Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Admin

Spitzer May Look Into Nysut Ing 403(b)

Recommended Posts

TC is somewhat reminiscent of the old Financial/INVESCO group, which at one point established 12b-1 fees because they would actually lead to a decrease in fund expenses! Really! That was the line they gave. So now TC is increasing fees because that is going to benefit shareholders.

 

War is peace, ignorance is strength, slavery is freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TC is somewhat reminiscent of the old Financial/INVESCO group, which at one point established 12b-1 fees because they would actually lead to a decreasein fund expenses! Really! That was the line they gave. So now TC is increasing fees because that is going to benefitshareholders.

 

War is peace, ignorance is strength, slavery is freedom.

 

 

Orwellian references aside, I can see where a fee increase MIGHT lead to increased benefits to shareholders. It depends entirely, 100%, on what is done with those fees. If they are used to construct new world headquarters for TIAA-CREF, then the shareholders got reamed. If they are used to hire a small army of salaried financial planners who have "asset retention" NOWHERE in their job description, then they may indeed provide a benefit.

 

The answer probably lies somewhere in between, but it'll be interesting to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

Prior to the establishment of the SEC in 1934 it was perfectly legal for a stockbroker to give a $10 tip to newspaper columnist for mentioning a certain stock or number of stocks in his column. Since 1934 it is against the law. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW BECAUSE THE COLUMNIST IS IN THE PUBLIC EYE AND THE READER ASSUMES HE/SHE HAS THE READER'S INTEREST UPPER MOST IN HIS MIND---THE COLUMNIST IS GUILTY OF USING THE INFLUENCE HE ENJOYS OVER THE LIVES OF HIS READERSHIP TO LINE HIS OWN POCKETS.

 

I find this practice alive and well when a union takes money from a stockbroker in return for recommending a security to its membership---THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! IF NOT FOR THE NEGOTIATED FEE THE UNION WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND AN INVESTMENT PRODUCT!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prior to the establishment of the SEC in 1934 it was perfectly legal for a stockbroker to give a $10 tip to newspaper columnist for mentioning a certain stock or number of stocks in his column. Since 1934 it is against the law. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW BECAUSE THE COLUMNIST IS IN THE PUBLIC EYE AND THE READER ASSUMES HE/SHE HAS THE READER'S INTEREST UPPER MOST IN HIS MIND---THE COLUMNIST IS GUILTY OF USING THE INFLUENCE HE ENJOYS OVER THE LIVES OF HIS READERSHIP TO LINE HIS OWN POCKETS.

 

I find this practice alive and well when a union takes money from a stockbroker in return for recommending a security to its membership---THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! IF NOT FOR THE NEGOTIATED FEE THE UNION WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND AN INVESTMENT PRODUCT!!

 

Did the newspaper columnist used to publish a disclaimer saying that he had accepted $10 from a stockbroker before touting a stock?

 

Because otherwise, this already-thin comparison falls apart entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be very concerned if I saw TIAA-CREF field at Yankee Stadium a la Great American Ballpark (Great American Insurance who sell 403(b) plans/stadium is home of Cincinnati Reds) and Lincoln Financial Field (financial service provider Lincoln Financial Group who also sell 403(b) plans/stadium is home of the Philadelphia Eagles). Do teachers who have 403(b) plans with these respective companies get a discount on goodies at these stadiums? Maybe M&E really means Munchies & Eats at the stadium.

 

Dan Otter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"QUOTE(Sierra @ May 3 2006, 02:19 PM)

 

Prior to the establishment of the SEC in 1934 it was perfectly legal for a stockbroker to give a $10 tip to newspaper columnist for mentioning a certain stock or number of stocks in his column. Since 1934 it is against the law. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW BECAUSE THE COLUMNIST IS IN THE PUBLIC EYE AND THE READER ASSUMES HE/SHE HAS THE READER'S INTEREST UPPER MOST IN HIS MIND---THE COLUMNIST IS GUILTY OF USING THE INFLUENCE HE ENJOYS OVER THE LIVES OF HIS READERSHIP TO LINE HIS OWN POCKETS.

