Federal Retirement Thrift Invesment Board

[James48843]

Monthly meeting minutes of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board are posted every month. Here you can get data on how much is in each fund, month by month, in total. And also information about future changes that are discussed, and what the expenses are, etc.

Monthly meeting minutes are posted on the electronic reading room. If you are a techy geek, or a detail person, you might want to check it out. Heck, if you are a TSP holder, you might want to check it out.

November 2006 minutes were just posted this week at:
http://www.frtib.gov/FOIA/minutes-board-member-meetings_2006Nov.pdf

They usually post the montly meeting minutes a month and a half or so after the meetings.

You can go to the electronic reading room link from the http://www.frtib.gov website, then click on "electronic reading room", and look at the monthly minutes each month.

Here is a direct link to the electronic reading room:

http://www.frtib.gov/FOIA/index.html

 

[ATCJeff]

One reason for the delay could be that the previous monthly minutes have to be approve by the Board at the next meeting.

Edit: Just looked at the minutes and what I said above is correct.

 

[James48843]

The recent TSP Survey data is finally out.

If you like reading what people say about TSP, then spend some time going through this:

http://www.frtib.gov/FOIA/2006-TSP-Survey-Results.pdf

The report is 55 pages long, but contains some great hard data on what people's expectations are about the TSP.

Enjoy the read!

 

[Spaf]

WOW!
The top reason for NOT participating in TSP, of all, 21.3%, indicated that they "Don't have enough money"!

 

[Show-me]

Perception and fact are defiantly two completely different things.

 

[Birchtree]

It never hurts to get a second part-time job to earn a little more money. It all depends on the individual's degree of initiative. Some have a greater desire to succeed and some prefer to be looked after.

 

[Wrngway]

WOW!
The top reason for NOT participating in TSP, of all, 21.3%, indicated that they "Don't have enough money"!

Ironically, I'm using TSP and visit here now because...I don't have enough money!

 

[Birchtree]

Investing correctly is a part-time job in itself - but working for yourself.

 

[mailmanusa]

Investing correctly is a part-time job in itself - but working for yourself.

You got that right. The good part is its a fun job. One that I enjoy.

 

[James48843]

The December meeting minutes of the Board have now been posted- take a look and see that costs of trading in the "I" are higher; that the Navy has the highest active duty participation rate of the armed services;
and that the "L" fund being named to become the default fund is again being discussed as the priority for legislation in 2007 by the Board.

Personally, I couldn't agree more. "L", then age appropriate, is much better for employees over the long haul than the "G" fund, if the employee hasn't taken the time to get invovled in his/her own retirement planning.

Here is the link to the Board minutes, along with several great data subsets to examine for yourself.

http://www.frtib.gov/FOIA/minutes-board-member-meetings_2006Dec.pdf

 

[SkyPilot]

The "L" fund might be a better default option, but only when the market is making gains.

I believe this is a further effort to justify the cost and implementation of L funds (not really funds themselves, but blends of the funds already available).

IMO, another instance of Big Brother "knowing" what is best.

However, the markets tend to make gains overtime, so it will probably work out okay...

 

[qibovin]

It never hurts to get a second part-time job to earn a little more money. It all depends on the individual's degree of initiative. Some have a greater desire to succeed and some prefer to be looked after.

It could if you consider the value of your TIME. Most "2nd" jobs make less than (often MUCH less than) the main job. It's not like your "second" employer is going to pay you overtime. Conversely, a business on the side can provide additional income, tax benefits, and may, particularly with the internet and other technologies available today, allow for better TIME flexibility, and may be something that could involve family and or friends so that this doesn't become more time away.

Personally, I couldn't agree more. "L", then age appropriate, is much better for employees over the long haul than the "G" fund, if the employee hasn't taken the time to get invovled in his/her own retirement planning.

I believe you are right about better over the long term, but 2 points:
1. If you don't have the sense to bother with WHERE your money is being invested, you don't deserve the gains.
2. "Better" or not, the "default" should be to the NO RISK option. People should not be involuntarily (or at least, unknowingly) subjected to risk if it is avoidable.

 

[FundSurfer]

The "L" fund might be a better default option, but only when the market is making gains.

