Dr. Detroit
Diamond Member
- Sep 25, 2004
- 8,143
- 608
- 126
Actually that is false. Which is why 401K and IRA contribution limits are periodically increased.
Oh - so they just pick and choose which one to ignore. Ahhhhh yes, but of course.
Actually that is false. Which is why 401K and IRA contribution limits are periodically increased.
What was the point of Executive Order 6102? It was two fold.
First, in order to make the confiscation legitimate, the US government required the delivery of all gold coin, bullion, and certificates to be concluded by May 1, 1933 in exchange for $20.67/ounce. Several months later, the new, official gold exchange price (which however was merely the government's bid as nobody could actually buy gold at this price) became $35.00, which remained until 1971 when the last trace of the dollar's pseudo convertibility into gold was wiped out by Nixon. In effect, what FDR did was to devalue the USD by 70% overnight.
Second, not only did the government remove the incentive for ordinary citizens to hold gold by establishing price and criminal controls over possession, it also changed the rules in the middle of the game allowing it to build up a massive gold hoard of over 8000 tons today which is maintained at Fort Knox, and is, to the best of our knowledge, unauditable by any mere mortal. Critically, it made the US government the sole source and monopoly agent of gold purchases, using reserve fiat currency it could print with impunity, beginning in 1933 and continuing through 1974 when the limitation on gold ownership was repealed after President Gerald Ford signed a bill legalizing private ownership of gold coins, bars and certificates by an act of Congress codified in Pub.L. 93-373, which went into effect December 31, 1974. In summary, the US government, which is now the largest official holder of physical gold in the world, had 40 years of uncontested zero cost gold accumulation in which it could build a gold inventory that was second to none.
As for the process the government had in place to deal with those who refused to voluntarily hand over their gold quietly, curiously there was only one case of prosecution, which however should make it very clear that holding gold in "authorized" bank safes is about the dumbest thing one can do the next time the US government decides to devalue the dollar, and change the rules.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/what-30-years-gold-confiscation-us-government-looks
-snip-
i'm honestly getting sick and tired of the government trying to decide what i need. How much money for retirement.
Its not like 3million is that much in a retirement account, especially not if there aren't plans to keep it current with inflation. Especially so with increasing life expectancy.
I think you can buy a lot more than cat food for $200,000/year...
Never happen. The fact that its being talked about seriously in Washington is the worrisome bit.
You're missing the point. IRA and 401K contributions are already limited by income, this is going a step further to say you can only enjoy a certain amount of investment returns before Uncle Sam decides you have too much money in your account.
Just great. Now not only do we need to deal with the phaseout of defined benefit (pension) plans in the workplace, Obama wants to limit our defined contribution (401K) and IRA plans now. Heaven forbid I put aside few hundred thousands over the course of my working years, and with a bit of stock picking luck manage to turn that into a decent seven figure nest egg. No Sir-ee, Obama will make sure you don't enjoy any outsized investment returns and thus be able to live any more comfortably than the average moron who gets a new leased car every year and relies on Social Security to pay for their monthly ration of cat food.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/10/retirement/obama-retirement-saving/index.html
At an amount far beyond what anyone needs for retirement.
The purpose of special tax advantaged retirement accounts is so people can save for retirement. Not so you can hide money from taxation.
You NEED more than $200,000/year? :hmm:
This idea, at least as explained in the article, makes no sense. Say I have $20 million throwing off $200k per year at today's crappy 1% savings rates (ignore other investments for simplification). I'm good. Then one day the bond market wakes the hell up and interest rates jump to 5%. Now my $20 million is throwing off $1 million a year and I'm supposed to immediately reduce my balance to $4 million to satisfy this proposal. After a bit of 5% rates the economy tanks and interest rates plunge back to 1% but now I have $4 million instead of $20 million.
Why this and not capital gains taxation reform? That's where the big money is.
At an amount far beyond what anyone needs for retirement.
The purpose of special tax advantaged retirement accounts is so people can save for retirement. Not so you can hide money from taxation.
Freedom is not about need. It's about being able to keep what you earn.
Why do you hate freedom?
Then you'll have no problem with slavery because you won't earn anything unless, of course, freedom is about something more than keeping what you earn, like ones reciprocal duty to the state for it's proper functioning as a device for insuring that my freedom doesn't result in your slavery. Tax is the cost of freedom and a constitutional right the government can impose. Your say in the matter is your ability to lobby, to vote, and to appeal to the courts, etc. Think of yourself as a parasite that grows fat on the larder created by the society the state creates and facilitates. Once you could maybe have been free in a jungle, but most nations now rule there too. Unfortunately a single human in a jungle doesn't earn much than you will after your IRA taxes are paid and you won't have to slap nearly as many mosquitoes, thanks again to spraying by the state.