Inspirational messages

[James48843]

I have been watching the comments over at the on-line petition against TSP TRADE LIMITS. (http://tspshareholder.org)

Some of the comments are real inspiring. I thought I would share them in this thread.

 

[James48843]

Dec 29, 2007, SAMUEL E. RIVERA , Texas
PLEASE DO NOT RESTRICT OUR TSP ACCOUNTS TO ANY NUMBER OF SHARE TRADES. WHEN THE MARKETS ARE NOT STABLE, WE HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES DUE TO GOVT, OVERSEAS MARKETS, OIL, MILITARY CAMPAIGNS AND THE FUNDING OF, THESE ARE JUST SOME INDICATORS I BASE MY MOVES, AND TRY AND SALVAGE WHAT IS LOST OR MAINTAINED BY MY CURRENT UPDATES OF WHAT IS GOING ON PRIOR TO MY RETIREMENT.

# 2,652:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , Idaho

# 2,651: The Thrift Board is crazy to propose such sweeping changes to the TSP regulations without first conducting an INDEPENDENT AUDIT to determine if these changes are really necessary and to review all options. They are nuts.

# 2,650:
Dec 28, 2007, Corey Ackerman , Virginia
I am opposed to this action by the Thrift Savings Board because it will severely restrict my ability to dollar cost average, which I currently do on a regular basis to reduce my risk of investing in the TSP stock funds. This is a terrible idea and it will hurt many federal employees. Shame on the Thrift Board for treating us like this!

# 2,649:
Dec 28, 2007, Scott Gunville , Massachusetts

# 2,647:
Dec 28, 2007, Carol Reyes , California
I move my funds and sometimes it is only once in a while and sometimes more often. I do not think we should be penalized for moving our own money. If I take an interest in the stock market and move my money to maximize my earnings why should I pay?

# 2,646:
Dec 28, 2007, Tim Torri , Pennsylvania
The regulation changes to the unlimited interfund transfer policy are simply reckless and should be confronted by all 3.8 million participants as a non-solution. I am absolutely apposed to relinquishing any control over my retirement account as no one cares more about increasing and preserving my money than me. Share the true administrative costs associated with interfund transfers and institute trading fees if necessary.

# 2,645:
Dec 28, 2007, Steve Barnes , Oklahoma
Everything about this rushed initiative appears to be questionable. The timing, limited exposure, inadequate information, real intent, ultmate purpose, actual costs, other options, etc. Many of us waited years for the current system to be put in place. It was determined to be the right way to proceed and the system was funded and changed. Now you want to change it again virtually over night with no documented justification. Please do not make this change. If a change must be implemented, lets consider other alternatives and be open with everyone involved so the best decision can be made.

# 2,644:
Dec 28, 2007, Paul Jones , Massachusetts

# 2,643:
Dec 28, 2007, Michael Dunn , Washington
I'm retired with over 36 years of federal service,including spending months at a time underwater on a fleet ballistic submarine. My TSP fund should be able to be controlled by me, not by some abitrary limit set by the TSP. Please let us, who earned the right, to control our TSP funds without limits on transfers. Thank you, Michael Dunn

# 2,642:
Dec 28, 2007, J Herrero , Puerto Rico
Only Communists call trading excessive! Where is Reagan when you need him?

# 2,641:
Dec 28, 2007, Kwo Liang Lee , California
It's my choice to manage my own money at will

# 2,640:
Dec 28, 2007, Joseph Duvall , Louisiana
It's my money, allow me the freedom to manage it.

# 2,639:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , Georgia My Retirement is what Im concerned about, it depends on a ample TSP Fund to meet the same levels as my CCRS friends. Why tie my hands more than they already are. Respectfully, leave the plan alone.

# 2,638:
Dec 28, 2007, Brian Shugart , Texas
I retired in early 2007 and factored my ability to make frequent IFTs to maximize my TSP earnings. I have and can do better than the L-funds,but need to have the flexibility to move my money. The Board is now changing the rules. This rule change will have an adverse impact on my account and may cause me to run out of money sooner than planned. I AM NOT A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE and this rule change impacts me!!!

# 2,637:
Dec 28, 2007, TODD RUPERT , Missouri
TSP administrative fees are the same as any other investment firm, they need to offer the same services as other investment firms. I cannot believe any public investment firm could stay in business if they told their customers they could only move their money twice a month.

