nasa1974's Account Talk

Sort by newest Sort by date
I like riding roller coasters. But, even with my sticky pants on this ride is getting very uncomfortable.
 
So, I pulled up the August meeting minutes for the FRTIB. They approved the FY15 budget for 207.2 million dollars. $207.2M and we still have to snail mail. Are servers that expensive?????? That or the employees are making close to or above 6 figures. I know there is more to the budget than that, but $207.2M. What the heck.

The TSP currently has over 400 billion dollars in assests.

Here is the link; http://www.frtib.gov/pdf/minutes/2014Aug.pdf
 
nasa1974.....So, I pulled up the August meeting minutes for the FRTIB. They approved the FY15 budget for 207.2 million dollars. $207.2M and we still have to snail mail. Are servers that expensive?????? That or the employees are making close to or above 6 figures. I know there is more to the budget than that, but $207.2M. What the heck.

The TSP currently has over 400 billion dollars in assests.

Here is the link; http://www.frtib.gov/pdf/minutes/2014Aug.pdf
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting NASA... I will be curious to find out at year end, how many billions were pulled out of TSP and rolled into individual IRA's, etc.,

Last I read, months ago, it was many billions, and FRTIB was not happy, suggesting that recent retirees were being preyed on by investment firms..
 
I saw in the highlights pamphlet where the FRTIB is trying to get employees to put their other 401 K into the tsp. Evidently they are fighting to keep employees from moving their tsp funds into private IRA accounts. Maybe we are getting close to bargaining for more monthly trades to keep us from jumping ship hmmmmmmm.....
 
GUCHI.....I saw in the highlights pamphlet where the FRTIB is trying to get employees to put their other 401 K into the tsp. Evidently they are fighting to keep employees from moving their tsp funds into private IRA accounts. Maybe we are getting close to bargaining for more monthly trades to keep us from jumping ship hmmmmmmm.....
Click to expand...

One might hope so !! But considering their mentality, maybe not... They may just start a P.R. campaign warning FED employees of the hazards, fees of private IRA's..
 
This roller coaster ride is hard on those that have good stomachs. My sticky pants can barely keep me in the seat. I used to like riding with my hands in the air. Now I hang on to the safety bar for dear life. Hanging in there though, waiting for the light at the end of the tunnel.
 
Here is a snip from a GAO report done in 2007 about TSP expenses. This is the latest I have found on FRTIB pay rates. I haven’t looked real hard in a couple of years.

You may view the whole report at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/270/260588.pdf

GAO-07-541 pages 16-17
FRTIB compensates employees according to federal pay schedules. Currently, FRTIB employs about 65 staff members, the majority of whom are paid according to the General Schedule. About 28 percent of these employees are compensated at or below the GS-11 level. Accordingly, to the extent that the composition of FRTIB’s staff is appropriate, compensation costs appear reasonable. The Executive Director is compensated according to level three of the Executive Schedule.[SUP]21 [/SUP]Additionally, 7 staff members are part of the Senior Executive Service.[SUP]22 [/SUP]These Senior Executive Service positions are all approved by the Office of Personnel Management. Each of the 5 board members—who are not otherwise officers or employees of the federal government—are compensated at the daily rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule for each day the board member is engaged in performing a function for FRTIB.[SUP]23[/SUP]
[SUP]21 [/SUP]5 U.S.C. §5314.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]FRTIB had an additional five open senior executive positions available as of September 2006.
[SUP]23 [/SUP]5 U.S.C. § 8476(d)(1).
Click to expand...

So in 07 we have "about" 65 staff members (they couldn't count?), "about" 28% are GS-11 or below (about 18.2), 8 are SES (maybe 13 according to foot note 22) so that leaves 39 GS-12 to 15. All in DC? I am not sure about that.

Then we have five board members who get SES level IV pay per day. Don't know if that means if they think about TSP the day is billable or if they answer a question or if this is hourly or one action per day equals one days pay.

PO
 
Last edited:
nasa1974 said:
From Govexec.com

Government News, Research and Events for Federal Employees - GovExec.com



View attachment 30838







Invest More in TSP, Says Head of World's Largest Asset Management Firm

By Eric Katz October 27, 2014 8 Comments

"Employees failing to reap the full benefit of their retirement investment accounts is the “biggest problem we have with society today,” according to the chairman of the largest asset management firm on the planet...."
Click to expand...

I'm glad they won't be forcing existing employees into the L fund. Congress should not be allowed to force anyone into the L fund? It's unbelievable.
 
jkenjohnson said:
I'm glad they won't be forcing existing employees into the L fund. Congress should not be allowed to force anyone into the L fund? It's unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Could it just be a default upon hiring? Employees are still have option to change to something else? Not sure what they mean by default.
 
Yes, I understand it's just your initial allocation until you change it to what you want. The problem they are trying to solve is that some people never go in and change anything. That's why they want to change the default from the G Fund to the L Fund.

What I want to know is how do they know what L Fund to stick you in? Are they going strictly by age? years of gov. service?
 
jpcavin said:
Could it just be a default upon hiring? Employees are still have option to change to something else? Not sure what they mean by default.
Click to expand...

New employees currently have their matching 1% go to the G fund by default. The change would be it would go by default to one of the L funds. This would only affect new hires and they can still go in and change it.
 
Cactus said:
Yes, I understand it's just your initial allocation until you change it to what you want. The problem they are trying to solve is that some people never go in and change anything. That's why they want to change the default from the G Fund to the L Fund.

What I want to know is how do they know what L Fund to stick you in? Are they going strictly by age? years of gov. service?
Click to expand...

That's not so bad is it? But then again, I'm a bull. :laugh:
 
To me the l funds are not aggressive enough I currently have 1% in bonds the L2050 has 10% in bonds (3.33% G and 6.67% F) it’s better than 100% G fund.
But I can afford to be more aggressive I should have 2 pensions coming in at age 60.
Bonds? i don't need no stinking bonds!:laugh:
jpcavin said:
That's not so bad is it? But then again, I'm a bull. :laugh:
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Valleymd blog (the international question)
Replies
2
Views
162
tsptalk
tsptalk
P
Negative Adjustment Earnings
Replies
3
Views
203
nasa1974
nasa1974
TommyIV
  • Article Article
Winning Strategies - Lessons from Top TSP Talk AutoTracker Performers in November
Replies
0
Views
332
TommyIV
TommyIV
TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk Weekly Wrap Up - Optimism with Caution
Replies
1
Views
347
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Has the mid-month pullback begun?
Replies
1
Views
139
TommyIV
TommyIV
Back
Top