Message From Dear Leader: I'm Coming After Your Sa

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Message From Dear Leader: I'm Coming After Your Savings.


I was reminded of it vividly today when I read this article in the Wall Street Journal. It's about how Dear Leader's new "budget" proposes to cap the amount you and I can save in 401Ks and IRAs. Yep. Seems that Barry doesn't like these "tax-sheltered investment vehicles." Otherwise known as the LIFETIME FREAKING SAVINGS OF HARDWORKING AMERICANS.

"The White House explanation is that some people have accumulated "substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving." So Mr. Obama proposes to "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 for someone retiring in 2013."

Did you get that? He's decided that people have accumulated "substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving."

HE HAS DETERMINED THAT. All by his little ol' self.

"The Administration's political motive here is two-fold: First, it's a redistributionist play and a revenue grab. But for many on the left it's also about reducing the ability of individuals to make themselves independent of the state. They have always disliked IRAs, just as they oppose health-savings acounts, because they make Americans less dependent on federal entitlements or transfer payments."
 

tommyjo

New Member
All your little conspiracy buddies already posted on this...you are a little late to this edition of the "I hate America" party you all throw here every day.

There are multiple, simple ways for "hard working Americans" to save in tax deferred investments...of course, 99.99% of Americans will never have the luxury of a $205,000 per year retirement income...but you go ahead and scream about injustice fostered upon those poor people having to pay income tax on their measly $205,000 annual retirement income.
 

Pushrod

Patriot
All your little conspiracy buddies already posted on this...you are a little late to this edition of the "I hate America" party you all throw here every day.

There are multiple, simple ways for "hard working Americans" to save in tax deferred investments...of course, 99.99% of Americans will never have the luxury of a $205,000 per year retirement income...but you go ahead and scream about injustice fostered upon those poor people having to pay income tax on their measly $205,000 annual retirement income.

Jealous? It's not fair that they get to retire with much more than we do, isn't it? We should petition the government to take some of their savings and distribute it to us, shouldn't we? They most certainly need to be brought down to our level, how dare they do so well when others are barely scrapping along!!!
 

somdwatch

Well-Known Member
All your little conspiracy buddies already posted on this...you are a little late to this edition of the "I hate America" party you all throw here every day.

There are multiple, simple ways for "hard working Americans" to save in tax deferred investments...of course, 99.99% of Americans will never have the luxury of a $205,000 per year retirement income...but you go ahead and scream about injustice fostered upon those poor people having to pay income tax on their measly $205,000 annual retirement income.

The moron speaks yet again. No one said annual income in all the reports of the POTUS statement. He was speaking lumps sum in any retirement account. The only ONE's with that high of retirement maybe the elected official raping the rest of us.

TERM LIMITS, Reduced pay, same retirements as the one's who elected the thiefs is what will fix the elected officials.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
All your little conspiracy buddies already posted on this...you are a little late to this edition of the "I hate America" party you all throw here every day.

There are multiple, simple ways for "hard working Americans" to save in tax deferred investments...of course, 99.99% of Americans will never have the luxury of a $205,000 per year retirement income...but you go ahead and scream about injustice fostered upon those poor people having to pay income tax on their measly $205,000 annual retirement income.

Why is this relevant at all?

You know, the original taxes that started the war weren't necessarily oppressive - we just didn't like that England considered us their cash cow.

Are you defending the idea that government ought to have the right to tax this kind of savings, and your only defense is that only really rich people will have to pay it? Is a tax "fair" because someone else pays it?

I don't get why another tax on the rich - even if one day I become rich - is somehow ok. Why does the government think that allowing people to keep their money is somehow wrong?
 

mamatutu

mama to two
All your little conspiracy buddies already posted on this...you are a little late to this edition of the "I hate America" party you all throw here every day.
There are multiple, simple ways for "hard working Americans" to save in tax deferred investments...of course, 99.99% of Americans will never have the luxury of a $205,000 per year retirement income...but you go ahead and scream about injustice fostered upon those poor people having to pay income tax on their measly $205,000 annual retirement income.

With all due respect, tj, I think you have that backwards. The members here who speak out against Obama and his government every day truly "love America". Obama and his kind are the ones who hate America as it is, and want to change it through their agenda of socialism. And, as others have said here, the government has no right to our private retirement funds. Those funds were the result of hard work, have already been taxed (part of which went to the welfare sloths that do nothing but sit on their butts), and what ever was left was put away for the future. Obama's concept is warped and insane, but, what else do we expect? I am sure more totally unacceptable ideas will be coming our way. Never a dull moment with this prez.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
The problem I see here, or one of the big problems (the whole thing is problematic) is that lets say the pick an amount that you should be able to retire on, pick 200k
what happens in 20 years when 200k is now equal to todays 20k.
Does anyone here think that our government would actually worry about raising the standard of retirement living?
 