# 2,636:
Dec 28, 2007, Patricia Lacap , California
It amounts to deprivation of freedom of choice and of the limited control that we have over our retirement funds. I can't imagine this same limitation being imposed on private sector employees without resulting in mass exodus to other plans. Please reconsider your decision. It's the right thing to do.

# 2,635:
Dec 28, 2007, Christy Swanson , Oklahoma

# 2,634:
Dec 28, 2007, MATHEW KRATKY , Wisconsin
THIS IS UNJUST AND NOT WARRANTED.

# 2,633:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , Nebraska
Thanks for starting this very important site. Participant representation is presently lacking.

# 2,632:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , California

# 2,631:
Dec 28, 2007, John Foley , Louisiana
I want continued unrestricted access to my account but would be willing to accept a small fee ($10) per transaction as a compromise. I am not a day trader but I do make moves, maybe once a week on average, based on market conditions. The board has failed in its duties to protect ALL the SHAREHOLDERS including those who are willing to accept some risk. We spent millions and lost a lawsuit (costing more money) to have this ability and now they want to take it away. The L funds were created for those who want to "set it and forget it".

# 2,630:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , West Virginia
Please do not restrict trading on the TSP. I will seek to put more of my money into another private account that will allow me the flexibility to trade if restrictions are implemented.


# 2,629:
Dec 28, 2007, Gary Schanche , Illinois
TSP account holders should be allowed to move their money into any of the TSP funds just like any of the many regulated IRA and 401K funds available to people in the private sector. If higher "fees" are required to cover thess transactions, then the TSP board should set those fees. The proposal to limit people who actively manage their TSP portfolios to only "snail mail" trading is ridiculous. We are already penalized by having to wait 24 hours for our trade to be executed, unlike the private sector which executes trades immediately. The automatic transaction systems are available and used extensively by the private sector, why can't the TSP do the same?

# 2,628:
Dec 28, 2007, Anonymous , Colorado

# 2,627:
Dec 28, 2007, James Ord , Illinois
The TSP was started so that government employees would share in the risk of funding their individual retirements. The government gave us some tools to help us to manage that risk. Now they want to severely limit the number or trades that can be made. Question: Since the government wants to take away the individual's ability to manage their retirement benefit risk will the government guarantee a minimum return on our investment?

# 2,626:
Dec 28, 2007, Richard LaCasse , New Mexico
In 2007 I tranferred a significant amount of funds from a private IRA into the TSP because it was managed poorly, but the fund managers still got their "service fee" even though they were losing money. It has been my experience that fund managers are only going to care about their clients when it affects their own salaries. Is that what is happening to the TSP? Maybe it's a time for new leadership who is concerned about the clients of the TSP and not their own selfish interests.

 

[James48843]

Here are somemore of today's INSPIRATIONAL MESSAGES from the signers of the on-line petition at http://tspshareholder.org


Take a look at these:

# 2,662:
Dec 29, 2007, Frank Powers , North Carolina
Sorry, but I don't buy the administrative expenses TSP says that a few thousand people who make frequent trades costs. After all, the system is set up to handle this trading electronically, not by manual input. The 12 noon deadline we already have is bad enough given the volatillity of the markets these days. With the devaluation of the dollar which is being manufactured currently we all stand to lose alot of "OUR" money regardless of how we trade. We are limited enough,,,,,,,,,,Leave it alone!!!!!


# 2,661:
Dec 29, 2007, Nancy Della Vecchia , New Jersey
Please do not implement these proposed restrictions-it is not right to penalize everyone for the extremes of a few involved.



# 2,660:
Dec 29, 2007, William Betts , Virginia
When did it become the mandate of the Thrift Savings Board to limit investors accumulation of wealth? Since when is "Administrative Simplicity" more important than TSP investors controlling their hard earned money? The same bureaucratic buffoonery that has made Social Security a bastion of financial security is at work to blow a viable retirement plan back to the stone age. If these restrictions become reality, I hope that we will be given the option of investing our money outside of the TSP. I'm not interested in being told how to invest my money.



# 2,659:
Dec 29, 2007, Emilio Basa , Japan



# 2,658:
Dec 29, 2007, William Frederick , Hawaii
Not only is the limitations on interfund tranfers hurtful and unfair, the time limitations on the current interfund transfer should be changed.



# 2,657:
Dec 29, 2007, Rony boy Doner , California




# 2,656:
Dec 29, 2007, Jim Rony , California
Limit TSP Interfund Tarnsfers is Wrong ! Wrong! Wrong!!!!!



# 2,655:
Dec 29, 2007, Lanys Nash , California
Limit TSP Interfund Transfers is wrong for the shareholders.



# 2,654:
Dec 29, 2007, Anonymous , Germany

 

[James48843]

Fourty-Four signatures added to the petition today.

Have you asked your co-workers to sign? Have you asked your Union rep to sign?

#2,774 Jan 2, 2008, William Amos , Pennsylvania


# 2,773: Jan 2, 2008, Donald Campbell , Florida
In addition to totally disagreeing with ´The Board´s decision to restrict trades, I am also offended at the harsh language in their proposal, as they seem to suggest that forward thinking TSP participants are somehow doing something underhanded or illegal, or taking advantage of the poor, uneducated mass of other TSP participants. It is insulting language and should be noted as such.



# 2,772: Jan 2, 2008, Scott Howell , Iowa
Control of funds distribution/investment, should be up the individual who contributed the funds to the account. Limiting the number trades will reduce my ability to earn and restrict me to the mediocre returns of the general funds/management.



# 2,771:Jan 2, 2008, Greg Blick , Michigan
Obviously Ms. Ray is worried how the impact of 3,000 of the 3.8 million members adversely affect the TSP, perhaps she doesn't realize were talking about .001% of the TSP population. Let's punish the 99.999% for what she believes is the few that abuse(?) the system. NOTHING else in the federal government is this efficient.




# 2,770:Jan 2, 2008, Larry Hilliard , Oregon




# 2,769:Jan 2, 2008, Ronald Rossington , California




# 2,768: Jan 2, 2008, Ronald Schultz , Minnesota
Let us control are own money, we do not want to be stuck once a move has been made and not be able to move it back.



# 2,767: Jan 2, 2008, George Hallman , Nebraska



# 2,766: Jan 2, 2008, Wesley Collins , Virginia
Ms. Ray, CIO of the Thrift Savings Board (TSB) noted in the November '07 TSB minutes that $13.5M had been spent on fees for transfers of the I-Fund for the entire year 2007 (to November). That's just $3.54 per TSP member. So you don't trade regularly - who wouldn't pay 10 times that on an annual basis for the right to make transfers whenever they please? This is a retirement fund. Why does Ms. Ray think people actively managing their money is a bad thing? There are nearly 4 million TSP members, with $235 BILLION in the funds! It's our money - make yourselves heard!



# 2,765: Jan 2, 2008, Bruce Specketer , Florida




# 2,764: Jan 2, 2008, Patricia Sechler , Idaho
Shareholders should have control of their own accounts and should be able to move the money to where it would benefit the individual.



# 2,763: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Illinois



# 2,762: Jan 2, 2008, Eric Pragnell , Washington
When Congress set up the TSP system years ago, it not their intention for the TSP administration to impose limitations like this. Its our retirement, our future, my life. Don't limit me.



# 2,761: Jan 2, 2008, David Liles , Oklahoma
Duu, I have been left in the dark. I have been told all I could do was borrow a little from my account. I wasn,t aware that we had any control or able to trade any part of my investment.



# 2,760: Jan 2, 2008, Orlando Maldonado , Minnesota
no limits on the numbers of transactions!



# 2,759: Jan 2, 2008, Richard Kellogg , Tennessee




# 2,758: Jan 2, 2008, Charles Forbes , Florida




# 2,757: Jan 2, 2008, LAURI SMALLEY , Oklahoma



# 2,756: Jan 2, 2008, George Cazares , Florida
During the course of the month, there should be at least 10 transaction



# 2,755: Jan 2, 2008, EDGARDO LOZANO , Florida
At least 15 transactions per month.



# 2,754: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Florida
At least minimume 10 transaction per month



# 2,753: Jan 2, 2008, Jeff Hauth , California
I do not agree with the proposed changes to limit our control of our assets in our TSP fund. I would not be opposed to a fair transfer fee.



(more)

 

[James48843]

(Continued- signatures added on Janaury 2nd...)

