What YOU can do to fight back - IFT limit

[JonesH2O]

Jones,

What a beautiful brain you have! We need to use all legal avenues to stop the injustice, to stop the arrogance of power, and to bring accountability into process. Keep up the good work.

Thank you. I'm just "trying to stir the pot" by making arguments that the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board has to counter. If they cannot, then this action is withdrawn.

 

[JonesH2O]

Jones,

I adopted and sent your letter to:

mailtoavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov

Airlift,

It cannot hurt. The more emails on this technical point sent to the Office of Management and Budget, the better.

 

[ayla]

What is the real motivation behind restricting transactions to two a month?

IMO, their restriction is based on fear of their own incompetence. They are thinking (under the guidance of Ms. Ray) that they are following the big boys (i.e. a few funds that are using limits already, forget the fact that these funds have much much larger overhead than TSP and have shareholders that insist on profit and big salaries for the board members, not just that the funds cover expenses) .

Being a mindless copycat is enough to relieve them of some of their fear. The last thing they want to do is actually do the homework necessary to determine what is really the best path to take. Instead they get someone like Ms. Ray with an agenda (forget multiple people with multiple agendas coming to a consensus) to give them a sense that homework has been done. Heaven forbid, a real discussion and debate might take place on the best options here for everyone.

They have "outsourced" it in other words. A classic method for incompetent management to determine strategy. If it doesn't work out for the best, they can blame Ms. Ray (or better yet the contractors who are furnishing her info).

No accountability so why do actual real work to overcome any lack of information leading to their incompetence? Down the road when TSP participants no longer are maxing out their contributions but instead are taking what they would have given to TSP and investing in IRA's that give them real time trading with minimal costs for unlimited trades, the board members making this decision will be long gone (and as we know memories are always short.)

And I am totally convinced that "down the road", newcomers WILL be much more interested in trading their TSP than the current group who still have ties to the Depression mentality of keeping your funds in the G for absolute security.

 

[weatherweenie]

I don't know if it will do any good, but I emailed my union's leadership, NWSEO, to ask what, if anything, they intend to do to protest the TSP board's decision to restrict transactions.

NWSEO's reply: 'we can protest this but we have no legal jurisdiction and therefore no influence.'

 

[Show-me]

So I have to ask the question. If the DOL has no power over FRTIB and ETAC has no power over FRTIB, who is accountable? The more we are learning the more this really stinks bad.

 

[James48843]

I brought it up to folks in my office and they immediately went on the offensive accusing us of "running of fees"- classic TSP Board propaganda.

If only they KNEW the potential earnings with their TSP- I tried to explain.

One can only TRY and lead a horse to water...

Newsflash: The November Board minutes were published last night on the FRTIB website's electronic reading room.

At first glance, something HUGE stands out in October's data.

Yes, there was a lot of trading in the I fund in October.

And guess what?

The trading didn't COST TSP shareholders. No. Because of various Fair Value errors, the TSP came out AHEAD- ON TOP-- once again. This time by 56 basis points.

That right folks- because of TSP Trading in the I fund, the I fund holders CAME OUT AHEAD BY 56 BASIS POINTS!!!!


It didn't COST someone who was a buy and holder- THEY benefited by 56 basis points from the trading in October.

How about THEM apples? ? ?

 

[Show-me]

Congress makes the laws and has oversight. However, the Board is politically appointed rather than nominated and elected by the membership, and the Board IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE. It's in the law. Go figure.:nuts:

A rhetorical question to provoke participants. hee hee My evil plan worked. Thank you anidoc!

Newsflash: The November Board minutes were published last night on the FRTIB website's electronic reading room.

At first glance, something HUGE stands out in October's data.

Yes, there was a lot of trading in the I fund in October.

And guess what?

The trading didn't COST TSP shareholders. No. Because of various Fair Value errors, the TSP came out AHEAD- ON TOP-- once again. This time by 56 basis points.

