Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs , page 8

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 30 times

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:16 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by djpaec
reply to post by MAINTAL

Type of discussion you say? Take all of our money you say? Doesn't sound like typical republican taking point to me...

Except I thought what they were discussing was ending the subsidy, visa vi no tax, on 401(k). But that's just me trying to find someone elses' opinion of it besides the obviously skewed Carolina Journal.
www.workforce.com...

From your own source as proof

"so Democrats will seize on the opportunity to attack a program where investors control their own destiny,” he said. "

Exactly!

"In retrospect that doesn’t seem like such a good idea to me,” Andrews said. "

My sentiments EXACTLY!

" most political observers believe that Democrats are poised to gain seats in both the House and the Senate, so comments made by the mostly Democratic members who attended the hearing could be a harbinger of things to come."

Which justifies my concern also!

From your own source

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The words "REQUIRED" and ALL workers. Did you get that part? all wORKERS?

will be REQUIRED to invest 5% of thier pay into a guarranteed retirement account. where I would get a whopping 3% ROI WOW! That scares me because it is a guarranteed LOSS which I have already explained in this thread.

Why would anyone want the Government to force them into another type of retirement plan when it loses money and they have already proven they have mis managed every other one.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by MAINTAL]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:22 PM by E-ville

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by Komodo

And people didn't believe this would happen under a completely controlled Democrat government.

By the time they are done, if they have their way, they will own everything.

Everything.

Hey, congratulation on voting in Obama again everyone!

Excellent choice!

well i had a friend lose 40k out of a 150k account, that she was initially told was safe. so in your rational world, i guess this was caused by the democrats who have a slim majority in the senate, with a republican minority that filibutered laws into oblivion 46 times in the last 21 months.
i guess your republican wall street boys or the republican president for the last 8 years or a republican majority for 6 years, had nothing to do with this right??? and by the way...was this even voted on? or passed?

you republicans are the ones to blame for this economic disaster and that's why the people kicked you out. republicans have become the cancerous, viscid, pustual, growth on the heart of this nation and no amount of verbal vomit coming out of your mouth has any significance, or truthfulness. you have become the vile brown stain on this country and i hope we never have a neo-con majority again.

Im not republican and didnt vote for Obama or McCain, but I don't care who you voted for, if you think the government should have authority to take over your hard earned cash in a retirement fund you deserve to be hauled out and shot..

I'm surrounded by a bunch of idiots.!

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:30 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by E-ville

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by nyk537
reply to post by Komodo

And people didn't believe this would happen under a completely controlled Democrat government.

By the time they are done, if they have their way, they will own everything.

Everything.

Hey, congratulation on voting in Obama again everyone!

Excellent choice!

well i had a friend lose 40k out of a 150k account, that she was initially told was safe. so in your rational world, i guess this was caused by the democrats who have a slim majority in the senate, with a republican minority that filibutered laws into oblivion 46 times in the last 21 months.
i guess your republican wall street boys or the republican president for the last 8 years or a republican majority for 6 years, had nothing to do with this right??? and by the way...was this even voted on? or passed?

you republicans are the ones to blame for this economic disaster and that's why the people kicked you out. republicans have become the cancerous, viscid, pustual, growth on the heart of this nation and no amount of verbal vomit coming out of your mouth has any significance, or truthfulness. you have become the vile brown stain on this country and i hope we never have a neo-con majority again.

Im not republican and didnt vote for Obama or McCain, but I don't care who you voted for, if you think the government should have authority to take over your hard earned cash in a retirement fund you deserve to be hauled out and shot..

I'm surrounded by a bunch of idiots.!

That is basically what they are talking about and mick wants proof that it is going to happen. All I can prove is that is what they are talking about. and I hope I never have to prove that is what happens.

He says threads like this ruin the boards when i say it is threads like this that get people to want to write their respective represenatives and tell them in no way shape or form will you mess anything more up and that they DON'T know whats best for us especially when the only thing they come up with is this idea where they give us a 15% tax hike removing the tax subsidy which is a misnomer OR force us into another type of social security plan that loses money in relation to the cost of living index.

I can take that 5% of my income and stick it in a lousy pass book savings account and make more than the plan they have been discussing

While the poster you quoted wants to blame the republicans on the economy, it is better explained here and why it is NOT their fault

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 12-11-2008 by MAINTAL]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:49 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by MAINTAL

Where in there did you prove that 401k's will be confiscated? I thought that was the conversation?

