Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,593 profile views
  1. Yea, Ed, and you krow36, could not only be a tax professional but a tax attorney as well. I kept things simple and used only the regular Roth IRA and the 403(b). I have plenty in my Roth currently. The 403b Roth, 457b Roth and the 401k Roth are a recent addition to employer-sponsored retirement plans, came along after I retired.
  2. Hi Ed, Let me get this straight: You are talking about four different retirement vehicles that the same money is passing through: 1. traditional IRA, 2. employer 401k, 3. nondeductible traditional IRA and 4. finally the Roth IRA. This looks like one of the biggest tax loopholes that the tax code gives us. Fascinating.
  3. TIAA half billion in low cost, passive assets should also be included. As far as I know, as I once owned a CREF REIT Roth and the .99% ER was way too expensive. I get the Sunday-only LA Times, and don't have time to read much of it!
  4. Great Thanks. Looks like good news. Of course, most of us here are especially fond of 8!
  5. WOW! In California! In the land where secrecy and behind-closed-doors discussion rules with an iron fist by the districts, state insurance commissioner's office, and teachers' unions. Everybody here has known this for years about the complete lack of public discussions of anything about financial literacy for either adults or the students. Out of nowhere appears this bill. https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2019/02/22/financial-literacy-high-school-course/ However, I cannot find any details about this new bill, AB 1087. At first glance, it looks like it is sponsored by Bank of American as this article, along with USA Today, cites their comprehensive survey of financial literacy among young people in 2016. https://about.bankofamerica.com/assets/pdf/BOA_BMH_2016-REPORT-v5.pdf Steve
  6. Hi krow, Dan and Scotty can speak for themselves but I seriously doubt that NEA would take any outside advice. But I have been wrong before! :- ) Nobody knows the reason why NEA came up with the Direct Invest but the eerie coincidence of NEA creating this option came right after their lawsuit when two teachers sued NEA for breach of fiduciary duties. The general consensus around here is that NEA created this option as an added protection against future lawsuits. They can argue with clear evidence and say with a straight face to future judges and juries, "look we have this fiduciary (and low cost) option but as you can see your honor hardly anybody uses it." NEA case against them was beaten back twice because the judges threw it out as the 403(b) is not under the department of labor fiduciary regulations. The teacher's attorneys argued a brilliant case IF the 403(b) had fiduciary mandates. In fact, if the 403(b) was under fiduciary mandates as the 401k world, this website could be closed down and we all could go home. It's that simple. But that isn't going to happen, YET. Steve
  7. Hi Lit, Fortunately, you do not have to wait for a response. Your question has been discussed for the last couple of years on this forum. What you want is NEA Security Benefit DIRECT INVEST: here is a discussion on this, http://board.403bwise.com/topic/7040-aspire-or-nea-direct-invest/?tab=comments#comment-39356 And one of our esteemed posters, Ed, wrote this on his blog: https://educatorsfightingforfairness.wordpress.com/security-benefits-nea-directinvest/ There are other discussion threads, just use the search feature. Ask your employer if a 403b Roth is available. Good luck, Steve
  8. You're welcome krow. We need Scott and others working together to keep bringing this terrible problem to the front again and again so that more of our colleagues will get wind of it and make changes. One thing that I all know, if we give up, the problem will never go away.