That right folks- because of TSP Trading in the I fund, the I fund holders CAME OUT AHEAD BY 56 BASIS POINTS!!!!


It didn't COST someone who was a buy and holder- THEY benefited by 56 basis points from the trading in October.

How about THEM apples? ? ?

James,

These proposed changes to limit the number of interfund transfers has shed a enormous light on the lack of oversight, accountability, and customer service issues. Maybe we should send a letter to Ms. Ray and Mr. Long thanking them for showing us how vulnerable and customer unfriendly TSP really is. I can't wait for Congress to get back to work!

 

[James48843]

Congress makes the laws and has oversight. However, the Board is politically appointed rather than nominated and elected by the membership, and the Board IS NOT ACCOUNTABLE. It's in the law. Go figure.:nuts:

In America, when the law is wrong, what do you do?

Change the law.

(Let me think about that one for a bit....)

 

[hessian]

In America, when the law is wrong, what do you do?
Change the law.
(Let me think about that one for a bit....)

Hi James,
Question: When does the 2-trade limit take effect? -Others might be interested too!!

Show-referencesd the following in his AcctTalk (its a bit old but I thought you might get some ideas from it):
Federal Pensions: DOL Oversight and Thrift Savings Plan Accountability GAO-03-400 April 23, 2003 (sic)...
"The Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) is a retirement savings - and investment plan - for federal employees, governed by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (the TSP Board). Recent events relating to the TSP Board's contract to upgrade TSP's record keeping system have raised questions about the management of the TSP. In light of the TSP Board's actions relating to the record keeping system and the recent submission of the TSP Board's legislative proposal that would enhance its independence, Congressional requesters asked us to examine federal oversight of the TSP Board. Specifically, our objectives were to (1) describe the Department of Labor's (DOL) oversight authority, under the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act of 1986 (FERSA) and (2) determine the actions DOL has taken in exercising its authority over TSP.
DOL is charged under FERSA with establishing an audit program of TSP and its operations. The audit program is to ensure that TSP assets have been reasonably safeguarded and that appropriate steps have been taken by TSP fiduciaries to comply with FERSA. If DOL finds that the Executive Director or TSP Board members have breached their fiduciary responsibilities, under FERSA, DOL cannot take legal action.

IMHO, Tthe TSP Board is bucking their primary responsibility of TSP being a Retirement "Investment Plan" (not just a savings Plan). I'd recommend DOL to re-audit TSP and its operations.

Also likely should keep pressure on to seek new laws be enacted if needed to ensure the original intent of TSP is being implemented - primarily that IFT limits cannot be imposed, because this is contrary to original intent, that being - an investment Plan).
--at least up to 8 IFTs/month should be allowed, for TSP to work as an investment plan!

PS Just FYI, I'm a Navy civilian, & I work in DC. Not saying I know how this stuff works, but I observe alot - mostly difunction, but also see some on how things get done too. Anyway, look me up if ever in town.
VR Until then, I think you'll enjoy this... http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=73719&page=110

 

[James48843]

Hessian:

Thanks for that note. I'll be sure to investigate further and read the whole report. And think about it for a bit- and your angle. Very nice - I hadn't seen that.

But it makes sense.
later

\Cya

 

[hessian]

Hessian:
Thanks for that note. I'll be sure to investigate further and read the whole report. And think about it for a bit- and your angle. Very nice - I hadn't seen that.
But it makes sense.
later
\Cya

Just read you were a reservist, I thought of you, your post, with this video...
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=158754&page=2

Also, another for your collection...
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?page=2&displayContent=83744#alphaBottom

Overall, its a pretty cool website.
Appreciate your continuing hard work and efforts.
VR

 

[James48843]

Thanks for thinking of me, but I only have dial-up, so I can't watch videos.

Perhaps another time.....

(My new year's resolution is to try and get DSL- I have been too far out in the boonies in the past. The last couple years, I check around and looked for high speed options, without success.

