Brian Gongol
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c314c/c314c9d03cd85f9847769dd1c2418dd12765e07e" alt="The United States of America"
What if, instead of giving Social Security benefits to Americans as they retired (to the tune of up to $2,500 a month for high-earning individuals), we instead endowed every 18-year-old with an amount of money similar to what they would have otherwise received (on average) from Social Security after retirement? ($2,500 a month for someone who lives for 20 years would be $600,000.) Certainly, there would be many objections. One would be that "they might lose it". Which is true. But that would certainly focus needed attention on better financial education, wouldn't it? A sizeable endowment for all would take away many excuses about not having a fair start in life. It would allow some to go to school, some to start businesses, and some to blow it on fast cars and liquor. Let's be clear: This is only a thought experiment, not a policy recommendation. But it does highlight some of the shortcomings in how we address money (and educational) issues today. And it may perhaps shed some light on how we should address old-age savings in America by shedding light on how we do things today through the lens of inversion.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c314c/c314c9d03cd85f9847769dd1c2418dd12765e07e" alt="The United States of America"
One thing can be said for the debate: It was unusually wonkish.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c314c/c314c9d03cd85f9847769dd1c2418dd12765e07e" alt="The United States of America"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26d74/26d74680e07d2a9c57029391252a6ac6ebe75786" alt="Computers and the Internet"