I was under the impression that the TSP was immune from "raids" by the Feds similar to what has happened to SS, and that the TSP governors were supposed to prevent that sort of thing. However, it seems that our G Fund money is going to bail the government out of its debt ceiling problem once again (see FedSmith.com article of 17 Feb 06). Anyone interested and knowledgeable on class-action law suits?
-
Welcome to the TSP Talk Forums forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, join our AutoTracker, and access many other special features. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. -
Please read our AutoTracker policy on the IFT deadline and remaining active. Thanks!
-
$ - Premium Service Content (Info) | AutoTracker Monthly Winners | Is Gmail et al, Blocking Our emails?
Find us on: Facebook & X | Posting Copyrighted Material
-
-
Join the TSP Talk AutoTracker: How to Get Started | Login | Main AutoTracker Page
-
The Forum works well on MOBILE devices without an app: Just go to: https://forum.tsptalk.com ...
Or you can now use TapaTalk again!
Government "Loan"
- Thread starter geelmore
- Start date
have cake and eat it too
Um, while I won't disagree that raiding the G fund is disingenuous and in a way double dealing, there aren't very many politically acceptable ways to deal with the problem.
The best way is to deal with such things is for Washington to PAY AS THEY GO. And that means to either raise taxes or to cut spending. Nobody is willing to take that kind of medicine because most Americans want something for nothing. That is the illusion we are living under at the present.
But in some ways it make sense to raid pension funds to pay for goods and services: don't corporate raiders use such tactics when it comes to hostile takeovers? Of course they do! In fact a well funded pension fund is one reason why hostile takeovers are attempted in the first place.
Many pension funds in the private sector, however, are underfunded.
Gee, wouldn't it be awful is our TSP accounts were some day confiscated to pay some small portion of the national debt? Or if Uncle Sam allowed TSP itself to be taken over/bought out or managed by some foreign concern in which we owe hundreds of billions of dollars?
Maybe that's a bit of a stretch, but crazier things have happened in life, no?
Um, while I won't disagree that raiding the G fund is disingenuous and in a way double dealing, there aren't very many politically acceptable ways to deal with the problem.
The best way is to deal with such things is for Washington to PAY AS THEY GO. And that means to either raise taxes or to cut spending. Nobody is willing to take that kind of medicine because most Americans want something for nothing. That is the illusion we are living under at the present.
But in some ways it make sense to raid pension funds to pay for goods and services: don't corporate raiders use such tactics when it comes to hostile takeovers? Of course they do! In fact a well funded pension fund is one reason why hostile takeovers are attempted in the first place.
Many pension funds in the private sector, however, are underfunded.
Gee, wouldn't it be awful is our TSP accounts were some day confiscated to pay some small portion of the national debt? Or if Uncle Sam allowed TSP itself to be taken over/bought out or managed by some foreign concern in which we owe hundreds of billions of dollars?
Maybe that's a bit of a stretch, but crazier things have happened in life, no?
Mike
Active member
The government can do whatever it wants as long as nobody scrutinizes its actions / holds it accountable.
The Constitution doesn't matter if most people don't even know their rights guaranteed by it (see: study that showed most don't know their 1st amendment rights). Even if they did, it would only matter if people were willing to fight to defend those rights.
Apathy rules the day at the present time, so nothing really would surprise me much - be it confiscation or some other disgusting approach.
The Constitution doesn't matter if most people don't even know their rights guaranteed by it (see: study that showed most don't know their 1st amendment rights). Even if they did, it would only matter if people were willing to fight to defend those rights.
Apathy rules the day at the present time, so nothing really would surprise me much - be it confiscation or some other disgusting approach.
Similar threads
- Article
