Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1 DUmmies Worry Facts About Obama's Plans Could Get Out 
    Senior Member Perilloux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    555
    fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:08 AM
    Original message

    DAMN! Freepers have linked to U.S. News & World Report on dem story re 401k's

    This is not good news. Biden's so-called gaffe was nothing compared to this:

    Would Obama, Dems Kill 401(k) Plans?

    October 23, 2008 10:47 AM ET | James Pethokoukis | Permanent Link | Print

    "I hate to use the "S" word, but the American government would never do something as, well, socialist as seize private pension funds, right? This is exactly what cash-strapped Argentina just did in the name of protecting workers' retirement accounts (Efharisto, Fausta's Blog). Now, even Uncle Sam isn't that stupid, but some Democrats might try something almost as loopy: kill 401(k) plans.

    More at http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/10/23...


    I understand that this is just one plan they were considering, but this kind of crap could really scare a lot of voters. We are so close I can smell victory, but Obama needs to get on top of this ASAP before this gets emailed to millions of folks over the next week.
    I've heard a little about this on the radio in the last couple of days, but have seen nothing in the MSM. This is very important, IMO, and people need to know what's in store for them with a (God forbid) Obama administration. I've already sent out emails on this topic, please pass this information around to anyone you know with a 401k. From the article linked in the DUmp OP:

    ... A few respectful observations:

    1) McDermott is right when he says the savings rate isn't going up. But the savings rate doesn't include gains to money you invest in the stock market. It ignores the buildup of net worth. (If you bought a share of XYZ Corp. in January at $100, for instance, and its value doubled by December, the savings rate measure would still value that investment at $100. In short, the savings rate is a phony number.)

    2) So based partly on the above faulty logic, the $4.5 trillion, as of the start of the year, invested in 401(k) plans doesn't count as savings.

    3) Ghilarducci would have workers abandon the stock market right at the bottom of the market. A stupid idea, according to Warren Buffett: "I don't like to opine on the stock market, and again I emphasize that I have no idea what the market will do in the short term. Nevertheless, I'll follow the lead of a restaurant that opened in an empty bank building and then advertised: 'Put your mouth where your money was.' Today my money and my mouth both say equities."

    4) Ghilarducci would offer a lousy 3 percent return. The long-run return of the stock market, adjusted for inflation, is more like 7 percent. Look at it this way: Ten thousand dollars growing at 3 percent a year for 40 years leaves you with roughly $22,000. But $10,000 growing at 7 percent a year for 40 years leaves you with $150,000. That is a high price to pay for what Ghilarducci describes as the removal of "a source of financial anxiety and...fruitless discussions with brokers and financial sales agents, who are also desperate for more fees and are often wrong about markets." Please, I'll take a bit of worry for an additional $128,000.
    Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
    ~Winston Churchill
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lake Champlain
    Posts
    152
    As expected, many of them agree that 401k's are a Republican plot to screw the little guy, and should be impounded. The few who express a desire to KEEP their 401k are being slammed.

    I suspect not many DUmmies have a 401k anyway. News flash for you idiots: Not all 401ks are now worthless. Mine has been in a money market for a year and a half, and has not lost a nickel in value. I'll withdraw it all and spend it on hookers and beer before I let the Messiah get his claws on it.

    I do have a question about this though. If they are going to kill 401's in favor of a return to traditional pensions, how does that affect the self-employed who have solo 401k's? I have a small 401 for my new job, but most of my dough is in a Solo K...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    2,068
    As usual they shoot the messager. The sure do like to deny reality. It's as if they don't acknowledge it then it hasn't happened or isn't true.

    babylonsister (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:11 AM
    Response to Original message
    3. Excuse me, but why give so much credit to this story or freepers?
    Edited on Sat Oct-25-08 10:12 AM by babylonsister
    And who reads this stuff? Not your average voter. And this certainly sounds like a r/w attempt at changing the conversation with no basis in fact. If there was, why isn't it being aired all over the place? Obama is not that dumb.
    You know what they say about opinions...
    Name removed (0 posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:14 AM
    Response to Reply #3
    14. Deleted message
    Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
    fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:21 AM
    Response to Reply #14
    24. Why IN THE HELL DO YOU IMPLY THAT I BELIEVE THIS STORY?
    DAMN, but you all like to shoot the messenger. If the right wing spins this, it can hurt us.

    That's all I'm trying to say. PERIOD.
    Name removed (0 posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:22 AM
    Response to Reply #24
    25. Deleted message
    Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
    babylonsister (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-25-08 10:41 AM
    Response to Reply #24
    29. Why post it? I'm tired of reading r/w spin. And no, it won't hurt us.
    And if it did, what do you think we could do about it? Stop fretting please. Enjoy the ride, and VOTE!
    tjwash (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-25-08 12:51 PM
    Response to Original message
    43. Did you even bother reading the article past its screaming headline?
    It's a joke...OK?

    First of all he's a fucking BLOGGER. It's an OPINION PIECE. And screaming that Obama "has to do something about this NOW" is like screaming that he needs to waste all of his time debunking the constant stream of lies coming from Bill O'Reilly or Shawn Hannity.

    This is why this country blows chunks right now...bumper sticker outrage politics that takes peoples attention off of legitimate issues. I can't believe I am wasting keystrokes responding to this bullshit.

    Article nushell; Ghilarducci comes to the house and gives a breakdown on secure government retirement accounts that don't crash when the stock market does. Writer of the article makes a poor attempt at equating "house democrats" with Obama with absolutely no proof cited that Obama has any intention of implementing anything that the Ghilarducci plan would entail. Writer then tries to use the words "socialism" and "obama" in every sentence that it will fit in. Writer then goes off on unregulated-free-market-capitalism-good, socialism-and-democrats-bad tangent.

    Du'er freaks out and yells at everyone that tells her to calm the fuck down.

    Ah-screw it...I,ve wasted enough keystrokes on this crap.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member GrumpyOldLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    1,304
    If leftists didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member GrumpyOldLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    1,304
    The root of Obama's plans -

    If leftists didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Rebel Yell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    5,181
    How is this spin?

    "The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, as least as it's been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasnít shifted."

    "one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still stuffer from that."
    How can he honestly take the oath of office?

    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
    I feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •