Return to Article: Lawmakers question Thrift Savings Plan investment strategy
-
60230
I, too, agree with women's and minorities's rights - but, not at the risk of losing our hard-earned TSP funds. Let's leave the folks in charge who are running them now and doing a great job. KEEP THE GOVERNMENT AND THE POLITICIANS OUT!!!! COngress is having a hard time running the country and their own pocket books - leave our retirement funds alone. They just can't stand to have something running right and they aren't in charge or don't have their hands all over it! Leave the TSP fund as it is - it works!!!!!
-
55008
The larger the TSP gets the more frequent the dumb ideas will get...
A Roth option is a good change, but "Active Management" drives cost which is why the Board just took away my ability to trade more than three times a month. If active management is coming back, please return my right to daily trades. I was doing better than the averages.
Tipoff had it right: The board held up private industry as a justification for limiting trades. Many of those same companies require majority votes for substative changes in policy. Give us the right to vote on both issues and Board members.
Next a letter to my congressional representatives encouraging a Roth option without the BS.
TSP participants would be wise to organize and concentrate their opposition to this and future dumb ideas.
-
54941
Just what we need these brilliant lawmakers getting in the TSP. They have managed to screw up virtually everything they have put their hands on and now TSP. I think they need to go back to questioning baseball players regarding steroids or something of that importance...The less they do to better off we are.
-
54890
My initial reaction was incredulous outrage! As for Blue Dogs vs. the Pachyderm comments; this time it was a dawg, last time it was an elephant. Let's NOT let this become a pis... political contest. Neither do that well with finances, particularly ours!
Secondary (and more considered) reaction? Okay, I don't know if it is my infernal Devil's Advocate or my penchant for options; regardless, I started to consider the possibility and was buoyed a bit by "Female and Minority" who did well on her 2nd comment.
My assumptions: 1. Change for the sake of change is foolhardy. 2. I appreciate EO, but don't wish to bet my future on it! 3. Neither the FRTIB nor Congress has greatly impressed me with their fiduciary responsibility or knowledge. (and, thank you Erich, we dodged the bullet on the REIT!)
Still, as I've said in the past, I do like options. So I thought "Under what conditions would I want change to the TSP?" A number of folks have requested those REITs, socially responsible investment funds (those NOT invested in the Darfur political régime or contributors to the genocide happening there), "green" funds, and my personal favorite - a ROTH(401k). Conclusion? While not adverse to change, IF it is to happen, I feel the Change Mechanism needs to be changed first. As I said, neither the FRTIB nor Congress impresses me. So saying, here are my proposals for your consideration and comments:
1. All changes must be accepted/voted by 51% of the participants. (This would REQUIRE something I've requested for a LONG time; a feedback mechanism.) 2. The current funds would remain the same; i.e. untouched. 3. Any new funds would be required to incorporate all costs within themselves, with no spillover or pulling from the current or other funds.
If these conditions were implemented I, and many others, might actually consider some changes to the TSP; and then my fellow participants and I would vote on them.
I DO like the democratic feel of that.
-
54557
This is business, serious business, not an intellectual exercise, affirmative action, or being inclusive. I think TSP is doing just fine with my retirement. I don't want to mess with success. More importantly, I don't want Congress to mess with TSP. If minorities and women want to play--or Congress wants them to play, they should earn it the "hard way". Alternatively, give Congress's retirement funds to a minority or women owned firm--leave mine alone.
-
54320
The TSP is mostly Barclay's bank products. They have been around since 1690. We already are part of an exclusive fund that does a great job overall. Perhaps it will be time to stop contributing and investing with someone like Vanguard if this happens. Perhaps a class action suit will have to occur if this happens.
-
54251
A Followup: Read the article again. I'm okay with looking at other options but all options need to be throughly investigated and shared with participants and voted on by TSP participants before put in action. After all, it's our money.
-
54250
I'm a minority and female. And, I say absolutely no to this idea! Mess with my retirement money to help minority and female business. No way! Let these companies fend for themselves in the market. If we so desire, we can invest in businesses via other means. Don't go test driving with my primary retirement vehicle! Congress, you forced us to manage our own retirement when you switched from CSRS to FERS, so let us do it! Let us participants determine changes. Don't change anything without votes from the participants. Same with the number of interfund transfers. That should have been determined based on TSP participant votes. Otherwise, as someone else stated, let's go back to CSRS when employees didn't have to spend time watching the market to manage their retirement funds.
-
54177
Shelley, The Democrats love playing the "Do as I say not as I do." game especially when it comes to someone else's money!
-
54175
Another prime example of trying to improve the position of a few, at the expense of many. I beleive they call that self interest. Horrible idea!
-
54174
TSP already has riskier funds. Please - Please don't mess with the "safe" funds. Unless, of course Congress plans to convert the FERS retirement system back into the CSRS retirement system.
-
54172
If you voted for a DEM then don't complain.
-
54165
I knew this would eventually happen! They can't wait until they get their grubby hands on our savings. Their palms must really be itching and I am sure there is some Lobbyist lurking in the background. Ah! Yes! Election year again and another effort to get some votes and I am sure campaign Contributions under the table! None of our Politicions can be trusted to manage a Kindergarten. Both Parties! 9% approval rate! What a joke! They just don't get it.
-
54152
I thought this was the year that government was not supposed to be about race and minority issues. I don't care what color the TSP fund is as long as it is GREEN and keeps my money SAFELY invested. Forget the high risk. In times like this week's stock market, none of us can afford the risk. Congress, please keep your mitts off my money.
-
54150
I find it interesting that when they start talking about adding more funds to the TSP and some folks say it might lead to manipulation there's always people that scream "oh, it's not going to be manipulated by special interest groups or lobbiest" Well I have to say BS to that. If it wasn't for someone wanting to make a bunch of money with MY RETIREMENT MONEY, then they wouldn't be interested in getting their hands on it!! The argument that we need more variety is non-sense. If someone wants more variety they can put some of their money wherever they want. No one is forcing them to put ALL their retirement money into the TSP. I don't want to pay higher fees because some special group(such as the real estate folks)want some of my money in their pot so they can more it around all the time and charge the TSP millions in fees!!
-
54149
If you want to have a social experiment in set-asides for minorities, do it with your own retirement and not somebody else's. TSP is one of the few things that the government has got right. Don't screw it up. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If these minority investment gurus were all that good, they'd have people beating down the door to invest with them. If they're hurting for clients, it's probably because they suck.
-
54143
I'd like to be assured my investment is secured and there when I retire in two years. Lawmakers please concentrate on your responsibilites such as ensurng our soldiers and their families are taken care of......TSP is doing a good job managing my money.
-
54133
The TSP was not set up for active management. It WAS set up for providing a solid foundation for retirement. The TSP Board should follow their charter and concentrate on getting a ROTH option in place. Only then should they start evaluating other possible index funds. Active Management should not be on the agenda at all.
-
54132
The article should be titled "How can I get some of all that Government Employee money too?" because it is just a blatantly pathetic attempt to get some managmeent fees from one of the biggest retirement funds in the country under the guise of "beating the market". has no one else heard of the scams to steal old people's money? well these people who propose active management are trying to steal our old people money before we are even old! If these active managers are so good at beating the market, why are they having trouble attracting capital? No thanks, I will take the low fees and market average returns. My more exotic investments are made far away from my relatively safe, unexciting TSP investments.
-
54125
The TSP sucks! The C-fund It can't even been a bond index fund for the past 10 years. Our investments are barely keeping up with inflation. Hope you al enjoy holding index funds like the C-fund which hold Bear Stearns and other great companies.
-
54120
This is not really very subtle. Active fund managers are lobbying congress (with plenty of those legalized bribes call campaign contributions thrown in) to open up TSP accounts to their tender mercies. Lots of sheep to be sheared. Part of the cover is to sell it as place for minority owned and women owned businesses to excell. Usually, these entities are just shells for the real owners. Look at the way so few actively manage funds outperform index funds over a 10-year period. And even those few look worst once fees are subtracted.
-
54116
We demand that 20% of all TSP business go to black owned business to reflect our workforce numbers in Fed employment. It should be mandatory that all blacks be part of that strategy for investment
-
54105
So we need to limit the number of transactions that a TSP participant makes, but should pay a company to make them for us. If Lawmakers want to give participants a better system, which I don't think they do, why not add a series of ETF, that are conservative yet adds tremendous flexibility to our system. It is our system isn't it?
-
54100
CALL OR WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES!! Tell them plainly, you WILL vote against them if they start tinkering with TSP!!!
-
54097
I find it interesting, and ironic, that 95% of government employees vote for the Democrats every single time but don't like it when their politics come home to roost.
