Posted on 04/06/2013 12:51:50 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Lonely Conservative
With his budget proposal, President Obama has told us what he believes is a “reasonable” amount to have in a retirement account. $3 million is the number he chose.
According to a White House statement, the Obama administration believes the current rules allow some wealthy individuals “to accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”
“The budget would limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million in 2013,” the statement said. “This proposal would raise $9 billion over 10 years.”
Brian Graff, executive director and chief executive officer of the American Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries, told Bloomberg News his group intends to “vigorously oppose” the proposal. (Read More)
Progressives have had their eyes on Americans’ retirement accounts for quite some time. I guess Obama sees this as a good place to start. Or maybe it’s just a major jab at Mitt Romney.
President Obama’s budget, to be released next week, will limit how much wealthy individuals – like Mitt Romney – can keep in IRAs and other retirement accounts. …
Romney, Obama’s 2012 opponent, had an IRA several to many times that amount, leading to questions about how the former Massachusetts governor was able to squirrel away so much money in that sort of retirement account. (Read More)
He can cram it. Hard and deep.
He is a socialist. He believes that if you have more than you need for today, you have too much and it should be redistributed. But not what HE has.
Life expectancy. Comrade, you’ve reach the age of 80. Time for you to go. Social Security and Medicare shouldn’t have to pay you for any more years. You don’t want to be greedy now, do you? After all it’s for the children and the planet.
OT
WHo has the Apple ping list? Trying to find out about when the new iPad comes out.
I’ve heard all kinds of dates. Here is a sample from Macworld UK: Speculation regarding a new iPad 5 release date is rampant at the moment, but we do expect a new iPad 5 model to be released at some point in 2013.
What I’ve heard is the new iPad is supposed to be released in April but Apple hasn’t finished updating their OS 9.something which they don’t expect until this summer. I don’t know if the new iPad is contingent upon that software or if the software is supposed to be for their computers?
like his speeches, and books...GHOST WRITERS DO IT FOR HIM...
I just sent you a link that talks about that (I think they said iOS7) and gives April or May as a possibility.
ok... lets say there is a max...
and you use that 3 million to invest in something just doubles overnight to 6 million...
what then?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1692671/posts?page=222#222
Above ping list thread is from Sept 2006.
And I just located this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2992395/posts
Keyword: APPLE see below:
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/apple/index?tab=articles
Back to topic:
FAMOUS ORIGINAL QUOTE:
“I have only five words for you: From my cold, dead hands.”
Charlton Heston (1923-2008)
U.S. actor and gun rights activist
May 19, 2001 speech at an NRA convention in Kansas City
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ju4Gla2odw
The lies have been sold to the public so long and so well that it is very hard to break through that hardened shell of practiced ignorance with the truth.
My mother grew up during the FDR years and I had to tell her any number of time that there is no SS Trust Fund and there never was before I think she finally believed me. She also started listening to Mark Levin on the radio because it preceded her favorite show.
It is difficult to convince most people that people in authority are at least misleading them and most likely boldly lying about things that truly matter to their future wellbeing.
People by education and natural inclination will accept the word of their leaders unless or until personal experiences teach them otherwise. Once the barrier of trust is broken the truth becomes obvious.
There are those of course who are ideologs and see truth through that ideology. To them the truth is secondary, superfluous or a tool to the ends they seek.
The biggest impediment to getting people to see the truth about SS is that in this case to most people “The Truth Will Set You Free” is not they way they feel. People do not want to believe that their government can at any time pull SS out from under them. This is a truth that for many puts them at risk of poverty in their old age. For many people SS is a major part of their retirement plans. Telling these people that SS most likely will be broke before they retire is not a truth they want to hear and definitely not one they want to believe.
I have heard politicians on the Left and on the Right spout the pleasant to hear lie that SS is solvent and will be around for a long time to come. Most in government do not want the general population to know that the 15% of their income that has been deducted from their hard won earnings for many years has gone down the rabbit hole of wasted government spending and that they will never see it again. Such truth makes for angry voters.
That's exactly the point. I assume you were perfectly happy when the government "inserted itself into your personal life" by giving you the tax exemption for retirement plan contributions in the first place. All you're doing now is complaining that they've changed the terms, right?
You can still save for retirement, but you just can't deposit it into one of those 401(k) or IRA accounts as a tax-deferred contribution.
Not exactly re: tax exemptions. Clinton did away with that and you’re taxed on the money before hand. But I’m not going to argue the fine points of it.
“. . . keep in mind that some of the strongest opponents of this measure in both houses of Congress will be those from a place like New York (i.e., Democrats) where investment banking is a huge industry and a major employer.”
This is why I believe it is a nonstarter. The same holds true for “carried interest.” The Wall Street bankers, Buffett, Soros, and their toad Schumer are not going to allow any revenue enhancing measure to get into their pockets. This proposal is a diversion to get the conservatives and Republicans fighting something the Dems will never allow to pass anyway.
Contributions to most qualified retirement plans are not tax-exempt, they are tax-deferred. When you make a qualified contribution to one of those plans, you don't have to include the amount of the contribution in your taxable income for that year. That has been in place under the U.S. tax code since the 1970s, and it remains so to this day.
What changed during the Clinton administration was the introduction of a new kind of retirement plan where the contributions were not tax-deferred, but the withdrawals in retirement were tax-exempt. That's what the Roth IRA is.
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.