Government starved of revenues due to tax deferral programs.

[Woodznutz]

I'm completely baffled by this entire thread and the logic behind it, that forcing people to retire in object poverty, is somehow going to help the US budget.
Wouldn't having more people impoverished, result in them requiring more government assistance, and thus put a larger strain on the US budget?
By what logic does making retirees poorer, make the budget balance?

Where did I suggest doing away with such programs?

 

[leftwinger]

They collect Tax when you begin to pull it out. They invented it. Practically Forced on us with employer match first percentages input. Many have millions yet still work.

If you Take it out when making $100K+++ then it will be taxed in a higher bracket of course. + penalty if not yet age 59.5

they own it. They caused it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I'm completely baffled by this entire thread and the logic behind it, that forcing people to retire in object poverty, is somehow going to help the US budget.
Wouldn't having more people impoverished, result in them requiring more government assistance, and thus put a larger strain on the US budget?
By what logic does making retirees poorer, make the budget balance?

So, if the Govt was not giving you a break on your current taxes you would not be saving for retirement?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Are you deranged???? How many old people living on welfare do you want??? 401K'S came about because companies no longer offer pensions, and workers don't work for the same company for 40 years any more.

are you another one of those people that only save for their retirement because the Govt is giving you a tax break for doing so?

 

[Dragonlady]

are you another one of those people that only save for their retirement because the Govt is giving you a tax break for doing so?

You completely ignored my question, and come back with right wing bullshit!!! I'm not an American, which you would have known if you'd looked at my poster info.

Given that fewer than 50% of Americans have ANY retirement savings at all, one would think that any SANE person would expand this program. Instead, you attack ME. No wonder your country is in the toilet with the water swirling.

 

[Andylusion]

Where did I suggest doing away with such programs?

Well when the thread says that "government is starved of revenue due to (these programs)" the implication is that you want to do away with them.

 

[Andylusion]

I don't have a tax-deferred saving plan and I'm doing fine.

Other people are not, and need those plans.

 

[Andylusion]

But, that money will be taxed at a lower rate (supposedly) when withdrawn in retirement. So, the government loses when the money is earned and later when it is spent. No wonder we're in deep debt.

So you get rid of these plans that causes government to lose money.
Then no one saves for retirement.
Now the government has no investments to tax at all at retirement, and since those people have no retirement now, they end up being entirely dependent on government programs, costing the government even more money.

How is this better?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You completely ignored my question, and come back with right wing bullshit!!! I'm not an American, which you would have known if you'd looked at my poster info.

Given that fewer than 50% of Americans have ANY retirement savings at all, one would think that any SANE person would expand this program. Instead, you attack ME. No wonder your country is in the toilet with the water swirling.

I asked the question as you were the 2nd person to make that same comment. As to where you are from, I do not really give a shit.

The tax deferred part of these plans do very little to help the poor as they are getting all their money back when they file their taxes any how. They tend to help the well off way more, and we are saving for retirement with or without the tax differed part.

Thus the question about the 401ks and if they are doing what they were designed to do. Expanding this program would just help people like me who really do not need it but would be more than happy to take advantage of if it they did.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then no one saves for retirement.

are tax breaks the only reason you save for retirement?

 

[Dragonlady]

I asked the question as you were the 2nd person to make that same comment. As to where you are from, I do not really give a shit.

The tax deferred part of these plans do very little to help the poor as they are getting all their money back when they file their taxes any how. They tend to help the well off way more, and we are saving for retirement with or without the tax differed part.

Thus the question about the 401ks and if they are doing what they were designed to do. Expanding this program would just help people like me who really do not need it but would be more than happy to take advantage of if it they did.

You're a total idiot. POOR PEOPLE don't have 401K's or any other form of retirement savings. People dependant on government handouts and earned income credits to feed and house their families, don't have funds left over to save for retirement.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You're a total idiot. POOR PEOPLE don't have 401K's or any other form of retirement savings. People dependant on government handouts and earned income credits to feed and house their families, don't have funds left over to save for retirement.

Well then, do tell how expanding the 401k program is going to help the situation, since you said a SANE person would do so.

 

[Anathema]

I e got an idea for you… How aboutvthis:

Any level of Government which taxes a citizens INCOME may not tax that citizen in an any other way. We’ll pay the taxes up front but then the Government has no right to tax us again. No sales tax. No gasoline tax. Nothing. One bite at the apple ONLY. Then we’ll give up those tax deferrals.

 

[Andylusion]

So, if the Govt was not giving you a break on your current taxes you would not be saving for retirement?

