Is Jonathan Gruber — the MIT economist who seemingly dropped out of public view after he was caught on camera bragging about how he and other Obamacare architects misled the American public — now advising the Department of Labor?

No evidence indicates that he is, but the authors of DOL’s sweeping new seven-part group of regulations that would sharply curtail choices of assets and investment strategies in 401(k)s, IRAs, and other savings plans appear to share Gruber’s mindset on the “stupidity of the American voter” (a revelation that Rich Lowry aptly described as “an unvarnished look into the progressive mind, which . . . favors indirect taxes and impositions on the American public so their costs can be hidden, and has a dim view of the average American”).

Now President Obama and Secretary of Labor Tom Perez are advancing a new regulatory and hidden-tax scheme while claiming to protect average Americans’ retirement savings from unscrupulous financial professionals. The proposed “fiduciary rule” would restrict the investment choices of holders of 401(k)s, IRAs, health savings accounts, and Coverdell education accounts.

In a speech to AARP, Obama proclaimed:

If you are working hard, if you’re putting away money, if you’re sacrificing that new car or that vacation so that you can build a nest egg for later, you should have the peace of mind of knowing that the advice you’re getting for investing those dollars is sound, that your investments are protected.

Similarly, a DOL “fact sheet” describes the rule as “protecting investors from backdoor payments and hidden fees in retirement investment advice.” The sinister-sounding “backdoor payments” actually refers to a longstanding practice of compensation to brokers from many mutual funds and annuities. This practice is disclosed to investors and enables brokers to charge them less because of the additional compensation that brokers receive.

Yet upon further reading, the DOL rule seems premised on the Gruberite notion that American investors need protection from their own stupidity. According to page 4 of the rule:

[I]ndividual retirement investors have much greater responsibility for directing their own investments, but they seldom have the training or specialized expertise necessary to prudently manage retirement assets on their own.

Therefore, they “need guidance on how to manage their savings to achieve a secure retirement.”

Can’t savers who feel they need this guidance seek it out from a variety of investment professionals under a system with strong disclosure and anti-fraud rules? Absolutely not, says the Obama administration.

read more:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417525/obamacare-your-ira-joh...

Views: 288

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

MARXISTS NEVER RUN OUT OF SCHEMES TO FLEECE THE PEOPLE . THEY WONT BE HAPPY UNTIL THEY HAVE STOLEN EVERYTHING WE OWN .

"You didn't make that money-- the government did!"  Obama and his trolls are looking at every pile of money they can get their hands on, drive the country into overwhelming debt, seal saving accounts from those who have worked and managed their money, yap that's the Obama way.

What a low down gangster crook!!!!

he isn't really needed; he uses an [MIT?] computer modelling software that is specifically flawed.  garbage in, garbage out... [he] looks at the output of fatally improper input - disguises it as thought pattern and spews the exact same crap that was planned to be the output from onset - and, here we are... so to speak.  So did a lot of Federal funding/grant monies go into the development of the software to back the necessity of outcome?  Becoming like an old Betty Davis Movie married to (starting with): 2010, A Space Odyssey... Whatever Happened to Hal?

Don't know for sure but when I looked at the Obamacare stats relied on to produce the Obamacare catastrophe, appears so  -  on purpose or just stupid, is the question?

Yet upon further reading, the DOL rule seems premised on the Gruberite notion that American investors need protection from their own stupidity. According to page 4 of the rule:

[I]ndividual retirement investors have much greater responsibility for directing their own investments, but they seldom have the training or specialized expertise necessary to prudently manage retirement assets on their own.

Therefore, they “need guidance on how to manage their savings to achieve a secure retirement.”

Hay, I for one [1] am Glad the U. B. Government is looking out for me & my retirement money - - - - NOT!!!!

The Washington schemers never stop. Once they've forced everyone into one of the seven chosen investment schemes, they can use the government controls congress gave them to bankrupt those schemes, then save everyone with government handouts.

Obama wants all Americans to have the same everything  doing this in his mind its ok to steal what is not his and make it his.  Tyranny it is worse than that.  He is pure evil and his thirst for power and money is one thing he will never be able to satisfy.  He needs to be impeached.  NOW.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Goodbye 2020: Clinton Ordered By Federal Judge To Submit To Questioning

(TeaParty.org) – Just when Hillary Clinton began hinting that she’s ready to run again in 2020, she has been ordered by a federal judge to submit to questioning about the use of her private email server to convey classified documents during her time as Secretary of State.

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan made the order as part of a lawsuit from conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.

“Court rules late today Hillary Clinton must answer more email questions — including key q’s about the setting up of her email system,” wrote Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a tweet following the ruling.

Judicial Watch 🔎 @JudicialWatch

BREAKING: Judicial Watch announced today that, following JW's court battle, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that Hillary Clinton must answer – under oath – two additional questions on her controversial email system within 30 days.

Judicial Watch: Federal Court Ordered Hillary Clinton to Answer Additional Email Questions Under...

 (Washington, DC) –Judicial Watch announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that within 30 days Hillary Clinton must answer under oath two additional questions about her...

judicialwatch.org
Tom Fitton  @TomFitton

Breaking: Court rules late today Hillary Clinton must answer more email questions -- including key q's about the setting up of her email system. Court denied our request to unseal vid depositions of Clinton aides. Great work by Michael Bekesha!

As a statement from Judicial Watch explains, the ruling is the latest development in the group’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which they began to discover why former deputy chief of staff to Mrs. Clinton, Huma Abedin, was allowed to work at the State Department while also engaged in “outside employment.”

Clinton now has 30 days to answer two key questions from a list of 25 questions composed by Judicial Watch.

The questions the judge selected are:

1) “Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.”

During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails “were in the State’s system” and “if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so.” Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.

This new development is huge because it means that the two critical scandals from Clinton’s time in the State Department, her private email server and the Benghazi attacks, are facing fresh scrutiny in both the legal system and the court of public opinion.

And while Clinton likely had little chance of any run in 2020, this makes it even less likely she will stand even a shred of a chance.

We’ve have got to hope and pray that at long last, this leads to the long overdue criminal charges we’ve all been waiting to see.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service