  9. Hi Tony, I am too old to be "irritated" by your posts regarding investing. :- ) I judge each one of them by their merit. I don't respond to most of them. I agree with you that most people will not go out and buy a book, much less read it. I just think this particular article is biased against Vanguard, perhaps causing confusion for those who lurk here once in a while. Some will go back to their agent convinced that Vanguard is no different than the vast majority of investment companies and annuities. OF COURSE, we know better, but people who lurk might not be. Worse yet, since this article is on 403b wise, it must be accurate. I just wanted to set the record straight. That almost all of us who frequent here will love Vanguard for many years. Have a great day, Steve
  10. This is W. Scott Simon's 9th M* article on the pathetic 403(b) and its gotten some traction on the web. We all know here where Mr. Simon is going. Since 2007, he has written 8 parts, "Fleecing 403(b) Plan Participants," pointing out what we have known here since 2001 when this site was launched. About the only thing we can do is keep spreading this article on our Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and our blogs to try and reach as many teachers as possible. When will this unfiduciary abuse stop? https://www.morningstar.com/articles/911520/403b-plans-not-adding-up.html Again and again 37 newspaper articles since the 1990s have reported some variation of this excerpt again and again: Mr Simon wrote: [Ben} Franklin's adage also applies to, say, retirement plans in the public sphere, such as 403(b) plans made available to educators by public school districts. It's no secret that many educators participating in 403(b) plans are forced into suboptimal investment options, such as high-cost annuities and mutual funds. Why? Because in many states like California and Texas, school districts can offer educators just about any looney insurance company-issued financial product no matter how high their costs may be and how imprudent they are. In such states, the bad guys rule the roost and the good guys--low-cost providers--stay away because they refuse to sign school district hold harmless agreements, which legally shield districts from unforeseeable events that may negatively impact a provider.
  11. M* has to "chummy" to managed funds or they would not be in business. Blackrock has institutional investors. Vanguard has primarily ordinary investors. But do we really care about another article trying to cast doubt about Vanguard?
  12. I love my pension plan and grateful that I have one when millions of Americans do not. But when it comes to their investment decisions, no, I am not interested in anything the chief investment officer, Ailman or Calstrs does! My fight is with the 403(b). I have no control over anything that CalSTRS does. What can anybody do when CalSTRS screwed up so badly in 2008, losing 26%!? Besides, the teacher's unions all over the state send dozens of reps to their monthly meetings, and all they talk about is the same issue over and over again, decreasing the liability gap. Do you know its only funded by 62%? It's frightening. They never ever talk about one of the great 403(b)s that CalSTRS runs Pension2, and while they want educators to take more responsibility for their retirements such as using the 403b or the 457b plans, CalSTRS does very little to promote our cause here to educate teachers. When we report so-called advisers (insurance agents) claiming to be CalSTRS pension experts to them, CalSTRS does very little or nothing. Its one of the primary reasons why 403b reform is so difficult. CalSTRS, Securities, and Exchange Commission and the State Insurance Commissioners office are all governmental agencies and their job is to keep the status quo. They are not in the advocacy business. Yet they acknowledge there is a problem with our state teachers are not protected from the 403b sharks that are everywhere. Thanks for the question, Keep up the fight, Steve
  13. It was just reported that California teacher's pension plan, my pension, lost 3.2% in 2018. I think that's about right considering the amount of equity risk they are taking on.
  14. There are many educators who are financially literate as we are around here. Unfortunately, they keep quiet and would never come here and support the cause. The vast majority of people are not advocates like we are here. That AXA guy probably talks to many "Eds" during his cold calling. All of us here will be recognized in a nanosecond and the salesperson will move on and not waste his or her time. As Tony said these people are some of the shrewdest people on the planet. For several years, the agents used to post here and argue with us. They know its a waste of time. And the more time spent here the less time trying to connect with our colleagues. And time is getting to them. I heard over the grapevine from the industry that it is a lot harder to fool educators these days. This word, fiduciary, is FINALLY getting some traction and educators know now that anybody who comes on campus and into one's classroom unannounced and uninvited to pitch a retirement plan IN THEIR CLASSROOM during recess is NEVER looking out for the educator's best interest. Cited in this article, "According to a Personal Capital survey, about 32 percent of Americans believe a financial advisor is likely to take advantage of them. And of the 54 percent of Americans who choose not to work with a financial advisor, just under half (45 percent) cite lack of trust as the reason they don't." Ed's guy was shrewd enough just to end the conversation as he did. Steve
  • Create New...