[quote=AN]Like I said, we’ll just have to wait and see. I would never have thought SCA-5 would be proposed much less got extremely near passing by democrats, the party that’s supposed to be defending the minorities. But it did. So, I’m not ruling anything out.[/quote]
I think the bloomberg editorial summed it up pretty well….
? Because it’s a question we may have to ask ourselves. As I observed when I first wrote about the plan, the very fact that we are discussing taxation of educational savings — redistributing educational subsidies downward — indicates that the administration has started scraping the bottom of the barrel when seeking out money to fund new programs. Why target a tax benefit that goes to a lot of your supporters (and donors), that tickles one of the sweetest spots in American politics (subsidizing higher education), and that will hit a lot of people who make less than the $250,000 a year that has become the administration’s de facto definition of “rich”?
Presumably, because you’re running out of other places to get the money.
And….
What it does argue for is diversifying where you put your money: some in traditional IRAs and 401(k)s, some in Roth, and hopefully, some in regular taxable accounts, because you’ve already maxed out your tax-advantaged contributions. That way a change in a single program doesn’t radically alter your retirement and college plans.
What it also argues for is saving even more than you are. The government is going to come for its money one way or another, and the best way to deal with that is to have more than you need.
