IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/polsoc/v40y2012i1p81-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Improved Options for Private Saving Offer a Plausible Substitute for Public Pensions?

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Burtless

Abstract

Old-age income protection is provided in wealthy democracies by publicly funded defined-benefit pensions. Budgetary challenges have forced policy makers to consider private alternatives to these traditional systems. I consider the shortcomings of private saving arrangements in duplicating the advantages of public pensions. Some shortcomings can be overcome by introducing compulsory elements into private saving plans. Worker contributions into such plans could be mandatory; some or all worker accumulations in the plans could be converted to annuities at retirement; and workers’ investment choices could be narrowly circumscribed. These restrictions do not eliminate the biggest weakness of private saving plans. Fluctuations in asset prices make it hard even for well-informed savers to select an affordable saving rate and an investment strategy that will assure decent income in old age. Public pension systems partly insulate workers against economic and financial market risks by sharing those risks broadly across workers, retirees, and taxpayers in multiple generations.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Burtless, 2012. "Can Improved Options for Private Saving Offer a Plausible Substitute for Public Pensions?," Politics & Society, , vol. 40(1), pages 81-105, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:polsoc:v:40:y:2012:i:1:p:81-105
    DOI: 10.1177/0032329211434691
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0032329211434691
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0032329211434691?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:polsoc:v:40:y:2012:i:1:p:81-105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.