Replies

Any sort of fund that relates to retirement (IRA, 401k, company pension, railroad retirement, etc.) Will be rolled into social security, for your own good of course. The government knows that you aren’t capable of planning your own retirement, so they’ll take your funds, and put them in a lockbox, to be doled out to you according to your fair share. Oh, and they’ll allow the fed reserve to “tap” those funds to use at their discretion, because they know how to manage it better. But it doesn’t really matter, because under obamacare, you probably won’t live long enough to collect a pension anyhow, unless you’re an undocumented immigrant, government employee, or an executive for a financial institution.

Don’t believe me? Just see Argentina as an example.

House discusses 401k/IRA confiscation

Submitted by midtowng on November 7, 2008 - 4:04pm

This shouldn’t surprise anyone who watched what happened to Argentina in 2001. Eventually the government is going to do this.

Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.
Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.

...
GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.

Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.

Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/house-discusses-401kira-confiscation