I find this practice alive and well when a union takes money from a stockbroker in return for recommending a security to its membership---THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! IF NOT FOR THE NEGOTIATED FEE THE UNION WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND AN INVESTMENT PRODUCT!!

 

 

Did the newspaper columnist used to publish a disclaimer saying that he had accepted $10 from a stockbroker before touting a stock?

 

Because otherwise, this already-thin comparison falls apart entirely"

 

 

Joel, You have made a great post, and I agree one hundred and ten percent. THANK YOU

 

FT You talk about a disclaimer. Please forgive my ignorance about the "disclaimer", but where is the disclaimer? Is it in the advertisments that the insurance company has placed to hawk the product? Does the union present this information to union members in a newsletter that they might issue? Where is it? Is it buried in prospectus? If so how do the union member receive this prospectus?

 

FT, do you think that the union is proud of their actions, and is sending information to the union members to brag about the good that they are doing?

 

( We need Marlon Brando to lead a fight against the union bosses- For those who don't know, he played in ON the Waterfront" and fought against a brutal system of corrupt boses to clean up his union.)

Edited by ira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Joes

"QUOTE(Sierra @ May 3 2006, 02:19 PM)

 

Prior to the establishment of the SEC in 1934 it was perfectly legal for a stockbroker to give a $10 tip to newspaper columnist for mentioning a certain stock or number of stocks in his column. Since 1934 it is against the law. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW BECAUSE THE COLUMNIST IS IN THE PUBLIC EYE AND THE READER ASSUMES HE/SHE HAS THE READER'S INTEREST UPPER MOST IN HIS MIND---THE COLUMNIST IS GUILTY OF USING THE INFLUENCE HE ENJOYS OVER THE LIVES OF HIS READERSHIP TO LINE HIS OWN POCKETS.

I find this practice alive and well when a union takes money from a stockbroker in return for recommending a security to its membership---THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! IF NOT FOR THE NEGOTIATED FEE THE UNION WOULD NEVER RECOMMEND AN INVESTMENT PRODUCT!!

 

 

Did the newspaper columnist used to publish a disclaimer saying that he had accepted $10 from a stockbroker before touting a stock?

 

Because otherwise, this already-thin comparison falls apart entirely"

 

 

Joel, You have made a great post, and I agree one hundred and ten percent. THANK YOU

 

FT You talk about a disclaimer. Please forgive my ignorance about the "disclaimer", but where is the disclaimer? Is it in the advertisments that the insurance company has placed to hawk the product? Does the union present this information to union members in a newsletter that they might issue? Where is it? Is it buried in prospectus? If so how do the union member receive this prospectus?

 

FT, do you think that the union is proud of their actions, and is sending information to the union members to brag about the good that they are doing?

 

( We need Marlon Brando to lead a fight against the union bosses- For those who don't know, he played in ON the Waterfront" and fought against a brutal system of corrupt boses to clean up his union.)

 

The real investigation needs to be done . It is TIAA-CREF that needs to be investigated. Did you know that the NY legislature wrote TIAA-CREF into the originall education law 392 by name as the only provider allowed in the NY university system. There was no compitition allowed until mybe 10 years ago. Which is why they have any market share at all.

Now its being uncovered that TIAA CRef is a private dumping ground for washed up politions or high level state employees that need a place to spend there senoir working years and even retirement sucking hugh salaries for little or even no work.

 

Funny how it works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joes...........If TIAAcref id something illegal, and it is within the legal time period for prosecution, of course they should be prosecuted. I am not familar with the TIAA and NY university schools association, but it seems that you are. You can contact Mr. Spitzer's office directly with any relavant informaton that you might have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

Did the newspaper columnist used to publish a disclaimer saying that he had accepted $10 from a stockbroker before touting a stock? I'll leave the answer to you.

 

FT: You are placing great weight on the fact that once the $ arrangement is published in the Propectus both the New York State United Teachers and its partner the ING group have nothing legal to worry about. Again, full disclosure of a wrongful act does not make the act proper. WE WILL JUST HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE.

