Clinton to Propose Universal 401K Plan

[sabra]

Source: MSNBC

Clinton will lay out a proposal to provide a universal 401K plan for everyone, at a speech today in Webster City, Iowa. Her staff is calling it the second-biggest policy rollout of the campaign in terms of cost and the number of people it would cover.

Under the plan, everyone would have access to a 401K and would be able to get matching funds from the government. It is part of Clinton's effort to increase retirement security by promoting savings and investment. Clinton's policy advisors will explain the plan in detail after the speech.

The senator kicked off her two-day "Middle Class Express" bus tour in Cedar Rapids Monday with an economic speech aimed at drawing a distinction between herself and Republicans ahead of tonight's GOP debate on economic issues.

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/09/403550.aspx

[Donnachaidh]

1. matching funds from the government?

Uhh yeah -- that will sink like a rock.

When you have pukes voting against schip for kids - do you honestly think they'll do ANYTHING for retirees? I mean other than allow their corporate cronies steal their pension plans. :sarcasm:

[LiberalFighter]

94. Everyone? NO Matching govt funds? NO

So many problems with this idea.

What happens to the fund when the person dies? Before they turn 18?

[antigop]

2. Pandering to Wall Street -- we need a universal DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION plan

Defined benefit pension plan -- not a defined contribution plan.

Defined benefit -- like Social Security only actuarially funded with better retirement benefits.

All this would be is a gift to Wall Street.

[Renew Deal]

15. Yep, it's Bush's plan all over.

On it's face.

[Larkspur]

24. Yep, it's another way to say "Privatize Social Security"

With the trillions we've lost in Iraq, I don't see how she can afford to pay for this plan of hers.

[Virginia Dare]

38. Agreed...n/t

[Turn CO Blue]

115. Yep. Same 401k crap brought to you by NIXON.

We should all demand -- and need a President who demands -- defined pensions run by managers with one-year contracts - only way to protect people in their retirement.

[peacebird]

3. Is this a first step towards privatizing social security? Are details available yet anywhere?

thanks!

[FREEWILL56]

53. Why does Hillary feel this need to privatize my social security?

Because she is a republicon in democratic clothing. Every true democrat knows this wouldn't work and would cause further spread between the haves and the have nots. I guess Hillary never heard of the possibility of buying US savings bonds either as a way of supplementing and those that can do something like this already are so nothing is fixed. So please tell us why Hillary, just why are you still saying you're a democratic candidate?

[Solar_Power]

64. Special interests

Mutual funds and hedge funds benefit from fees charged on 401K accounts

[Common Sense Party]

66. How does a 401(k) fee benefit a hedge fund?

Just curious.

[kamtsa]

139. So what if they benefit?

I am more than glad to pay Vanguard 0.19% a year for managing VTSMX for me.

I don't care if other people benefit as long as I do.

Kamtsa

[lovuian]

4. combined with Social Security it would be a good program

Americans need to save more but it shouldn't be used instead of Social Security

[Renew Deal]

14. When Bush proposes it it's bad, but when Hillary proposes it it's good?

This sounds like privatized social security.

[lovuian]

51. Like I said I need to read the proposal but pensions are

not happening for Americans and the 401K would help that lost
I agree Universal Health is a must and higher priority

but if Hillary is trying to destroy Social Security she is crazy

[humbled_opinion]

122. I really don't see much difference between the two....

Except Balls and she sure does have a set don't ya think.

[kamtsa]

134. There few differences

1. SS is mandatory, 401K is not
2. SS pays you until you die (after some retirement age), with 401K you have a given sum of money
3. SS does not give you control over the investment, 401K does (including the choice of making bad decisions)
4. SS can be used only after some retirement age, 401K can be used at any age (with some penalties).
5. SS is an entitlement that can changed by the government any time, with 401K you investment is yours (similar to Algore's Lock Box).

Kamtsa

[endarkenment]

35. it will defund SS.

Here is a clue: the Kleptocracy and War Party took the social security trust fund and spent it on occupying mesopotamia and on huge tax breaks for the wealthy. Now, having made sure that medicare and ss pensions would be difficult to maintain at appropriate levels as the boomers retire, they propose diverting even more money into private accounts that will generate huge transfer cost profits to wall street. No fucking thank you. We are not that stupid.

