Although corporate and conservative interests have done a stellar job of demonizing “Obama Care,” it makes no economic sense whatsoever to de-fund this landmark legislation.

In a major concession triggered by pending state lawsuits challenging the health reform law, President Obama recently signaled he was flexible on the law’s insurance mandate. Yet that would require  Congress to shift the major building blocks of the plan back to the states, many of which are ill-prepared to design their own plans.

We’re back to a cagey political poker game. Obama has called to see the cards of his opponents. They either come up with a winning hand or fold. Being martyrs to the cause proves nothing, though.

Tea-partying House GOP members who want to kill health reform, and (in some cases) refused to sign up for federal health benefits, are paying the price and experiencing first-hand the cruelty of individual insurance markets.

My own Congressman (Joe Walsh, R-Illinois), eschewed federal coverage at the expense of endangering his own wife, who has a pre-existing condition. Although I didn’t vote for this fellow, I can tell him from my own experience that he’s going to pay sky-high premiums, not get any real discounts from providers with his meager health-savings account and may not even get private coverage for his spouse.

Misguided principles are trumping sound politics. Health reform is one of the best consumer laws in a generation. Not only would the health reform law over time create employment, it’s good for small and large businesses alike.

According to a Center for American Progress study, the health law would create up to 4 million jobs. That’s in addition to saving lives by expanding health access for all, eliminating the inhuman denial of coverage for those with pre-existing conditions and reducing costs for businesses.

Starving the law of funding — which is what the House GOP said it plans to do — will immediately raise taxes for small businesses. Currently they receive a 25- to 35-percent tax credit for paying for health insurance for employees. It will also trigger a cascade of roadblocks that will prevent some 30 million Americans from saving on insurance through widely-available exchanges in three years.

One of the keystones to health reform has been an attempt to move insurance marketing toward free-market principles. Today’s system is upside down. Instead of creating one large pool to include both the sickest and healthiest Americans, those with pre-existing or chronic conditions are “underwritten” out of most private non-group coverage.

Individual buyers (under age 65) can’t shop for themselves across state lines for the best rates or get into any federal program. They are restricted to their own states, which are typically controlled by a handful of large insurers who can keep competition low and rates high. Instead of an ability to pick the best insurer, it’s the companies who select their clients.

In theory, the insurance exchanges that will go into effect in 2014 will end the apartheid of the sick and chronically ill. Should Congress do anything constructive with health reform enhancement, it should put exchanges and consumer protections on the books next year or create an option to buy-in to Medicare.

Ironically, the health insurance industry, which lobbied vigorously against reform, has the most to gain from the law going forward. Mandatory purchase requirements will deliver them some 32 million new customers.

Yet by pouring millions into GOP coffers and indirectly encouraging Republican governors and attorneys general to battle the individual mandate in federal courts, they should be chary of what they initially desired.

I asked Wendell Potter, a former health insurance company executive with a conscience, what he thought of the industry’s perverse death wish. Potter, who authored “Deadly Spin,” a brilliant insight into corporate public relations, told me “they [the industry] need the revenue stream” from the potential new customers. “Their business practices were not sustainable for the long haul. Without the individual mandate, their costs will explode.”

Granted, the health reform law is loaded with flaws. It won’t ensure universal coverage for all Americans and may not reduce costs all that much. We will need a single-payer system to better address many of these shortcomings.
As an economic booster, though, the health act is still potent and should be enhanced. The Congressional Budget Office predicts it will shave $124 billion from the federal deficit by 2019 and $1 trillion in the subsequent decade.

The best kind of economic growth comes from a confident populace that’s willing to take risks to succeed. They can’t do anything if they are still at risk of bankruptcy from simply getting sick.

We are all Wisconsin badgers now. If collective bargaining goes, forget about personal economic progress for middle class Americans.

The huge demonstrations in Madison, Wisconsin, over the union-busting proposal of Gov. Scott Walker have impact on us all. Ditto that for similar moves in other states like Ohio and Indiana.

There’s something deeper and more malignant in efforts to strip public employee unions of collective bargaining. They are the last bulwark of organized labor in the U.S. Corporate interests want them crushed and are using budget deficits as a sledge hammer. That’s also the rallying cry of the majority of the GOP-dominated House, which voted to de-fund the National Labor Relations Board.

It’s an age-old saga: labor vs. capital. In the case of Wisconsin, the real plot wasn’t a concerted effort to reduce a state budget deficit. The state was in the black until the Governor insisted on corporate tax cuts.