-
54091
This is just another example of knee jerk politics at best. They're out to make names for themselves making changes for the sake of making changes and not so much for the honorable intention of making things better for the people they've been elected to represent. What would they propose for their Plan B should they push these changes on us and have our funds tank forcing us into the cheese and bread lines after working 30 years and saving our money - like we've been guided to do with the promises made for our retirement years? Should I advise my kids to make sure they have an extra room in their houses for me in case I need to move in with them?
-
54089
Dear Congress---GET YOUR SLIMEY HANDS OUT OF MY POCKETS!
-
54088
This article makes me very angry! Ensuring the TSP is run efficiently is the most critical. It is not and should not be about meeting a minority quota!!
-
54083
I think the lawmakers should be told in no uncertain terms to keep their political agenda hands off our money. Write your congress person and Senator TODAY and let them know to BACKOFF. They have proven they have not idea how to manage money or financial risk. (SEE Federal Deficit and the financial bailout.)
If government employees want a risker strategies they should take their money out and put it into other investments, but the key for politician to remember it is the employees money and their decision not the lawmakers.
-
54072
It's not a questio of minority owned business but what is best for those using the TSP. I prefer the current passive management style because it minimizes cost. I also prefer the trading limits for the same reason. Those that want to actively trade should do so with other funds as that type of activity drives up costs and adversely affects my investment. As for political coersion, I happen to believe that it will exist if the TSP is allowed to be actively managed.
-
54069
...no wonder this Congress has the lowest approval rate in history. Rather than pass legislation that is imperative such as going forth with off shore and Alaska drilling, prohibiting speculation in commodities futures, etc., they try to mess with our retirement investments. I'll make darn sure that I check my candidates position on this carefully before I vote. The TSP does not need congressional intervention.
-
54063
It is unanimous, at least in these comments. Congress has no business using personal savings to attract campaign contributions. This is NOT GOVERNMENT MONEY and NOT A CONGRESSIONAL power. No laundering of personal savings into campaign coffers. There is too much of that being done with tax money.
I already have the choice to invest outside the government in managed funds. I don't need or want it in the TSP which gives me cheaper broad indexes than I can purchase outside the TSP. The rest I can handle myself.
-
54061
I don't trust anything the congress, house or senate has to say or do at this time. They have failed the american people enough by allowing subprime loans, and poor under table (Corp.) financial decisions by allowing the old rules that "you can have what you truly can afford" system to be pushed aside. No creditability and their actions speak the loudest! FAILURE!!!!!!!
-
54037
This Congesssional hearing itself was an example of political manipulation. In order to re-direct some TSP business to special groups, Congress is willing to consider revamping the investment strategies of TSP. In other words, to further their own political interests, they are willing to manipulate the the inverstment strategy into a riskier mode. Is this not a prime example of political manipulation?
-
54035
Why are the TSP managers even entertaining these people and their agendas? They are on the right track and doing a dang fine job of it besides. The new L funds are exceptional and should be used to the utmost. You want to play the market Einstein (especially now)? Do it with your own private funds and stop driving the TSP operating costs up for everyone else. At this point in time (R word?)there's no reason to try and fix something that isn't broken. The TSP managers have been saving our bacon for several months now and deserve our sincere thanks for their dedication to keeping the TSP safe and sane. They should stay with their current methods of operation and slam the door in the face of these political agendas without even entertaining them from the get go. God forbid we start hearing about misdealings with the TSP like we have with private corporation retirement funds. If only they could just keep the Govt from borrowing from it these funds would be even more secure than they are already. Again, the TSP is not a personal play thing. You want to play the market do it on your own and pay the costs yourself. Let these dedicated professionals run the show and determine the best course to run.
-
54034
The purpose of the TSP is to make money to benefit the retirement of those of us who elect to participate. That's my main focus. It's an investment instrument not a statement on political correctness. If Representative Davis is concerned about providing opportunities for minority owned companies he should feel free to put his money into those companies and allow me the same considerationto make my own decisions about my financial future.