[lovuian]

52. if it defunds Social Security Forget it

but if it is an extra program sponsored by taxes on corporations who don't provide pension funds for their employees

then I am in

[BrightKnight]

65. I don't see anything about defunding SS. - n/t

[endarkenment]

106. Where exactly is the money coming from to pay for this?

The political pressure to transform social security into a welfare system rather than a pension plan will getter larger and larger as the boomer retirement cashes in on the 'social security trust fund' that exists only on paper. Schemes like Clinton's will divert funds needed to meet current SS payouts requirements into private accounts. In addition to providing a vast new source of revenue to wall street for individual account administration, these schemes create two tiers of government pensions, ending the 'everyone in the same boat' standard that has made it politically impossible to defund social security over the last 70 years. Over time the standard SS pension will be defunded in favor of private schemes and the system we have today will degenerate into a welfare system as a wedge can be driven into the senior citizen voting block between those with privatized accounts and those without.

The Democratic position should always be "hands off social security, everyone in the same boat".

[FREEWILL56]

56. Look again as Hillary would be proposing to replace

social security with this republicon plan of privatizing my retirement. It is not going to give more to those on the low end because they won't be able to put as much in as those in the upper monetary scales could. She never said supplement to ss did she? As I already said in another post here there are plenty of ways those with the EXTRA monies can save as there's even US savings bonds and private retirement savings plans already existing. Nice of her to offer more to those that have more isn't it? Most would be far below poverty levels with this as it is with any republicon plan for privatizing social security.
QUIT THINKING A VOTE FOR HER IS GETTING BILL BACK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE AS THEY ARE DIFFERENT IN THEIR VIEWS. Hillary is trying to ride her husband's coattails and though Bill wasn't perfect Hillary doesn't hold a candle to him and it's no surprise to me why bill went looking elsewhere. You think I'm wrong? I'm quite right as Hillary has already stated that Bill wasn't standing there answering questions as she differed in opinion to Bill and made it clear she'll sent Bill away as a diplomat so he won't be in the white house. They stay together more for appearance and career's sake as they truly don't see eye to eye.

[lovuian]

63. Screw her if she wants to privatize Social Security

wow if this is her plan she is self destructing as we speak

[Auntie Bush]

105. Sounds like you've been listening in on their phone conversations.

or you have physic powers. I can see speculating but you sound like it's fact. That's what the Rethugs do. Remember...it's our possible candidate you're talking about Can't we give our own a break...at least till we know the facts? That's the time to attack.Why can't you all wait till the bill is announced and questions answered and you understand how it works before you attack the plan and Hillary?

Me thinks you're just a Hillary hater and no matter what she says...you'll attack her...like a lot of people on this site. I haven't decided who I will vote for yet...but I find it difficult to read so many unfounded attacks on Hillary.

[FREEWILL56]

119. Unfounded with no facts?

You better look again as there are plenty of facts to go around. I saw the video of Hillary saying, it's not Bill standing here answering questions, as she was questioned on her answer differing from Bill's. It is also well known that Hillary intends to make Bill a diplomat. Now I may not have all of the facts with this 401k proposal, but it is not needed and only benefits those, as it is shown, who have more $. It really doesn't take too much of a leap to draw some conclusions on her based on some facts. I admit I don't like Hillary now and it is based on the facts that I now don't like her as she is bought and paid for by the insurance and pharmacuetical industries. Look it up if you really want to see the truth about her. Oh, and let's not forget her factual voting record. Do I hear Iraq and Iran, plus her Vapor health coverage, and now 401k's instead of ss?
I will add here that how dare you say I am not allowed to question or bring to light the integrity of a candidate just because she has a piece of paper saying democratic party on it? Just because you may not have found out yet what many others know or that you don't want to know doesn't mean we should keep quiet about it.

[FREEWILL56]

121. Come to think of it,

how dare you say I'm spying on them when (who was it now amongst many?) that was voting to allow bush to do this? Tell me again how I'm saying unfounded things. Oh poor victomized Hillary.
RE:puke:

[ProudDad]

138. HOW ABOUT A LARGER SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENT

remove the cap...

This is a fucking welfare program for Wall Street...

Not surprising -- she's getting most of her pay offs from Wall Street...

[Whoa_Nelly]

5. I want a Universal Health Care plan

I think that is so very much more important at this point in time.
And HRC does not have such a plan. She offers only more support for insurance industry through revamping.
There will still be many Americans who will not be able to afford health care should that become the new direction.

[AllyCat]

43. Right! Universal health care, not universal, mandatory health insurance

God I'm sick of the fat cats continuing to get rich off of the poor and middle class.

