IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/epa/cepawp/2016-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovations in Protecting the Old: Mostly Social Insurance and Some Assets

Author

Abstract

For the first time in two generations, there's a growing risk of being poor or near poor in old age because the U.S. pension system has failed. The U.S. pension system is based on a threelayered pyramid, with Social Security on the bottom, employment-based retirement plans in the middle, and personal assets at the top. The second layer has collapsed over the last 35 years as employer-based pensions have shifted years to “do-it-yourself†financial-based accounts anchored in individual asset-building.

Suggested Citation

  • Teresa Ghilarducci, 2016. "Innovations in Protecting the Old: Mostly Social Insurance and Some Assets," SCEPA working paper series. 2016-05, Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (SCEPA), The New School.
    • Handle: RePEc:epa:cepawp:2016-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.economicpolicyresearch.org/images/docs/research/retirement_security/WP_2016_5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Barr & Peter Diamond, 2009. "Reforming pensions: Principles, analytical errors and policy directions," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(2), pages 5-29, April.
    2. David Neumark & Ian Burn & Patrick Button, 2016. "Experimental Age Discrimination Evidence and the Heckman Critique," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 303-308, May.
    3. Brigitte C. Madrian, 2014. "Applying Insights from Behavioral Economics to Policy Design," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 663-688, August.
    4. Jesse Bricker & Alice Henriques & Jacob Krimmel & John Sabelhaus, 2016. "Measuring Income and Wealth at the Top Using Administrative and Survey Data," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 47(1 (Spring), pages 261-331.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wei Sun & Teresa Ghilarducci & Michael Papadopoulos & Anthony Webb, 2019. "The Impact of a Social Security Proposal for "Catch-Up" Contributions," SCEPA working paper series. 2019-03, Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (SCEPA), The New School.
    2. S³awomir Czech, 2016. "Choice Overload Paradox And Public Policy Design. The Case Of Swedish Pension System," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(3), pages 559-584, September.
    3. Deng, Weiguang & Li, Dayang & Zhou, Dong, 2019. "Beauty and Job Accessibility: New Evidence from a Field Experiment," GLO Discussion Paper Series 369, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    4. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Mauricio De Rosa, 2018. "Wealth distribution in Uruguay: capitalizing incomes in the dark," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 18-07, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    6. Bertrand Garbinti & Jonathan Goupille-Lebret & Thomas Piketty, 2016. "Accounting for Wealth Inequality Dynamics: Methods, Estimates and Simulations for France (1800-2014)," World Inequality Lab Working Papers halshs-02794339, HAL.
    7. Andreas Fagereng & Luigi Guiso & Davide Malacrino & Luigi Pistaferri, 2020. "Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 115-170, January.
    8. Schularick, Moritz & Albers, Thilo & Bartels, Charlotte, 2022. "Wealth and its Distribution in Germany, 1895-2018," CEPR Discussion Papers 17269, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Button, Patrick & Walker, Brigham, 2020. "Employment discrimination against Indigenous Peoples in the United States: Evidence from a field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. Per Krusell & Anthony Smith & Joachim Hubmer, 2015. "The historical evolution of the wealth distribution: A quantitative-theoretic investigation," 2015 Meeting Papers 1406, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Moritz Kuhn & Moritz Schularick & Ulrike I. Steins, 2020. "Income and Wealth Inequality in America, 1949–2016," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(9), pages 3469-3519.
    12. Xavier Gabaix & Jean‐Michel Lasry & Pierre‐Louis Lions & Benjamin Moll, 2016. "The Dynamics of Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 2071-2111, November.
    13. Rob Euwals & Annemiek van Vuren & Daniel van Vuuren, 2011. "The impact of reforms on labour market exit probabilities," CPB Discussion Paper 179, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    14. González, María P. & Scartascini, Carlos, 2023. "Increasing the Use of Telemedicine: A Field Experiment," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12850, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Alex Imas & Sally Sadoff & Anya Samek, 2017. "Do People Anticipate Loss Aversion?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1271-1284, May.
    16. Jesse Bricker & Alice Henriques Volz & Kevin B. Moore, 2017. "Updates to the Sampling of Wealthy Families in the Survey of Consumer Finances," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-114, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    17. Bertrand Garbinti & Jonathan Goupille-Lebret & Thomas Piketty, 2016. "Appendix to "Accounting for Wealth Inequality Dynamics: Methods, Estimates and Simulations for France (1800-2014)"," Working Papers halshs-02794354, HAL.
    18. Alvaredo, Facundo & Atkinson, Anthony B. & Morelli, Salvatore, 2018. "Top wealth shares in the UK over more than a century," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 26-47.
    19. Kuhn, Moritz & Bartscher, Alina & Schularick, Moritz & Wachtel, Paul, 2021. "Monetary policy and racial inequality," CEPR Discussion Papers 15734, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Rishabh Kumar, 2016. "Personal Savings from Top Incomes and Household Wealth Accumulation in the United States," International Journal of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 224-240, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social Security; Inequality; Policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • I14 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health and Inequality
    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:epa:cepawp:2016-05. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Bridget Fisher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cenewus.html .

    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.