Posted on 10/23/2008 6:52:48 AM PDT by indianyogi
McCain -- go after them the Democrates.
The Democrats want to end the private retirement system that has allowed Americans to become a vast investor class and put them back in thrall of the federal government. This is nothing more than a second welfare system that would sit on top of the crumbling Social Security entitlement. It would leave the American working and middle classes with no retirement option other than a government handout. If the Democrats control both Congress and the White House, kiss your 401(k)s goodbye, and get into the bread lines first before the crowd arrives. (via Q&O)
Sarah, McCain - we need as AD on TV.
It would also seriously depress the stock market. Without all that money going into, typically, mutual funds, the downward pressure would slice at least a couple of thousand points off the Dow. This is one reason I am not back in the market yet.
Yeah, heard this a while back — I can’t believe McCain isn’t going that angle.
If Obama lies about McCain taking away SS then McCain certainly should tell people that Dems want to take your 401Ks and convert them to government annuities.
What a f-ing stupid proposal. I’ve seen this pop up over the last few weeks and wondered why McCain wasn’t hitting them on it.
They will do it twice. The first and last time.
Despite the behavior of the market during the last Presidential election, over longer periods of time, the stock market has done significantly better under Democratic administrations.
The accompanying chart shows stock returns under each occupant of the White House since the beginning of Harry Truman's second term. I have calculated the return from the end of the November election, since stocks will react to the policies of the incoming administration when it is elected, not when it takes office.
| President | Party | Date | Months in Office | Annualized Stock Return |
| Truman | D | 11/48-10/52 | 48 | 18.28% |
| Eisenhower | R | 11/52-10/60 | 96 | 14.96% |
| Kennedy | D | 11/60-10/63 | 36 | 15.15% |
| Johnson | D | 11/63-10/68 | 60 | 10.39% |
| Nixon | R | 11/68-7/74 | 69 | -1.32% |
| Ford | R | 8/74-10/76 | 27 | 17.21% |
| Carter | D | 11/76-10/80 | 48 | 11.04% |
| Reagan | R | 11/80-10/88 | 96 | 15.18% |
| Bush | R | 11/88-10/92 | 48 | 14.44% |
| Clinton | D | 11/92-10/00 | 96 | 19% |
| Bush, G.W. | R | 11/00-2/06 | 63 | -0.92% |
| Average from 1948 to Feb. 2006 | Democrat | 42.8% | 15.26% | |
| Republican | 57.2% | 9.53% | ||
| Overall | 100% | 11.95% | ||
The table tells the story. Since 1948, Republican Administrations have controlled the White House 57.2 percent of the time. But during the period that the GOP was in office, stock returns have averaged only 9.53 percent per year, while under Democratic administrations, stocks returned 15.25 percent per year, more than five percentage points higher.
Stocks did best over the 8 years of the Clinton administration, with stock returns at 19 percent per year. Stock returns were above average during the Truman, Ford, Reagan, Kennedy, Eisenhower, and Bush Senior administrations. And stock returns were only slightly below average during the Carter and Johnson Administrations.
By far the worst stock returns came under the Republican administrations of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush. Of course, even George W and Nixon cannot compare to the Great Depression era stock returns during the Republican administration of Herbert Hoover.
During the 69 months from the election of President Nixon in November 1968 through his resignation in July of 1974, stock returns averaged minus 1.32 percent per year while inflation exceeded 6 percent. Similarly, during the 63 months since the election of George Bush in November 2000, stock returns have been negative.
==
Source: Are Republicans or Democrats Better for the Stock Market? March 22, 2006.
Touch my 401(k) and there’ll be HELL TO PAY!.......
If this was passed, and you were forced to convert 401K’s to government accounts, I think I’d take the hit and cash out (ours are all in T-bills right now and we haven’t lost a penny from the crash.)
This type of plan would absolutely crash the stock market (more than it is now) because think of all the people invested in the stock market through their 401Ks.
I’d rather have half of what I’ve saved than none (I don’t trust the SS Administration to have my money there when I retire.) Of course, I guess I’d be forced to continue to contribute the obligatory 6 percent to this new plan, pay higher taxes on my regular pay since I can’t contribute to a pre-tax plan anymore, and basically just see my money used by the SS Admin. to continue their failed policy of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Do I believe that money would be held in savings for my retirement...absolutely not, it’d be used just like the SS money has been used for years.
“It would leave the American working and middle classes with no retirement option other than a government handout.”
What is to stop people from saving anyway. I realize that we would loose the tax deferred benefit, but those who were using a 401k anyway would most likely continue to put back for retirement.
On the other hand, I have known few if any people who actually put back enough that they would not need social security and medicare anyway.
They’re not leaving the money in the stock market, they’re giving it to the SS Admin and it will pay a 3% yield. You’ll be forced to contribute 6%, non pre tax.
Right now we fund ours at maximum allowed, mainly because of the pre-tax advantage. It has been in mutual funds, but we moved it to a stable fund (t-bills) a couple months ago when all the “weirdness” started.
Has this been seen ANYWHERE in the MSM beyond than “Workforce Management” and “Hot Air?”
One could still save, but there’d be less take home to save because you’d miss the pre-tax saving on a 401K, so you’d be paying higher taxes, and you’d be forced to contribute 6% to the mandatory gov’t plan.
Mine is down about 35%.........But that is market fluctuations. What the Congress is proposing is outright THEFT!!!!.........
Which stocks??
And then the dot com bust. Fake gains. And oh the pain. Nasdaq killed a lot of people's life savings. And I guess it doesn't matter now. Obami will take the rest. I wish I was younger and had dual citizenship somewhere else. Like Norway. I'd be out of here.
Correlation does not equal causation.
Not to mention the fact that you would also get to pay tax every year on whatever pittance of a return you earned on those savings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.