[kysrsoze]

97. Agree. I was looking at this and thinking, "Will we be required to participate?"

More bullshit from HRC. Thanks again, Hillary Republican Clinton

[fujiyama]

83. You got it...

If she's going to announce outrageously expensive ambitious government programs, I'd prefer universal healthcare and I think most others would as well.

This savings plan isn't necessarily a horrible idea on the face of it. I like the idea of promoting savings and some of us don't have 401(K) programs through work. But matching funds from the government? Ha, yeah right. Is this going to apply only to those who don't have one already? Either way, I see this thing being so expensive...this plan isn't going anywhere.

[asjr]

6. When I hear the "plan

in detail" then I will react.

[antigop]

8. Maybe we'll get as many details as we did about her health plan. HA! n/t

[kysrsoze]

99. I think this proposal is great b/c it again shows she's not on our side

She is doing bidding for her corporate masters. I want to see more of this. She is making a fool of herself and I'm predicting now that by the time the primaries start in January, she'll be toast.

[antigop]

7. And how in the HELL does she expect to pay for this? GOOD GRIEF! n/t

[amandabeech]

9. By taxing the guys that Harry Reid won't tax.

Or by printing more junk bonds, formerly known as U.S. treasuries, in the hopes that someone will buy them.

OR GETTING US OUT OF IRAQ NOW!!

[antigop]

10. Um, sure...... n/t

[amandabeech]

22. What's your point? n/t

[antigop]

32. Check the debt lately? Think she'll get the troops out NOW? n/t

[amandabeech]

50. Yes, I'm well aware of the debt and have been for years.

It doesn't look like she'll do it, but I can still want her to.

Do you have a point about Harry Reid's recent decision not to push a reasonable tax on the takeover snakes and hedge fund hoodlums? That was the reason I posted.

[antigop]

54. Um, I posted this earlier....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3592634&mesg_id=3592634

[amandabeech]

55. Didn't realize it was you.

Why didn't you mention that in the first place?

[antigop]

62. Huh? n/t

[madfloridian]

11. Is that like Rahm's proposal in the DLC's Ideas Primary?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1566

I have not really compared the two.

Why can't people save on their own, and not make anything in addition to Social Security??

If you think this is not a first step to drastic change in Social Security, I have some swampland for you.

[iamjoy]

28. I Believe Her

I don't believe Hillary wants to dismantle Social Security - and I'm no supporter of hers.

That being said, I do think if such a program is implemented, Republicans will use it as a step towards dismantling Social Security as we know it, and it will make it that much easier.

Why can't people save ont heir own? Some people are struggling to make ends meet. Some people don't have the skills to manage their money wisely.

[BrightKnight]

76. .

[bpeale]

12. i do not like the idea of the government getting involved

in people's 401K plans. she can stuff this idea where the sun don't shine.

[iamjoy]

26. You Think They Aren't Now?

401(k) plans are subject to IRS and ERISA guidelines as it is. The government has a heavy hand in the regulation of the plans.

Some people work for small companies that don't offer health benefits or 401(k). It wouldn't be cost effective for them to do so. What is wrong with the government acting as an "employer"
for these people and offering them benefits packages?

Another problem is, people are transient, they change jobs frequently (especially low income workers) so they don't get to keep the employer match (they aren't vested). Also, they are likely to cash out their 401(k) plan, even though they have to pay a penalty. If the government offered a 401(k), the money could be rolled into it more easily - thus encouraging savings.

[bpeale]

36. it would be social security all over again. NO!

and you don't think they would again "borrow" that money & replace it with IOU's? how naieve (sic) you are. no more mandating of money to the government. i give enough as taxes & social security.

[iamjoy]

70. What If It Were Voluntary

just like a company can't force you to participate in its 401(k), neither could the government. And, just like ERISA, etc regulations prevent companies from taking money employees invested in the 401(k) and using it for other purposes, so could regulations on a government run 401(k).

Of course, that's all before Republicans get their greedy paws on it and change the rules. I guess its just like a single payer health care system. With good Democrats in charge, I have no worries. However, thinking of what the Republicans could do to it scares me.

[bpeale]

108. what people have left of their salaries the gov't should keep its hands off!

[midlife_mo_Jo]

135. We're a nation of non-savers

I think this plan has some merit, but I'd tweak it. For instance, the government would give a matching tax credit towards your 401K for five years, then the next five years the gov would match 25% of your contribution, or something like that. (All capped at a certain amount, of course.) This might spur people to save, and continue saving. Freepers might say it's using our tax money for social engineering, but we've got to learn how to be a "saver" nation, and not just a debtor nation.