 

Now that NYSUT/ING has been written up by two major newspapers, one on the left side of the country and the other on the right side, is there another investor in the ING variable annuity that would like to join FT in his defense of his union's financial arrangement with ING? Please come forward.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FT: You are placing great weight on the fact that once the $ arrangement is published in the Propectus both the New York State United Teachers and its partner the ING group have nothing legal to worry about. Again, full disclosure of a wrongful act does not make the act proper. WE WILL JUST HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE.

 

 

"Waiting for Godot" is a book you might want to check out as you wait for this investigation to unfold.

 

You refer to the NYSUT endorsement as a "wrongful act." I ask you again, what law is being broken here? If you are alleging wrongdoing, you must have at least a vague idea of the grounds upon which Mr. Spitzer can proceed.

 

 

FT You talk about a disclaimer. Please forgive my ignorance about the "disclaimer", but where is the disclaimer? Is it in the advertisments that the insurance company has placed to hawk the product? Does the union present this information to union members in a newsletter that they might issue? Where is it? Is it buried in prospectus? If so how do the union member receive this prospectus?

 

FT, do you think that the union is proud of their actions, and is sending information to the union members to brag about the good that they are doing?

 

( We need Marlon Brando to lead a fight against the union bosses- For those who don't know, he played in ON the Waterfront" and fought against a brutal system of corrupt boses to clean up his union.)

 

 

Ira, the information is formally disclosed in the prospectus. It has also been talked about informally so much in the last year that no one who's paying any attention is unaware of it. And yes, there are MULTIPLE disclaimers issued from NYSUT with virtually every piece of mail they send that even mentions 403(b)'s. [Edit: I forgot that this arrangement has been written about multiple times in "New York Teacher," the union publication, and is mentioned regularly in advertising by the benefits department.] And finally, yes, my sense is that the union is quite proud of the benefits department and what they have put together, but I suppose you'd have to ask them that.

 

I don't even know how to respond to the Brando stuff. The messiah complex runs a little thick here at times, no? If you honestly see parallels between "On the Waterfront" and NYSUT's endorsement of a Dutch conglomerate for 403(b) services, well...perhaps we are thinking of two different s? For the record, there was no "Johnny Friendly" to twist my arm to sign up for my account.

Edited by FrenchTeacher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dan,

Thanks for posting this great FERA letter. It is personally gratifying that he referenced the seminal 403b LA Times article that was initiated by Los Angeles teachers. History will note that the series of articles will start a revolution to lower the costs of retirement plans. We have had other media publication of the 403b mess, but nothing of this magnitute. When Kathy Kristof told me that it was going to be on the front page last year, I nearly died.

 

Even if Spitzer finds no legal wrongdoing, it’s unethical and disgusting for any teachers union to willingly and publicly accept money from vendors so that those same vendors can have access to their members without competent accountability. that’s the main point of the Times articles. The future holds a win/win situation for all teachers who participate in 403b/457. There is no turning back to the old days of business as usual. What a great two weeks it’s been for us little guys. We have come a long ways. I am personally proud that I was and am part of this historic movement. I also believe that a small group of educators with no position, no power and no money can make huge and powerful institutions change. Wow!

 

The one problem I see with the Spitzer connection is timing. I cannot believe that Spitzer would seriously investigate because he will not attack a teachers union during an election campaign, even if he finds no wrong doing. He is running for governor of NY the last I heard.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sierra

FT: We all await your letter to the editor of the latimes that will tell him that his newspaper did not mention the law that these unions have broken.

 

Joel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FT: We all await your letter to the editor of the latimes that will tell him that his newspaper did not mention the law that these unions have broken.

 

Joel

 

 

I'm breathlessly awaiting your response right here, telling me which laws they DID break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Joel F

In my opinion they have breached their fiduciary responsibility to their membership by entering into a fee for endorsement agreement with ING. Now may we all see your letter to the latimes in defense of the fee for endorsement agreement entered into by your NYSUT and ING? Also while you are at it get a letter out to FERA. Such a strong unionist like you should not let these accusations and "fabrications" go unanswered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...