Arf.com's Favorite president wants this

I am interested to see how you guys feel about this. I will share my predictions on what I feel is going to happen later.

At this point, even if this was a good thing at face value, I'd still be inclined to not believe a fucking word FBHO speaks.  Everything he says is a crock of shit, why would this be any different.

Having following this topic for years, the bad thing is that you only see one side of it when they report on it. You can look at every article and they only have quotes that are in favor of a deal like this. You never hear both sides of the story, which is very unusual for the Financial News outlets.

This. Being admittedly ignorant of what the details of this are, I don't trust a thing he says. Somehow, the end result will be something I don't like, just like everything else he does.

The details are difficult to explain, because what they want to do and why they want to do it are on two completely different planes. Where as you can give an answer to both questions both those both answers don't ordinarily agree with one another. I really have an idea on what the end game is, and it's not in the best benefit of anyone.

It sounds good at face value.  After all, who wouldn't want an adviser that always gave you advice with your best interest in mind, right?  Right?

The only people that will get rich off of this rule are the lawyers hired to go after advisers and the lawyers hired to defend the advisers.

Lets work out the logic here:
The advisers will make a living one way or another.
Because of the fact that the majority of Americans refuse to become educated on basic financial literacy guarantees that they will need these services.
Therefore someone will be paying the advisers.
If the advisers are not getting paid by the funds for steering business their way then it's coming from somewhere else.
The plan administrator (company that hires the adviser and keeps records of your account) will need money to pay the guy that you really shouldn't need, but are too lazy to learn some basics so you do need him.
That money will come from somewhere in the plan.
I doubt your employer will pick up the tab.
Who does that leave?  YOU.

Now, to be fair, you have always been paying this adviser in one way or another.  If he does his job correctly he will put you in the best funds for you instead of best funds for him to profit.  How will he get his paycheck?  You will start seeing much higher plan administration fees.  People that have been avoiding his high cost funds all along have been (at least partially) dodging the "stupid tax" that others have been paying.  Now they will just spread that cost among everyone.

that's the 401k side, what about the IRA side?

I don't see there being much difference overall.  Either the investment firm gets profit from the funds it sells or from the customer directly.  That adviser will need to be paid if you are using him, you know he isn't working for free just because he's a nice guy.  If he's not getting paid by the funds for selling a specific fund then he's going to have to generate his fee from somewhere else.  That somewhere else will be administrative fees/ Assets Under Mgmt/ Etc.  You might see some funds lowering or eliminating their load fees, but don't count on it.

The only way out if it is to become literate on investing - and I don't mean day trading.

The rule proposal will not allow for a load (commission) to be charged at all to the clients account at all regardless if .25% or 7%.

Okay, so all of these unscrupulous advisors who charge upfront fees are just all of a sudden going to stop charging up front fees? You know better than that. Annuities is where they will go. This is a place holder for what will happen in the future. Unscrupulous advisors, will start to recommend annuities, in turn the DoL will call it a success because now more Americans have insurance products in their retirement accounts.

Keep in mind, insurance products are the more lucrative products to sell.

oh I have no doubt that they will make their money.  I also believe they will get even more creative than they already are with their "insurance investments"

You now see what I am saying? The transparency isn't going to be any better and it won't reduce cost to the client.

Also, have you ever researched the requirements to be an RIA, which is what the DoL just loves? Compare that you what it takes to sell a share of CVX for .5% to someone.