-
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
No problem there.
Murphys_Law
Member
Count me in as well.
KneednDough
Member
Count me in as well. Any chance of this improving is well worth it. Thanks.
I'm in, these policies by the TSP board have put us at extreme disadvantage to market players, we have no flexibility whatsoever anymore. In the days of super computers, high algos and bots trading back and forth, we can't just sit back and let our money disappear if an event occurs outside our allotted trading limit. The technology is there to make instantaneous changes if we need to do so with minimal cost to the overall funding. As others mentioned, we're not asking for major changes, just incremental improvements over this atrocious system that we've been locked into...
.
nsurf9
Member
REALLY?! DO YOU REALLY YOU WANT A CHANCE TO HAVE MORE IFTs? AFTER READING THIS, DO NOTHING - AND TWO, EFFECTIVELY, IS ALL YOU AND WE WILL EVER GET.
POST A ******* “YES, I’M IN,” ******** AND LET EVERYONE KNOW, AND PERHAPS WE WILL GET A REAL CHANCE FOR A FEW MORE.
THIS EFFORT IS LIKELY THE ONLY TIME ANYONE WILL EVER PERSUE THIS!!! IT REALLY IS, NOW-OR-NEVER!!!
IF YOU READ THIS AND DON’T INDICATE A “YES,” WE WILL MOST ASSUREDLY BE A VICTIM OF THIS RULE UNTIL WE ARE 59 and ½ YEARS OLD.
SOME PEOPLE ARE INDICATING A POSSIBLE DOLLAR AMOUNT - - ALL I’M LOOKING FOR RIGHT NOW, IS A “YES.”
BESIDE SUFFERING THE IFT RESTRICTION, WE WILL, EFFECTIVELY, ALSO ABDICATE CONTROL OF OUR RETIREMENT TO THE TSP BOARD FOR NOT ONLY OURSELVES, BUT ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, FOREVER.
WE HAVE HIGHLY RECOMMENDED, GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATIVE LAW EXPERIENCED, ATTORNEYS - DAVID AND JOSH ROSE - TO REVIEW THE BOARD'S 2008 IFT LIMITATION FOR A STAY OR REFORMATION. I WAS QUOTED $3,000 AS A RETAINER AND I BELIEVE THIS COULD GIVE US A REALISTIC APPRIASAL. YOU MAY NOTE THAT DAVID ROSE WAS A LONG TIME FEDERAL EMPLOYEE, LIKE OURSELVES. http://www.roselawyers.com
AT SOME POINT, I WILL ALSO CONSIDER WRITING THE FEDERAL TIMES TO PUBLISH INFORMATION ON THE EFFORT. IT PUBLISHED MY EDITORIAL ARTICLE ON THE 2008 IFT RULE ON OCTOBER 13, 2008.
P.S. TSPTalk or WXExtreme, I need to know how to get this on a prominent thread.
POST A ******* “YES, I’M IN,” ******** AND LET EVERYONE KNOW, AND PERHAPS WE WILL GET A REAL CHANCE FOR A FEW MORE.
THIS EFFORT IS LIKELY THE ONLY TIME ANYONE WILL EVER PERSUE THIS!!! IT REALLY IS, NOW-OR-NEVER!!!
IF YOU READ THIS AND DON’T INDICATE A “YES,” WE WILL MOST ASSUREDLY BE A VICTIM OF THIS RULE UNTIL WE ARE 59 and ½ YEARS OLD.
SOME PEOPLE ARE INDICATING A POSSIBLE DOLLAR AMOUNT - - ALL I’M LOOKING FOR RIGHT NOW, IS A “YES.”
BESIDE SUFFERING THE IFT RESTRICTION, WE WILL, EFFECTIVELY, ALSO ABDICATE CONTROL OF OUR RETIREMENT TO THE TSP BOARD FOR NOT ONLY OURSELVES, BUT ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, FOREVER.
WE HAVE HIGHLY RECOMMENDED, GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATIVE LAW EXPERIENCED, ATTORNEYS - DAVID AND JOSH ROSE - TO REVIEW THE BOARD'S 2008 IFT LIMITATION FOR A STAY OR REFORMATION. I WAS QUOTED $3,000 AS A RETAINER AND I BELIEVE THIS COULD GIVE US A REALISTIC APPRIASAL. YOU MAY NOTE THAT DAVID ROSE WAS A LONG TIME FEDERAL EMPLOYEE, LIKE OURSELVES. http://www.roselawyers.com
AT SOME POINT, I WILL ALSO CONSIDER WRITING THE FEDERAL TIMES TO PUBLISH INFORMATION ON THE EFFORT. IT PUBLISHED MY EDITORIAL ARTICLE ON THE 2008 IFT RULE ON OCTOBER 13, 2008.
P.S. TSPTalk or WXExtreme, I need to know how to get this on a prominent thread.
Last edited:
You could try putting it in the TSP News forum:
http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/forumdisplay.php?40-TSP-News
...but you'd want to keep it active so it stays in recent posts list. I will put a link on the home page to the thread once you get it started so it gets more attention. Make sure the thread title is a good description of the issue and a grabber. Like maybe "Tired of the IFT Limits?", or "Time for IFT Limit Changes!", etc.
