Khotso
Active member
Nice avatar NS9 -- just noticed. Used to have that photo posted on my cubie wall. Whitey's shown up a few times this past week ..... what's that mean for the markets? me'thinks its too soon to get in the water -- wave or not.
-
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
-
20% Off Annual Premium Subscriptions!*
Ends Jan 18... Click Here For More Information
* For new or current subscribers -
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!
NSurf9 Account Talk
- Thread starter nsurf9
- Start date
Nice avatar NS9 -- just noticed. Used to have that photo posted on my cubie wall. Whitey's shown up a few times this past week ..... what's that mean for the markets? me'thinks its too soon to get in the water -- wave or not.
nsurf9
Member
Nnut, great gif - looks exactly the way I felt. That would have been 1st w/ 2% to boot.
Khotso, nsurf9 comes from my 9ft windsurfer. The avatar was inspired by what I felt was swimming deep, but close, in the financial market cards in 2007, 2008, well before the housing bust (median home prices way above median income (40yr+ mortgages), mirror breath mortgage requirements). Only, what really could have happened didn't, the Congressional deer caught in the bank melt-down headlights averted it . . . at least temporarily. I'll have get a hard copy of Great White in the Wave pic for my wall.
Concurring with with Tom Crowleys comments, I don't plant to sit on the lilly pad (G Fund) very long (today?), but I am well aware these waves (sharks) easily can take your whole head right off, if your lucky. Thanks!
Khotso, nsurf9 comes from my 9ft windsurfer. The avatar was inspired by what I felt was swimming deep, but close, in the financial market cards in 2007, 2008, well before the housing bust (median home prices way above median income (40yr+ mortgages), mirror breath mortgage requirements). Only, what really could have happened didn't, the Congressional deer caught in the bank melt-down headlights averted it . . . at least temporarily. I'll have get a hard copy of Great White in the Wave pic for my wall.
Concurring with with Tom Crowleys comments, I don't plant to sit on the lilly pad (G Fund) very long (today?), but I am well aware these waves (sharks) easily can take your whole head right off, if your lucky. Thanks!
nsurf9
Member
Wed 11/9/2011 - EFA down 4%, even before it registered on graph (delay). What a beautiful bull trap - bait them when the Greece, then slam them with Italy, before they even can take a breathe. Maybe it will wiggle back up - ever seen a 7% swing day - could happen!?$ Italy could find a massive amount of gold and everything will be okay.
Mcqlives
Active member
The pope has it!!!
nsurf9
Member
Europe didn't act as fast as I had hoped earlier this month. Go figure, itonly cost me ~13%, and even worse for others. I was going to bail to the G fund. Many did. But, I hung in there, believing the second half of November would likely be better. Yes it was a big risk and until the last 3 days, I though it was all lost and would hobble into the end of the year. Luckily, its paying off and things are looking a lot better now, I'm back up ~11% with this morning's strong action - -after the recent worst Thanksgiving drop since 1932. Don't fret, the TSP saved all of $30, tops, for 2 IFTs I would have gladly paid for. Fortunately, I took the risk, though having already expended one IFT for November to stay in even after the carnage. That was a very tuff decision With an extra 2 IFTs. I still believe it doesn't have to be like this. I could have protected my account and moved to the safe G fund. And, for those of you that couldn't stand the heat, you are now forced to sit on the sidelines watching the rally (fortunately until tomorrow, when we get our measly 2 IFTs for December. THIS STINKS AND ITS PLAIN WRONG!!!!
The question is" Is this our money and are we really willing to do something about. The money was OUR money when we put OUR cash and hard earned matching benefits in our TSP account.
Under common trust law principles, although the trustee (the TSP or their assigns) hold what is call "legal title," we the makers and beneficiaries hold what is called "equitable title." What does that mean - their hold on OUR money is a mere formaility. The TSP Boards hold, or at least the manner, on our money is a mere formailty. Should we have the hootspa to show the TSP Board who owns what, I believe a court, or administrative court, would agree, and a more moderate imposition of the 2008 rule would be imposed, until a full hearing could be had (which should be successful). The question is would the federal employees, as a group, be willing to allow members to add additional IFTs, if it cost nothing and didn't dilute an individual fund.