Public-sector workers are actually willing to compromise on contributing more to their retirement and healthcare. Walker’s all-or-nothing proposal wanted to eliminate their ability to collectively bargain. It was clear from his caudillo attitude that he wanted to bust the unions.

Walker’s union animus is fed by the money that flowed into his campaign coffers. The politically regressive Koch Brothers, whose companies include Georgia Pacific, donated more than $43,000 to Walker’s campaign.

The Koch Brothers’ various interests in Wisconsin also would benefit from no-bid sales of state assets, which was conveniently inserted in Walker’s “budget repair” bill.  A spokesman for Koch Industries denied that the company would benefit.

A prank call further revealed the iron-fisted tactics Walker was willing to employ to crush the unions. Corporate money can be freely used as a cudgel against unions under the wretched “Citizens United” Supreme Court ruling. Business interests can donate unlimited amounts to political campaigns and pursue their anti-labor agendas unheeded.

I have a sense of what it was like before labor-backed social benefits of Social Security and Medicare didn’t exist. Old-age poverty was rampant. Maybe you didn’t go to the doctor when you left the workforce. You couldn’t afford it. Life was indeed nasty, brutish and short, to quote Thomas Hobbes.

Without unions, it’s a divide and conquer world where each of us become weak private contractors — if we can even get to the bargaining table without getting fired. Benefits will continue to erode and communities will suffer. There’s not much left to unionized America as it is — 88 percent of the workforce is not represented through collective bargaining.

Then there are the vaunted fringe benefits that most of the labor force enjoyed at one time and now are the envy of most white-collar workers chafing at puny 401(k) balances. Defined-benefit pensions used to guarantee a monthly retirement payment for the rest of your life. In 1980, two-thirds of American workers had this great coverage.

Now most Americans are scared to death they won’t have enough money in their 401(k)s, which corporate America adores because it contributes so little, loads up with excessive vendor fees and doesn’t guarantee. Employers don’t have to offer a 401(k) at all or even put money in them. Here’s your lump sum, good luck!

America was a prosperous nation under the forced savings of defined benefit plans. Now we borrow for everything, although that won’t work for retirement. Only one-in-five workers get old-style guaranteed pensions now. Most of them are in the public services or old industrial companies.

I’m not saying that given this age of diminished expectations and global competition that public employees can’t contribute more to their own health and retirement plans. They have said that they will and they understand the new reality.

But you don’t confront working people by first smashing the bargaining table and telling them they can hit the bricks if they don’t like it. That’s so 19th century and smacks of robber barony. We’ve come too far to sink into corporate feudalism.

Somehow I don’t think President Obama had the home-mortgage interest deduction in mind when he mentioned the U.S. tax code before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce this week.

Yet winding down and eliminating this write-off for homes would be good for business. It’s unfair, doing nothing to revive the housing market and can be put to better use shifting it to entrepreneurs to create jobs.

Most of the job creation in the U.S. economy comes from small businesses, which typically have no public shareholders to sate and are not primarily interested in fattening pay packages of overpaid executives.

The home mortgage deduction needs to go because it doesn’t make housing less expensive, either. If anything, it makes homes more expensive because the subsidy inflates prices. Most homebuyers don’t even itemize to take advantage of it. Nixing it would make homes more affordable.

As Alan Mallach, senior fellow at the Center for Community Progress, wrote in this space: “It is one of the most regressive parts of the tax code, since it affects all house prices, including the price of houses bought by lower-income home buyers, who rarely itemize and get little benefit from the deduction.”

Mallach cites one study found that “barely 10 percent of homeowners earning less than $30,000 take the deduction, but they pay higher prices for their homes to benefit more well-off homeowners. On top if this, it is projected to add $120 billion to the federal deficit next year.”

Will getting rid of the write-off deep-six the already flagging U.S. home market? Mallach noted that Italy pared its residential housing deduction in 1992 and maintains a higher home ownership rate than the U.S.

Why give a break to entrepreneurs? Won’t they squander it? True, many businesses won’t make it out of start-up mode, but those that become profitable become employment engines. Small and medium-sized enterprises account for 60 to 70 percent of most jobs in industrialized countries. Why not give those that are struggling to survive a tax break if they can create more employment?

According to Robert Litan of the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, between 1980 and 2005, nearly all U.S. net job creation was produced by small firms.

