RETIREMENT ISSUES, PLANS AND LIFESTYLES RETIREMENT SECURITY ENDANGERED BY LOW SAVINGS ASSESSMENTS AND ANALYSES No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained herein This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, medical or any other professional services RETIREMENT ISSUES, PLANS AND LIFESTYLES Additional books in this series can be found on Nova’s website under the Series tab Additional e-books in this series can be found on Nova’s website under the e-book tab RETIREMENT ISSUES, PLANS AND LIFESTYLES RETIREMENT SECURITY ENDANGERED BY LOW SAVINGS ASSESSMENTS AND ANALYSES RAYMOND W GREENE EDITOR New York Copyright © 2016 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher We have partnered with Copyright Clearance Center to make it easy for you to obtain permissions to reuse content from this publication Simply navigate to this publication’s page on Nova’s website and locate the “Get Permission” button below the title description This button is linked directly to the title’s permission page on copyright.com Alternatively, you can visit copyright.com and search by title, ISBN, or ISSN For further questions about using the service on copyright.com, please contact: Copyright Clearance Center Phone: +1-(978) 750-8400 Fax: +1-(978) 750-4470 E-mail: info@copyright.com NOTICE TO THE READER The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of information contained in this book The Publisher shall not be liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers’ use of, or reliance upon, this material Any parts of this book based on government reports are so indicated and copyright is claimed for those parts to the extent applicable to compilations of such works Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in this book In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise contained in this publication This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the subject matter covered herein It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services If legal or any other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought FROM A DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS Additional color graphics may be available in the e-book version of this book Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data ISBN: (eBook) Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc † New York CONTENTS Preface Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter Index vii Retirement Security: Most -Households Approaching Retirement Have Low Savings United States Government Accountability Office Statement of Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Associate Professor, Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St Louis Hearing on ''Bridging the Gap: How Prepared are Americans for Retirement?'' 49 Statement of Andrew G Biggs, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute Hearing on ' 'Retirement Savings 2.0: Updating Savings Policy for the Modern Economy'' 69 Testimony of John C Bogle, Founder of the Vanguard Group Hearing on ''Retirement Savings 2.0: Updating Savings Policy for the Modern Economy'' 83 99 PREFACE As baby boomers move into retirement each year, the Census Bureau projects that the age 65-and-older population will grow over 50 percent between 2015 and 2030 Several issues call attention to the retirement security of this sizeable population, including a shift in private-sector pension coverage from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans, longer life expectancies, and uncertainty about Social Security’s long-term financial condition This book examines the financial resources of workers approaching retirement and retirees and the evidence that studies and surveys provide about retirement security for workers and retirees In: Retirement Security Endangered … ISBN: 978-1-63484-137-5 Editor: Raymond W Greene © 2016 Nova Science Publishers, Inc Chapter RETIREMENT SECURITY: MOST -HOUSEHOLDS APPROACHING RETIREMENT HAVE LOW SAVINGS* United States Government Accountability Office WHY GAO DID THIS STUDY As baby boomers move into retirement each year, the Census Bureau projects that the age 65-andolder population will grow over 50 percent between 2015 and 2030 Several issues call attention to the retirement security of this sizeable population, including a shift in private-sector pension coverage from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans, longer life expectancies, and uncertainty about Social Security’s long-term financial condition In light of these developments, GAO was asked to review the financial status of workers approaching retirement and of current retirees GAO examined 1) the financial resources of workers approaching retirement and retirees and 2) the evidence that studies and surveys provide about retirement security for workers and retirees To conduct this work, GAO analyzed household financial data, including retirement savings and income, from the Federal Reserve’s 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances, reviewed academic studies of retirement savings adequacy, analyzed retirement-related * This is an edited, reformatted and augmented version of a United States Government Accountability Office publication, No GAO-15-419, dated May 2015 Testimony of John C Bogle … 91 Sources: Investment Company Institute and U.S Census Bureau Exhibit U.S Retirement Plan Ownership Think of it this way: What amount of annual income would $120,000 produce today? The yield on stocks is about 2%; the yield on stock mutual funds averages only about 1% (Those excessive investment expenses take their toll.) The yield on a portfolio of U.S