement options currently under consideration (see GAO-09-642.pdf).

One option would be the Universal 401(k) Plan giving every worker, including part-time employees and recent hires not yet eligible for an employer-sponsored plan, access to a government-administered defined contribution retirement savings account. Workers would be enrolled automatically unless they opted out.

The Guaranteed Retirement Accounts plan proposes a mandatory system with both defined benefit and defined contribution features. The report makes it clear in footnote 79 that this system would work only if everyone has to participate: “A mandatory retirement system cannot ensure 100 percent coverage if certain groups, such as very low-income workers, are exempt from the mandate.”

The report also warns that requiring workers and employers to contribute to any type of pension plan would increase the costs and divert funds from other uses, such as employers’ business expenses and workers’ basic necessities. Under such a scenario, employers might have to reduce compensation to employees, disproportionately affecting lower-income workers and small businesses.

An annuity is the investment vehicle most favored by many government officials. However, the GAO report says that forced annuitization is problematic because annuitants who die early in their retirement would not realize much benefit, they would no longer have access to their assets in the event of an emergency, and generally could not leave a bequest to their heirs.

Finally, the report concludes that any centralization or nationalization of the private pension system, especially one that guaranteed a rate of return, “may be a costly and complex effort that requires new regulatory and oversight efforts. These costs could be passed on to workers, employers, and taxpayers in general.”

Opposition to government-run plans

In a letter sent to the Department of Labor and Department of the Treasury, Republicans expressed strong opposition to any attempt to eliminate or federalize private-sector IRAs or 401(k)s. Alexa Marrero, spokesperson for Republican members of the House Education and Labor Committee, told CJ that, while she’s unaware of any specific timeline, the administration’s lack of transparency on previous issues makes it possible it could act at any time without providing much notice.

Public comments to the RFI from those who were not connected to labor advocacy groups or the investment community largely were negative. While some said improvements could be made to the current system, many expressed distrust of the government’s ability to manage retirement systems and said individuals should make their own decisions.

[Backstop]

I've been keeping a close eye on this, and here is my opinion:

That plan of theirs has absolutely nothing to do with this: "Supporters say these changes are needed to ensure Americans save more for their retirement and have lifetime income options that prevent them from outliving their retirement savings, protecting them from market risk.

It has everything with the Government needing our money to continue with their out of control spending, and at this point they need the funds to keep our economy afloat.

[Ryan Ruck]

I've been keeping a close eye on this, and here is my opinion:

That plan of theirs has absolutely nothing to do with this: "Supporters say these changes are needed to ensure Americans save more for their retirement and have lifetime income options that prevent them from outliving their retirement savings, protecting them from market risk.

It has everything with the Government needing our money to continue with their out of control spending, and at this point they need the funds to keep our economy afloat.

Indeed. Not to mention the fact that the part in red is none of the government's damn business if people have "enough" money. After all, who determines "enough"? What happens when/if hyperinflation hits and that $400k grandma and grandpa have saved up to cover the last 15-20 years of life suddenly won't last them another 4 years?

[Backstop]

You and I Ryan are reading on the same page.

[American Patriot]

The government better NOT fucking TOUCH MY money.

I put money in PRE-TAXED IRAs. That means, they have already taxed it. Leave it the fuck alone, or else.

If someone wants to start a war, they WILL start one over that.

Touch MY money and I will defend it.

I have worked my ASS off for the little bit I've saved for old age. Keep your fucking hands off it.

[Ryan Ruck]

Obama Administration Plans to Seize 401(k) Retirement Accounts

May 5, 2010

One aspect of a new and improved federal regulatory scheme is the seizure of 401(k) retirement plans and the subsequent government-administered disbursement of the funds.

In Chapter 3 of the Annual Report on the Middle Class released in February by Vice President Biden and the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, the Obama administration calls for enhancing the “retirement options” for the middle class by imposing “new regulations to improve the transparency and adequacy of 401(k) retirement savings.”

