Im behind Obama on this one

[alphatarget1]

Sending people tax refunds as saving bonds = low interest loan to the government.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: CPA
I like it also. I would like it even better if they allowed folks who were investing in a 401K (or similar plan) the option to opt-out of SS.

What Obama is doing here is a good idea, but I disagree about the removal or an opt-out of SS. Even 401k plans are suceptible to market crashes, as the last year or two have proved. SS is about stability, not maximizing returns.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: CPA
I like it also. I would like it even better if they allowed folks who were investing in a 401K (or similar plan) the option to opt-out of SS.

I used to feel that way (when I was younger), but I've paid in too long now. I want my money, lol!

Hence the option.

However, in the case of an individual opting out of SS, the funds that would otherwise go to SS (under the current system) should go to that individual's 401k account (and not count towards the $$ limit).

 

[piasabird]

All of his ideas do nothing for the people who are fired or layed off and are forced to spend their retirement money in order to live and eat. He can do away with penalties for those fire or layed off. Having money for retirement means nothing if you have no place to live and no food on the table.

I work in education and there is a SSN penalty for state and federal employees who receive a retirement or annuity from their employer. So after saving 8% of my pay every year (with matching funds from employer) I would be inelligible to receive full social security. It is like a slap in the face for working in the education field for less money. Hell half of that money would be the contributions of the employee.

You just cant win.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: CPA
I like it also. I would like it even better if they allowed folks who were investing in a 401K (or similar plan) the option to opt-out of SS.

What Obama is doing here is a good idea, but I disagree about the removal or an opt-out of SS. Even 401k plans are suceptible to market crashes, as the last year or two have proved. SS is about stability, not maximizing returns.

My concern is choice, not stability.

 

[StageLeft]

I don't think it will make much of a different--the auto-enrollment. It's already well known that many people cash out their retirement when they change employers. In this case just more of them will.

The reason we don't save any money is because the Federal Reserve evaporates the money out of our bank accounts with their loose money policies. People won't save more money until it actually keeps its value.

No. People don't save money because they insufficiently prepare for the future. Inflation for the past couple of decades has been quite moderate and easily countered with low-risk money market accounts. Believe me, the average joe who is "living paycheck to paycheck" but manages to replace his car every four years is definitely not thinking about inflation.

 

[ccbadd]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: CPA
I like it also. I would like it even better if they allowed folks who were investing in a 401K (or similar plan) the option to opt-out of SS.

What Obama is doing here is a good idea, but I disagree about the removal or an opt-out of SS. Even 401k plans are suceptible to market crashes, as the last year or two have proved. SS is about stability, not maximizing returns.

You say this like it is money in the bank, its not. Would you let your employer use you 401k money like it was a company checking account? It's not stable at all. What do you call it when the rules are changed and you have to wait 4 years longer to collect? Congress says that is not a benefit decrease because you will get the same dollar amount just loose 4 years of it.

I have paid into SS for a long time and I am still willing to opt out is it is ever made available.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: masteryoda34
The reason we don't save any money is because the Federal Reserve evaporates the money out of our bank accounts with their loose money policies. People won't save more money until it actually keeps its value.

Yes, because everyone I know loves to live a financially irresponsible existence living paycheck-to-paycheck just to piss off The Fed.

:roll:

More ways to save than just sticking cash in the bank and earning interest that (hopefully) negates inflation. He could be investing in metals (gold, silver, copper, etc.), stocks, bonds, etc.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: blackangst1
-snip-

From the article:

While saving for retirement is universally seen as a good idea, any increase in savings rates could somewhat slow the nation's rebound from the economic recession.

That's my concern. We're primarily a consumer driven economy and if people don't spend we won't get out of this economic situation.

Do you want short term growth and long term ruin, or short term ruin and long term growth?

Curing ourselves of our current debt is the single most important thing for our future. That you would sacrifice our future to live in the moment is a great fallacy. There is no need to consider it, there should be no contest, yet here we are begging for more prolonged suffering cause we cannot handle a little bit now. We are self centered lemmings.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: blackangst1
-snip-

From the article:

While saving for retirement is universally seen as a good idea, any increase in savings rates could somewhat slow the nation's rebound from the economic recession.

That's my concern. We're primarily a consumer driven economy and if people don't spend we won't get out of this economic situation.

Do you want short term growth and long term ruin, or short term ruin and long term growth?

Curing ourselves of our current debt is the single most important thing for our future. That you would sacrifice our future to live in the moment is a great fallacy. There is no need to consider it, there should be no contest, yet here we are begging for more prolonged suffering cause we cannot handle a little bit now. We are self centered lemmings.

QFT. Same can be said of personal finances.

 

[Dari]

This is something we definitely need. Stop buying crap.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Dari
This is something we definitely need. Stop buying crap.

yeap. stop with the Cash for clunkers ideas. stop with the tax free holidays etc.

why try to get people to buy?..

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Dari
This is something we definitely need. Stop buying crap.

yeap. stop with the Cash for clunkers ideas. stop with the tax free holidays etc.

why try to get people to buy?..

