TSP investors suspending contributions

[OBGibby]

James -

Excellent argument on all accounts. My hat is off to you. I especially enjoyed the civil discourse of this thread (and most threads on this Message Board), even when we disagree.

But, alas, I am a stubborn fool at times (or as my spouse would say - most of the time!), and I am not yet convinced that your argument is what's best for the TSP. I understand many of the points you and others have expressed, but some finer points still remain murky to me. It is certainly a persuasive argument, but I still harbor my doubts.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I certainly benefited from it and I suspect a great many other people have too.

 

[Gumby]

James -

Excellent argument on all accounts. My hat is off to you. I especially enjoyed the civil discourse of this thread (and most threads on this Message Board), even when we disagree.

But, alas, I am a stubborn fool at times (or as my spouse would say - most of the time!), and I am not yet convinced that your argument is what's best for the TSP. I understand many of the points you and others have expressed, but some finer points still remain murky to me. It is certainly a persuasive argument, but I still harbor my doubts.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I certainly benefited from it and I suspect a great many other people have too.

Gibby,

Is the reason you disagree with James is that FRTIB is your employer?
My recommendation for the new year for you is to immediately buy into C, S, and I funds and hold all funds and report back next December 30.
Thanks in advance for saving with FRTIB and keeping transaction cost to a minimum.:nuts:

 

[XL-entLady]

.... alas, I am a stubborn fool at times (or as my spouse would say - most of the time!), and I am not yet convinced that your argument is what's best for the TSP. I understand many of the points you and others have expressed, but some finer points still remain murky to me. It is certainly a persuasive argument, but I still harbor my doubts.

OBGibby, do you have a cogent counter-argument as to why we should not be able to purchase additional IFTs, charging our individual accounts an amount that would cover any real or imagined additional cost for that IFT?

Lady

 

[James48843]

James -

Excellent argument on all accounts... and I am not yet convinced that your argument is what's best for the TSP. I understand many of the points you and others have expressed, but some finer points still remain murky to me. It is certainly a persuasive argument, but I still harbor my doubts.

Still harbor doubts?

Ahhhh,,, you... and Thomas.

(sigh).

Well, you are here now, in TSPTALK land. This is the place where people ask questions, and learn.

That is about all we can do. Education is key. Learn as much as you can. Find out who is dealing facts, and who is dealing fluff. Then decide in your own mind.

A long, long time ago, I was taught- "Question everything".

Because when you look behind the curtain, you can find many more pieces of the puzzle. And when you assemble the puzzle, you find wisdom

That is much more interesting than if you simply sit on the log and let everyone feed you pablum.

Best of luck.

When you learn more, let us know.

 

[sdouglas3]

Still harbor doubts?

Ahhhh,,, you... and Thomas.

(sigh).

Well, you are here now, in TSPTALK land. This is the place where people ask questions, and learn.

That is about all we can do. Education is key. Learn as much as you can. Find out who is dealing facts, and who is dealing fluff. Then decide in your own mind.

A long, long time ago, I was taught- "Question everything".

Because when you look behind the curtain, you can find many more pieces of the puzzle. And when you assemble the puzzle, you find wisdom

That is much more interesting than if you simply sit on the log and let everyone feed you pablum.

Best of luck.

When you learn more, let us know.

James,

Maybe this person is new to investing or maybe is part of the TSP board and has nothing to do during the holidays. It’s amazing how mediocrity is more settling than being proactive. In anycase they will learn from this board.

Steve

 

[FUTURESTRADER]

Still harbor doubts?

Ahhhh,,, you... and Thomas.

(sigh).

Well, you are here now, in TSPTALK land. This is the place where people ask questions, and learn.

That is about all we can do. Education is key. Learn as much as you can. Find out who is dealing facts, and who is dealing fluff. Then decide in your own mind.

A long, long time ago, I was taught- "Question everything".

Because when you look behind the curtain, you can find many more pieces of the puzzle. And when you assemble the puzzle, you find wisdom

That is much more interesting than if you simply sit on the log and let everyone feed you pablum.

Best of luck.

When you learn more, let us know.

Brilliant, James Thanks for all you've done and continuing to be our advocate.

 

[dannyboy]

James -

The new system may have been designed to handled unlimited IFT's by everyone, but I don't think it was intended to. Sort of like the "worst case scenario" capability built into the system.

Greetings Gibby and welcome to the tsptalk circus. I'll be as open and honest as I can, and I'd have to tell you this site must have been inspired by GOD. I graduated in Computer Science and I work in the fiield and I have zero know-how on finances. All the insight that I receive here is incredible. I had a friend in high school everyone called Gibby. :suspicious:
Until reading this deep explanation by james48843 on his thoughts that he must have good connections with Wall Street and the companies involved. I've never paid a whole lot of attention to james48843, but I sure will from now on. I'm going to print out his threads and study this guy's knowledge and insight. I've been through this thread twice and I'm still unsure of everything. This guy should be elevated to "tsp guru" immediately.