When President Obama exhorted corporations to spend the “$2 trillion sitting on their balance sheets” to bring down the 9-percent unemployment rate, he was preaching to a tone-deaf choir. Although they wanted to hear that the corporate income tax would be reduced — and that message was delivered — he should have talked about how he was going to help small and medium-sized businesses.

Big public corporations have long relied upon anti-social incentives when it comes to employment. They can fatten their bottom lines when they lay off people, cut benefits, take over other companies and sit on cash. The market often rewards them for doing so and executive stock options go up in value.

The White House should be studying what Singapore, Hong Kong and New Zealand are up to, which were rated as the three best places for the “ease of doing business” by the World Bank. And instead of talking before the mega-corporate club of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, he should talk to some innovative entrepreneurs around the country.

A more socially responsible tax code needs to reward people for productive activity. Giving Americans a huge break to buy an overpriced home has already gotten millions into trouble. It’s the one part of the American Dream that has turned into a nightmare.

Did the Egyptian rebellion open up a gold mine for civil reforms or a mummy’s tomb of economic perils?

I choose to think there are some robust opportunities presenting themselves as Egypt and other countries press their demands for freedom from oppression. On the political side, if you subscribe the “big wave” theory that Egypt’s mass protests will trigger similar revolts in other Arab states, then the resulting reforms — should they happen — may fuel prosperity and greater distribution of wealth.

The markets, of course, have a laser focus on Egypt and its ramifications. There’s a huge commodities rally going on; some of it is guided by fear and speculation but most of it is driven by demand.

I’m rooting for the Egyptians to get a better shake from their thuggish government. For a country of 83 million, most of Egypt’s wealth is concentrated at the top and little of its resource wealth is shared.

Compare the most populous country in Africa to the tiny oil-drenched Gulf State Qatar, which reported about $145,000 in GDP per capita and has one of the highest growth rates in the world at 19 percent. My source, by the way, is the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, which apparently was behind the curve on unfolding events in the land of the Pharaohs. They weren’t watching Twitter closely enough.

As Jack Ablin, chief investment officer of Harris Private Bank, notes in his current market update, Egypt’s per-capita gross domestic product is $6,200, which even lags Tunisia’s $9,500 and most of the Arab world.

The most immediate reaction of the markets as the revolt unfolded was to sell stocks and buy U.S. Treasury Bonds, gold and energy stocks (and other commodities), which is typical. The widespread fear is that the Arab “street” will emulate Egypt and Tunisia and somehow curtail oil production in other oil-producing states. I don’t buy this idea — yet.

If you believed the panic peddlers and bought into the oil-scarcity scenario, you’d be long natural resources stocks. Just don’t focus on one region, though. Get a piece of energy growth regardless of what happens in the Middle East. Expanding economies from China to Brazil are going to demand more oil to make everything from gasoline to plastics.

Of course, if you were optimistic that Egypt is going to sort out its political crisis in a way that will economically benefit most of its people, you could bet directly on the country through the Market Vectors Egypt Index, a basket of stocks that trade on that country’s exchange. (Normally a reasonable vehicle, the ETF halted trading on Jan. 31.)

Let’s look at some other strategies:

Energy prices continue to rise no matter what happens.
I think this is a safe bet due to rising global demand in emerging economies. In that case, move into the Vanguard Energy ETF or the Rydex S&P Equal Weight Energy ETF.

Petro-energy price increases trigger more clean energy production.
This has always seemed like a reasonably good wager to me, although it’s happened in fits and starts and is a much more powerful trend in China, Japan and Europe. The Powershares Cleantech Portfolio or Van Eck Global Alternative Energy ETF are good places to start. President Obama highlighted a clean energy drive in his State of the Union speech, although he still must get any new legislation through the climate-change hostility of the GOP.

Energy prices will drop in the short term after the panic buying.
This is always a possibility when there’s blood in the streets; energy prices will drop once the protests die down. Want to be adventurous and take much more risk? Short (bet on the price falling) energy through the ProShares Ultrashort Oil & Gas ETF, which moves in the opposite direction of energy prices.

Do you want to think less and invest more? Don’t trouble yourself with which scenario may play out. These things are hard to predict.

Spread your money across all commodities through an ETF like the Powershares DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund, an efficient way to invest in a basket of in-demand goods like crude oil or zinc. Even if there isn’t more unrest and widespread hoarding, there will be growth in this sector.

