Many people are worried about investing their money privately and think that at least social security is "guaranteed." Another argument against privatization is that people who are not required to save will not, and will then end up sucking off those who do, when it comes time to retire. Think about it this way: if you knew that there would be no social security waiting for you when you retired, how much money would you start saving today? Would you honestly run about happy-go-lucky and just let the chips fall where they may? I know of one senior citizen in particular who knew next to nothing about the stock market before he retired. Yet now that he has retired, and rolled over his retirement funds into private investment, he watches the financial cable channel daily, has regular discussions with his stock-broker, and follows the market like a hawk. Yes, this is only one example but I have to believe that others would behave in a similar manner.
During an argument with a former professor of mine (who shall remain nameless) over the issue of the privatization of social security, I posed the following question, "Do you honestly believe that when people's incentives change their behavior does not?" He answered with a shout, "Yes!" Poor man, he obviously never had a course in economics. That type of belief system is akin to saying that when a pint of Ben & Jerry's ice cream goes up to $7.50 he will continue to buy exactly the same amount as he did before. When people's incentives change, their behavior changes - this is how the free market works.
Go To Page: 1 2
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Beth Skinner's Marketplace Economics topic, please visit the Discussions page.