Treasury and investment-grade corporate bonds is around 3% Combine these yields, even haphazardly, and the yield on a balanced portfolio is something like 2% On $120,000, that’s $2,400 a year, or $200 a month Better than nothing, but not really enough But $120,000 is merely the average accumulation for those of us nearing retirement For the top quintile of households, the accumulation averages $450,000 For the bottom quintile, the accumulation is but $18,000—likely to produce income of about $30 per month Yes, most experts believe that a 4% annual withdrawal rate (let’s say 2% from income and 2% from capital) is likely to be sustainable over a retiree’s lifetime They’re probably right Probably At this hearing, I expect you’ll hear from some experts who will argue that “all is well” for our retirement system that gives investors such a wide range of choices An ICI survey, for example, suggests that those in their 60s have account balances averaging $147,600 ($239,000 for those who have been participating in their firm’s plan for 30 years or more) But the ICI survey covers only “consistent participants” in 401(k) plans—those who have accumulated plan balances each year since 2007—so it hardly belies the $120,000 average balance reflected in the Boston College survey 92 John C Bogle ARE WE ADEQUATELY PREPARED? The average retirement balance for investors at or near retirement age then ranges from $120,000 for all plan holders to $147,600 for consistent plan participants The answer to the question “Are we saving enough for retirement?” is, unequivocally, “No.” And yet fund industry advocates (including the ICI) seem rather sanguine about today’s retirement readiness, claiming, “Contrary to conventional wisdom, most Americans are properly preparing for retirement.” Given that “most” could mean as few as 51% of households, this odd formulation would be true even if 49% were totally unprepared ICI presents data from four different studies, two of which support broad retirement readiness One of these two studies tells us that 71% of households are prepared for retirement, the other avers that 84% are prepared But the ICI also tells us that fully 33% of U.S households have no employer-sponsored retirement plans whatsoever Thus you would be unwise to give much credence to those two surveys The other two studies of this subject considered by the ICI suggested between 48% and 57% of households are estimated to be prepared for retirement These data clearly reaffirm what we see in the modest retirement accumulations cited earlier for those at or near retirement Indeed, a Federal Reserve Board study concludes that only about one-fourth of individuals appear to be planning for their own retirement If one presumes that common sense and objective reality trump speculative data from surveys making a plethora of mind-boggling assumptions, then of course we are not saving enough David Brooks, columnist for The New York Times, describes the reality: The people who created this country built a moral structure around money The Puritan legacy inhibited luxury and self-indulgence Benjamin Franklin spread a practical gospel that emphasized hard work, temperance and frugality Over the past 30 years, much of that has been shredded The social norms and institutions that encouraged frugality and spending what you earn have been undermined The institutions that encourage debt and living for the moment have been strengthened the most rampant decadence today is financial decadence, the trampling of decent norms about how to use and harness money [This] transformation has led to a stark financial polarization On the one hand, there is the investor class It has tax-deferred savings plans, 21 Testimony of John C Bogle … 93 as well as an army of financial advisers On the other hand, there is the lottery class, people with little access to 401(k)’s or financial planning but plenty of access to payday lenders, credit cards and lottery agents FACING THE FACTS Let’s face the facts: in 2013, twenty percent of our households received income below $20,599 (In current dollar terms, slightly below the $20,633 figure for 1970—an astonishing 33 years of stagnation.) Can you imagine trying to save for your retirement when you earn $20,000 a year before taxes? For the record, our households in the fifth percentile (earning more than 95% of U.S households) earned $191,156 in 2012, up from 28,950 in 1975, which equals $138,122 in 2012 dollars, a real increase of almost 40% So for those in David Brooks’ “lottery class,” the only way to approach adequacy in retirement security is to enhance Social Security (or some new supplemental federal program) for those at the lowest income levels in our society Given the constraints of today’s federal budget deficit, this will not be easy to accomplish For the “investor class,” those at the very top of the income ladder need little additional support for their retirement At lower levels, greater tax incentives for retirement savings would help, but a tax-credit would be a wiser policy than a tax-deduction, for it would limit further reductions in tax revenues by the federal government due to tax-favored retirement plans That loss in revenue totaled an estimated $164 billion in 2012 alone It is not at all clear that public policy should continue to encourage retirement savings for our wealthiest citizens, who have the resources (and more!) to prepare for retirement without needing tax incentives But we must be careful in how we handle this politically charged issue It stands to reason that in order to gain tax advantages for themselves, employers (especially in small- and medium-sized