# 2,752: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Virginia



# 2,751: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Minnesota
2 transactions per month is woefully inadequate for managing one's TSP investments. I could live with 8 transactions per month, but no less than that number.



# 2,750: Jan 2, 2008, MANUEL SEPULVEDA , Arizona




# 2,749: Jan 2, 2008, Mark Herriage , Texas




# 2,748: Jan 2, 2008, Chuck Bader , Colorado




# 2,747: Jan 2, 2008, James Ellis , Oklahoma
What was this country founded on? FREEDOM and with that comes the taste of success and failure. What better way to help yourself for the future is to let you have a say in it.



# 2,746: Jan 2, 2008, John Hidinger , Colorado
I would rather pay a small fee for a transfere.



# 2,745: Jan 2, 2008, Ernest Barby , Oklahoma




# 2,744: Jan 2, 2008, Paul Koerner , Nebraska
Please do not reverse the progress. We do have the right to make our own decisions. Thank you



# 2,743: Jan 2, 2008, Rick Lahodny , Oklahoma




# 2,742: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Florida




# 2,741: Jan 2, 2008, Alan Pensiero , Florida
This proposal would severely penalize the employee who takes the time to diligently research all investment options and maximize the money he or she worked so hard for. Cost reducing measures can be implemented by eliminating all paperwork and switching to a totally electronic system via PostalEase, as postal employees make up the largest block of TSP investors. Everyone has computer access by simply going to their public library and using a computer to complete any TSP transactions. The paperwork savings will make up for any costs involved in high-volume trading.



# 2,740: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , Georgia
This is my retirement, and limiting transactions will impact my future negatively. We should be able to continue limitless interfund transfers as part of our investment opportunities.



# 2,739: Jan 2, 2008, Thomas Baum , Pennsylvania
Do not agree with the proposed changes to limit our freedom to control our own assets in our TSP fund. We do not need interference from the Board to try and control what we want to do with our money. Many of us are educated investors and don't want to be limited to two trades per month which could have negative consequences.



# 2,738: Jan 2, 2008, Kevin Moran , Massachusetts




# 2,737: Jan 2, 2008, David Farrington , Kansas
The math is not adding up. There is not ademonstrated need to limit transfers. Dave



# 2,736: Jan 2, 2008, Dong Luu , California
We the shareholders of the TSP's fund, hereby reject the decision of the theift boards artificial limit, and call for the Employee thrift Advisory Council to reject the thrift board plan to impose needless trading restrictions. This is OUR money, Limit TSP Interfund Transfers is the WRONG!!!!!!!!! decision.



# 2,735: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , New York
By limiting to 2 trades per month(a 3rd if the last goes to the G fund) you would have to start the month off in a stock fund, go to the G for one trade, back to stocks for 2 trades, then back to G for your "courtesy" trade. Then comes the problem. The next month you would be starting in the G. 2 trades would allow you to go to the stock fund and then back to the G. Thats It! You would be stuck in this pattern until a month where you only make one move to stocks so you could start the next month in the stock fund. Does anyone else see this problem? They need to give 3 moves per month to alleviate this.



# 2,734: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , California
We do not believe the TSP's current administrative and market impact expenses are excessive, and we reject that claim. WE don't think the TSP board should limit trading based on these levels of expenses. This is OUR money, Limit TSP Interfund Transfers was the WRONG!!!!!!!!!! decision.



# 2,733: Jan 2, 2008, Richard Riggins , Maryland
This is our money and our future. I disagree with the proposal of having limits on the number of transfers one can make.



# 2,732: Jan 2, 2008, Joseph Young , California
The is OUR money, and you cannot change the rules in the middle of the game without shareholder approval.



# 2,731: Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous , California
The proposed changes are a step backwards in governing the tsp. Before Gary Amielo presided over the board we were limited to one change a month this put us at a terrible disadvantage compared to the rest of the 401k world. Gary modernized the tsp, I know changes have to be made to keep up with the times, and a few people can ruin a good thing for everybody, but don’t limit us to just two transfers a month that’s taking us backwards several years. Please don't do it. There have got to be other options like, a graduated fee for excessive traders spread out across the calendar year. I don't agree with limiting my freedom to protect my hard earned retirement money as I see fit and to invest it accordingly, and we need to explore all other alternatives before coming to such a far-reaching and hasty decision.



