Privatizing Social Security in the U.S. -- Comparing the Options
This paper uses a new version of the Auerbach-Kotlikoff model to consider alternative ways to privatize the U.S. Social Security system. The new model incorporates intra- and intergenerational heterogeneity and is closely calibrated to U.S. fiscal institutions. Three privatization issues are considered: financing the transition, participation rules, and progressivity. As shown, Social Security's privatization can substantially raise long-run living standards. But these gains come at the cost of welfare losses to transition generations and take a long time to materialize. The long-run poor have much to gain from privatization even absent an explicit redistribution mechanism. Finally, privatizations that give initial workers the option of remaining in the current system have particularly low transition costs and particularly favorable macroeconomic consequences. (Copyright: Elsevier)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 2 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.EconomicDynamics.org/review.htm
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.EconomicDynamics.org/RED17.htm Email: |
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andrew A. Samwick, 1997.
"Discount Rate Heterogeneity and Social Security Reform,"
NBER Working Papers
6219, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Samwick, Andrew A., 1998. "Discount rate heterogeneity and social security reform," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 117-146, October.
- Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier, 1998.
"Privatizing Social Security: First-Round Effects of a Generic, Voluntary, Privatized U.S. Social Security System,"
in: Privatizing Social Security, pages 313-361
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alan L. Gustman & Thomas L. Steinmeier, 1995. "Privatizing Social Security: First Round Effects of a Generic, VoluntaryPrivatized U.S. Social Security System," NBER Working Papers 5362, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Imrohoroglu, Ayse & Imrohoroglu, Selahattin & Joines, Douglas H, 1995. "A Life Cycle Analysis of Social Security," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 83-114, June.
- Davis, Steven J & Henrekson, Magnus, 1999.
" Explaining National Differences in the Size and Industry Distribution of Employment,"
Small Business Economics,
Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 59-83, February.
- Steven J. Davis & Magnus Henrekson, 1997. "Explaining National Differences in the Size and Industry Distribution of Employment," NBER Working Papers 6246, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kotlikoff, Laurence J & Smetters, Kent A & Walliser, Jan, 1998.
"Social Security: Privatization and Progressivity,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 137-41, May.
- Martin Feldstein, 1997. "Transition to a Fully Funded Pension System: Five Economic Issues," NBER Working Papers 6149, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:red:issued:v:2:y:1999:i:3:p:532-574. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christian Zimmermann)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.