When debt collectors call, hang up

Can your financial adviser, unless they are a fiduciary

By John F. Wasik (reuters)
Author, The Cul-de-Sac Syndrome

There’s a host of information a mortgage broker or banker won’t tell you up front that may increase the cost of your financing.

You could pay much more on a mortgage than your initial quote rate based on a rating system used by government mortgage insurers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Brokers and bankers rarely tell you this coming in the door. They want to lock you in to a loan as soon as possible. With rates rising, this is really important to know.

In the wake of the biggest real estate meltdown in American history, the devil’s in the details when you apply for a loan. This hidden rating system will penalize you with a higher rate if your credit score is low or you apply for certain types of loans. It’s being employed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government’s captive mortgage entities, which account for about 80 percent of new loans now.

As of January 1, mortgage brokers and bankers have to tell you that you may not get the best rate if your credit report is flawed, although they may not give you essential details up front on what else could bump up your finance rate.

You need to ask about how you will fare in the Fannie/Freddie “risk-based pricing” regime, which is basically a computer-run scoring matrix run by your banker. Here are some factors that could raise your cost of credit:

• Credit scores (based on the FICO system) below 740.
• High loan-to-value ratios (the percentage of the property’s value that’s mortgaged). The more equity you have or the more money you put down, the lower your rate.
• Adjustable-rate, Interest-only or 40-year loans.
• Cash-out refinancings.
• Investment properties.
• Condominiums and cooperatives.
• Manufactured homes.
• Multiple-unit properties.

The risk-based pricing program evaluates the type of loan, your credit score and loan-to-value ratio and determine what “add-ons” will boost your quoted rate, if any.

A low FICO score — say below 620 — may add at least a half-percentage point to your loan. An interest-only loan may increase your rate by three quarters of a point. Those financing buying investment properties will likely pay the highest rates — up to one and three-quarter points more.

As with all loans, it pays to pull your credit report before you apply for a loan or refinance. Certain items such as record errors or bumping up against credit limits can be fixed fairly easily and raise your credit score. Outstanding bills such as medical debts may also hurt.

“We encourage people to be more informed,” says Dick Lepre, a senior loan officer with RPM Mortgage in San Francisco. “If they want the best rates they need to keep their credit score at or above 740.  They must be vigilant about things such as medical collections which are often the result of confusion regarding medical co-payments.”

You can request a free credit report from www.annualcreditreport.com. Just be careful not sign up for credit monitoring services that will cost you additional monthly fees. The Federal Trade Commission spells out some of the pitfalls of so-called free services.

One other side effect of risk-based pricing: The stricter underwriting rules also make it more difficult to qualify for a loan, which is not much help to markets that are swimming in properties and won’t get back on their feet unless demand returns.

Hindsight seems to rule the day as the government struggles to alleviate the home crisis. If only the mortgage barons had some realistic underwriting standards five years ago. It would have prevented a lot of heartbreak.

The fiscal malady that plagues Illinois — and its painful treatment — may be coming to a state, county or municipality near you.

What will cure this spreading pox on the populace? Higher taxes, lower spending and that rare commodity: political honesty.

I feel the pain since I live in Illinois and will pay higher taxes. This couldn’t be more personal to me. My daughters’ school district is owed state money and has fired teachers. My father’s teachers’ pension fund (among others) has been methodically underfunded for years. I went down to our state capitol last year with other University of Illinois alumni to lobby the state legislature to pay more than $400 million in unpaid education bills.

The Prairie State’s teaching moment was ignited by the Illinois legislature’s passage on January 11 of a tax increase that will raise $6.8 billion for state coffers and impose spending limits. The personal income tax will climb from three percent to five percent; the corporate levy from seven percent from 4.8 percent. It’s a mere finger in the dike as the state still needs to borrow to cover pension obligations. The rates may ratchet down over time.

Sad as this may sound, the Chicago Cubs have been managed better than the Illinois budget. The state was running a $13 billion budget deficit, which could balloon to $15 billion; it was in the worst fiscal shape of any state. Its shortfall was nearly twice that of California, which has nearly three times the population.

As a taxpayer, I’m outraged that things got this bad. As a citizen, though, I still want education to be fully funded, public-employee pensions to be honored and my state to invest heavily in infrastructure and job-creating programs.

While Illinois is a poster child for horrendous fiscal management, other states and municipalities are hurting in a similar way. Banking analyst Meredith Whitney says 50 to 100 municipalities may file for bankruptcy.  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon recently echoed that concern.