Let's be honest, this thread has never been about a proposed plan, it was mudslinging from the start with people acting like the "big, bad democrats" are going to sneak into your room and steal your 401k.

Now whether you agree with the plan or not, that's a different story. This thread is not about that unfortunately.

In fact, MAINTAL, if you were to create a thread based off of the ACTUAL proposals like you just did, I would be much more inclined to respect your overall opinions on things.

You do see the difference right? One post is "OMG Democrats want to steal my money and take away my 401k", and the other post is "Well, at 3% interest, I could be better off investing..."

One makes sense, the other is all emotion.

Let's go with the latter.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:51 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by E-ville

Where is anyone talking about stealing another persons cash? That's exactly why threads like this should be closed, because people like you come in, don't read through, and assume it's true.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 01:52 PM by djpaec

reply to post by MAINTAL

Andrews characterized the proposals as “loopholes” and said that investment advice should not be given by advisors who have a direct interest in the sale of financial products.
The Pension Protection Act of 2006 contains provisions making it easier for investment advisors to give individualized counseling to 401(k) holders. “In retrospect that doesn’t seem like such a good idea to me,” Andrews said.
“This is an issue I think we have to revisit. I frankly think that the compromise we struck in 2006 is not terribly workable or wise,” he said.

I think you might have misinterpreted, mis-read, or were just trying to push your point across. But what you quoted he was talking about a 2006 ACT that was passed.

They're not outlawing 401(k)'s or forcing you to transfer them over to the government. However if it is recquired, as you're interpreting, I would be against it as well. How people save there money for the future should be up to them, Social Security is ENOUGH.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:02 PM by Servigistics

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by MAINTAL

Where in there did you prove that 401k's will be confiscated? I thought that was the conversation?

No... the conversation and the TITLE of the thread is....

Democratic leaders in the U.S. House DISCUSS confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs

And I beleive that is what we are doing.....discussing the possibility

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Servigistics]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:08 PM by racegunz

reply to post by Irish M1ck

Hey I really hope you're right, I really do. Not too much I can do if you're not unless I want to quit my job to get my savings out. But I do have a question for you, do you have a 401k? how many years have you been contributing if you do? you see it matters because those that don't have one and haven't worked and been responsible just can't comprehend why those that have don't want it taken. I work with alot of people that make basically the same income as me, the ones who live a moderate lifestyle and have a nice 401k account are worried, those that lived beyond their means and live paycheck to paycheck are cheering on Obama and are awaiting their hand-out. Those same people sound just like you when I talk to them they are angry arrogant and want something for nothing.
I know you haven't said you want something for nothing but you sound just like them, so do you have a 401k? are you even employed? how many times have you filed for bankruptcy? do you support communism?

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:11 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by Servigistics

No, I don't believe we are. People are saying things, possibly saying them without merit, and I don't believe that's a discussion.

Just because a bill hasn't been introduced or passed, doesn't mean there is no way you can prove the claim that democrats want to "confiscate" 401k's.

Until someone can give me a quote, piece of verifiable text, or a sound byte, I will be here making sure that every time someone lies or posts up unsubstantiated information, that they get called out for it.

I mean, how easy can you guys make it for me? I don't even have to defend anything because there IS NOTHING TO DEFEND. My job, as of late, is simply to ask people where they get their information from.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:23 PM by Servigistics

reply to post by Irish M1ck

No, I don't believe we are. People are saying things, possibly saying them without merit, and I don't believe that's a discussion.

You may not believe that is a discussion....but that's what it IS..

discussion Definition
dis·cus·sion (di skus̸h′ən)

noun

the act of discussing; talk or writing in which the pros and cons or various aspects of a subject are considered

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:25 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by Servigistics

Right, but before you discuss something, shouldn't you be sure it exists first? Did you want to discuss the goblins in middle earth after this or is this good enough?

All I am asking for is for someone to show me where democrats have said they want to steal people's 401k's.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:38 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by Irish M1ck

Just because a bill hasn't been introduced or passed, doesn't mean there is no way you can prove the claim that democrats want to "confiscate" 401k's.

Until someone can give me a quote, piece of verifiable text, or a sound byte, I will be here making sure that every time someone lies or posts up unsubstantiated information, that they get called out for it.

I mean, how easy can you guys make it for me? I don't even have to defend anything because there IS NOTHING TO DEFEND. My job, as of late, is simply to ask people where they get their information from.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]

I think you look foolish at this point but that's just me. You say I shouldn't ask you to prove a negative when that is exactly what you are asking me to do by asking me to prove a bill hasn't been passed yet when I have never said a bill like this has passed or to prove discussions like this have NOT happened when in fact they have been.