The plan, as sketched in the 43-page document, calls for the creation of something called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts” (GRAs). Biden slyly shifts the onus for the idea through weasel words typical of the federal government: “Some have suggested the creation of Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs), which would give workers a simple way to invest a portion of their retirement savings in an account that was free of inflation and market risk, and in some versions under discussion, would guarantee a specified real return above the rate of inflation.”

These accounts would be “free of inflation and market risk” because they would be under the direct and absolute control of the federal bureaucracy. There would be no risk because the funds would no longer be moored to the free market and subject to the fluctuations thereof. Rather, the retirement funds of every hard-working American dependent on a 401(k) for their retirement security would be nationalized and made subject to the whims and will of the executive branch.

The current administration is practiced in the erection of such straw men to deflect their own socialistic and absolutist intent. The record is clear, however, and since the day of his inauguration, Barack Obama and his congressional co-conspirators have consistently and unapologetically set out to systematically nationalize the economy of the United States: first the banks; then the insurance companies; then the auto industry; then healthcare; and now the piece de resistance, the private savings accounts of millions of middle-class Americans. This is an unlawful usurpation of power unprecedented in the annals of American political history.

Coinciding with the publication of the report described above, the Obama White House, together with the Departments of Labor and Treasury, issued a so-called “Request for Information” calling for a detailed analysis of the pros and cons of the “annuitization” of individual 401(k)s. The scheme was set forth in a set of “Proposed Rules” published on February 2, 2010 in the Federal Register.

The document reads in part, “While defined contribution plans have some strengths relative to defined benefit plans, participants in defined contribution plans bear the investment risk because there is no promise by the employer as to the adequacy of the account balance that will be available or the income stream that can be provided after retirement.” And furthermore, “The Agencies are considering whether it would be appropriate for them to take future steps for them to facilitate access to, and use of, lifetime income or other arrangements designed to provide designed to provide a stream of income after retirement.”

The upshot of that clunky prose is that the Obama administration believes that employers cannot be relied upon to adequately manage the 401(k) retirement accounts it provides for their employees, therefore the federal government will relieve them of that responsibility and take sole discretionary control of those funds, thus eliminating the risk of mismanagement. In other words, the Obama administration is planning to divert the “stream of income after retirement” and channel it right through Washington, D.C.

Under the section of the Proposed Rules marked “Background,” the document declares that it is the intent of the agencies considering these changes to further “their efforts to promote retirement security for American workers.” And, to “provide wages that support families, and rise with time and productivity.” Since January 2010, it seems that the only thing rising with time is the likelihood that the economic wealth and might of our once enviable Republic will be methodically eradicated through the exercise by the executive branch of unconstitutional authority over every financial aspect of our nation’s people.

While the time for commenting on these Proposed Rules has passed (May 3, 2010 was the deadline), there is yet time for concerned citizens to contact their elected representatives and voice their opposition to President Obama’s proposed seizure of their 401(k) retirement accounts.

In response to the White House’s pronouncements, many Republicans in the House of Representatives, including GOP leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), have joined together to defend against the federal assault on the financial freedom of the middle class. Boehner and a cadre of colleagues known as the “House GOP Savings Recovery Solutions Group” (an organization founded by Boehner to, “help Americans protect and rebuild their hard-earned savings as quickly as possible while making sure the federal government does not hinder the process”) have written a memo to the secretaries of Labor and Treasury, imploring them to “take no action” to nationalize the retirement security of millions of Americans, representing trillions of dollars. The text of the letter is reprinted below:

Dear Secretaries Solis and Geithner:

As members of the Republican Savings Solutions Group, we write today to express our strong opposition to any proposal to eliminate or federalize private-sector defined contribution pension plans, such as 401(k)s, or impose burdensome new requirements upon the businesses, large and small, who choose to offer these plans to their employees.