I've been trying to get DSL, but I've always been too far from the central office. I hear they are building infrastructer closer these days...maybe 2008 will be the year I can go HIGH SPEED!)

 

[pogo]

I faxed mine to Thomas K. Emswiler at 202.942.1676. Was that correct? Thanks.

http://faxzero.com/

tom if i copy and paste a letter from the website and put it on faxzero do i have to put .doc or pdf in the box i'm not sure

 

[Show-me]

tom if i copy and paste a letter from the website and put it on faxzero do i have to put .doc or pdf in the box i'm not sure

Just cut and paste it to the box provided and it will work. The .doc and .pdf is if you have it in a file and use the small "browser" window to download it.

Go get'em pogo!

 

[James48843]

Attention all Postal People:

It looks like at least one of the ETAC members at least got his organization to post something on their website- The National Associaton of Postal Supervisors has put Tracey Ray's November 6th memo on their website at: http://www.naps.org/index.shtml

Perhaps you postal people can contact your supervisors, and get them to write in in opposition, and also send them copies of the latest newsletters from tspshareholder.org.

Fight Back. Get Informed. Tell YOUR UNION To vote NO!

Thanks

 

[Show-me]

Contact Infor for APWU or Postal folks.

I just send a note to my Union and to PostalReporter.com to post something, anything about the changes FRTIB are trying to sneak through.

Here is contact info for PostalReporter: http://www.postalreporter.com/about_site.htm

List of APWU Officers: http://www.apwu.org/about/directory-officers050310.htm

APWU webmaster: http://www.apwu.org/webmaster.htm

 

[James48843]

If you are represented by a Union or Association who is on the ETAC, OR a Union that is NOT on the ETAC, and want to add your union or association leadership to the e-mailing list for TSPSHAREHOLDER newslettes and alerts, then I highly suggest you take one of the newsletters and "forward it to a friend" command at the bottom of the newsletter.

P.S. test the e-mail first, and see if it works. I'm finding that a lot of the e-mail addresses listed on webpages for union leaders are dead addresses. Send them an e-mail and ask them if it is ok to send them information about the pending IFT restrictions, and ask what e-mail to send it to, and then, when they reply, hit the "forward to a friend" button.

Thanks

 

[GuilRL]

Here are some of my opinions in bold for all of you to consider.

1.) First of all, for those of you who are thinking that we should be charged a fee like they do at Vanguard or Magellan, or others in the private sector, you people are just giving into the demands of those who seek to dominate you. Why should we pay fees, our TSP was a defined benefit and we earn it, and if you all want to hand in your rights and defined benefits, lets do it on a one on one basis, and you all who want to, can donate it voluntarily. DON'T SPEAK FOR ME ON higher fees or on any fee!

2.) As for charging any kind of fee, if it ever came to this, just make sure that we all get the same service that you would get in the private sector for executing a trade guaranteed at a guaranteed price at the instant demanded. Then, if I wanted to trade several times a day, the trade should be executed at the moment I dictate that it be done at, and if I sell, and buy several times in one day that would be my option. Furthermore, if it ever came to this, I would love to deduct the cost of my trades off of my income tax.

I am so sick and tired of hearing some of you giving into relinquishing any rights (your rights and my rights) on our defined benefits! That is what they want, and if you give into them, they will only begin to control you one step at a time, until you have none.

3.) Do not call it Trading, as this is not an accurate use of the word when reallocating your money. If it were a TRADE, it would be like a stock trade. Seems to me, we have some people calling it trading, only because those that want to control our reallocation rights such. They are using this term to further their gains. Do not let them use the term TRADE or that we are TRADING, as it is not accurate. Please get this straight into your heads.

If you don't like this message, think of it as me trying to save you and me from yourself later.

 

[James48843]

Thank you.

Very nicely put.

 

[Rod]

Thank you.

Very nicely put.

I'd say!