One step closer to Cyprus. And you idiots thought it wouldnt happen here.
You're right and I lost sight of it. I had said what you're saying way back. The flip flopping of control just keeps pulling us farther down the mine shaft. Full Dem control of the federal government will bring us down very, very quickly. The sooner it happens, the sooner it's over and the sooner we can start anew.I'm voting for whatever party I can get in that gets us a supermajority, preferably, the Dems. It is quite clear the country does not have the fortitude, or will, to do what is necessary for the US to remain what made the US or for the long term benefit of the US. Thus, I'm using my vote and personal day to day influence to convince as many people as possible to vote for shit who will absolutely, without a doubt, tank this country the fastest. That is the only sane thing to do.
The faster we can hit bottom and burn the better. China, India, TRoTDW isn't waiting now that we've opened, and vastly accelerated, that box.
Chuck
And obviously if you have 3 million you no longer need incentive.
Anyone who supports this is.
1.) A stupid child who has no life experience and hasn't even begun planning for retirement and has no concept of what it may cost.
2.) An old angry liberal fuckstick who sucked at life and is jealous of others' success and feels like if they can't have it neither should anyone else.
Calling people names doesn't help validate your argument anymore. Actually it just serves to invalidate your argument since to make your point you have to resort to personal attacks against the people that might have a viewpoint different than yours.
Someone explain to me why and how it is the role of government to determine how much one "needs" in retirement?
Because the government is the one giving you a tax break on your IRAs. You're free to save money however else you want free of government intrusion, just pay your taxes on it.
Yet many, many people have been investing in IRA's because the government INDUCED them to do so because of those tax breaks. In other words, if Obama's proposal passes, it would mean that the government LIED to the public when it passed laws that allowed unlimited contributions to IRA's. How would that not be upsetting to every single person in this nation? It is about as clear an example of a government LIE as one can get.
"Here's a big pot in which you can throw your money. Don't worry, we won't tax you on it. Until we do. Heh heh."
And yes, I'm fucking upset about this. I worked really god damn hard to get where I am. And yes, I took advantage of programs that were CREATED by the government in part to get where i am. I did that BECAUSE I am smart, and BECAUSE I plan ahead. I started dumping money into tax advantaged IRA's roths, 401k, TSP at age 21 because, well, that's what people who make smart financial decisions for retirement do. My choices my very well have been different had I known that 20 some years down the road, someone was going to say "oh you sir! Yeah, the one with a ton of life savings that you worked all your life for. You have too much. So, fork it over." My response to that is a big FU - stop spending money willy nilly on stuff we don't need!
Seriously, I'm going to run for office. My campaign will be "vote for Sho'Nuff - the baddest motherfucker who will give all everyone in this country a beamer and everyone in harlem two beamers." Then when I am elected by an overwhelming vote, I'll say "did I say beamer? I mean a ray of sunshine. You know, the one I shone up your ass to get in power. Now its taxation time. Now whose the baddest? And you saps better damn well say sho'nuff, cause every second you don't I'm raising taxes by 1%."
Yet his points are largely true. Let me tone them down a bit -
1. Many folks that support Obama are young. At the risk of overgeneralization, many of them do not understand basic economics. How many folks do you know that are age 18-25 are already planning for retirement in a meaningful way? My guess is not many. Yet those same folks are the ones marshalling the rallying cry to raid the "rich," and help the poor. Never mind that the "rich" that they want to raid are, by and large, citizens who busted their ass to get where they were. Many of the other folks supporting Obama's budget are those that stand to gain from it. . . i.e., they have skin in the game because they stand to benefit from government programs that are riddled with inefficiency, are ineptly managed, and are downright wasteful. Ever wonder how its possible for the government to simply lose track of hundred of millions of dollars that were earmarked for a program. I do, and it happens all the damn time. People need to realize that those dollars came from someone and were not simply drawn out of thin air (unless the government prints money). And that someone is the american taxpayer. So to put it simply, the taxpayer is giving the government money for programs, and the government says, "whoops, sorry! Don't know where it went! My bad." And the american citizens suck it up and and say "OK, here's some more money. And you know what, we're ok if you take a little more of the money I worked all (day/year/my life) to earn, cause we know you'll spend it well. Its vomit inducing how complacent we as citizens have become.
As to the posters point about old folks - it is not an unreasonable assertion to say that many of the elderly like helping other people out. Its natural for them to want to do that, and it brings them great satisfaction. Ask your grandmother if you don't believe me. There is nothing wrong with that personal desire, but it is not the role of government to prop up huge swaths of the populace at the expense of another, very hard working swath of the populace. And before you start going "whoa is me, what about the poor, what about the the [insert] group of interest," let me remind you that for the bulk of U.S. history, the extensive government entitlement programs that exist today did not exist. And for good reason. And that is because the founding fathers had the good foresight to understand what it meant to have an overbearing government. Indeed, it could be argued that Obama's recent proposal to limit the balance of tax advantaged IRA accounts is akin to the stamp act of 1765, in which an equally overbearing British government decided to tax the hell out of the colonies.
Yet many, many people have been investing in IRA's because the government INDUCED them to do so because of those tax breaks. In other words, if Obama's proposal passes, it would mean that the government LIED to the public when it passed laws that allowed unlimited contributions to IRA's. How would that not be upsetting to every single person in this nation? It is about as clear an example of a government LIE as one can get.
"Here's a big pot in which you can throw your money. Don't worry, we won't tax you on it. Until we do. Heh heh."
So, uhh, you really have $3M or anywhere near that amount in your IRA w/o running a Romney scam? Really?
It's not like you'll never pay taxes on retirement accounts, either- that's why they're called *deferred compensation* plans. You pay taxes when the money comes out...
It's actually not crazy to have $3 million in an IRA by retirement age, if you make some good decisions. You can buy many things besides stocks and bonds - gold, real estate, etc. If you get involved with a successful startup or two during your career that provides an ESOP that gets bought out, you can also rollover all proceeds to an IRA.
Sure, but it's unusual to have over $100 million in an IRA. We can thank Romney and I'm sure many other rich people for abusing a system setup for the middle class and once again screwing all us regular folk.
Wait...so you think it'sRomney'sthe rich's use of tax-preferred accounts that led to this proposal?
:hmm:D:
That's what the article was stating. :hmm:
I'm glad Obama is addressing this. This helps the middle class and I fully support it.
It's actually not crazy to have $3 million in an IRA by retirement age, if you make some good decisions. You can buy many things besides stocks and bonds - gold, real estate, etc. If you get involved with a successful startup or two during your career that provides an ESOP that gets bought out, you can also rollover all proceeds to an IRA.
You could win the lottery, too. Your scenario is somewhat more likely, but not by much.
I'm glad Obama is addressing this. This helps the middle class and I fully support it.
Calling people names doesn't help validate your argument anymore. Actually it just serves to invalidate your argument since to make your point you have to resort to personal attacks against the people that might have a viewpoint different than yours.
It applies to one type of retirement savings, nothing more. It doesn't say you can't save more than 3 million just not 3 million in this one type of account.
For those of you with 3+ million, just keep it in other types of accounts. You'll be fine.
The cap would apply to the total of all of an individual’s tax-favored retirement accounts.
The cap would be set starting at $3.4 million, the amount needed to fund a $205,000 annual annuity for a 62-year-old, and would be adjusted for the cost of living.
Because the cap is tied to annuities, it could decline if interest rates rise, according to an analysis by the Employee Benefit Research Institute.