Some of the more annoying arguments against individual investments for Social Security go like this: “It’s too risky. It’s too expensive. It’s too complicated.” Donald Luskin points out in his article, The Lesson of Thrift that Personal accounts already work (which might be why the critics are so scared)
The critics never mention that there’s already a government-administered retirement system that has shown for over 15 years that personal accounts are prudent, inexpensive, and simple. It’s the Thrift Savings Plan of the United States federal government, currently serving 3.3 million government employees.
I wonder why senators and congressmen aren’t being asked why should the public at large be deprived of a benefit good enough for the same congressmen & senators to enjoy. Luskin has a theory,
The Thrift Savings Plan proves that there’s nothing too risky, too expensive, or too complicated about personal accounts for Social Security. So what are the critics really worried about? I think they’re afraid that personal accounts are too empowering. Once a nation of voters becomes a nation of empowered investors — there’s just no telling what kind of empowerment they’ll want next.
José Carlos Rodríguez would probably agree.