How about they stop buying things they don't need? Although it's their choice, a little discretion goes a long way. Besides, it's just common sense.

 

[bamacre]

Isn't it just ironic that a government which owes trillions is attempting to encourage individuals to save?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: bamacre
Isn't it just ironic that a government which owes trillions is attempting to encourage individuals to save?

Better than Bush telling Americans to go crazy and spend money right after a national tragedy. He even took his own advice. Perhaps Obama will do the same.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Vic
The fed promotes inflation to promote commerce. If people invested in currency rather than goods, commerce would come to a standstill and the economy would collapse.

But if the fed overdoes its promoting of commerce and people overdo their investing (in say, houses, for example) couldn't commerce then also come to a standstill and risk collapsing of the economy? Oh, wait, I think they've already answered that question for you.

So, how can the Fed know just how much inflation the economy needs? How much is too little, how much is too much? How can they accurately define "money?"

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: bamacre
Isn't it just ironic that a government which owes trillions is attempting to encourage individuals to save?

Better than Bush telling Americans to go crazy and spend money right after a national tragedy. He even took his own advice. Perhaps Obama will do the same.

He already has. Cars, houses.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: bamacre
Isn't it just ironic that a government which owes trillions is attempting to encourage individuals to save?

Better than Bush telling Americans to go crazy and spend money right after a national tragedy. He even took his own advice. Perhaps Obama will do the same.

err...

you do know that the idea behind Cash for clunkers was to get people to go out and spend money right? and the stimulus?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Vic
The fed promotes inflation to promote commerce. If people invested in currency rather than goods, commerce would come to a standstill and the economy would collapse.

But if the fed overdoes its promoting of commerce and people overdo their investing (in say, houses, for example) couldn't commerce then also come to a standstill and risk collapsing of the economy? Oh, wait, I think they've already answered that question for you.

So, how can the Fed know just how much inflation the economy needs? How much is too little, how much is too much? How can they accurately define "money?"

for the 100000th time, the fed had little to nothing to do with the housing bubble.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Americans dont save because theye been culturally brainwashed into thinking that spending every dollar they have is a good thing.

Our society is very much built on instant gratification, it seems. It seems many (most?) people seem to think that they "deserve" certain things regardless of whether or not they can actually afford them or not. Their solution is to just keep charging with no regard of what will happen when the bill comes due.

Encouraging savings is a great step, though.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: blackangst1
-snip-

From the article:

While saving for retirement is universally seen as a good idea, any increase in savings rates could somewhat slow the nation's rebound from the economic recession.

That's my concern. We're primarily a consumer driven economy and if people don't spend we won't get out of this economic situation.

Do you want short term growth and long term ruin, or short term ruin and long term growth?

Curing ourselves of our current debt is the single most important thing for our future. That you would sacrifice our future to live in the moment is a great fallacy. There is no need to consider it, there should be no contest, yet here we are begging for more prolonged suffering cause we cannot handle a little bit now. We are self centered lemmings.

QFT. Same can be said of personal finances.

I completely agree with you and Jacklas in the same thread :shocked:

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh


More ways to save than just sticking cash in the bank and earning interest that (hopefully) negates inflation. He could be investing in metals (gold, silver, copper, etc.), stocks, bonds, etc.

A point I came in to make. :thumbsup:

I know so many people IRL that are living on the very edge of what they can afford, and some that have gone beyond it. You know the type, have to juggle the debt from one credit card to another's interest free introductory rate for balance transfers. Now, I think most aren't even able to do that with the credit crunch. So, now they are servicing just the interest on their debts, while principle remains untouched, or worse.

A couple were greedy enough to get caught house flipping during the height of the bubble, and it will be very surprising if any of them escape foreclosure and bankruptcy court.

These same folks, will bag on you for not wanting to join them at the trendy fondue restaurant where it is over a $100 a couple easy. I have to bite my tongue, or I would layout their whole financial future so well for them, they would think about putting a gun in their mouth.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: ccbadd

Originally posted by: First

Originally posted by: masteryoda34
The reason we don't save any money is because the Federal Reserve evaporates the money out of our bank accounts with their loose money policies. People won't save more money until it actually keeps its value.

Except this doesn't happen to any significant degree in the first place and hasn't happened for almost 30 years. Plus the alternative has been thoroughly documented as worse.

Monetary policy drives inflation which absolutely has happened in the last 30 years.

Inflation has occurred, but as I said, to nowhere near a significant degree for almost 30 years. The last inflation problem was 1981, perhaps 82.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: First
Inflation has occurred, but as I said, to nowhere near a significant degree for almost 30 years. The last inflation problem was 1981, perhaps 82.

Or from 2003-2008 if you include housing and energy prices.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: First
Inflation has occurred, but as I said, to nowhere near a significant degree for almost 30 years. The last inflation problem was 1981, perhaps 82.

Or from 2003-2008 if you include housing and energy prices.

Energy wasn't high for that long until last year's bubble, and isn't the same as housing, where asset inflation is good. It made a lot of people rich between 03 and 08 that got out by September 08. 09 is a different story of course. Asset inflation is different than real inflation anyway.