-
54029
Based on my reading of (to date) 44 comments to this news item - I think the House members involved -- and TSP would be well advised to issue a statement concerning their intentions and expectations--beyond statements made at the hearing. The objective of such statements would be to calm the waters. It strikes me as spectacularly bad timing for House members to encourage exploration of higher risk strategies upon TSP managers in a time when (per the 7/11/08 - Wall St. Journal & NY Times) Fanny Mae and Fanny Mae are currently under consideration to be nationalized thanks to the imploding subprime market and (my opinion) the Fannys' bonus driven management style. Sure, there's no formal connection between the Fanny's, the caving stock market, imploding mortgage industry and a single House hearing on TSP investment techniques - but in this economy, psychology can trump fudiciary ties, and the House is playing with the confidence of millions of working and retired feds. A suggestion for the House -- while TSP is busy exploring- at the "request" of the House-- how other TSP like funds are investing, the House committee should request a study from Library of Congress Research Service to compare and contrast the firewalls between politicians and investment managers in every state run 401K-type fund. Let's all learn some good lessons from outside the federal/Congressional hothouse.
-
54015
The purpose of TSP is to provide a sound low-fee retirement investment vehicle for federal employees. It is NOT to create business opporties for investment firms. My TSP fund should not be used to support someone else's social agenda.
-
54005
Silly quotes. "People showed up and said, 'why don't you look at commodities?" ... who were these people? What's to prevent someone from the Gold Industry suggesting this (and thus biasing what TSP invests in to their advantage) or Silver Industry, Real Estate, etc.
TSP should remain an index fund with low costs/overhead. That's its advantage, the low costs/overhead. The moment it becomes actively managed, it's subject to biases that should not be allowed within a government system.
-
54003
I feel a hand sneaking into my pocket! I don't want some speculator gambling with my retirement money. Over time, index funds make money! It's tried and true.
-
54001
While active management may seem attractive approach it is not for everyone. Many retirees want their investments managed to reduce risk. I see active management resulting in an increase risk. Even though there are many different investment options under TSP, may be there could be a fund that is actively managed that members could choose from. Those who chose that fund would also have to bear any additional management fees
-
53998
The TSP board has done everything in its power to prevent participants from making appropriate changes in their allocations in order to compensate for changes in the stock market. further, the TSP provides absolutely no advice to participants on when to hold and when to fold in the severely limited funds they offer. congress needs to audit and investigate the management practices of the TSP to a greater degree than in the past.
-
53995
TSP should remain a conservative retirement savings vehicle as originally designed. TSP is an OPTIONAL program and federal employees may choose other non-government investment plans if they wish to incur additional risk for potentially larger returns.
-
53994
The TSP is NOT the place to open up access to all manner of investment vehicles because they "might" provide better returns. Most TSP participants do not understand the basics of investing, especially evaluating risk. Many learned papers attest to the fact that maintaining a properly balanced portfolio, using index funds, keeping expenses low and rebalancing periodically will produce fine returns over the long term. The only reason other firms want access to TSP money is the chance to earn fees and commissions. KEEP THEM OUT.
-
53993
These people needs to keep their fingers out of my investment fund. The TSP board should slowly and methodically look at other options but should be in no rush; a ROTH option is likely next on the list and more important than more funds. More minorities is not an investment strategy, it's a employment goal. A teacher or REIT fund is just lobbyists talking.
-
53992
The research is pretty clear on this: lower costs = better returns. Passively managed funds have lower costs than actively managed funds, resulting in higher returns over long periods of time.
-
53991
One way to make a small fortune is to let a bunch of politicians start out "manipulating" a large one. I'm largely invested in the C fund and losing money every month, but I'm more comfortable with the TSP managing my money their way. I would encourage suggestions from any group, but as soon as there is any appearance of "pressure", I would junk their whole proposition. Politicians are the worst money managers this society has ever encountered. Need proof? Look at the Nat'l Budget.
-
53990
leave my money alone. if I wanted something else I would have got it!!!
-
53989
I sure wish Congress would quit meddling with TSP and let those individuals charged with administering the program, do just that - administer it. Only Congress could take the most successful government retirement program ever and find a way to ruin/corrupt it.
-
53988
If women and minorities want a greater share of business from the TSP, then they should offer products compatible with customers' desires. TSP should not change its investment strategy to accommodate someone's business plans.
-
53987
I obviously don't understand how TSP works (is managed), but as an investor I am glad to see it is NOT in the risk-taking business. The C fund is risky enough for me and if others want to take more risk in hopes of getting more return, then they should invest outside of TSP. I do not want to see higher fees that may be justified by more trading in the markets. I would be interested in an article that explains how TSP is managed and what minority- and women-owned financial management firms have to do with it, if anything.