 

[OBGibby]

Lady -

Please see my earlier post in this thread where I stated I thought TSP participants should be able to have unlimited IFT's if the active trading participants paid for it.


To others concerned -

If you review my previous posts you'll find that I offered no disparaging comments relative to active trading, or its' proponents. In fact, I stated I appreciated the position/perspective of active traders. I have questioned the costs associated with active trading in the TSP and have attempted to examine the reasoning behind the decision restricting IFT's. Obviously, I've hit upon a raw nerve for many of you. Some of you have been gracious enough to indulge my curiosity and stoked my interest even more so on this matter, for which I am grateful. It's unfortunate some posts in this thread have a tinge of arrogance and offered no meaningful contribution to the discussion.

 

[XL-entLady]

Lady -

Please see my earlier post in this thread where I stated I thought TSP participants should be able to have unlimited IFT's if the active trading participants paid for it.

From your mouth to God's ear.

Lady

 

[tsptalk]

I've never paid a whole lot of attention to james48843, but I sure will from now on. I'm going to print out his threads and study this guy's knowledge and insight. I've been through this thread twice and I'm still unsure of everything. This guy should be elevated to "tsp guru" immediately.

James was the mastermind behind the website, tspshareholders.org. He got thousands of TSP participants to sign a petition against the proposed transfers limits. There's more to the story, and he could be at the "TSP Guru" level, but if I tell you any more, we may have to send some men in black to your house.

 

[Frixxxx]

If you review my previous posts you'll find that I offered no disparaging comments relative to active trading, or its' proponents. In fact, I stated I appreciated the position/perspective of active traders. I have questioned the costs associated with active trading in the TSP and have attempted to examine the reasoning behind the decision restricting IFT's. Obviously, I've hit upon a raw nerve for many of you. Some of you have been gracious enough to indulge my curiosity and stoked my interest even more so on this matter, for which I am grateful. It's unfortunate some posts in this thread have a tinge of arrogance and offered no meaningful contribution to the discussion.

OB-

I think you are misunderstanding the issue here. Nobody sees you attacking the people here and I'm sure that no one is faulting you for your statements. I know that when I express my opinion on this site, I better have some serious facts to back me up. There are a few rants on this site I wish to take back.

That being said, James gave a lot of information that needs to be gleened and reviewed for novice to expert to understand here. I hope that with the information and links he has provided, that the alternate opinion have the same, or some, data to back up the claims or expectations.

Since you have joined the site some time after the announcements of IFT limits, you haven't seen all the research, request, rebuttals, and re-(insert fav). We debated the IFTs for months before it even occurred. We even asked for fees to be considered and it fell on deaf ears(FRTIB).

No one here has ever debated stronger than when they show up with the facts to represent their arguments. I personally spend most of my time trying to research most of the terms used on this site to even keep up with most of these guys/gals.

But something my Papa taught me early in life:
Arrogance is the thinking you can,
Confidence is KNOWING you can.

I really haven't seen the arrogance you reference but, if you have, I apologize for me and them.

 

[CountryBoy]

To others concerned -

If you review my previous posts you'll find that I offered no disparaging comments relative to active trading, or its' proponents. In fact, I stated I appreciated the position/perspective of active traders. I have questioned the costs associated with active trading in the TSP and have attempted to examine the reasoning behind the decision restricting IFT's. Obviously, I've hit upon a raw nerve for many of you. Some of you have been gracious enough to indulge my curiosity and stoked my interest even more so on this matter, for which I am grateful. It's unfortunate some posts in this thread have a tinge of arrogance and offered no meaningful contribution to the discussion.

Uh -huh, that's good enough for me then, please forgive my curiosity. And BTW it wasn't a tinge of arrogance, just an honest observation, so chill if your being truthful and yep you hit a sensitive subject, especially when it comes to someone preventing me from increasing my retirement funds, just so they could help their buds at barclays.

Frixxxx explained the work we went thru much better than me, but he didn't need to apologize for me since arrogance wasn't meant, but then he is much more diplomatic than me. You just kinda stuck your stick in a hornets nest and got some of us stirred up that fought the battle with our so called TSP board, who is supposed to look after our best interests, plus we know they had folks monitoring the board during all of that period as some folks were quoted in response letters back from his majesty Long.

CB

 

[DrFaustus]

I know things differ from agency to agency, but my former agency (I'm retired) never mentioned the TSP. If we saw a TSP email it was a very occasional piece of spam that got through the junk mail filter. When I first started trying to educate myself I wasn't sure where to even start. That's why I had (still have ) some black holes in my knowledge base, even though I have a business and accounting background. Most people in my former agency don't even think about their TSP accounts. Sad.

