Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 177
Page 2 of 18

« Previous | Next »

Traders Taking Bite From TSP Returns

Cynic

Specialist
USDA
Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:23 PM

Post Reply

A solution in search of a problem. Have you ever heard of an employee complaining about TSP costs? No, because TSP is a great buy, as is.

This plan is simply limiting your options to manage your funds. And if you don't think the 24 "free" trades will shrink to zero remember the evolution of "free" 411.

Rather than just say so.... they go to the oldest play in the book.... Envy.

The other guy, that mean old day trader (and I am not one by the way) is ripping You off. Let's get him!

This way YOU cheer as the start the march toward charging YOU for every transaction.

Oh, do you think the fact that the dollar is going the way of the Mark during the weimar republic has anything to do with the complaining about the "expensive" I fund.

"I" fund will probably be gone in a few years too, "too expensive". Then you same suckers can cheer that too.

What was it that PT Barnum said?

Day Trading Fees

Accounting Technician
DVBA
Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:39 PM

Post Reply

I wholeheartely support the limiting of trades. I do not feel that I should have to lose money because of the cost of these frequest traders. TSP was never meant to be a day trader account. I have an advisor and I talk to them and then chose my funds and sit there for 1 year and then reassess and sit for another year and I have never lost money. So YES limit the amount of trades by all means.

What are the costs for trading the L Funds?

Mr.
DoD
Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:40 PM

Post Reply

Curious that you left the L-Funds out of your report. I would like to know the costs for L Fund transactions. Why not give a complete report for all of the administrative costs in 2007 for all of the TSP funds?

Beyond that, it seems to me the TSP Board is going backwards. If they actually add restrictions to the numbers of trades per month or raise fees, I really don't see why we shouldn't replace their entire operation with someone like Fidelity, etc.

Re: What are the costs for trading the L Funds?

Numbers guy
Doesnt matter
Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:36 AM
I just can't believe all this bull...they say something and everyone just takes their word for it.

If they said "everyone should trade", eveyone would have said let's do it without questioning. Why? Because they said so.

Wake up people, stop being so guilable. Look at the numbers, analyze them, see if they make sense then react.

They say 3,000 people make such an impact on cost? Hard, very hard to believe. I am sorry, I am just a numbers guy, and don't buy it.

Did anybody look at the L funds and how their daily balancing (which is technically the same thing as daily trading) affects the overall cost?

I have a feeling that is the REAL cost issue, not the 3,000 doing probably less transactions than somone in the the L funds. They just do it on their own, not on a daily basis as the L - funds...

I read strong words. Shame on you all, shame for letting others think for yourself.

It is a matter of principle. We have grown so accustomed to giving up our rights.

TSP trading

Assistant US Attorney
DOJ
Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:47 PM

Post Reply

Wow! Those numbers for trading expenses are staggering. I completely agree that frequent traders should not be allowed to negatively impact the returns for the rest of us. Restrctions should be imposed sooner rather than later!

Re: TSP trading

Day Trader
Small Agency
Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:17 AM
I would like to see the L Fund fees as well since that is the new funds they are pimping and trying to force on everyone. There is some weird stuff going on with TSP lately and I don't think we are getting the whole story. They are trying to force people to contribute and automatically enroll them in the L Fund.

day trading, fund balancing

software engineer
navair
Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:02 PM

Post Reply

I have often wondered and have heard the question raised (but never answered), how does the computerized "day trades" (fund xfers requested by a participant) cost more than the computerized "fund rebalances" of the lifetime funds? If the participants' fund xfers aren't computerized maybe it's time to bring the system into the 1990s. When is a fund xfer not a fund xfer?

Re: day trading, fund balancing

manager
DoD
Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:39 PM
I think the answer to your question is in the article on which you are commenting where it says "Expenses for this fund came to $13.8 million out of the total costs of $15 million. Trading I fund shares has become more frequent. In September and October, the average I fund daily trading totaled $224 million. That compares to an average of $49 million in daily I fund trades in 2006. According to the TSP study, most of these costs came from frequent traders. In other words, TSP participants who bought or sold shares in the I fund completed a "round trip" of trades within 60 days.:

It sounds like there are about 3000 day traders responsible for most of the trading expenses that the rest of us are paying for in the form of lower rates of return.

Day Traders

Retired Supervisor
Department of the Army
Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:07 PM

Post Reply

Yes, the trades cost money, but the proposed solution is a classical Democrat solution. The logical solution to take the cost of the trades and roll them back to the person making the trade. In short be responsible for your actions and accept the consequences of your actions. Instead, they propose taking a page from the Democrat’s play book. They want to still pass the expense to everyone but then also dictate how people are to live according to their grand plan. In this case how they are to manage their own funds. Capitalism works, but the Democrats who seem to feel the need to control the personal activities of everyone else are the greatest impediment to a successful capitalistic system.

Re: Day Traders

HR Specialist
NASA
Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:07 PM
Let's leave the political parties out of TSP. All of the changes that created the new funds and permitted unlimited trading came into effect under Republican presidents. These are the same folks who want to do away with the protections of Social Security in favor of more "investments" in the stock market.

P.S. The last balanced budget was with a Democrat in office. Since then, Republicans were so anxious to line their own pockets, they created "for the rich only" tax breaks that stole the future financial srcurity from our children and grandchildren. If they manage to steal yet another election, they are going to bankrupt our great country.

Re: Day Traders

IT Spec
dod
Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:06 AM
HR Specialist, first you say leave political parties out of this discussion, then you turn right around and bash one of the very political parties you tell us to leave out of this discussion!

You need to take your own advice and stop contradicting yourself.

Re: Day Traders

Retired Supervisor
Department of the Army
Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:28 AM
I know facts are seldom considered by those who pull the lever under the donkey’s tail, but let's mention a some just to clear a couple points. It is the Legislative branch of the government (Congress) that establishes budgets, not the Executive branch. The last balanced budget was during a Republican Congress. As far as “stealing elections”, you should read the Constitution to dispel some myths regarding the process. However, if you want to see actual stealing of elections on a wholesale basis you should study the history of Chicago and Mayor Daley.

Day Trading

CIS Admin Assistant
DHS
Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:08 PM

Post Reply

In todays world when computers can track anything.
A nominal charge of $25 per trade after the third trade and maybe $50 after the fifth tade per calender quarter would still allow a wary individual a sense of safety in a volatile market and also reduce the tendency to day trade.

Remember your rights are also at risk from unwarrented restrictions.

The unsaid is most people lose value when they "day trade" and soon stop the ins ands outs.

Total Comments: 177
Page 2 of 18

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.