Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Wed Feb 15, 2017, 09:58 AM Feb 2017

Who'd Want to Limit Retirement Plans? House Republicans - NYT Editorial Board

There is no overstating how unprepared Americans are to retire. Nearly half of private-sector employees — some 55 million people — do not have an employer-provided retirement plan. Most of them are low- to middle-income earners who will end up relying on Social Security for between half and all of their income in retirement.

And yet, as early as Wednesday, House Republicans are expected to pass a measure to thwart efforts by California, Illinois and other states to establish basic retirement savings plans for employees at companies that do not offer such coverage. In California, for example, participating employees would have a small percentage of pay deducted from their paychecks, unless they opted out. Those amounts would be pooled and managed by investment professionals chosen by the state in a bidding process; the plan would be overseen by a board of government and business leaders appointed by the governor and the Legislature.

Financial firms claim that the plans represent unfair government competition. That’s false, but that doesn’t seem to concern House Republicans as they use a fast-track process to derail the states’ plans, siding with the financial industry over ordinary savers.

First, under the plans, states establish the legal framework for deducting contributions from employees’ paychecks, but they do not run the plans. Second, state plans do not compete unfairly because mutual funds and other financial firms have not competed for the small-business market where employees without retirement coverage tend to work. If they had, tens of millions of Americans would not be without coverage, and the state plans probably wouldn’t be needed.

more
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/whod-want-to-limit-retirement-plans-house-republicans.html?emc=edit_th_20170215&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=57435284

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Who'd Want to Limit Retirement Plans? House Republicans - NYT Editorial Board (Original Post) DonViejo Feb 2017 OP
Once they put 401K's in, almost no public company offered retirement plans MiniMe Feb 2017 #1

MiniMe

(21,719 posts)
1. Once they put 401K's in, almost no public company offered retirement plans
Wed Feb 15, 2017, 01:36 PM
Feb 2017

That was in the 80's under Reagan.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Who'd Want to Limit Retir...