I believe the general TSP membership would agree, if they had any idea what it really means to be proactive with their retirement and people like us at TSP Talk and Fantasy TSP could show them just how much better 30 minutes a day can dramatically improve and compounded their TSP return. The fact is, excluding the I fund, the cost of an IFT is easily ascertainable and it, contrarily to what the TSP Board stated, reasonably be calculated, including the pooling and settling costs. Additionally what other retirement funds are doing is irrelevant. That's not where we've invested our money.
The idea here is to bring an injunction of the extremely limiting 2008 IFT rules. The way would for us at both TSP internet sites to accumulate funds to retain an attorney assess the law, which is different from general trust law, but underlyingly support by it, and see what can really be done, instead sitting around and just being the victim of the rule. If we start such a fund, please allow me to be the first to contribute. Any thoughs . . . ?
The question is" Is this our money and are we really willing to do something about. The money was OUR money when we put OUR cash and hard earned matching benefits in our TSP account.
Under common trust law principles, although the trustee (the TSP or their assigns) hold what is call "legal title," we the makers and beneficiaries hold what is called "equitable title." What does that mean - their hold on OUR money is a mere formaility. The TSP Boards hold, or at least the manner, on our money is a mere formailty. Should we have the hootspa to show the TSP Board who owns what, I believe a court, or administrative court, would agree, and a more moderate imposition of the 2008 rule would be imposed, until a full hearing could be had (which should be successful). The question is would the federal employees, as a group, be willing to allow members to add additional IFTs, if it cost nothing and didn't dilute an individual fund.
I believe the general TSP membership would agree, if they had any idea what it really means to be proactive with their retirement and people like us at TSP Talk and Fantasy TSP could show them just how much better 30 minutes a day can dramatically improve and compounded their TSP return. The fact is, excluding the I fund, the cost of an IFT is easily ascertainable and it, contrarily to what the TSP Board stated, reasonably be calculated, including the pooling and settling costs. Additionally what other retirement funds are doing is irrelevant. That's not where we've invested our money.
The idea here is to bring an injunction of the extremely limiting 2008 IFT rules. The way would for us at both TSP internet sites to accumulate funds to retain an attorney assess the law, which is different from general trust law, but underlyingly support by it, and see what can really be done, instead sitting around and just being the victim of the rule. If we start such a fund, please allow me to be the first to contribute. Any thoughs . . . ?
nsurf9
Member
Josh Rose's internet address - http://www.roselawyers.com/
I'm in for $20. We don't need a daily IFT but it would be nice to have 3 or 4 a month. Also let's extend the cut off time from noon Eastern to 3 or 3:30 Eastern.
RealMoneyIssues
Well-known member
There is a financial planning firm around where I live that claims to have pushed the Roth TSP through. They might have some insight on what needs to be done...
OBTW, I am in if there is a chance this would work.
OBTW, I am in if there is a chance this would work.
Khotso
Active member
YES -- I'm in. Would like to hear more details.
nnuut
Moderator | TSP Legend
Have you talked to Tom about this?
YES-
But I would prefer to contribute as an individual. The TSP hates TSP Talk (we started this trading mess) and we probably want this to come from the participants, not from a "business" which they would try to disparage.
nsurf9 - Are you the one who sent me an email about this, or is someone else having the same idea?
But I would prefer to contribute as an individual. The TSP hates TSP Talk (we started this trading mess) and we probably want this to come from the participants, not from a "business" which they would try to disparage.
nsurf9 - Are you the one who sent me an email about this, or is someone else having the same idea?
nsurf9
Member
No, I haven't talk to Tom. My fingers were having knee-jerk reactions though it would be very convenient to have TSP Talk serve as a "real" trustee for the donations. The idea is to get a feel for support. If the fund gets even half way to $3,000, I would personally go to the Rose's office for an initial consultation. The key is to get jurisdiction and a reasonable injunction argument, based on an attorney's well surveyed view of the program and pertinent law. Me and perhaps some other key Talk members could serve a lead to a class action injunction. If, we don't end up with enough money, the money would be returned.
Similar threads