In the Annual Report of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, Vice President Biden discussed at length the creation of so-called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts, (GRAs)” which would provide for protection from “inflation and market risk” and potentially “guarantee a specified real return above the rate of inflation” — presumably at taxpayer expense. In the Report, the Vice President recommended “further study of these issues.”

The Vice President’s comments are troubling, insofar as they come on the heels of testimony before Congress from supporters of GRAs proposing to eliminate the favorable tax treatment currently afforded to 401(k) plans, and instead use those dollars to fund government-invested GRAs into which all employees would be required to contribute a portion of their salary — again, with a government subsidy. These advocates would, essentially, dismantle the present private-sector 401(k) system, replacing it instead with a government-run investment plan, the size and scope of which remain to be seen. This despite data showing that 90 percent of households have a favorable opinion of the existing 401(k)/IRA system.

In light of these facts, we write today to express our opposition in the strongest terms to any effort to “nationalize” the private 401(k) system, or any proposal that would dismantle or disfavor the private 401(k) system in favor of a government-run retirement security regime.

Similarly, and more recently, the Departments of Labor and Treasury have jointly issued a “Request for Information” regarding the “annuitization” of 401(k) plans through “Lifetime Income Options.” While we appreciate the Departments’ seeking guidance and information from all parties and stakeholders in advance of regulatory activity, we strongly urge that the Departments not proceed with any regulation in this area before they have carefully and thoroughly considered all of the information received.

More specifically, we urge that the Departments take no action to mandate that plan sponsors — often, small businesses — include a “lifetime income” or “annuitization” option if they choose to offer a 401(k) plan to their employees, or that beneficiaries take some or all of their retirement savings in such an option. Data shows that 70 percent of Americans oppose the concept of a mandated annuity or government payout of their 401(k) plan. On a more fundamental level, Congress should not be in the business of choosing “winners” and “losers” among retirement security stakeholders. Instead, we urge the Departments to make it easier for employers to include retirement income solutions in their savings plans and to help workers learn more about the value of their retirement savings as a source of retirement income. Finally, to the extent new mandates and bureaucratic red tape from Washington push small employers out of the business of offering these plans to their employees, we would submit such an effort weakens, rather than strengthens retirement security.

We appreciate your consideration of our views in these important matters and stand ready to work with you and the Administration to promote secure and adequate retirement savings for all Americans.

Sincerely,

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
Rep. John Kline (R-MN) 
Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) 
Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) 
Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) 
Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) 
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) 
Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH) 
Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH) 
Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN) 
Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) 
Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) 
Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA)

While the goal of Boehner’s group is noble and laudable, the tactics it uses to resist the administration’s attack on middle-class savings seems somehow to justify them, as well. If Congressman Boehner and his allies are genuinely committed to helping “Americans protect and rebuild their hard-earned savings,” then their interest, as well as that of our Republic and the citizens thereof, would be best served by a bold and relentless campaign to drive all branches of the national government to retreat to a place within the borders of their constitutional authority.

[vector7]

The New Auto IRA is just Highway Robbery

by Ron Holland
by Ron Holland
Previously by Ron Holland: A 21st Century Patriot’s Dream



Firrst They Destroy Private Healthcare in America – Yes, the socialist Democrats won their first battle to destroy the private healthcare system in the US but the automatic IRA bill now in Congress is their next attack to also control, confiscate and destroy the private retirement system. Ultimately, nationalizing healthcare is designed to create a major new government revenue stream by replacing private health insurance with a nationalized, mandatory, government program and their goal is identical with your retirement plan.

Washington will decide the annual forced healthcare premiums on all Americans with the middle and upper wage earners paying far higher premiums than the subsidized voting constituencies who will be the primary beneficiaries of the program. Their goal is to allow Washington to steal much of the annual health premiums (taxes) for current revenue needs and to bailout and subsidize with your premiums the health programs for the voting blocks of poor and underemployed, illegals, unions and the millions of city, county, state and federal government employees. Eventually there will be no private competition available except for the very wealthy and Washington will constantly increase premiums just as they raise taxes today.