[Renew Deal]

13. This sounds like privatized social security.

Did she photocopy this name from Bush and just change the name? Sounds like it.

[Robbien]

16. It is privatized social security

Take a look at Clinton's list of major donors. Notice how many are investment firms.

[toopers]

112. Tell me again what is wrong with private retirement accounts?

[ronnie624]

132. Maybe this will help:

United Airlines, which is operating in bankruptcy protection, received court permission yesterday to terminate its four employee pension plans, setting off the largest pension default in the three decades that the government has guaranteed pensions.

*******

The ruling releases United, a unit of the UAL Corporation, from $3.2 billion in pension obligations over the next five years. The federal agency that guarantees pensions, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, will assume responsibility for the plans, which cover about 134,000 people.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/11/business/11air.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>

The federal agency insuring private-sector pension plans that have promised benefits to about 44 million employees and retirees could see its own shortfall more than triple in the next decade, a congressional agency said Thursday.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) testified before a House committee Thursday that the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. could face a $71 billion gap in the next decade between its assets and promised benefit payments by plans taken over by the agency. With the PBGC recently agreeing to take on the pension plans of bankrupt United Airlines, its largest pension plan takeover, the agency now faces a $23.3 billion gap.
<http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/09/retirement/pensions/index.htm>

[Common Sense Party]

69. This isn't mandatory. It's not funded via payroll tax.

How is this in any way Social Security?

[Renew Deal]

104. That was what the Bushies said about their plan. n/t

[Common Sense Party]

114. No, it's not. It's completely different. n/t

[Doctor_J]

17. So she really is listening to Bush?

Not that Stupid would understand what it means, but this sounds like the owning class would be getting their fingers on SS, which is exactly what the GOP wants.

[endarkenment]

18. Bad Idea: subverting social security.

That matching fund needs to be directed at maintaining social security and medicare benefits at decent levels, not going into a corrupt boondoggle that benefits the well off and wall street.

[pansypoo53219]

19. 401k's

are a ripoff. only welfare for wall street.

[Common Sense Party]

67. 401k's are not a ripoff. What tripe. n/t

[BrightKnight]

74. My 401K is a beautiful thing. Everyone should have one.

She could actually get this passed and a lot of people will be a lot better off.

[Common Sense Party]

88. I don't like the whole government match idea, but she's on to

something here.

[madrchsod]

20. how fucking stupid does she think we are

-----WE are the government----

[bpeale]

37. pretty damned stupid i think

[HeraldSquare212]

21. Sort of just like the $5K baby plan

My impression based just on the govt-matching funds idea is that once again instead of getting at root problems the proposal simply seems to try to ameliorate them a bit with govt funding, as though handing out money is the only power govt has.

Edit to add: which doesn't mean the proposal is bad on it's own terms, it's just that it becomes an excuse not to do anything else. If issues around job and income security, etc., were also going to be addressed via detailed proposals, then I would have no beef with the proposal per se.

[demnan]

23. Considering that it's impossible to live on Social Security

I think this is a good plan.

[formercia]

25. Gimme a break

So, Hillary, how are poor people that can't afford to put money into a 401K going to share in the wealth?

What are they going to do when you kill Social Security?

Hillary is just Junior in Drag.

How about a real Woman candidate? How about someone with empathy and sense of social justice?

[antiimperialist]

27. I'm not interested in no 401K

I'm too poor as we speak to save money like that.
Thanks though.

[superconnected]

30. Lot's of companies don't offer 401k's anymore.

I'm sorry if this offends but hillary is beginning to look like a cheap whore for the insurance companies. Instead of funneling our taxes to haliburton/bechtel/united defence through iraq, she wants to funnel them to the insurance industry here. Better, but still no deal.

[frylock]

42. she ain't cheap

[Common Sense Party]

68. Lots of companies never did.

Millions of working Americans have no retirement plan.

This is one lame option to give an incentive to participate in one.

I disagree completely that I should pay for someone else's matching contribution, but she likes to redistribute wealth.

Personally, I think the government has given us a great benefit in the Roth IRA. Everyone should sign up for a Roth and Hillary can keep her bloated government program.

[BrightKnight]

79. Partial matching incentive for young people & US Savings rate

A partial matching incentive for young people might be a good idea. If people get in the habit of saving young it will take pressure off of the government. Increasing the overall savings rate would be good for the economy.