Lady

This goes back to what I was saying when the FRTIB started all of this business of limiting IFTs. The reason that the TSP is such a low cost vehicle is because the vast majority of its members are content to let their money ride in the G fund. The fact that one tenth of one percent of its members were causing costs to rise by actively managing their accounts proves that the FRTIBs claim of the TSP being a low cost vehicle was a complete and total sham. It's high time they owned up to it.

 

[Spaf]

Still harbor doubts?

............Well, you are here now, in TSPTALK land. This is the place where people ask questions, and learn.

That is about all we can do. Education is key. Learn as much as you can. Find out who is dealing facts, and who is dealing fluff. Then decide in your own mind..........................

Thanks James!

Glad you were able to answer the questions about Interfund Transfer costs. Maybe folks will be better informed. This is now a good thread to answer that question.

Thanks again! Spaf...........

 

[OBGibby]

OB-

I think you are misunderstanding the issue here. Nobody sees you attacking the people here and I'm sure that no one is faulting you for your statements. I know that when I express my opinion on this site, I better have some serious facts to back me up. There are a few rants on this site I wish to take back.

That being said, James gave a lot of information that needs to be gleened and reviewed for novice to expert to understand here. I hope that with the information and links he has provided, that the alternate opinion have the same, or some, data to back up the claims or expectations.

Since you have joined the site some time after the announcements of IFT limits, you haven't seen all the research, request, rebuttals, and re-(insert fav). We debated the IFTs for months before it even occurred. We even asked for fees to be considered and it fell on deaf ears(FRTIB).

No one here has ever debated stronger than when they show up with the facts to represent their arguments. I personally spend most of my time trying to research most of the terms used on this site to even keep up with most of these guys/gals.

But something my Papa taught me early in life:
Arrogance is the thinking you can,
Confidence is KNOWING you can.

I really haven't seen the arrogance you reference but, if you have, I apologize for me and them.

Frixxxx,

Please refer to Post #30 in this thread where I prefaced my inquiry into the issue of transactional costs associated with active trading through IFT’s with an assumption that the transactional costs were to the detriment of all TSP participants, and I asked that if my assumption was incorrect, to please advise. A review of my subsequent posts in this thread reveals I posted additional questions on the subject and James (and others) have done a wonderful job in explaining many intricate facets of the subject at hand.

As I stated earlier, proponents of unlimited IFT’s in the TSP have presented a very persuasive argument in their favor; however, I am not yet convinced. This is a statement of fact as it applies to me and implies nothing towards anyone else. It simply means that I am still in analysis mode and leaves open the possibility that my views will change. Nothing more, nothing less.

From your post you seem to imply that I should be prepared with “data” and “facts” to support whatever position I am debating. I did not engage in this particular discussion to debate with a confrontational argument – I asked questions. (My apologies in advance if I have misread the tone and intention of your post)

I accused no one of attacking me; rather, I observed that I had not been disrespectful of others during the discussion, in an effort to offer comparison to some of the other posts in this thread wherein it a) was questioned whether I was actually a federal employee; b) implied I was a tool for the TSP Board; c) recommended I engage in a B&H investment strategy; and, d) seemed to equate a B&H investment strategy as inferior to a proactive approach (with the implication being that active trading trumps B&H). Regarding my accusation that some posts were tinged with arrogance, from my perspective, the aforementioned posts (c) and (d) fit that category – we may disagree on many things, to include investment strategy. I’ve offered no criticism of active trading, yet some can’t seem to hide their disdain for any strategy other than active trading. As I’ve stated in earlier posts on this Message Board, for personal circumstances, B&H is the right strategy for me, for now, for my situation. But everyone has a different situation, so throwing around blanket statements implying a strategy unlike their own is inferior smacks of arrogance to me. Concerning posts that offered nothing significant to the discussion, posts (a) through (d) fit the bill in my mind.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I suspect many people found the discussion regarding IFT’s in this thread beneficial. If may be worth consolidating that particular discussion and the analysis provided by James and others into one long post, clean it up to make it flow easily, and then apply that post as a “Sticky” somewhere on the Board.

 

[James48843]

Gibby- Good morning-

Sorry if any of us sounded off after the debate. We did a lot of work back when this was being rammed down our throats, to try and enlighten the Thrift Board as to their mistake. They didn't listen, heck, I don't even know of any of the actual Thrift Board members ever saw our 4,000 signatures, and data package showing that what they were about to do was a mistake. I believe that Greg Long and Tracey Ray intercepted the data, refused to share it with the Board, because it didn't fit their preconceived notions. Now that we have a year's worth of real data, we hope we can find another way to get them to re-look what they did.

Anyway, no one here would (or should) tell you that one strategy or another strategy is the right one or the wrong one. If someone told you Buy and hold was bad, they shouldn't have. Buy and hold is ONE strategy. For those who wish to follow that, more power to them. Swing trading is another strategy, and for those who choose to do that, I say they are welcome to work on their own strategy. I've seen "LAst month, best month" work better than I thought it was going to. So I am intrigueed with that approach as well.