FreedomFan

Snarky 'ol Cuss
Jealous? It's not fair that they get to retire with much more than we do, isn't it? We should petition the government to take some of their savings and distribute it to us, shouldn't we? They most certainly need to be brought down to our level, how dare they do so well when others are barely scrapping along!!!

I've often asked the question: "Where does the line between the very normal human desire to better ourselves and acquire wealth end and "greed" begin?

If it is completely obvious to some that others are "greedy", then surely there must a point at which that greed begins? When a certain level of wealth is attained, is there some genetic switch that is supposed to trip and we become passive and complacent with the lot in life to which we've ascended?

Of course, I've never gotten a reasonable answer, and any compelling justification to go along with it. Best I can tell "greed" is when you are better off than the person with whom you're discussing the matter and still want more.

Why does enjoying the fruits of investment in education and training, and sense of delayed gratification trigger some sort of resentment among the less-ambitious among us? Note that I didn't use the PC cliche "less fortunate". It is rarely a matter of fortune, but rather one of laziness.
 

RoseRed

American Beauty
PREMO Member
My Grandparents have acquired several million dollars. If Uncle Sam skins off of theirs, where does that leave for the inheritances that have been set up for the rest of the family, including college trust funds for the great-grand kids?
 

mAlice

professional daydreamer
I've often asked the question: "Where does the line between the very normal human desire to better ourselves and acquire wealth end and "greed" begin?

If it is completely obvious to some that others are "greedy", then surely there must a point at which that greed begins? When a certain level of wealth is attained, is there some genetic switch that is supposed to trip and we become passive and complacent with the lot in life to which we've ascended?

Of course, I've never gotten a reasonable answer, and any compelling justification to go along with it. Best I can tell "greed" is when you are better off than the person with whom you're discussing the matter and still want more.

Why does enjoying the fruits of investment in education and training, and sense of delayed gratification trigger some sort of resentment among the less-ambitious among us? Note that I didn't use the PC cliche "less fortunate". It is rarely a matter of fortune, but rather one of laziness.
It doesn't matter where the line is, or if the person who acquires wealth is greedy. They still earned it, it's their money, and its nobody else's business.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Hell it isn't ,you cry and want the government to cut SS. yet you don't want them to know you don't need it.

This #### pisses me off and makes me want to punch people like you in the throat.

SS is money your employer takes out of your paycheck. It's yours. You earned it. It doesn't matter if you "need" it or not - it is your money that the government has confiscated to supposedly give you back when you retire.

Do you not earn a paycheck or something? Because it's astounding how little you know about them.
 

Dakota

~~~~~~~
This #### pisses me off and makes me want to punch people like you in the throat.

SS is money your employer takes out of your paycheck. It's yours. You earned it. It doesn't matter if you "need" it or not - it is your money that the government has confiscated to supposedly give you back when you retire.

Do you not earn a paycheck or something? Because it's astounding how little you know about them.

Yep, and if I invested 7 1/2 percent of my income while my employer also invested that much and put it in an account, it would be more than enough to live off of in retirement.... Social Security isn't an entitlement and the sad part is if I don't live long enough to see any of it, the government gets it, not my children.
 

BigBlue

New Member
This #### pisses me off and makes me want to punch people like you in the throat.

SS is money your employer takes out of your paycheck. It's yours. You earned it. It doesn't matter if you "need" it or not - it is your money that the government has confiscated to supposedly give you back when you retire.

Do you not earn a paycheck or something? Because it's astounding how little you know about them.


Good glade you're mad because you and your buds want "entitlements" cuts ,I don't hear anyone here screaming for the government not to touch SS . I know it's my money, that's why when your right wing bozo president Bush wanted to give it to Wall Street people were screaming.
 

BigBlue

New Member
This #### pisses me off and makes me want to punch people like you in the throat.

SS is money your employer takes out of your paycheck. It's yours. You earned it. It doesn't matter if you "need" it or not - it is your money that the government has confiscated to supposedly give you back when you retire..
No not really ,the money out of your check is suppose to cover your parents and then while you kids work theirs cover you, that was the original idea.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Good glade you're mad because you and your buds want "entitlements" cuts ,I don't hear anyone here screaming for the government not to touch SS . I know it's my money, that's why when your right wing bozo president Bush wanted to give it to Wall Street people were screaming.

I would like it very much if I didn't have to contribute to SS and could keep that money to invest the way I see fit for my retirement.

The other kicker is that I have a SIMPLE IRA that has a max annual contribution limit of $12,000. Go ahead and explain to me why there is a limit on how much of MY money I can put into my retirement plan?
 
Top