[Common Sense Party]

89. I don't know the details of her plan, but...

As a 401(k) consultant, I know that the #1 reason why people save as much as they do in a 401 employer plan is that it is automatically deducted from their paycheck. People don't have to remember to save.

Is Hillary suggesting that contributions to this Universal 401 come out of payroll like FICA taxes are deducted?

[superconnected]

29. Does everyone see clearly yet how the insurance industry is backing her?

[BrightKnight]

80. No, a 401K is a savings plan. It is not insurance. - n/t

[Yupster]

87. Many 4-1 (k's) are run by insurance companies

Hartford Life and John Hancock Life are just two major players in the industry.

If your 401 (k) is in an annuity, it's run by an insurance company.

[BrightKnight]

92. Anyone can roll a 401K into an IRA at any time.

I guess that might not be possible if you choose to contribute to an Annuity. I know a lot of people choose to purchase annuities with their 401K savings when they retire. I was not aware that you could purchase them while working.

I agree that financial services companies are going to make money. So what? If a lot of people start retirement accounts then a lot of people will be better off. I would like to see it aimed at getting people started.

I save and pay fees to financial services companies. Everyone else should do that too.

If she can find a way to pay for it I don't have a problem with it.

Anything would be written and passed by the House and Senate. I don't see a grand conspiracy. Perhaps some desperate campaigns grasping for something to hit her with.

[Yupster]

95. You can't roll your 401 (k) into an IRA

if you are still working and contributing to your 401 (k) through payroll deductions.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said, just pointing out that insurance companies are heavy players in the 401 (k) markets.

Also, most people in 401 (k) annuities with Hartford Life for example did not "choose" to contribute to an annuity. That's just the deal their employer made with Hartford.

I'm against Hillary's $ 1,000 401 (k) plan by the way. If you want to contribute $ 1,000 to your retirement and don't have a plan at work, then either a Roth IRA or a traditional IRA is already available to you.

[juno jones]

31. Personally I plan on dying early

Nevermind I'm currently healthy as a horse, but the $300 a month they are promising me in SS is a mockery of my service to the economy of this country and at generally less than $1000 take home (usually somewhere around $600-$800) a month, what money am I supposed to have saved, pray tell?

I will walk into the woods on a snowy night rather than deal with the oh-so-generous government in my old age.

[sandnsea]

33. The rich want more of our money

to invest in China, India and Dubai.

[hatrack]

34. Yes, whatever it takes to keep the stock markets nicely pumped

Pathetic.

[Dawgs]

39. My first thougt was PRIVATIZED SOCIAL SECURITY

Twelve Reasons Why Privatizing Social Security is a Bad Idea
http://www.socsec.org/publications.asp?pubid=503

Reason #1: Today's insurance to protect workers and their families against death and disability would be threatened.

Reason #2: Creating private accounts would make Social Security's financing problem worse, not better.

Reason #5: The odds are against individuals investing successfully.

Reason #6: What you get will depend on whether you retire when the market is up or down.

Reason #7: Wall Street would reap windfalls from your taxes.

[Dawgs]

40. How can anyone recommend this pile of crap?

Is she in full blown pandering mode now?

$5,000 to every newborn and now matching 401K plans for every adult - WTF!!

[AllyCat]

41. Will this also be mandatory? Why is investing in the stock market

so freakin' important? Just one more way for Wall Street to make its millions while we all whither away.

[StrongBad]

46. Contrary to what you may think

The stock market isn't rigged and if you put in some effort you can make decent returns to save for the future.

[AllyCat]

77. I don't think the stock market is rigged. It does make a lot of money

for the richest in America. The average person doesn't have time to dink around watching the tickers all day to figure out how to invest their 401Ks (which will usually be all mutual funds anyway).

I'd rather not see people setting themselves up to lose more of their income so the rich can get richer, even if some people win the game.

[BrightKnight]

127. Social Security is enough for most people. Saving for retirement is a bad idea.

Working people should just buy beer with their money and be happy. The evil corporation will just rob them blind anyway.

[Tyler Durden]

44. NOW somebody say something bad about Democratic Socialism.

NOBODY in our party is going to divorce themselves from the bankers, the insurance assholes, and Wall Street.

I'm getting pretty SICK AND TIRED of ALL OF THEM.

[StrongBad]

45. This is pretty cool

If people actually took the time to research the concepts of investing and not rely on some idiot "account representative" looking only to take money to make commision, this can be a really beneficial thing for all Americans.

