 |
 |
Study: Americans don't save enough for retirement, welcome 401(k) plans
April 04th 02:35:30 PM
A study conducted by Mathew Greenwald & Associates, a survey research firm based in Washington, D.C., has concluded that most Americans don't save enough for retirement -- with almost 4 in 10 workers 55 and older having less than $25,000 in savings. No big surprise there.
It's true that people of all ages need to save more for retirement. However, what is encouraging about the study (and maybe even a little surprising considering last year's opposition to Personal Retirement Accounts) is the overwhelming support for 401(k) plans:
Nearly 70 percent of workers said they were either strongly favorable or somewhat favorable to 401(k) and other retirement plans setting up automatic enrollment for new workers...
Ideally, PRA's in Social Security would look very similar to current 401(k) plans, and much of the worry out there that people cannot or will not be able to manage their accounts can look to this study as evidence to the contrary.
These are just more statistics in favor of what we have always been saying: Once people learn about PRA's they usually think they are a good idea. It's education that is the key.
As they say, read the whole thing.
Posted by Jeremy Tunnell
Comments
QUOTE:
Ideally, PRA’s in Social Security would look very similar to current 401(k) plans,
/QUOTE
Especially the part about how you have no choice in what fund manager is used. The main difference would be that a single company's HR department wouldn't be nearly as likely to be corrupted by controlling fund managers and the funds they offer as the government would and the consequences of such corruption would only effect those involved with the HR department's company, not the whole U.S. economy.
SS Equity Funds EQUAL Big Government Corruption!
S4 Sucks and Gives Change!
Posted by Noid on April 05th 01:25:50 AM
"Especially the part about how you have no choice in what fund manager is used."
Of course you would. Where did you get the idea that PRA owners wouldn't be able to chose their fund manager?
Posted by jeremy on April 06th 04:31:32 PM
Not unless your choice is Barclay's do you get to choose (think black and Model-T Ford) and neither does anyone in the Thrift Savings Plan. We'll get Barclay's and like it.
Posted by Noid on April 07th 03:21:32 AM
They have to control fund manager and define what funds we can invest in for our safety. They do this in the Thrift Savings Plan, the 7.65% solution paper and everywhere else too. And if they don't that's even more reason to just let us invest the money ourselves in our own accounts. Socialist Insecurity: End It Don't Mend It!
SS Equity Funds EQUAL Big Government Corruption!
S4 Sucks and Gives Change!
Posted by Noid on April 07th 03:26:28 AM
And by "for our safety", I'm just saying that that's how they justify Socialist Insecurity at all. They start with the assumption that you can't invest yourself because otherwise clearly the most sensible things to do would be to just gradually lower the tax along with people's "benefits" which would have the effect of just letting people invest their own damn money without SS fascists managing everything. No government program needed for that. And I've stated that phasing SS out and just letting people invest for themselves would be fine with me but it isn't with S4 because it's a group of fascists and useful sheep.
SS Equity Funds EQUAL Big Government Corruption!
S4 Sucks and Gives Change!
Posted by Noid on April 07th 03:35:19 AM
Not surprising Americans don`t save enough for retirement...working Americans have been sold a bill of goods by the pandering politicians, who promote risky Socialist Insecurity as the be-all & end-all for retirement.
When in fact, it`s the politicians` job security scheme, that rewards their powerful voting bloc of retirees, with windfall benefits, provided by the silent majority of FICA payers, who don`t protest enough to stop this fraud.
Where in the Constitution, that the pandering politicians take an oath to support, does it prescribe Socialist Insecurity as a function of the central government, to be subsidized by FICA payers?
Let the revolution begin... instead of tea, politicians who embrace risky Socialist Insecurity, should be tossed into Boston Harbor, symbolic of the area where Mr. Ponzi did some of his best work.
Harry Thompson
Socialist Insecurity retiree
Posted by Harry Thompson on April 21st 09:35:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