None of them are "right" or "wrong". It's all in the risk tolerance one has, and what one wishes to do with their own money.

People only get upset when someone changes the rules, and prevents them from exercising their own strategy, based on false assumptions. The false assumption I am talking about is that trading costs others money, or "too much money". It's simply not true.

You are welcome to post any question here, at any time. Educate yourself, and do what YOU are comfortable doing. That's all anyone can ask. You are entitled to be skeptical. We just know that when your skepticism ends, and you have real facts at your fingertips, then you'll be in our camp, not theirs.

Welcome to TSPTALK. A world of learning, one person at a time.

It would be rather hard to blend, merge,and edit all the posts in this thread. Believe it or not, this thread has been replicated about four or five times over the last year- and already exists in several of the forums here.

I hope you spend some time digging around the threads of all the forums. You'll find great debates, good information, and will learn a great deal.

Welcome aboard.

 

[Frixxxx]

Frixxxx,

Please refer to Post #30 in this thread

I read the whole post!

Regarding my accusation that some posts were tinged with arrogance, from my perspective, the aforementioned posts (c) and (d) fit that category – we may disagree on many things, to include investment strategy. I’ve offered no criticism of active trading, yet some can’t seem to hide their disdain for any strategy other than active trading. As I’ve stated in earlier posts on this Message Board, for personal circumstances, B&H is the right strategy for me, for now, for my situation. But everyone has a different situation, so throwing around blanket statements implying a strategy unlike their own is inferior smacks of arrogance to me. Concerning posts that offered nothing significant to the discussion, posts (a) through (d) fit the bill in my mind.

I stopped trading in July, the limits made it impossible for me to try and "guess" the market.

But everyone has a different situation, so throwing around blanket statements implying a strategy unlike their own is inferior smacks of arrogance to me. Concerning posts that offered nothing significant to the discussion, posts (a) through (d) fit the bill in my mind.

Like I said in my post, I really haven't seen the arrogance just their strategies. Strategies differ and they always will. Don't get me wrong, your questions were good, I just think that when you call out arrogance by a few "tongue in cheek" remarks you may have gotten the wrong idea. Everyone I have dealt with here has been more than fair in treating me as a respected member. Judging from your comments and questions so far, you WILL be a respected member.

I also said that I apologize for myself and others, and believe me my new friend - I MEANT IT! Happy New Year!

 

[F4mandolin]

Just made the effort to look all the way through this thread. I am one of those people who are 50-50 on what has been said through this thread. I had the chance to move to either TSP or stay with CSRS way back in the late 80's....all I got from the "officials" that represented the FERS program was how much better it would be. It was repeated over and over that it was the smart way to go. I wish I could prove that now....young and foolish at the time I didn't realize that if the govt said it was the best thing for me.....it was the best thing for them. Water under the bridge, can't change it. Am I still maxing out my TSP...yep. Max plus the over 50 catch-up. Is it the best possible financial thing to do? Not sure....I have read comments about how it is my responsibility to take action.....and how it is the govt's job to make more effort to get us clued in. I can say I do not know one person who is under FERS that I work with (I am a school teacher....short attention spans at the best of times) that really know how the program works. I am hoping to retire on VERA (if they offer it) in the next couple of years at 53-54. Not because I have saved a ton of money....but because I live cheap. I had to make the effort to learn what VERA was....I still am informing people that I work with on what TSP is and what VERA is etc etc...and quite simply, I don't know what I am talking about.....I just know more than they do. There are no easy answers to these TSP questions...I wish I had maxed out my TSP when I started......I just put in the matching. Better than nothing, but I have less than those that were putting in more. I need to get out of teaching because I don't see any real changes taking place that will help...I just don't think they are pushing for what students really need. Scores on tests are the number one concern.....knowing anything about financial problems isn't tested.....so they better learn it somewhere. Oh well....back to the mandolin.......yeah, like I am going to make a living doing that, but I do enjoy it......

 

[tsptalk]

Welcome F4mandolin! Nice first post. I remember those days, FERS or CSRS? Hell if I knew. I was 20 at the time. I made the wrong choice also.

 

[Gumby]

young and foolish at the time I didn't realize that if the govt said it was the best thing for me.....it was the best thing for them. ......

I remember standing in line waiting to get into the retirement system meeting our agency was having in 1986. I was talking to my clerk that had ~30 years of service in.....and asked her if she was changing from CSRS to FERS. She said "If is so good for me....why are they pushing it".
Needless to say, I stayed CSRS, but always remember her words of wisdom.
The presenters at the meeting did make it sound like the FERS matching was the way to go. Not many people in my agency switched to FERS.