Investing yourself can generate a much greater return than Social Security over the long term.

[waiting for hope]

47. That's just peachy - but there are

a lot of us Americans who are literally paycheck to paycheck, and that's by scrimping and saving in every way known to man. Investments for some are not a reality.

[StrongBad]

48. I don't think SS is going anywhere

If she's proposing a government backed matching contribution, given the tax benefits also associated with a 401K it could be a nice supplement to SS income.

[MilesColtrane]

81. Social Security was put in place because so many Americans lost their life savings...

...in the market crash of 1929.

I don't like the idea of our tax revenues going directly to Wall Street in the misguided notion that giant financial corporations will do what's best for the investor.

Of those people who even have the money to invest, most don't understand the risks involved in investing and how to ameliorate them.

[killbotfactory]

49. Has she ever acknowledged the working poor?

[AllyCat]

78. No n/t

[Neshanic]

91. She would not know a working poor issue if she stepped in it.

[high density]

57. Matching funds from the government??

Why doesn't she just cut income taxes... This is silly, not to mention that it's just going to bankrupt the country further.

People need to save more but we can't afford to do this!!

[DuaneBidoux]

58. Sorry to say this: she sounds like a fucking Republican.

After the deal with healthcare and then this, I'm sure corporate america will supporting HER other than the Republican candidate.

[triguy46]

59. Not exactly everyone.

Early reports say that any tax credit would be for families with incomes less than $100K.

[AngryOldDem]

60. First a college fund for every kid, and now a 401K for everybody else

One question: How will she pay for all of this when the system is already practically bankrupt?

Tell me -- is there any other viable alternative to HRC?

[Solar_Power]

71. How about a free Prius for every family?

[FREEWILL56]

75. I like Kucinich myself.

[Politicub]

61. Yay!

The more policy proposals I hear from Hillary, the more I am inclined to support her as the Dem nominee. She's actually proposing real ideas, not just throwing out platitudes that sound great, but have no real substance.

[FREEWILL56]

72. Huh?????????????

I guess if she said she could walk on water and that she could make water into wine you'd jump into your bathing suit ready for a wild swim party while creating a new religion honoring her as God. I guess there's one born every minute.
:wtf: :party: :silly: :crazy: :dunce:
:shrug: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :popcorn: :spray: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

edit to add:

In case you'd be interested I'm thinking of getting the Chinese to make some toys up that are robots, but resemble Hillary. Pull it's string and it'll feed you lies and once in awhile it'll just laugh. Interested? I'm thinking you'd pay top dollar for this. How's $1000 sound? I guess you'd say great here's $2000.:freak:

[EFerrari]

73. What about self employed people?

[MilesColtrane]

82. Vaguely reminiscent of Herbert Hoover's "two chickens in every pot".

A market crash is looking more and more likely. When it comes will the new homeless families live in Hillarytowns this time?

[Triana]

84. So. What Investment Firms Paid Hillary lots of lobbyist money..

...so she'd promote this and they could make a profit? Just asking. Maybe it's a good plan, I haven't read it but with Hillary, you gotta follow the money, I'm afraid.

[JeanGrey]

85. This is part of what bugs me about Hillary. What does she mean

a "retirement" plan? Isn't that what Social Security is? Is this softening us up to losing it? And why do they keep on with their useless "tax cuts to pay for it". Doesn't she realize that tax cuts aren't going to put real money in the pockets of poor people????

[BrightKnight]

93. Hysterical spinning -- The House and Senate would write and pass it..

Enabling everyone to participate in a 401k plan is not a bad idea. She could get something passed and a lot of people might benefit.

Doing something to encourage people to start a 401K account is a good idea.

Financial services companies benefit when people save. So what? That is not a good excuse for encouraging people not to save.

[fujiyama]

86. I sense a lot of paranoia here over her proposals

and I say this as someone whose last choice for the nomination is Hillary. I also don't see any evidence that Hillary wants to privatize social security.

Her aim is actually not bad - encouraging people, especially young people to save, is great. And being that many don't have a 401(k) from an employer, it's an interesting idea.

But it's also INSANELY expensive. I don't see this being workable at all. If she's looking to implement crazy expensive programs, why not go with universal health care, rather than her crappy proposal as it is now?

Ending the war and cutting an inflated defense budget could save this country a LOT of money...and at least fund universal health care...

[Neshanic]

90. "Hillary The Littlest Republican" My how they must be proud of her.

She takes the cake, I will give her that, and the plate.

