quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
No fucking way I’m giving my state government control of my retirement.

No kidding. Also, anyone who think Social Security is a good deal are clueless.

If the state created a fund that you have access and control of the funds, that the state could not access, nor could it borrow against then maybe something that allowed people who don't have access to a 401K style plan would be good.

Of course that means you'd have to automate the payroll systems in every employer in the state where an employee wants the funds taken out pre-tax, otherwise it would be a voluntary contribution that the individual would have to send in, and that will never happen.

I have a degree in finance and work five years in the financial services industry and I have no clue what is meant by a "state run retirement plan". I have serious doubts that the people answering the question knows what that is.

If it means I trade my SS for a investment account, I'm all for it. Give me 1/3 of what I paid in, into a Roth IRA, then sign me up.

Does anyone know what the definition of a "state run retirement plan" is, and how they are used?

We can trust there will be a lock box so good to go.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
I have a degree in finance and work five years in the financial services industry and I have no clue what is meant by a "state run retirement plan". I have serious doubts that the people answering the question knows what that is.

If it means I trade my SS for a investment account, I'm all for it. Give me 1/3 of what I paid in, into a Roth IRA, then sign me up.

Does anyone know what the definition of a "state run retirement plan" is, and how they are used?

Exactly. There’s 5 or 6 different ideas of what it means on just the first page of this thread. They might as well have asked who likes ice cream. I bet the responses change if they ask who likes shit flavored ice cream.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Is it really that crazy of an idea?

My kids’ 529 plans run by Utah seem to be doing ok. You pick from a variety mutual funds they offer and I picked the Vanguard S&P 500 Fund. If you want to take advantage of the tax benefits a 529 investment plan has to offer, you have no choice but to use a state run plan. They have about 40% more money for school than they would have had if I not for the tax benefits.

States run retirement plans as well, think teachers and all the other state employees. I have’t heard or read any complaints about those.

A 529 plan is radically different than a retirement account. 529 plans operate in a completely different environment and yes people can and do lose their kids ass in one. Take a look at 2008-2009. A very bad time to have to withdraw money for tuition. Nobody really remembers that period. It was even worse in 2002 (dot com bubble burst). On a side note, Utah's plan is semi private in that they are under state regulation but the state contributes ZERO money to them for operating expenses. The plans expenses are paid for by fees (very low) earned by assets under management.

You've never heard about state operated pension plans being underfunded? That is very concerning for many government baby boomer employees at or nearing retirement.

In short, a government
$1.3 trillion pension plan funding gap

I can't imagine how poor the etf and mutual fund choices would be. It'd be all DEI crap.

quote:

Among the key features that were highly favorable to respondents included higher returns (87%) and lower fees (86%).

Well...hard to argue with higher returns and lower fees. Who wouldn't want that in a retirement plan?

Of course, bureaurcrats cannot deliver either, so there's that.....

While we're at it, how about free lunches, and maybe backrubs? I'd like those in a retirement plan, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Bytes:
A 529 plan is radically different than a retirement account. 529 plans operate in a completely different environment and yes people can and do lose their kids ass in one. Take a look at 2008-2009. A very bad time to have to withdraw money for tuition. Nobody really remembers that period. It was even worse in 2002 (dot com bubble burst). On a side note, Utah's plan is semi private in that they are under state regulation but the state contributes ZERO money to them for operating expenses. The plans expenses are paid for by fees (very low) earned by assets under management.

You've never heard about state operated pension plans being underfunded? That is very concerning for many government baby boomer employees at or nearing retirement.

In short, a government
$1.3 trillion pension plan funding gap

I love 2008! That’s when I started two of my kids’ 529 plans. I did the 5 year thing where you fund it in one year but elect to recognize 1/5 of the amount on the gift tax return for each of the next 5 years to stay under the $12,000 annual gift tax exclusion for those years.

The only difference between saving for retirement or education is time frame. Even that’s debatable since 529 plans can be used for the kids’s kids. People losing money because the market dropped just before they started taking money for the kid’s school is poor planning. They shouldn’t have been in stocks at that point. Two years ago, I switched the investments in my oldest’s 529 plan from 100% stocks to 50% short term bonds, 25% money market funds, and 25% stocks because I knew he would start needing the money this year.

Of course I’ve heard of underfunded pension plans. That wasn’t the poll question though, was it? The poll question says retirement plan which could mean a variety of things as can state run. I decided it meant individually directed investment accounts. Others decided it meant pensions and other mandated plans like Social Security.

During the George Bush (43) administration a proposal was floated to allow the option of designating a portion of your SS taxes to be invested in a private retirement account. The proposal would have been voluntary for those who wanted to participate. There would be no new taxes. Just a redirection of part of your taxes to an account that you control.

The Democrats absolutely savaged the proposal as a "wall street takeover" of SS. They accused Bush of wanting to rob SS to enrich his greedy wall street buddies and destroy SS. So they eventually had to drop the proposal when there was too much blow back. It's too bad that the proposal died. I am for any proposal that gives more power and control to tax payers.

A link to the proposal is below.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse...cus/social-security/

Don't most or all states already have a retirement system for state employees? How is this news? Like Skins said - wtf do they mean? Let me participate in a state-run plan instead of my company 401k?

Giving more money/control to whatever Govt. entity strikes me as an extraordinarily bad idea for no other reason than the words of the late great JALLEN - "when you're spending someone else's money, there's no need to scrimp." The bigger the pot, the more tempting to loot it.

Legislators will always feel compelled to reallocate funds dedicated to a specific purpose for a "more noble" short-term benefit (perhaps improving their chances of getting re-elected? What could be more noble that that?) Over time this tendency will gut any State-run "trust" type program.

quote:

The poll question says retirement plan which could mean a variety of things as can state run. I decided it meant individually directed investment accounts. Others decided it meant pensions and other mandated plans like Social Security.

That really is the big question, who gets to control the funds, and what can they do or not do with it.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
The state of Illinois is $142 billion underfunded for their state employee pensions. Tell me they can manage money.

And that is why I believe that the states will petition the federal government to seize all private retirement funds to allow public retirement funds to be rescued. I too think the feds are figuratively drooling at the prospect of all the money held in private retirement accounts.

My fear is it will happen with no announcement, and we will wake up one day to the federal takeover with no recourse.

This is why we have second amendment.

I would guess that those for it do not want to contribute, they want something for free. If they are not saving now, they will not save if the govt runs (ruins) it.

People are stupid and this is one of a million ways that proves it. The majority of people do not save for retirement and trust that the govt will save them. I will never get out of SS what I put in. They have enough of my money.