In good times, many governments were generous with retirement and health benefits. They kept doling out the goodies with the assumption that widespread economic growth and a robust stock market would bail them out.

Yet the best intentions were declared on the road to hell. The stock market tanked three times in the last decade and took down public pension fund returns. Bond yields are abysmal. The ongoing housing crisis pummeled nearly every state by reducing income, property and sales tax revenues. Public pension payments were grossly inflated by bumping up salaries and bonuses in the final years of service.

The recession zapped state revenues by more than 30 percent between 2008 and 2009, the U.S. Census Bureau reported. That meant more teacher layoffs, furloughs for university professors and cutting services in countless communities. I went through my local school district’s budget with other citizens with a fine-toothed comb last year. It was like picking fleas off a lion.

The federal stimulus plan of 2009 helped somewhat, but not enough to offset a collective $130 billion state budget shortfall, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Some 40 states project budget gaps totaling $113 billion for next year and 46 states posted a deficit last year.

With the new bailout-averse Congress in place, it’s unlikely that we’ll see another major stimulus plan being passed that will ease the burdens on state houses and city halls. In the interim, sacrifices will abound.

Pension formulas will be downgraded. Benefits will be cut. Public employees will have to dig deeper into their pockets to pay for pension and health-care benefits. And taxes will certainly be raised if cuts fail to restore balance.

Not all taxes need to be onerous and unfair, though. It’s once again time to consider a tax on carbon, raising a motor fuel tax that hasn’t kept pace with inflation and a tax on financial speculation.

If I believed that states could “grow their way” out of their fiscal messes, I’d say wait on new taxes. Yet that won’t likely be the case in most states where jobs have been permanently vacuumed away by emerging economies. The best tax would be one that spurs a reinvention of the economy while creating private-sector employment and channels money back into communities. It would be a hallmark of social capitalism.

If only Illinois (and many other states) wasn’t too broke to take this next step. It would restore my faith in Prairie Populism. I might even root for the hapless Cubs again.

Although the old Chinese curse “may you live in interesting times” has a certain irony about it, this year will certainly not be dull for investors.

To prepare for it, you’ll need a plan, as always. I suggest you craft an investment policy statement that puts down in writing your goals and the amount of money you don’t want to lose. Then plan accordingly.

Resolutions are not on my list, nor is a budget, which doesn’t work for most people. Just stick to growing your money in a sustainable way.

And don’t pay any attention to forecasts. Stocks will fluctuate. There will always be volatility. Focus on a point in the future and figure out how to get there. Here are some trends already in motion that will help you in the coming year:

More brokers will be fired. If you have an adviser who makes recommendations based on commissions, they will never fully be in your corner. Make your own decisions. Only hire advisers and planners who are fiduciaries and will take responsibility — and can be sued — for their bad advice. (Sometime this year, the Securities and Exchange Commission will rule on whether all brokers should be fiduciaries, which will be a beneficial change.) If you need an adviser, hire a fee-only certified financial planner (www.napfa.org).

More investors will buy into auto-pilot portfolios. Wall Street has snookered Americans for years. They have conned people into believing that diving in and out of stocks and funds will boost your wealth. Well, it does increase wealth — theirs. Investing doesn’t have to be complicated. Stop investing in actively managed funds, most of which don’t beat the market over time. Figure out how much risk you can take and find a passive index portfolio at Folio.com or myplanIQ.com that meets your criteria for risk. Every major fund and ETF company also offers passive funds. Automatically invest in your 401(k) and other retirement plans. Rebalance every year according to your investment plan statement and goals.

Your taxes can come down even more. Sure, the government will give you a break on payroll and income taxes, but there’s more you can do. Appeal your property taxes. Property prices are averaged over the past three years by most assessors, so you should be due a reduction in your assessed valuation. Check your payroll tax withholding. Getting a refund every year isn’t necessarily a good thing. You’ve essentially handed the government free use of your money for a year. If your withholding rate is too high, lower it and give yourself a raise.

Stocks will gain. According to data on Presidential market cycles, stocks rarely decline in the third year of a term. If you can afford the risk of being in the stock market, make sure you are invested through an all-market index fund such as the iShares Dow Jones US Index Fund (IYY). That way, all your bets are covered and you don’t get sucked into a risky single stock or sector.