Next They Steal Your Private Retirement Benefits – Just as with the Obama Administration plans eventual nationalization of healthcare, the tremendous amount of funds in private retirement plans and IRA accounts are also being targeted to meet future revenue needs. Bills have just been introduced in both the House and Senate to create the new Auto IRA accounts which will at first be voluntary but later will become mandatory like Social Security and I expect the early 3% employee after tax contribution levels to eventually rise to 10 to 15% of compensation rising even more than Social Security has increased over the years. Read this August 17th article in Investment News at for more information.

Just Robbery Pure & Simple – The Auto IRA is the first step to grab and control your retirement assets and replace our private system with a forced, government controlled Social Security type program. In addition they will force much of your retirement funds into buying junk treasury bonds along with the Federal Reserve when the dollar/national debt crisis hits as billions of retirement funds become the buyer of last resort when the rest of the world are dumping dollars and treasury securities. Americans with substantial private retirement benefits will also likely be "means tested" out of their promised Social Security benefits and discover their private retirement benefits will be subject to confiscatory levels of taxes and penalties which will even target previously taxed Roth IRA accounts.

Bipartisan Theft – But don’t think a GOP victory in the fall elections or 2012 will safeguard your retirement assets as Washington’s need for new wealth is a bipartisan effort by both political parties. Note that the leading "Washington based" conservative think tank disagrees with my analysis of the threat to your retirement assets. I take exception to the views of David John, The Heritage Foundation's leading analyst on issues relating to pensions, financial institutions, asset building, and Social Security reform but read his The Automatic IRAs: A Conservative Way to Build Retirement Security and you will see how even some traditional conservatives are supporting the latest Washington retirement wealth and power grab.

Read More About the Retirement Threat & Protection Solutions – I have already covered the proposals in detail in two lengthy online reports: Get Ready For the Obama Retirement Trap at published on 1/28/2010 and The 10 Step Countdown To Retirement Plan Nationalization at published on 3/22/2010.

Please take the time to review both reports in detail which covered the threats when the Obama Administration first proposed this new program back in January 2010 and also read David John’s glowing support for the new Washington retirement scheme. Then decide for yourself if Washington is here to help you for a change or out to steal you blind as usual. Together, the reports above provide a confiscation timeline and actions you can take now to defend your retirement security and benefits.

August 21, 2010

Ron Holland [send him mail] is a contributing editor to the Swiss Mountain Vision Newsletter and Swiss Confidential published by Appenzeller Business Press.

[American Patriot]

Obama and Congress. Keep your stinking paws off my retirement money.

If there was ever a reason to start a fight, it's over MY MONEY. MINE MINE MINE.

Bastards, get your hands off it.

[vector7]

Obama: "Im Going To Spread The Wealth Around"


Spread The Wealth Around

[vector7]

Obama Needs Your 401(k) to Balance His Budget

Bob Adelmann | The New American
25 August 2010



The Obama administration is “taking the first steps to confiscate retirement dollars,” according to Dr. Jerome Corsi who predicts that the end result will be retirees with 401(k) plans holding near-worthless government debt “that will be paid off in a devalued currency worth … pennies on the dollar.”

The move to confiscate those retirement dollars for government purposes was best illustrated by Christina Kirchner, President of Argentina, in 2008 when she announced plans to seize her citizens’ private pension funds. Writers at the Heritage Foundation said that while Kirchner claimed such seizure was necessary to protect her citizens’ investment accounts from the global meltdown, “most observers believe[d] her real motive [was] to use the $30 billion in seized assets to ease the massive debt obligations her leftist spendthrift government [had] run up.” The Wall Street Journal agreed, saying that “taking over the … pension fund assets [would] ease the cash crunch faced by [her] government.”