Her Wall street pals will be be forever rolling in all that 401 cash to play with. Sub-Prime loans are so yesterday. They need a new cash fix, and Hillary's gonna give it to them.

[Egalitarian]

96. I must admit, brilliant political move.(nt)

[Egalitarian]

98. All this energy and only 5 recs?

[harpboy_ak]

100. More DINO from Hilary

Where is Paul Wellstone now that we need him? PLEASE, CAN'T WE GET SOME ELECTABLE *REAL* DEMOCRAT TO RUN?

Molly Ivins was right, we need to DRAFT BILL MOYERS.

[Imperialism Inc.]

101. If I am understanding it correctly this sounds freakin' awsome to me.

It is not meant to replace social security but run side by side with it. One advantage is that people can keep their same plan when they switch jobs. The government will have a much lower overhead to administer plans than do private companies. They don't have anywhere near the advertising overhead and they don't need to make a profit off of you while administering it. Unless there are some hidden gotchas (like private companies will actually administer it) or it is a prelude to later trying to dump social security this is an excellent plan. This is the kind of stuff that Dean Baker, author of The Conservative Nanny State (http://www.conservativenannystate.org/) advocates.

Lest anyone think I'm just a Clinton loyalist, I want to point out that she is the very last on my list of candidates and will have to earn my vote even in the general. Innovative solutions like this go a long way to earning that vote.

[endarkenment]

109. So when Republican's propose the same scam, it's bad?

These privatization scams do two things: they divert funds needed to pay SS current accounts and they create two tiers of government pensions. The neoliberals have long dreamed of killing SS by privatizing it into individual accounts, and this is yet another attempt to do just that. As an extra bonus, wall street gets to manage 300,000,000 individual accounts.

[Imperialism Inc.]

111. There is no diversion of funds in the plan as it currently reads on

her website. The only argument you can make is that in the future that there will be. As it stands now that is not the case. She claims she can pay for it by freezing the estate tax at proposed 2009 levels instead of eliminating it. So on that count I don't see that you have a case.

After reading the plan it does appear however that there won't be a public plan option. Well, there will, in name, but all of its functions will be managed by private companies. So yeah, turns out there is a give-away aspect to the plan which is very disappointing.

[endarkenment]

113. "The only argument you can make is that in the future that there will be"

yes of course there will be as we are just entering the boomer retirement wave. That demographic blip calls in all the fictional IOUs in the SS trust fund and the government will find itself very hard pressed to meet its SS and Medicare obligations. That pressure will not be offset by the un-repealing of the estate tax repeal, which by the way has not happened. I'm sure a Democratic congress will not be bullied into keeping the repeal in place. Oh wait, I'm not sure of that at all.

This proposal, which is the point of the privatization scams, will then morph into a replacement for SS itself, allowing the government to start treating existing pensioners as welfare cases while not getting voted out by irate future pensioners who will be deluded into thinking that their 'private' government accounts will be safe. Meanwhile billions will flow into wall street to manage all these accounts. It is a corrupt scam. If the intent is to encourage people to save more, liberalize IRA and 401K and SEP regulations.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

102. we have one. It is called SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU STUPID DLCer!

(not the author, but the topic)

[BrightKnight]

110. I have a 401K and SS. Everyone else should too.

In no way is this an attack on Social Security.

Perhaps you should read the plan before you spin it.

[sarcasmo]

118. This is no different than Bush's plan just worded different.

[BrightKnight]

126. You are spinning without reading it. - n/t

[sarcasmo]

130. I feel she is a Corporate Dem/ Dino whatever you want to call Her.

"Under the plan, everyone would have access to a 401K and would be able to get matching funds from the government. It is part of Clinton's effort to increase retirement security by promoting savings and investment. Clinton's policy advisor's will explain the plan in detail after the speech"


How is this any different than Bush's savings Plan? There is no guarantee in a 401K, it's the old do away with Social Security plan because the Government has already spent that money.

[FREEWILL56]

120. Oh isn't it an attack? It is minimumly an attack on the poor.

What stops people now from their own 401k or other such retirement plan in addition to social security? Nothing. So why propose this when social security is already there and supplemental plans are already out there available to anyone? Also, perhaps you should realize too that few can afford to save extra as they are living check to check. In a case like that it will only be those that do have extra $ to put into a 401k be it matched or not by the government so if you are saying she'll leave ss alone this is still a bad idea as those that need are forsaken again over those that don't need as they have the extra $ to be invested. In light of these factoids the only ones really benefitting are those running the 401k and those with the extra $ to invest into them to be matched with my tax money and of course Hillary benefits with kickbacks. If it's such a good idea to some of you then get a retirement plan on your own now, but don't hand me this crap in any way that this is wonderful for all as it certainly isn't. Gee, then why would Hillary propose this then? Hmmmmmmmm. Draw some realistic conclusions and quit thinking of how wonderful it'll be that you'll get matching funds to your extra monies invested because it was off of the backs of the poorer majority that extra goes to you.

