Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Ben on February 22, 2017, 06:07:22 PM
-
This was a new one on me. If I understand the article, though it is not likely, the gov can "borrow" money from the G Fund. If it's anything like "borrowing" from Social Security, this worries me a bit. I'm only 10% G fund at the moment, but I always looked at that fund as the fallback emergency fund, where I would keep money with no fear of losing it.
I was actually thinking of pulling some dough out of C and S because of how well they've done in the last few months and storing it in G until the next really big market dip. Now I'm thinking of maybe putting more of it into the Lifecycle income fund or the F fund (even though the bonds may lose short term value, "F" has been pretty good in the ten year average).
http://federalnewsradio.com/commentary/2017/02/really-tsp-account/
-
I store my money in coffee cans. It would not surprise me to find out that the feds are eyeballing the G Fund. [tinfoil]
-
I store my money in coffee cans. It would not surprise me to find out that the feds are eyeballing the G Fund. [tinfoil]
Heh. Sometimes I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to hide enough dough in a coffee can to buy a Cabelas mail order cabin and set it up on an acre in BFE. Just for in case. :laugh:
-
...
I think that there's a fundamental disconnect here. The article itself is a scare tactic, I believe.
For example, one thing I noted is that nowhere did it mention what fund class the G fund is.
For example, it tried to make the G fund some sort of "conspiracy" because it's not managed by blackrock. Why isn't it? Why should Blackrock get involved?
Base Funds:
G: Government securities, specially issued to the TSP.
F: Government, corporate, and mortgage backed bonds
C: Stocks of large and medium sized US companies
S: Stocks of small to medium sized US companies(not in C)
I: International stocks of more than 20 developed countries.
In short, it's not that the government can "borrow" money from the G fund. If your funds are in the G fund, you already lent them to the government! The G fund is basically US Savings bonds.
So yeah, the government could, theoretically, say that it's not going to pay back your money, either for right now or forever(you lose your investment), but considering that the government can always pay you back simply by inflating the money supply a bit, I doubt they're going to do that. Do you want to piss off all your federal employees, including quite a chunk of the military?
Otherwise, well, them borrowing your G fund money is a bit like renting your truck to a guy, then the guy going 'I'm borrowing your truck!' while still paying the rental charge.
-
...
I think that there's a fundamental disconnect here. The article itself is a scare tactic, I believe.
I definitely read it in the sense that it was something of a scare tactic. Basically there is nothing that would legally prevent them from doing so, but as you said, it would not be smart from the "pissing people off" POV. Highly unlikely, but possible. I'd be a lot more scared if Bernie Sanders were President. :laugh:
Then again, there's the talk of gov getting handsy with 401K money, plus what they're actually doing regarding basically forced distribution and taxing of inherited Roth IRAs, so you never know. [tinfoil]
-
Heh. Sometimes I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to hide enough dough in a coffee can to buy a Cabelas mail order cabin and set it up on an acre in BFE. Just for in case. :laugh:
https://www.amazon.com/One-Acre-Security-Without-Ruining/dp/157223394X
I've got a copy on my bookshelf, right next to this.......
https://www.amazon.com/Mortgage-Free-Innovative-Strategies-Debt-Free/dp/1603580654
-
Then again, there's the talk of gov getting handsy with 401K money, plus what they're actually doing regarding basically forced distribution and taxing of inherited Roth IRAs, so you never know. [tinfoil]
Republicans won't touch TSP money because it's the individual's money.
Democrats won't touch TSP money because a good chunk of their core supporters all have money in there.
That's not to say that the program can't be changed to the detriment of its investors, just that it's unlikely.
And when we talk about things like the government possibly confiscating 401k money, I think that we're back to that while the government theoretically could, it amounts to a drastically bad idea.
-
Not that we've ever seen .gov double down on and run with bad ideas before.
Federalizing 401Ks is something I really could see the current crop of leftist loonies trying to pull off. Just demonize people with 401K accounts as the evil rich and most of their brain dead followers will riot in the streets for it.
-
For those of you that have TSP accounts that aren't military, were you getting anything matched.
Asking because if I recall correctly are money is supposed to be matched but was one of those unfunded mandates that has never happened.
-
My agency (VA) works like this:
FERS employees receive agency automatic and matching contributions. TSP savings are a very important part of the retirement package for FERS employees. FERS employees are strongly encouraged to contribute to the TSP!
Agency Automatic (1%) Contributions - an amount your agency contributes to your TSP account that is equal to 1% of your gross basic pay. Your agency makes this contribution to your Traditional TSP account even if you do not contribute your own money to your TSP account.
Matching Contributions - when you contribute your own funds to your TSP account (Traditional, Roth, or a combination of both) you will also receive matching contributions from your agency. Matching contributions apply to the first 5% of pay that you contribute each pay period. Matching contributions are made to your Traditional TSP account (even if you contribute to only the Roth TSP) and are matched dollar for dollar on the first 3% of pay you contribute, then $.50 on the dollar for contributions between 3% and 5%. In order to take full advantage of the agency automatic 1% and matching contributions, employees and newly hired employees (who were automatically enrolled to contribute 3%) need to be contributing at least 5%.
I know the .mil has never gotten the matching like they have been touting for decades.
bob
-
My agency (VA) works like this:
bob
Yup, that's standard across civilian fed agencies AFAIK. Not sure if LE or Air Traffic folks have any different deals, like they do with retirement.
-
For those of you that have TSP accounts that aren't military, were you getting anything matched.
Asking because if I recall correctly are money is supposed to be matched but was one of those unfunded mandates that has never happened.
DoD civilians get matching. Mil folks do not. They're always quick to point out the "20 or nothing" retirement thing as a good thing, when only 17% of people who enter the military actually serve 20 years. The rest do get GI bill or vet benefits if applicable. But nothing for retirement. It's been a bad idea and everyone has said so for 40 or 50 years. Still nothing done because the middle managers don't want their retirement screwed up.
...
I think that there's a fundamental disconnect here. The article itself is a scare tactic, I believe.
For example, one thing I noted is that nowhere did it mention what fund class the G fund is.
For example, it tried to make the G fund some sort of "conspiracy" because it's not managed by blackrock. Why isn't it? Why should Blackrock get involved?
Base Funds:
G: Government securities, specially issued to the TSP.
F: Government, corporate, and mortgage backed bonds
C: Stocks of large and medium sized US companies
S: Stocks of small to medium sized US companies(not in C)
I: International stocks of more than 20 developed countries.
In short, it's not that the government can "borrow" money from the G fund. If your funds are in the G fund, you already lent them to the government! The G fund is basically US Savings bonds.
So yeah, the government could, theoretically, say that it's not going to pay back your money, either for right now or forever(you lose your investment), but considering that the government can always pay you back simply by inflating the money supply a bit, I doubt they're going to do that. Do you want to piss off all your federal employees, including quite a chunk of the military?
Otherwise, well, them borrowing your G fund money is a bit like renting your truck to a guy, then the guy going 'I'm borrowing your truck!' while still paying the rental charge.
Firethorn is correct. Article is a hit piece, or the author is a complete moron. If you're investing in government bonds, by definition, you are directly giving that money to the government to spend. They're just giving you a promise to repay. And they probably will. They'd inflate the money supply long before defaulting.