-
53985
It's amazing how when the government finally puts together something that works well, the politicians jump right in there to try and screw it up! All you have to do is watch the nightly news or pick up a newspaper and read about the unethical or shady situations they get themselves into. And look at the way they run our federal budget - and they want us to heed their financial advice? Keep your nose out of our money, the TSP is doing just fine the way it is!
-
53984
Jarvis Hollingsworth, Jarvis Hollingsworth and Edward Swan should stay out of the TSP business. I don't like their comments; they sound very suspicious to me. Concern about political manipulation is a more like a certainty to me. TSP is working just fine and I like the way it is now. Please keep it that way!
-
53981
To be involved in an ACTIVE Fund you must be able to make numerous trades and TSP just passed a rule that makes that financially impossible. Also minority run firms have much HIGHER operating cost due to the amount they SKIM off the clinets.
-
53980
It isn't broke; so quite trying to "fix" it. The TSP is MY retirement and it has worked quite well so far. I'm all for everyone getting to play, but NOT at my expence. If the strategy excludes some, so be it. The strategy works for me, and on this point I am adament. Don't mess with success!
-
53978
Well, it's an election year, and it looks like they're trying to find a way to buy votes with our retirement money.
-
53977
Several years ago Congress attempted to pressure TSP to get into an REIT Fund. Aren't we glad that the TSP Board resisted?
-
53974
It's time for congress to stay out of my money and my life. I don't appreciate them playing political correctness with my money and my future. I work long and hard to make and save money and don't want to handle my money based solely on their gender or the color of their skin. If women or minorities want to work with TSP, let them compete like everyone else. I'm all for the firm that allows for the best return on my investment.
-
53968
considering the current state of affairs with the stock market and the poor decisions that have been make by fund mangers in the past as they chased the current stock/or trend of the day, I am adamantly opposed to the active trading approach. Steady growth and with safety should be the path forward.
government employees should use their private funds to increase their returns using a risk based approach.
-
53967
Recommending that other people's money be used for risky speculation in a poor stock market, does not seem to be a good idea nor in the best interest of the government employee. Every person should be notified of any such plan and given the optiion to withdraw every penny they have invested. This is especially true for retired employees.
-
53962
Active management is NOT the way to go, and it is a waste of time to even discuss it. Research is readily available that shows, over time, that you cannot beat the market. When the higher fees for paying the active managers is taken into account, index funds are virtually always able to deliver a higher rate of return. People in the TSP just need to educate themselves more about what mix of the existing funds best meets their risk tolerance...the TSP is great as is. My 2 cents...
-
53959
Okay...HANDS OFF MY MONEY!!!! The TSP Board and 'lawmakers'(9% approval rating) need to BACK OFF. We, the stakeholders, should be deciding what is best, by vote. We need to be able to decide who can best represent us, and all the bozos mentioned above ain't it.
-
53958
So-called active management will lead only to increased expenses. There are many investment programs for active management. The TSP is building a strong and successful track record with its current offerings. Walk away from people who promise better-than-market returns with the TSP. Passive is better and cheaper in the long run.
-
53957
I'm all for increasing returns, but please STOP messing around with how our retirement monies are being invested simply because some alternative investment strategy seems fashionable at the time.
-
53955
S in order to implement the same system of qoutas "to make everything fair" they are going to mess with my money. Lets just work with the people who manage the money the best. I dont care if they are purple or from Pluto as long as they mange it well. Lets hire and promote people because they are the most qualified instead of because it would help the goverment meet this mystical fairness bit.
-
53953
Most fund managers will point to the TSP costs as being the lowest in the business. The management of the fund already gives options. Fed employees are free to look elsewhere to put money, and once they have earned their matching funds, that is not a bad idea.
But to change the system because minority business's are not getting a crack at this money reaks of political correctness instead of taking care of the customer, the federal employee. Keep politicians out of my retirement!
-
53950
I think this is a STUPID idea. TSP does what it does very well & absolutely does not need to take a more riskier approach to investing. It gets very good returns with low costs. That is a significant advantage over other plans. TSP was set up with certain goals & certain CONSERVATIVE guidelines. It certainly doesn't need to risk being manipulated by industry or government. The sole purpose of TSP is to take care of us & it needs to stay that way. We put our money in there for the long term to grow & to be available after the end of our careers. I realize the idea of long term investing is a foreign concept to some people, but that is too bad. If anybody wants to take a riskier position for a greater return than what they think is available through TSP, they can go into the open market on their own. TSP is the way it is for a reason & it doesn't need to be changed. It was bad enough when people were doing day trading & frequent transfers trying to play the market. That should have been nipped in the bud, as does this idea of getting into riskier positions. I think one of the reasons people want to change TSP is because it has been so successful - they now want to get a piece of the TSP pie. Let them go somewhere else. Thank you.