Interest rates will rise. I know, pundits have been predicting this for the last three years and if the economy remains moribund this year, then they will be wrong again. If, however, demand for credit escalates and corporations start to spend their $2 trillion hoard of cash, rates will climb to reflect higher demand for credit. Just make sure you are not in long-term bond funds, because they will suffer the biggest declines. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities or I Bonds will pay you more if inflation rises (www.treasurydirect.gov). Of course, any secure bond that you can hold to maturity will be okay.

Commodities will gain. A rising tide lifts all boats. A robust recovery in global economies means greater demand for commodities from coal to rare-earth metals. China, India and Brazil — and a host of other developing countries — all need several commodities to grow. Invest in a basket of them through the Powershares DB Commodity Index Tracking Fund (DBC), which follows a big basket of commodities.

Of course, all my market trends are based on the economy healing itself in the coming year and no major economic catastrophes.

There are always plenty of wild cards, though. That’s why it makes sense to create a low-cost, no-worry autopilot portfolio that samples big pieces of the stock, bond, real estate and commodities markets. It may not be interesting, but dull works better than daring and you don’t get penalized for betting wrong on trends.

For most of us, a 401(k) is like a big rock that we don’t want to turn over. We’re afraid of what may be skittering out when we do.

An untold number of 401(k) plans are charging employees too much to manage and administer their retirement kitties. The gremlins of excessive fees add up over time.

While it doesn’t sound like a lot, a one percentage point increase in plan investment fees can cut your retirement income by 28 percent over a work life of 25 years, according to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).

Lately, though, employees have silently been winning battles in getting these fees reduced and restoring hope for a decent retirement. Combined with a new DOL rule that will provide expense disclosure, this has been a watershed year for employees fighting to get a decent 401(k) program.

Some 85,000 employees in the $6 billion General Dynamics Corporation  (GD) 401(k) plan recently won a settlement in a lawsuit against the company. The workers claimed that they were being overcharged on fees within the plan.

As part of the settlement, the defense contractor’s insurers will put $15 million back into the plan, which will then be regularly reviewed by independent consultants to see that the employees are getting a fair shake on the fees. The company denies any wrongdoing.

Along with another recent case against Caterpillar, Inc. (CAT) by its employees, the General Dynamics suit is a landmark. This litigation represents some of the first victories by employees over bosses who bury and pass along needlessly onerous expenses in 401(k)s.

The General Dynamics settlement is a keystone because it appoints a watchdog, who is in charge of getting the best deal for employees on plan services. For example, administrative fees will be monitored by an independent fiduciary not connected to the company.

Some plans also charge high fees for middlemen called recordkeepers, who are involved in most 401(k)s. Instead of charging reasonable flat fees, these administrators were getting a percentage of assets under management, which was an awful arrangement for employees. The General Dynamics settlement mandated lower expenses for employees.

“Recordkeeping is a commodity,” says Jerome Schlichter, a St. Louis-based labor attorney who represented the General Dynamics employees and workers in similar cases. “Every 401(k) needs one, but cost has nothing to do with the size of the account. It should be a flat fee.”

Schlichter first filed a wave of similar suits against 14 large employers in 2006. Two of the cases have been dismissed, three are in the process of settlement and nine are outstanding.

These suits have shed needed sunlight on practices that few employees know about and most employers are loath to admit. Here are some things you should check with your 401(k) administrator, CFO or human resources department before the end of the year:

• Do you have retail-class funds within your 401(k)? This is the equivalent of Wal-Mart going into another store, buying something off the shelf and charging you the same undiscounted price. Funds within 401(k)s should be institutionally priced. That means expense ratios less than 0.10 percent annually for a stock index fund and 0.15 percent for a bond fund.
• No-bid funds. Your plan administrator should get the best diversified portfolio at the lowest cost. They should bid out services and fund management on a regular basis to do this. That’s their responsibility under federal law.
• Independent Review. An outside expert such as a fiduciary should thoroughly vet the plan to see that vendors are giving you the best price. Every plan can and should do this.

If you have no other contact with your company’s human resource department this year, make sure they are following up on getting you a fair shake in your 401(k). The savings will add up over time and boost your retirement fund.

Every dollar counts in a 401(k) these days since the average American has saved less than 7 percent of the desired amount for a comfortable retirement, reports a Wells Fargo survey.

In the case of General Dynamics, employees will see an additional $1.2 million in their plan.
Sometimes turning over that rock can be quite profitable.