Cato on Facebook Cato on Twitter Cato on Google+ Cato on YouTube Cato Mobile Cato RSS
Policy Analysis no. 692 February 13, 2012
February 13, 2012 Policy Analysis no. 692
by Michael D. Tanner
Michael Tanner is senior fellow with the Cato Institute and editor of Social Security and Its Discontents: Perspectives on Choice.
Michael Tanner is senior fellow with the Cato Institute and editor of Social Security and Its Discontents: Perspectives on Choice.
Published on February 13, 2012
Opponents of allowing younger workers to privately invest a portion of their Social Security taxes through personal accounts have long pointed to the supposed riskiness of private investment. The volatility of private capital markets over the past several years, and especially recent declines in the stock market, have seemed to bolster their argument.
However, private capital investment remains remarkably safe over the long term. Despite recent declines in the stock market, a worker who had invested privately over the past 40 years would have still earned an average yearly return of 6.85 percent investing in the S&P 500, 3.46 percent from corporate bonds, and 2.44 percent from government bonds.
If workers who retired in 2011 had been allowed to invest the employee half of the Social Security payroll tax over their working lifetime, they would retire with more income than if they relied on Social Security. Indeed, even in the worst-case scenario—a low-wage worker who invested entirely in bonds—the benefits from private investment would equal those from traditional Social Security.
While there are limits and caveats to this type of analysis, it clearly shows that the argument that private investment is too risky compared with Social Security does not hold up. With Social Security already running a cashflow deficit today—and facing a $21 trillion shortfall in the future that will make it impossible to pay promised benefits—private investment and personal accounts should be part of any discussion about reforming the troubled system.
Download the PDF of Policy Analysis no. 692 (1 MB) View this Policy Analysis in HTML Get Adobe Reader
Full text of Policy Analysis no. 692
� 2012 The Cato InstitutePlease send comments to webmaster
Healthy Competition: What's Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It
Removing government influence can cure what ails the American health system.
Printer Friendly Version
Feeds for Cato events: RSS • iCal
Knowledge and Coordination: A Liberal InterpretationCato Book Forum, Noon
U.S. Policy toward Iran: The Prospects for Success — and for FailureCato Conference, 9:00 am
The Lost Majority: Why the Future of Government Is Up for Grabs — and Who Will Take ItCato Book Forum, Noon
Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and PovertyCato Book Forum, 4:00 pm
Trade Policy Priority One: Averting a U.S.-China Trade WarCato Capitol Hill Briefing, Noon
Evaluating the Homegrown Terrorist ThreatCato Conference, 9:30 am
Free Market FairnessCato Book Forum, Noon
Is Immigration Good for America?Cato Conference, 9:00 am
[ More Events ]
Feeds for Cato events: RSS • iCal
[ More Events ]
March 29, 2012Knowledge and Coordination: A LiberalInterpretationCato Book Forum, Noon
March 30, 2012U.S. Policy toward Iran: The Prospects for Success— and for FailureCato Conference, 9:00 am
April 4, 2012The Lost Majority: Why the Future ofGovernment Is Up for Grabs — and Who WillTake ItCato Book Forum, Noon
April 4, 2012Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power,Prosperity, and PovertyCato Book Forum, 4:00 pm
April 11, 2012Trade Policy Priority One: Averting a U.S.-ChinaTrade WarCato Capitol Hill Briefing, Noon
April 13, 2012Evaluating the Homegrown Terrorist ThreatCato Conference, 9:30 am
Read Full Article »