-
53947
If it's not broke, don't fix it. The TSP has done quite well over the years and it's easy to use. The comments quoted in this article by members of congress does all that is necessary to prove the TSP board's point. anytime congress gets involved you know it can do nothing but get worse.
-
53946
I don't like the investment options presented by the TSP, and I don't agree with the recent changes by the TSP to limit the number of interfund transfers. However, Chairman Davis needs to stick to playing politics with the Treasury's money. Congress, keep your hands off my personal retirement funds!
-
53942
There are plenty of studies that have shown that using the modern portfolio thoeory and matching the market vice trying to beat produces better returns and also lower expenses which in turn produces better returns. TSP has the lowest expenses in the market. If Congress wants to start a new jobs initiative they should do it with tax dollar not my TSP investments.
-
53939
Please don't tell me we are now going to try to force "social engineering" into MY retirement funds manangement. Congress needs to stay out of this arena. All we need is " set-asides" in the TSP! It is bad enough that the acquisition process is overcome by social engineering due to Congressional " I know what is best" attitudes. Everything they touch turns to a negotiated mess which creates less than positive outcomes.Congress stay the heck away from my money!!
-
53938
Who's eating crow now? Legislators should have listened to TSP participants and not the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board. Limiting trades in today's market can only lead to disaster. Allow daily trading, but charge a small fee per trade.
-
53937
Changing the TSP investment strategy to benefit women and minorities (or any other special interest group for that matter) is a bad idea. The TSP was established to benefit federal employees. Those of us in FERS must depend on TSP to fund the bulk of our retirement and that should remain the sole purpose of the TSP. If federal employees want to introduce more risk into their investment portfolios there are numerous opportunities available to them outside of the TSP.
-
53936
So these people want to make the funds more risky to investors. Not a problem, since the management of these funds are the responsibility of the federal government and the federal government executed these funds to relieve the tax burden of civil service retirement, I suggest that the civil service retirement be put back into place since the core reason for TSP is safe solid growth. No problem, right now you can see the mechinizations and manipulations going on in the conversation. A big pot of money available for the first buzzards. Good sellout.
-
53932
No, no, no, no, no. The TSP program is designed to serve all its clients over the long term, to be simple and transparent to even the most financially illiterate employee and based on what I see, there are a lot of them. Once again, the legislature in their misguided attempt at social engineering are wrong. They're also being sold a bill of goods by lobbyists and financiers. If any of the naysayers can prove their method can GUARANTEE WITH 100% ACCCURACY to work over a 35 year period or longer (the lifespan of a civil servant), then maybe I would listen. But I doubt any of them at all could say their actively managed fund will beat indexing.
-
53930
Keep the social programs out of my financial investments. I deal with these social programs on a daily basis in procurement and I know the problems that are associated with such programs all too well.
-
53929
Legislators need to keep their grubby mits off our money!! They have almost destroyed social security and now they want to destroy our retirement fund too? Stay away!
-
53925
What? "...creating opportunities for women and minorities to play a larger role in managing the Thrift Savings Plan." Are you serious? This is an outrage. Don't turn our retirement plan into another politically correct welfare program. The TSP exists to make money for Federal employees. I don't care if purple midget aliens manage the funds as long as they produce.
-
53924
One of the benefits of investing in the TSP is the low expense ratio. The present expense ratio of 3 basis points can not be found in any other 401(k) program. The expense ratio is very critical to the returns of any investment. A change that will increase the expense ratio can not be good for anyone investing in their TSP accounts. Allowing the minority financial mangement companies to participate in the TSP investment strategy at the expense of a lower return and less retirement money would be a tragedy.
-
53922
Interesting how TSP can limit TSP owners ability to make active "trades" in a finite yet fairly easy trackable fund, and now they want "managers" to come in and actively trade and out-perform the markets?. How about letting TSP participants get something of real value, like say ROTH IRA type opportunities? Maybe Roths would be more difficult than keeping tabs on outside managers looking to make their own profits.
-
53913
Sounds like the politicians want to get their hands on my money. No thanks. TSP is doing just fine the way they are.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.