I would suggest keeping it as professional as possible. I know it is an attention grabber but I would avoid the all-caps look. I think posts lose some seriousess and credibilty when using all-caps... or big or color fonts, etc.
Let me know what I can do to help.
FishSqueezer
Member
Yes, I'll get in. But while we're asking for cookies, why not ask for the whole jar? Instead of just a couple more IFTs per month, why not extend the IFT close time to the close of the markets? And not just when it's processed, but when it's logged (I'm sure the computers can tell time an IFT is entered). Also, why not weekend IFTs that take effect BEFORE the Monday opening? Don't ya'll just love watching Europe burn over the weekend knowing your gonna have to eat any losses till COB Monday? What, the computers can't work over the weekend?? :suspicious: Any other ideas?
I don't really believe we would get all these, but always ask for more than you're willing to settle for.
I don't really believe we would get all these, but always ask for more than you're willing to settle for.
nsurf9
Member
To the 22 members that have indicated "YES," my gratitude and I salute you - we are the pioneers.
I believe if every federal employee knew this could be implemented without any cost or dilution of any fund, they would also support it, there would most assuredly would be change.
But right now, the flame is small - but it burns true and brightly, as we know the freedom. I believe the most worthy thing I can do as a federal government employee is to ensure all other federal government employees also know the freedom to be proactive with their own TSP retirements. The brightness of a few can turn a spark into the fire of reality and change.
Also, of paramount importance is that the Government, the Board, and we, ourselves, understand that this is not like a social security trust fund - this ours, its’ members, personally and together - and not the TSP Board or the Federal Government’s. For I fear the TSP could become something of a social security fund, if we do not reclaim and stake our title and true ownership of it.
My though is the effort will be embodied in a trust fund with a minimum of two TSP member trustees, contributors will be its beneficiary, and its purpose is to reform the 2008 TSP IFT rule.
The trust fund will have its own bank account requiring at least two members to serve as trustees, signing-off jointly on any check or disbursement to attorneys, or otherwise. Should the trust purpose become unfeasible, or fail for other reasons, the trust monies will be return to its contributors, less postage and other reasonable and minimal costs.
Twenty-two is certainly a good start. At 22, even $10 per, would be only $220. There are about 700 active Autotracker members and even many more on the TSP Talk forum. MCash's position and statement puts the situation succinctly: "I'm in. I'm a non-posting lurker here, but this issue is one important enough for me to emerge from the shadows."
With 30 people, at $100 each, I could be walking into the Rose law office this morning and we could be getting a well grounded legal review and appraisal by the New Year. Just a though.
Tom noted that this effort should have a separate thread in the News section, which I will be glad to do, however, the most active section is Members' Account section. The very ability for the NSurf9 thread to stay near the top of that forum section gives rise to the interest. Will we have enough interest, is unclear. If we reach 100 yes's, I will open up a bank trust fund. At $3000, I would gather the legal research back together on law and jurisdiction of the TSP program and its Board. And upon, a favorable attorneys’ review, contact the Federal Times for some coverage to other federal employees and bolster the fund and remove the apathy to clear the way to bring the action.
That's the plan. May the force and courage be with us, one and all.
I believe if every federal employee knew this could be implemented without any cost or dilution of any fund, they would also support it, there would most assuredly would be change.
But right now, the flame is small - but it burns true and brightly, as we know the freedom. I believe the most worthy thing I can do as a federal government employee is to ensure all other federal government employees also know the freedom to be proactive with their own TSP retirements. The brightness of a few can turn a spark into the fire of reality and change.
Also, of paramount importance is that the Government, the Board, and we, ourselves, understand that this is not like a social security trust fund - this ours, its’ members, personally and together - and not the TSP Board or the Federal Government’s. For I fear the TSP could become something of a social security fund, if we do not reclaim and stake our title and true ownership of it.
My though is the effort will be embodied in a trust fund with a minimum of two TSP member trustees, contributors will be its beneficiary, and its purpose is to reform the 2008 TSP IFT rule.
The trust fund will have its own bank account requiring at least two members to serve as trustees, signing-off jointly on any check or disbursement to attorneys, or otherwise. Should the trust purpose become unfeasible, or fail for other reasons, the trust monies will be return to its contributors, less postage and other reasonable and minimal costs.
Twenty-two is certainly a good start. At 22, even $10 per, would be only $220. There are about 700 active Autotracker members and even many more on the TSP Talk forum. MCash's position and statement puts the situation succinctly: "I'm in. I'm a non-posting lurker here, but this issue is one important enough for me to emerge from the shadows."
With 30 people, at $100 each, I could be walking into the Rose law office this morning and we could be getting a well grounded legal review and appraisal by the New Year. Just a though.
Tom noted that this effort should have a separate thread in the News section, which I will be glad to do, however, the most active section is Members' Account section. The very ability for the NSurf9 thread to stay near the top of that forum section gives rise to the interest. Will we have enough interest, is unclear. If we reach 100 yes's, I will open up a bank trust fund. At $3000, I would gather the legal research back together on law and jurisdiction of the TSP program and its Board. And upon, a favorable attorneys’ review, contact the Federal Times for some coverage to other federal employees and bolster the fund and remove the apathy to clear the way to bring the action.
That's the plan. May the force and courage be with us, one and all.
Similar threads