Are you talking to me personally? Because the whole reason I'm even on this thread, is because I am a ridiculous investment nut. I love investing, because I love investing. To me the idea of owning stock in a company, and having them pay me part of their profits, is the just the coolest thing ever.

But do you think most of the population is like me? Because you would be wrong. Trying to make a general point about all of society, based on the people on this thread, is a huge sample bias.

If you ask me if most of the population is going to save for retirement without 401ks and IRAs, the answer without any doubt at all, absolutely not. The vast majority are not going save anything.

And I know this because as a ridiculous investment nut, I have been trying my darn best to get people to invest for a decade now. Since 2007 actually, is when I really started preaching investment.

And people will not do it. They will not put money into investments. Getting people to put barely 1% of their earnings into a 401k is like pulling teeth. And people will say "My company doesn't offer a company match! So I will not save anything.".

In fact I've had people tell me they won't invest in their 401k, because the company match was too low. "They don't even offer 5% match! They only offer a 2% match! I'm not going to save then!".

I'm not making this crap up. These are real conversations. I had a lady tell me "Well I don't need to save for retirement, because Social Security and Medicare will take care of me."

And you are asking me if you remove the small incentives people have to save, will people not save for retirement? YES. I am telling you exactly that. They will not save. I have spent more than ten years begging, kicking, and screaming to get people to invest for retirement, and it's a struggle to get even one to do it. YES. Yes, I am saying they will not save, if you remove these tax advantage accounts. That is exactly what I am saying.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Are you talking to me personally? Because the whole reason I'm even on this thread, is because I am a ridiculous investment nut. I love investing, because I love investing. To me the idea of owning stock in a company, and having them pay me part of their profits, is the just the coolest thing ever.

But do you think most of the population is like me? Because you would be wrong. Trying to make a general point about all of society, based on the people on this thread, is a huge sample bias.

If you ask me if most of the population is going to save for retirement without 401ks and IRAs, the answer without any doubt at all, absolutely not. The vast majority are not going save anything.

And I know this because as a ridiculous investment nut, I have been trying my darn best to get people to invest for a decade now. Since 2007 actually, is when I really started preaching investment.

And people will not do it. They will not put money into investments. Getting people to put barely 1% of their earnings into a 401k is like pulling teeth. And people will say "My company doesn't offer a company match! So I will not save anything.".

In fact I've had people tell me they won't invest in their 401k, because the company match was too low. "They don't even offer 5% match! They only offer a 2% match! I'm not going to save then!".

I'm not making this crap up. These are real conversations. I had a lady tell me "Well I don't need to save for retirement, because Social Security and Medicare will take care of me."

And you are asking me if you remove the small incentives people have to save, will people not save for retirement? YES. I am telling you exactly that. They will not save. I have spent more than ten years begging, kicking, and screaming to get people to invest for retirement, and it's a struggle to get even one to do it. YES. Yes, I am saying they will not save, if you remove these tax advantage accounts. That is exactly what I am saying.

It is true there are a lot of morons out there, a bit of tax being deferred is not going to change their minds. Those that are well off enough to truly not care about the tax deferred part are the ones most likely to take advantage of a 401k. Thus the reason 401ks are being looked at closely right now, they are not really helping the group of people they were claimed to have been started to help

 

[leftwinger]

are tax breaks the only reason you save for retirement?

Two words, Employer match. It’s like free money. an incentive to join in. Market gains can be attractive over 25 yrs?

 

[leftwinger]

People on the fringe who try to put into savings will take it out every GOVT crisis created. Its too easy to take it. Its harder to get into your 401K and a penalty. You can take a loan, if working. Pay the interest charge to yourself.

 

[Andylusion]

It is true there are a lot of morons out there, a bit of tax being deferred is not going to change their minds. Those that are well off enough to truly not care about the tax deferred part are the ones most likely to take advantage of a 401k. Thus the reason 401ks are being looked at closely right now, they are not really helping the group of people they were claimed to have been started to help

But it does. You can convince people to invest in a 401k because of the tax advantages, and the company matches that are part of that tax advantage. I've done it. I have convinced people to save and invest.

Its hard to do it, but people are doing more saving in 401ks, than they would without that program. I guarantee it.

 

[Andylusion]

People on the fringe who try to put into savings will take it out every GOVT crisis created. Its too easy to take it. Its harder to get into your 401K and a penalty. You can take a loan, if working. Pay the interest charge to yourself.

Which is the dumbest thing ever. But, people do it.

 

[leftwinger]

Which is the dumbest thing ever. But, people do it.

if it’s homelessness for your family on underwater house payments (2009-2013), Many chose to hang on until market recovery. Not all bad ideas.