You seem to be the one getting wrapped up in all the hyperbole of the discussion asking us to prove this and that. I told you numerous times that if and when a bill like this gets passed THAT would be my proof.

How hard is that to understand?

In the meantime you have done nothing but take everything that is said her so totally out of context it is ridiculous.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:40 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by MAINTAL

For the 3rd time, I am not asking for a bill or legislation. That would be nice, but I am not.

There has to be something, otherwise why the hell are we talking about it? Is there not a sound clip? A you tube video would be better than nothing. How about transcripts from the discussion? Do you have a quote from the meetings?

What reason can you give to even believe any of this is true? Why should anyone believe you when you say democrats want to "confiscate" 401ks?

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:41 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by Servigistics

Right, but before you discuss something, shouldn't you be sure it exists first? Did you want to discuss the goblins in middle earth after this or is this good enough?

All I am asking for is for someone to show me where democrats have said they want to steal people's 401k's.

Words to that effect are in the OP and I have already shown you that much if a bill like that gets passed that is exactly what they will do OR do you actually think that talk is about making me more money?

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:46 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by MAINTAL

No where in the OP is there any mention of confiscating money. There is mention of policy change, but nothing of taking people's money.

You do realize that there is a difference between confiscating money and policy change (even if that new policy makes you less money) don't you?

When people read this thread, the first thought that is coming to their mind is "Democrats want to take all of the money from my 401k". Now, is that true or not?

That is my problem with this thread. Again, I am glad to discuss policy all day with you, but not when people are lying about the intentions. No one is trying to confiscate a 401k.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:48 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by MAINTAL

For the 3rd time, I am not asking for a bill or legislation. That would be nice, but I am not.

There has to be something, otherwise why the hell are we talking about it? Is there not a sound clip? A you tube video would be better than nothing. How about transcripts from the discussion? Do you have a quote from the meetings?

What reason can you give to even believe any of this is true? Why should anyone believe you when you say democrats want to "confiscate" 401ks?

So you're saying the whole thing is a lie the OP just made all this up? That all the talk radio announcers I have heard concerened about this are in a conspiracy with the OP to fool everyone?

That even those supporting your argument where I have quoted the words "REQUIRED BY ALL WORKERS" were not good enough either?

hehe Mick, tell ya what, you can spout off all you want, Ill continue to post my thoughts about the discussions the democrats are having as to the demise of our money. In the meantime Ill just add you to my ignore list you are just too much exercise anymore.

Oh and by the way, if you think the democrats are stupid enough to use the term "Confiscate" or "Steal" then you are even more naive than I first thought. Semantics like "Policy change" ? yeah thats a good one

[edit on 12-11-2008 by MAINTAL]

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:49 PM by Servigistics

reply to post by Irish M1ck

Right, but before you discuss something, shouldn't you be sure it exists first? Did you want to discuss the goblins in middle earth after this or is this good enough?

So, before any discussion on anything is to take place, proof of its existance has to happen first????? Kinda makes the point of a discussion board moot, doesn't it? I guess we should just call them "M1ck's" FACT boards and only post things that are proven, then people can read them, and NOT talk about the merits of them. Wow, how fun,,,,not.

All I am asking for is for someone to show me where democrats have said they want to steal people's 401k's.

Why do you have to have someone prove that to you???? Because nobody is saying that, but what is being said are that DISCUSSIONS are happening about the topic of 401k's being compromised.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:50 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by MAINTAL

All I have asked is for you to show me this:

"Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs"

You have, as of yet, failed to do so.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:51 PM by Irish M1ck

reply to post by Servigistics

That's not what the thread title is. The thread title is:

"Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs"

Are we talking policy change, or are we talking about confiscating 401k's? It's one thing to disagree with a policy, but it's another to out-right accuse people of stealing other's money.

reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 02:58 PM by MAINTAL

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by MAINTAL

All I have asked is for you to show me this:

"Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs"

You have, as of yet, failed to do so.

I hate having to repeat myself to you mick

if you think the democrats are stupid enough to use the term "Confiscate" or "Steal" then you are even more naive than I first thought. Semantics like "Policy change" ? yeah thats a good one.

I know what what WE will call it if it happens like the op and we will call it CONFISCATE whether YOU agree with it or not I don't care

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 >> ^^TOP^^