InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Zeev Hed

02/09/03 10:48 AM

#4239 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

This is a deleted post from the non politics thread by Seneca, please keep the politics here:

For those misguided fools who call for the destruction of the United Nations:

To isolate: "In medicine, to place a patient with a contagious disease apart from others to prevent the
spread of infection."

Your sorry plight is that you don't even realize you're contagion.

I know your type. Armchair Generals getting their rocks off as they raise their fists for those
phosporescent bursts of shot and shell over Baghdag.

As Georgie said last Thursday, "The game is over."

The Pentagon calls for the strike in early March. We should finish them off in a week or two. But My
God how long will the Ides last in rebuilding and reshaping the social structure of that stricken country?
icon url

mainehiker

02/09/03 10:54 AM

#4240 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

Hi Zeev....thanks..the reason i mentioned you re:
the politics..i didnt realize I WAS ON the politics thread!
hadnt had that cup of coffee yet!
Yes, you summed up the dividend issue well...and "knee jerk reactions" (mostly wrong imho) seems synonomous with the current admin.
MH

icon url

GT

02/09/03 11:18 AM

#4242 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

Bush Proposes Overhaul Of Retirement Accounts

A WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE News Roundup

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration proposed sweeping changes Friday (1/31/2003) in tax-advantaged retirement-savings accounts, such as greatly expanding the traditional Roth IRA, eliminating income caps and boosting contribution limits.

The White House is proposing to create two new tax-deferred savings accounts that don't offer tax deductions for contributions, but will allow the funds to grow tax-free and be withdrawn without taxes.

The changes, which require congressional approval, would mean more people would effectively forgo their upfront deductions and pay more in tax in the short run, analysts have said. The government would thus collect more tax upfront, but potentially much less in the years to come -- say, 10 to 20 years from now -- on the appreciated savings.

President Bush's fiscal year 2004 budget will contain a plan to create "lifetime-savings accounts," which can be used for any type of savings, and "retirement-savings accounts," from which money can be withdrawn after a taxpayer reaches the age of 58. People can withdraw money tax-free at any time from the lifetime-savings accounts. Taxpayers will be able to convert existing IRAs into these new accounts.

"No longer will individuals have to worry about the confusing alphabet soup of six different savings accounts," Pam Olson, assistant Treasury Secretary for tax policy, said in a prepared statement.

"The two simple accounts will have one powerful goal -- making saving for everyday life and retirement security easier and more attractive," she said.

Taxpayers can contribute up to $7,500 to each account, for a maximum of $15,000 a year. The $7,500 limit will be indexed for inflation.

The proposed new retirement account has no income limit, unlike the current Roth accounts, which are restricted to married couples with incomes up to $160,000 and singles with up to $110,000. Taxpayers won't get a tax deduction for contributing to either the lifetime-savings or retirement-savings accounts.

The $7,500 contribution limit for the new accounts is higher than the current cap of $3,000 for a Roth IRA or $3,500 for people age 50 and older.

The lifetime-savings accounts are designed to simplify the current tax-deferred savings arrangements. Taxpayers won't need to anticipate future qualified expenses and allocate savings among tax-preferred accounts, unlike the current education-savings and medical-savings accounts, the Treasury Department said.

"Taxpayers won't be required to document qualified expenses, financial institutions will not need to explain complicated rules to participants and the government will not need to verify the qualifying expenses," the Treasury said.

In addition, the Bush administration is weighing consolidation of a range of plans, such as 401(k)s, that have complex and varying provisions. It also is considering changes to pension rules to encourage more companies to offer them. Among other things, the changes could ease so-called top-heavy rules that limit the amounts executives can give themselves. That could encourage more company owners to undertake the expense of setting up plans.



icon url

AndrewL

02/09/03 1:27 PM

#4253 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

Zeev,
I agree vis a vis the "knee-jerk" reactions of this administration; unfortunately this seems to be the m.o. of the conservative Republican faction. Instead of looking ahead to the next generation, or even to the next decade, they are focussed in the moment, regardless of future ramifications: get everything you can get NOW. Level that forest now, to make building supplies; drain all the petroleum products from the earth-who cares about developing"alternative energy" sources--give us that oil now; dump those corporate toxins into that river cause its cheaper and easier than taking other measures; give everyone hefty tax cuts now (we'll figure out how to pay for stuff...later); let's play Rambo and go into foreign countries where there are perceived threats to our freedom and drop bombs, regardless of world consensus--because we can.
Somehow, I don't think this is the kind of thinking that made us the great nation we are today. I think there is a great deal of arrogance and small-mindedness in our country today and an assumption that it is our god-given right to be dictating to the rest of the free world. Patriotism is all well and good, but it becomes something else when we beat our neighbors about the head and shoulders with our flag.
Great leadership and vision are what got us here; our current chief executive possesses neither quality. He is a narrow-minded, beady-eyed man who got where he is by convincing "average Americans" that he was just like them and hence could be trusted. I don't know about you, but I don't want an average American leading my country. GW is nothing more than an empty suit with a wisp of an intellect and a B-actor's gift for mugging various looks of concern, compassion and strength.

Ah, I feel much better now...
Disclaimer: While I typically vote democratic, I do not consider myself a "knee-jerk" liberal, nor do I form opinions based solely along party lines.

AndrewL
icon url

mlsoft

02/09/03 5:22 PM

#4286 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

Zeev...

We will continue to disagree about foreign policy, but as you know, I am in full agreement with your stance on the dividend tax elimination. That is a bad proposal, and I doubt it will ever get enacted into law.

mlsoft
icon url

mike_m

02/10/03 9:35 AM

#4437 RE: Zeev Hed #4238

Zeev,

Not all retirees have dividend paying equities in their IRA's.

The tax on dividends is a double taxation in that the corporation already pays tax on that dividend. It's regressive and has always been an economic drain.

You have eloquently, if not dramatically, made your case. However, I believe the impact is significantly overstated. In any event, relax, the tax and spend Congress will return to full throttle once the economy finds traction and will find new ways to extract money from the rich and the wannabe's.<g>

I think I'll run for Congress.<vbg>