# 2,730: Jan 2, 2008, Paul Shevlin , California
The proposed changes are a step backwards in governing the tsp. Before Gary Amielo presided over the board we were limited to one change a month this put us at a terrible disadvantage compared to the rest of the 401k world. Gary modernized the tsp, I know changes have to be made to keep up with the times, and a few people can ruin a good thing for everybody, but don’t limit us to just two transfers a month that’s taking us backwards several years. Please don’t do it. There have got to be other options like, a graduated fee for excessive traders spread out across the calendar year, or something…..

 

[James48843]

This proposal of one move per month is limiting capitalism, and socialism has never been a strong point in America.

FREEDOM doesn't cost money. FREEDOM is important. FREEDOM is what made America strong.

Over 2,900 people- THE SHARE HOLDERS of TSP- have already signed the petition asking the Thirft Board to reverse it's decision. Perhaps today will be the day that the 3,000th person will sign. Ask your co-workers to sign. Ask your supervisor to sign. Ask your CONGRESSMAN to sign.

Now-- sometimes I try and say a lot of words- to explain that the decision to limit TSP Interfund Transfers is not the right decision. It doesn't make BUSINESS SENSE. I've run some of math problems out there to show eveyone that it doesn't make BUSINESS SENSE. People are not harmed by Intefund Trades, EVERYONE is helped by them.

But sometimes- arguing with logic doesn't have the same impact as plain old common sense. I can try and put math figures out there- I can try and aruge the logic, I can try and point out the flaws in their plan. But if I don't make a communication connection on a level they can understand, it's only so much words falling on deaf ears.

Which brings me to this:

Here is today's "quote of the day." It comes to us from Johnny Decker, a Federal Employee in Georgia. He's a TSP Share Holder, who reminds us that the TSP is working just fine. He can say it better than I ever could dream of saying it:


Jan 10, 2008, Johnny Decker , Georgia
I think this is the most stupidous thing these people can do this time. If it aint broke dont mess with it.



Thank you Johnny Decker. You are right.
Your simple statement says it better than anything I ever could.

 

[James48843]

Feb 29, 2008, Kevin W. Thatcher , New Mexico

Why should I be penalized and limited to the amount of retirement that I could possible acquire during my federal career. All you have to do is look at the market now and see how volatile it is. This change will affect my potential and optional life style in retirement.

Feb 29, 2008, Shane Sweeney , Oklahoma

Though it is a way to increase short term profitability, expense cutting is a poor strategy if you aren't being honest about what you are giving up in the process. I would hope that the Board will keep their eyes on the ball and concentrate on setting an appropriate balance between benefit and expense by avoiding the blind pursuit of efficiency. A more efficient, less expensive route is only pursuable if it remains effective. Please respect my volition to do as I see fit with my funds. If the lifecycle funds are worth the expense of daily trading to adjust them, then please don’t take away my opportunity to adjust my investment strategy as well. A system can only become so cost effective through expense cutting. Please find another golden cow to worship.


Feb 28, 2008, Jay Hilligrass , Arkansas

Last year I had more than 25%return on investment. This year since receiving the TSP Letter restricting movement of funds, I have lost 12.5% ($60,000.00)


Feb 27, 2008, Michael Kaffenberger , Nevada
I am a former fed employee (18 yrs). I have another 14 years to go before I can start withdrawing from my TSP. If limits are put upon the number of trades I am allowed, I will certainly be pulling my money out altogether and putting it into an institution that lets me trade at will.


Feb 27, 2008, David Garrison , Texas
After years of waiting to be competitive in the markets, TSP finally entered into the modern age. NYSE completes billions of transactions a day and our board can't handle a few hundred thousand? What's up with that? Maybe they need to get a government job. Stop helping us. We can do it ourselves and will gladly pay for quality service.


Feb 27, 2008, Darrell Hoffman , Pennsylvania
The TSP was initiated to allow investors to individually manage their own retirement monies as they see fit. TSP investors are already at a disadvantage having to wait two-days for interfund tranfers. Often times absorbing the brunt of an instantanious market. Does this sound fair, does this sound like effective management of my retirement? I should think not. The role of the TSP should be the manager of my funds, my broker in a sense. Trying to assist me to have the most effective financial strategy avialable. I would not think that Schwab or one of the other large investment firms would have me settle for "riding it out" in a bear market.