View Single Post
  #274   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Canuck57[_9_] Canuck57[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,596
Default the success of the bush tax cuts

On 14/06/2011 7:17 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:00:36 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In ,
says...


The employer is not going to be taxed but I bet those people taking
their 401k money out in the future will get their ass kicked on it.


Tax-sheltered retirement income is taxed as ordinary income when
distributed.
Always was, is, always will be.
It's expected that your income will be less when you retire.
You might be able to use Roth IRA's to some extent if you think working
vs. retirement yaxes will flip on you.
Normally it doesn't work that way.
Basically you've said if you're outside when it rains you'll get wet.


I think they are going to try to discourage people from cashing out
their 401ks to try to save the stock market. That usually happens in
the tax code.


I highly doubt that would fly.
As I've said, 401k's have always been sold as taxable as ordinary
income. Changing those rules would **** people off more than Ryan's
Medicare destruction plan.

There is a big problem coming when 83 million boomers do start pulling
that much money out of the market and there is not the excess income
coming along behind them to replace it. It is just another example of
the demographic problem that is going to threaten our whole pension
model. The only one we are really acknowledging is SS but all of the
pay as you go programs are threatened the same way.

I think you overstate the entire boomer deal.
I've seen there were only 76 million boomers ever born.
They span 16-18 years, so don't hit entitlements at once.
Many are already dead and never hit entitlements.
As some come into entitlements, others go to St. Peter.
Boomer life expectancy is about 69 years.
So the idea that they all live into their 80's and 90's is a myth.
As far as pulling money out of Wall Street, some.
But a lot will still be there when they kick off.
Hardly anybody with savings dies broke.
Tax policy is far more likely to hit inheritors and so keep equities
uncashed.


Right now a worker would be paying a very minimal tax on this money
but I bet those numbers will go up sharply as we try to dig our way
out of crushing debt.

Depends on income, but you have a point there.
Low income workers could lose by saving.
Here's the bright side.
Low income worker don't have any ****ing money to save.



These days the closest thing to a pension people have is the 401k


Stop right there. The closest thing MOST people have to a pension in
the the U.S. is SS. You still don't understand that.
I don't have figures, but a wild guess is less than half of current
workers even have money in a 401k, and far fewer significant money.
100% of them have SS, with some special exceptions.

and
if your employer will match, you should save all he matches.
I would not be shocked to see legislation that requires a certain
level of 401k savings ... for the same reason mentioned above, to
replace some of that boomer money that is coming out of the equities.


I would be shocked at forced 401k contributions.
Wouldn't be shocked by the revolution that follows.
What you're saying is the government would force worker taxation be
paid directly to Wall Strett fat cats.
In your dreams.


But add in government bamboozled and skimmed SS over the years....not a
pretty picture. Government borrows it into general spend at 1%,
inflation conservative at 3%, that is a year over year 2% reduction in
vlaue with the money sitting in SS. And over the years, that adds up
big time as a shortfall to the beneficiary.

Pensions not in your name and personal account are usually a big scam,
government included.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.