Corsi said he has a letter from the Treasury Department, Bureau of Public Debt, informing U.S. citizens that the federal government is rolling out a new program called “Treasury Direct” that will allow citizens “to purchase, manage, and redeem…savings bonds” electronically, as well as offering an option to purchase such bonds automatically through payroll savings or a personal checking account. This happened to coincide nicely, according to Corsi, with a bill offered by Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) to create “Automatic IRAs” that would require all employers and employees to invest in IRAs using that automatic deduction option, “whether they want to do so or not.”

And this happened to coincide also with a program being pushed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) called “ Retirement USA” which would create a government-forced retirement program with assets being directed into special Treasury Retirement Bonds, or R-Bonds. “Retirement USA” is promoting the idea that all workers have a “right” to a government retirement account, in addition to Social Security and any private pension plans those workers already have in place. Others behind “Retirement USA” also support more government dependency for workers, including the AFL-CIO, the Economic Policy Institute, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare and the Pension Rights Center.

All of this is being promoted by the idea that individual citizens aren’t saving enough for their retirement, and that consequently government has to “do something.” Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash., above photo), Chairman of the House Ways and Mean’s Committee’ Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, is confused about whose money is in those 401(k) plans: the individual contributor, or the government. He said that “since the savings rate isn’t going up for the investment [Congress is making] of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax savings], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that’s not generating what we now say it should.”

The world view of Rep. McDermott is revealing, and brings clarity to the point of view of many in the Washington establishment that the $4.5 trillion currently invested in 401(k) plans and other private pension plans that enjoy tax breaks actually belong to the government, and that when Congress loses $80 billion that would otherwise flow to Washington due to those tax breaks, it’s an “investment” that must “generate what we say it should”, or else it must be replaced with something else that works better.

The real “story behind the story” was revealed by Joe Wolverton here
when he said,

…since the day of his inauguration, Barack Obama and his congressional co-conspirators have consistently and unapologetically set out to systematically nationalize the economy of the United States: first the banks; then the insurance companies; then the auto industry; then healthcare; and now the piece de resistance, the private savings accounts of millions of middle-class Americans.

But, thanks to the SEIU and their program “Retirement USA,” it’s all dressed up to look like a good deal for unsuspecting owners of retirement plans. In “Making the Case for a New System” they take the view that “A secure retirement is part of the American dream. Yet our retirement system is failing many Americans. Social Security is the cornerstone of our system, but as currently structured, is not meant to be our only retirement program. Pensions and savings plans are supposed to fill the gap, but too many workers don’t have plans, and too many plans don’t do the job.” They complain that:

Private retirement plan coverage is not UNIVERSAL…

For millions of Americans, private retirement benefits are not SECURE…

And Private retirement benefits are not ADEQUATE…

And, continues “Retirement USA”’s website, “Social Security must be preserved and strengthened… [and] we must encourage employers to offer and maintain them.”[emphasis added]

Underlying all of this is, of course, the statist presumption that government knows best what’s good for the citizens, and when the citizens’ behavior fails to meet government expectations, then mandates and force must be used to do for those citizens what the government thinks is best.

And the fact that Washington is looking at annual trillion-dollar deficits “for as far as the eye can see,” that $4.5 trillion of private monies is just too tempting to ignore.

[vector7]

Nationalized retirement accounts: The coming confiscation of the retirement savings of the middle class

September 12, 2010 by ppjg

Marti Oakley (c)coyright 2010 All Rights Reserved
________________________________________



Having spent the last ten years, minimally, spending without conscience or concern, the federal government has hit the wall; no one wants to buy our Treasury bonds used to finance the national debt. As one bill after another comes out of congress giving the government and its corporate buddies control of everything from our water and land to our food and health, it comes as no surprise that the final act of redistribution of wealth to the already wealthy, is, the forced conversion of private retirement investments into nationalized retirement accounts which are nothing less than the confiscation of wealth from the middle class to pay the debt run up by one congress and president after another.

Obama Administration begins the “grab” for retirement accounts

S 3760, introduced August 5 by Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) would require that employers of workers currently not covered by any retirement program pay 3% of compensation into mandatory, automatic IRA accounts.

