[FoRK] Clarification on 401k, also further details of Obama's position re: investment income

[Jeff Bone]

Per Russell's comment re: 401k, Obama did not specifically mention  
such funds.  However it's important to note that eventual  
distributions stemming from vanilla 401k contributions, unlike Roth  
401k contributions and their corresponding distributions, are taxed.   
One has to wonder what tax policy would be enacted regarding any such  
distribution in an environment where tax policy was viewed as a tool  
primarily for equalizing economic outcome... particularly if the  
prevailing moral judgment about such investment income is negative.   
(And note that most higher income-earners are not actually eligible to  
use the Roth 401k vehicle which results in tax on up-front income but  
no taxes on distribution.  Further, the bar isn't that high for  
disqualification for Roth 401k;  for example, I cannot make Roth post- 
tax contributions to my 401k, and I'm sure as shit not on or even near  
that list of the hedge fund 50.)

Obama targeted not only uber-rich hedge fund managers in his comments,  
but took specific aim at "those who know how to work the stock  
market."  (Paraphrase.)  Does that include my parents who live on a  
fixed income from their earlier retirement investments? Further, and  
again I stress, he puts adjustments of tax policy "for the purpose of  
fairness" ahead of the revenue needs of such tax policy;  it's more  
important to "soak the rich."  Aside from questions of principle,  
there's a fatal flaw in his logic:  as an example of this flaw, 79% of  
tax filers in 2005 who declared capital gains actually earned under  
$100k.  Clearly, "rich" by his --- and the typical economic leftist's  
- definition means anything "above the mean."

Danger, Will Robinson.  Bush was the far-right's Manchurian  
Candidate.  It looks like Obama is shaping up to play that role for  
the extreme left.


jb