We need a leader(s) to explain this to the vast number of people who continue to believe that this money is theirs and can’t be touched. If we switched to an investment based retirement program for everyone, with a transition period for those above 45-50, we would all be better off.
Chile proved this along time ago, and was mentioned by George Bush when he tried to privatize SS.
> If we switched to an investment based retirement program…
Negative real interest rates (as we have now) are a real problem for that. (I’m not claiming to have a solution, nor even that there _is_ a solution. Disclaimer: My 401-K and IRA are in good shape, but for my retirement planning, my Schwab-bot has to rely mostly on the sacrosanct inflation adjustment of putting off Social Security until 70. No realistic investment offers anything close.)
We need a leader(s) to explain this to the vast number of people who continue to believe that this money is theirs and can’t be touched. If we switched to an investment based retirement program for everyone, with a transition period for those above 45-50, we would all be better off.
Chile proved this along time ago, and was mentioned by George Bush when he tried to privatize SS.
Pain is coming; we need to choose how and when.
> If we switched to an investment based retirement program…
Negative real interest rates (as we have now) are a real problem for that. (I’m not claiming to have a solution, nor even that there _is_ a solution. Disclaimer: My 401-K and IRA are in good shape, but for my retirement planning, my Schwab-bot has to rely mostly on the sacrosanct inflation adjustment of putting off Social Security until 70. No realistic investment offers anything close.)
> Pain is coming
Agreed.
Very interesting. New perspectives on the old problem.