[Imperialism Inc.]

131. One potential reason is that a government managed plan can have

significantly less overhead. SS has much much smaller administrative costs than private plans. The reasons include no need for advertising, it is easier to keep same plan as you switch jobs, and no profit motive. As Clinton's plan read though I'm not sure that advantage will be collected. It seems she wants to contract out the management to private entities that will surely be including a profit in their bids for the contract. Maybe I am missing something but I'm not seeing a huge gain by having a "public" plan that is actually has all its functions administered by private companies. It still keeps the other two advantages that I mentions, but I am much less enthusiastic about her plan than I was at first. However, there are valid reasons for a public plan if done right.

[JerseygirlCT]

103. What are the implications for Social Security. If this is a side-door

to "privatization", then no, thanks!

[havocmom]

107. Hillary - the other republican

This is the Wall Street Bail Out Plan. Not much security for workers at the end of their working years. Lots of help for Wall Street

[HockeyMom]

116. Choice of a Pension or 401K

That is what I had to choose at work. Which would you choose? I went with the Pension.

This pension is not from a private corporation, but a state pension.

I would rather put my money under a mattress, as my Grandma did right before the crash of 1929, than in a 401K.

[BrightKnight]

125. You can usually invest 401k in gov bonds or gov secured money market

If you are rally paranoid. I know that I have this option. Managing money involves managing risk.

Most people don't have the option to choose a traditional retirement account. Traditional retirement accounts can be and often are raided or mismanaged.

The mattress has risks too. It's not pre tax, and it won't keep pace with inflation.

[sarcasmo]

117. More and more like a Republican every time she speaks.

[humbled_opinion]

123. She is kind of scary like that sometimes I can't really tell the difference

I won't vote for her in the Primary but if she gets the nod then I will and we all must vote her in the General... no matter how close to a rethug we think she is she has a (D) after her name and we can hold her accountable after she is in office.

[sarcasmo]

129. I will have a hard time voting for Her.

Run Al Run.

[ozone_man]

124. It's the same thing as privatizing social security.

It's a corporate handout for Wall Street at the expense of unknowing Americans.

[dailykoff]

128. 1% off the top of every paycheck, straight to Wall Street.

Repulsive proposal and yeah it's basically a way of transferring the Social Security trust fund into the pockets of uber-rich financiers.

[ProudDad]

137. BINGO!!! (n/t)

[kamtsa]

133. 401K is great!

My employer has a 401K plan with a nice matching. I max it at the beginning of each year as fast as I can and I wish I could transfer the rest of my investments to that plan.

The principle and the ROI are tax deferred (great!), I control the investment within the limitation of the plan (mostly no load index funds), I can see my balance at any time in Quicken, and I know that the money is mine.

Having a similar plan easily accessible to everyone is a great idea.

Kamtsa

[dailykoff]

141. Ask former Enron employees how they feel about 401(k)s.

n/t

[kamtsa]

144. I see your point..

Some people are not responsible enough to have access to 401K and they invest all the money in a single stock.

Fine with me, as long as I can use it (responsibly of course, with ample diversification).

Kamtsa

[ProudDad]

136. She's fucking relentless isn't she...

She's going to force everyone to contribute to the FUCKING Stock market and the health insurance mafia...

Is she going to FUCKING CRIMINALIZE ANYONE who doesn't want her fucking 401K like she will people who can't afford "health insurance"?

[HockeyMom]

140. Thanks but No Thanks

No 401K for me.

[surfermaw]

142. Sounds like Bush, isn't that what Edwards and B.O. has been saying

That to me sounds much like a republican, any thing to do away with S.S. she had better watch her steps, didn't she hear what Eisnhower had to say, that any party that messed with S.S, would vanish from the nation.....

[Zhade]

143. Is she fucking kidding? How stupid does she think we are?

This is just as bad as her funnel-taxes-to-insurance-companies-who-are-in-business-to-DENY-claims "healthcare".

Get a fucking clue, Clinton.