Here is why "L" funds being the default is better. I had a secretary that worked for me who had all her TSP money in the G-fund. She at first did not know any better and just used G because it was the default. Later she was too scared to be responcible for her own money decisions and rather than make a decision to move her money into another fund, she left it alone. I think that if there had been a L-fund setup as "automatically" managed based on your intended retirement date, people like her would feel more comfortable with being in the L fund, especially since it is "managed" for you.

(The secretary I'm talking about went into an L fund in November after being in the G-fund for the first 12 years of her career.)

I'm always surprised by people who have just set up there TSP account and then never given it a second thought. I think that actually these type folks are the majority.

 

[SkyPilot]

"Better" or not, the "default" should be to the NO RISK option. People should not be involuntarily (or at least, unknowingly) subjected to risk if it is avoidable.

What he said...

 

[FUTURESTRADER]

Maybe they'll hedge, 50% L/50%G

 

[qibovin]

I had a secretary...

...at first did not know any better...

...too scared to be responcible for her own money decisions...

I think these are stages that we all go through--and need to go through--as we learn to manage our finances. Some go through them faster than others.

...Later...went into an L fund ("managed" for [her]).

This is awesome! I never said the L-funds were bad, only that they shouldn't be the default.

Besides, if they were the default "only when the market is making gains," who's going to decide that? When the market is going down, do you pull everyone out of the L funds and back into the G fund? How often do you do this?

On another note, how do you decide which L fund? Just because someone's birthday suggests they should or could retire in 20 years, perhaps they're shooting for closer to 10 or 30.

I think that actually these type folks are the majority.

I will agree with you here. I think the statistics confirm it, but hopefully folks like Tom and this website are helping to reach some of them and educate, and impacting this statistic for the better.

Thanks for the support, SkyPilot.

 

[SkyPilot]

I never said the L-funds were bad, only that they shouldn't be the default.

Exactly

 

[FundSurfer]

I guess I have a dimmer view of my fellow government employee. Some of them are just plain stupid. Most of the new employees will have 20+ years till retirement. They have zero business being in the G-fund.

I understand that you guys don't think the default should be risk. I'm all for giving everyone of them a brochure that tells them what they are invested in, explains the risk and historical perspective and gives them the option to change themselves to whatever they prefer. They should get this option and a bubble in form in case they want to switch on DAY ONE on the job. They are still in complete control of their own destiny.

If they don't change, the default should be an "L" fund. Why? Because too many of them are stupid. Too many of them will forget about TSP. Too many of them will just take whatever the default is.

The ONLY reason my former secretary changed is because I and several of her office mates have been talking to her for years.

 

[Spaf]

When TSP started in 86.... Everyone was with CSRS. FERS only applied to very few. TSP grew from the G-fund to what it is now. As it branched out into stock funds there should have been participant meetings to explain how to manage and invest wisely. The managers were in CSRS, that was where the ball was fumbled. So now some folks in FERS mishandle their investments. Heck they have been treated like mushrooms. How many folks have been to a TSP investment seminar? How many folks stumbled on to this web site and said Wow!.......:nuts:

PS: I use to e-mail our union about this problem. Our stewart finally got a fix in 2006. We had a seminar.

 

[Show-me]

Re: Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board

In my aging, I am beginning to believe that the L fund is a better default than the Gee for "new" employees with 20 plus years until MRA. I also believe that most federal employees don't care or are not aware of how their retirement works. My agency gave no instruction on how our retirement is structure. Nothing..............ever............ ! Some do not know about the matching funds. Some think their pension will completely take care of them at retirement. After all we are civil servants and will have a big fat retirement. No need for any other funds. Yea right! I would speculate that the agencies do not want "the masses" to know how they got screwed by going to FERS and do not want to broach the subject because you will have a mix of CSRS and FERS people in the same room. Also they do not want to spent man hours on it.

Best thing we can do is talk to our co-workers and get them interested. I nail the "newbies" as quickly as possible to let them know. Tell them they can set up contributions to TSP immediately even thought they will not get matching funds right away. That way they don't "forget".

I spoke to one co-worker last week who nailed me for talking to her husband about MAXING out the IRS limit and he was hounding her about bumping up her contribution. The short story is she is very close to MRA and thinks her "pension" will be all she needs. She has no idea about the reduced Social Security and how little her pension will be.

Back to the L funds. Long term the L's should do well for folks who do nothing.