That would also have the effect of increasing the assets that the US government could then seize.

This is the Republican privatization of Social Security scheme trotted out during the Bush years, retooled and now focused on the private savings of the middle class.

Now, instead of forcing you to invest any portion of your Social Security retirement in the stock market, a move which would have seen one of the greatest thefts of wealth and its redistribution to the crooks and thieves on Wall Street had they been successful, the Democrat faction has taken up the cause of confiscating private investment accounts to fund the rampant overspending of government using retirement savings of those who were able to contribute to 401(k) and IRA accounts and who have savings in private pension funds.

In lieu of the massive budget deficits and the continuance of uncontrolled spending over the last ten years by both political partys, an equally massive supply of Treasury Bonds, used to finance the debt has been floated. Unfortunately, the debt of the nation is so massive, so incomprehensible, there are no longer any willing buyers for these bonds in the number and amount needed to sustain the debt. No one in their right mind buys bad debt.

Congress intends to confiscate the estimated 11 trillion sitting in 401(k’s) IRA, and other private pension and retirement accounts, by creating a “nationalized retirement account” system, forcing the conversion of the savings and investments of American workers into a slush fund to be used to collateralize the national debt. These 401 (k) and IRA and pension accounts will be converted to Treasury bonds and sold to anyone who will buy them.

These bonds will in effect be “certificates of confiscation”.

Creating fictional accounting terms: Quantitative Easing = Theft

Quantitative easing is a tool of monetary policy and simply put is, the Federal Reserve intentionally destroys the value of our money by artificially expanding the supply in circulation (Monetizing). The effect is an increase in the circulating supply of fiat currency;of currency without regard to maintaining or recognizing itsquality i.e, its actual or real value.

Quantitative easing is a fictional theory used to hide the conversion of debt into debt currency.

You are now under contract

Bond futures contracts:

Are you aware that all the money borrowed and squandered on wars, needless corporate agency expansions and creations, foreign aid, bailouts and stimulus packages, and whatever else the federal government decides to blow money it doesn’t have, on; every dime will be paid back by you, your children and grandchildren.. YOU have now become subject to “bond contract” which is indenture.

Indenture: Agreement containing the terms under which money is borrowed.

The full faith and credit of the United States is YOU. Any debt issued by the US government, your state, county or local government is predicated upon wrenching the repayment of the debt, out of you. You have been contracted into slavery.

Bloomberg reported in early 2009, that the Federal Reserve announced the intent to purchase $300B of longer-term Treasuries. In essence, the Federal Reserve is buying our debt with a valueless fiat currency created by debt, and holding it longer. This will increase the amount of debt owed compounded by the added interest and fees. In the interim, the Federal Reserve is buying up taxpayer owned infrastructure and assets, with a fiat currency valued at O.

Currently, government is looking for buyers for an approximate 2 trillion in treasuries sales.

[Backstop]

These sorry bastards are still trying!

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39336

New Lame Duck Threat to Bailout Union Pensions
by Connie Hair

10/08/2010
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.

(Righthaven sucks).

[Malsua]

Just watch what these cornered rats do after they shellacking they're going to get on November the 2nd.

[Backstop]

Mal, I really do hope you're right.

If we don't do it now and in 2012...

[American Patriot]

The more and more I read, the more and more I am beginning to think that the Mayan Calendar thing OUGHT to happen.

Time to wipe the planet and start over.

Anyone wanna join up as warlords?

[Malsua]

As long as I get to drive around in 6 wheeled vehicles with nitrous and a hockey mask, I'm ok with being a warlord.

[American Patriot]

lol. Better start collecting whipped cream. There's lots of nitrous oxide in there. /chuckles

[Backstop]

The more and more I read, the more and more I am beginning to think that the Mayan Calendar thing OUGHT to happen.

Time to wipe the planet and start over.

I'd have no problem with this.

Figure it'll only hurt for a second or two.