Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by MrDODGE, Nov 5, 2008.

  1. clacy


    I seriously doubt that Barack would seriously consider doing this. It would almost be political suicide, for the Democratic party, in my opinion.

    If it happens, I will seriously consider leaving this country. Raising taxes, is one thing. That is something that can be reversed by electing different politicians. If they start to "confiscate" private property, then I would say that is not just socialistic, but communistic.
  2. Rocko1


    That's never stopped any past presidents from making awful decisions, how'd you think America got to where it is today?
  3. The fact that people are actually getting congressional time to talk about confiscating personal property in the name of "protecting the citizens from themselves" scares the HELL out of me.

    Love how the commies have to twist the truth to make a point because their arguments never hold up water on their own.

    I guess in some ways I should be happy that there are people this stupid or I wouldn't be able to make a living being the counter party to their trades but there is a limit to how much these people should be able to leave the house without adult supervision.

    Seriously, we need to start teaching economics in school so we don't kill the growth engine due to so many not understanding what is being done.

    For those that don't understand why we have so much wealth and so many rich people in the USA, the free market rewards the very best with very much and as a result people strive to be better. ANYTHING else in terms of market control that we know of creates waste, inefficiencies, and lower wealth for ALL

    Frustrated in Wisconsin

  4. "A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you've got"...
  5. Confiscate our property to protect us from OURSELVES?

    Then, turn it over to the SS Administration? Everyone knows that Congress STOLE the SS reserve trust fund monies, right? (They claim they didn't "steal" it... just borrowed. Of course, they never intend to repay except with print-money inflation.)
  6. Why do news stories like this hit the day after instead a month ago or a week ago.

    Not that the "give me free gas and a house payment" would consider this a bad thing but maybe, just maybe a worker or two would think that they dont want to work so someone else just as capable will sit home and collect a govt check off of their labor
  7. Vista


    Why would you doubt. This is the party that wants to start up the Death Tax again. After your parents have worked a lifetime and payed taxes on their money once already, the Democrats want to take over 50% of your parents money when they die. That will never make sense to me no matter how someone trys to BS it.
  8. Vista


    It's been discussed for awhile on Libertarian talk radio. Clinton was actually considering taking 15% of 401(k)'s at one time.

    Just wait, the Obama train hasn't even left the station yet. :D
  9. Political Suicide ??? He's locked in until 2012. Read closely Obama's words in relation to the (forced) Redistribution of assets:


    Should Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, congressional Democrats might have stronger support for their “spreading the wealth” agenda. On Oct. 27, the American Thinker posted a video of an interview with Obama on public radio station WBEZ-FM from 2001.

    In the interview, Obama said, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” The Constitution says only what “the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,” and Obama added that the Warren Court wasn’t that radical.

    Although in 2001 Obama said he was not “optimistic about bringing major redistributive change through the courts,” as president, he would likely have the opportunity to appoint one or more Supreme Court justices.

    “The real tragedy of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused that I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change,” Obama said.

    Karen McMahan is a contributing editor of Carolina Journal.


    (1&2) He knows he can't win redistribution of wealth and economic justice through the courts
    (3) He does know he can put together a coalition of powers ... to bring on the redistributive change .... the House of Representatives


    He is not "optimistic" about "redistributive change"????? Meaning he would do it in a heartbeat if he had a chance! Words count right?

    Bottom line ... his culture is solidly steeped through and through with Marxist Philosophy to the point that he calmly believes it to be a norm just as we believe individualism and capitalism to be the norm.

    Instead of innately dismissing this ... he is openly in Marx-speak showing you where we are going.

    This is far worse than I thought.

    I rue the day that ever put a nickle in my 401k and IRA.

    So ... with the prospect of being to forced to turn over our retirement accounts to be traded by the likes that ran Freddie and Fannie ... how many of you folks are contributing to your tax deferred accounts this year?

    One confiscation by the govt and where does that leave capital formation going forward?
    #10     Nov 6, 2008