Questions surrounding the proposed plan to lump 401K's and IRA's into Social Security?

Questions surrounding the proposed plan to lump 401K's and IRA's into Social Security?
Questions have been posed about this proposal, but I wonder how it can be done and how it will affect our banking institutions -- if it could be so, why aren't the banks speaking up? How would the removal of our 401K's and IRA's affect them? What would be the repercussions if this proposal eventually became reality? Is it even possible? What would be the long term effects? http://www.jbs.org/index.php/jbs-news-fe... http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/ar... http://www.rightsidenews.com/20081108254... What if ...... That is the question -- I am not asking if it HAS happened, I am asking what IF it happened.


Answers:

floridaman39us:  I don't like this idea. Something is wrong here.
2008-11-12 11:07:05
Holy Cow:  There is no such proposal. It's basically a lie and it never happened.
2008-11-12 11:07:16
Dana P:  well, at present the banks are being bought into by the government. Plauson said today the plan to buy the bad mortgages is out and they are using the money to buy stock in the banks. I say, get your cash out and move it into a community credit union or store it under your mattress. The feds are nationalizing everything. And to think how they have handled the Social security so far, how anyone would think they wont jack what remains of of your 401k...THEY WILL
2008-11-12 11:09:29
TG:  Who did you hear that from? That's not even possible. That would be similar to the government taking over your savings account. The government can't just take your private accounts from you. What you are probably referring to is the idea that we take the funds in the social security fund and move it into stocks. Currently these funds are invested solely in government securities which earn next to nothing and don't even keep up with inflation...then they wonder why the fund is losing money and not meeting the retirement needs of Americans...duh! I agree that these funds need to be moved into REAL investments, if social security is going to ever be a legitimate program. Either that or abandon the program entirely and let individuals invest on their own.
2008-11-12 11:10:12
Liberate America from Fascism:  If you are worried, I won't be because it won't happen.
2008-11-12 11:10:56
Brown9489:  I have no idea where you got that hallucinatory bit of information, but I would hazard a guess that the source was a pile of fat sitting behind a microphone.
2008-11-12 11:10:57
mbush40:  don't think the liberals have been educated on Pelosi's plan. I asked a similar question, and received similar answers.
2008-11-12 11:14:32
suthrngal:  Yes, it's very possible that this can happen. Heck with the government now in the business of apparently nationalizing everything, they can pretty much do as they please. Argentina just nationalized all pension plans to "spread the wealth", why wouldn't our own underhanded government do the same? They've managed to bankrupt SS, as it is. They need money! As a result, I've pulled mine and have paid the fine and heavy taxes. Here is one of MANY articles written about this:
2008-11-12 11:16:16
ndmagicman:  I can see the logic in this approach. It adds further safe guards to peoples 401s and IRAs, making them less vulnerable to market fluctuations. However considering the vast and powerful banking lobby in the US I serious doubt whether this will be done since it would eliminate a profit center from financial institutions.
2008-11-12 11:17:19
Wendy G:  The democrats are going to steal more money from you. And who are they taking it from ? MIDDLE CLASS. People are limited in contributions for these retirement accounts. Including the rich!!! They are robbing working stiffs to pay for obamas tax cuts on retirees. This is to make SS look like it is solvent, More to come I am afraid. RALEIGH — 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. The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.” Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA." Right now these retirement accounts are inherited. But if dems take them like SS they will be kept by the gov't. No more inherited wealth I guess. Most accounts are not enough to make you wealthy, but your money should go to your heirs.
2008-11-12 11:21:07
Chosen Answer
cyrius l:  I don't think it's possible. They would actually have to somehow make it legal for them to "impound" your private money. Banks don't actually hold your 401k, maybe their subsidiary investment firms do, since 401k's are essentially a group investment portfolio with various investment paths such as stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc. As to the hypothetical question of repercussions, well, that would be scary indeed. It would give the treasury and our government another cookie jar to pilfer. But before this happened, I think a large amount of people would see and hear about the legislation and quickly liquidate these investments causing yet more volatility in the markets. I think the most radical legislation we realistically could see regarding 401k and IRAs would be the proposal to eliminate the tax-deferred status (pre-tax) on this income for both the employer and employee. Barney Frank believes it will be an $87B annual tax revenue gain, I believe people will just stop investing in them causing a net loss of tax revenue in the long-term.
2008-11-12 12:03:19