companies) may well be more likely to provide 401(k) plans for their employees, surely a social good 94 John C Bogle A FEDERAL STANDARD OF FIDUCIARY DUTY FOR MONEY MANAGERS Finally, I offer one simple, essential principle that is required to underscore the more shareholder-oriented (as opposed to manager-oriented) mutual fund industry that I envision: a federal standard of fiduciary duty for our nation’s institutional money managers (including, of course, mutual fund managers).2 Such a standard of fiduciary duty for institutional money managers would include: A requirement that all fiduciaries must act solely in the long-term interests of their beneficiaries An affirmation by government that an effective shareholder presence in all public companies is in the national interest A demand that all institutional money managers should be accountable for the compulsory exercise of their proxy votes, in the sole interest of their shareholders A demand that any ownership structure of managers that entails conflicts of interest be eliminated It is a curious and, finally, unpalatable fact that so far the subject of fiduciary duty has touched just about every aspect of investing except money management For example, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, under section 913(g)(1), enables the SEC to “promulgate rules to provide that the standard of conduct for all brokers, dealers, and investment advisers, when providing personalized investment advice about securities to retail customers shall be to act in the best interest of the customer without regard to the financial or other interest of the broker, dealer, or investment adviser providing the advice.” The omission of mutual fund managers (and other institutional money managers) was clearly deliberate For section 913(g)(2) explicitly states “the Commission shall not ascribe a meaning to the term ‘customer’ that would include an investor in a private fund managed by an investment adviser, where such private fund has entered into an advisory contract with such adviser.” The Department of Labor (DOL) has also ducked on the issue of fiduciary duty for fund managers, limiting their attempt to broaden the standards applied to retirement plans to include financial advisers to the plans (i.e., firms offering investment advice to individual plan participants and employee retirement 43 Testimony of John C Bogle … 95 plans) The DOL first made this proposal in 2010 At that time the fiduciary standard applied only to registered investment advisers (RIAs) But even without proposing that fund investment managers be subject to the same standard, the DOL proposal has been the victim of fierce criticism and long delays, and still awaits even more meetings with the various interest groups What’s more, the SEC has warned the DOL not to implement its rule until the commission advances its own rule on a uniform fiduciary duty standard on retail investment advice I cannot fathom how this crabbed, narrow application of a fiduciary standard can ignore the most important element in the entire retirement plan system—the money managers who essentially run the funds that compose not only the entire universe of defined contribution plans, but the entire universe of managers who oversee virtually all of the savings of American citizens who have entrusted the care of their assets to their trustees (whether we call them by that name or not) Fiduciary duty for all individuals and institutions who touch Other Peoples Money is an idea whose time has come The financial industry and its lobbyists had better get prepared for it WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Look, members of the Senate Finance Committee: DC plans (including IRAs) are the only realistic alternative for investors seeking to achieve a comfortable retirement But we must demand significant (some might say, radical) changes in the structure of DC plans, and in helping investors to get their money’s worth out of each dollar they invest There are, in fact, some notable examples of DC plans that work, and that work with great efficiency in helping employees accomplish their financial goals The most obvious example—which strikes close to home here in Washington, DC—is the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) It is large: $385 billion, among the 25 largest pools of institutional money management It is, well, cheap, with an annual expense ratio of less than 0.03% (three basis points) It is largely indexed: 100% of its long-term assets—some $212 billion—are composed of four index funds (The remaining $172 billion is invested in a money-market-like account composed of U.S government securities specially issued to TSP.) TSP is generous Each participant may invest up to $17,500 per year in the plan, and there is an automatic deduction of 3% of salary unless the participant 96 John C Bogle opts out An additional matching contribution of up to 4% is also available Yes, members of the committee; you are all eligible to participate in the Federal Employees Retirement System You have a fine DC option right at your fingertips And, I should add, so have I At the beginning of my career at Wellington Management Company in 1951, the company provided a defined contribution pension plan in which each employee’s compensation was set aside in Wellington Fund, a balanced (bond/stock) mutual fund, even then among the lowest-cost funds in the industry Yes, as times and circumstances changed, the provisions of the plan changed, and in recent years our Vanguard Retirement Savings Plan (RSP) has provided a company contribution of 10% of base compensation, plus 5.7% of compensation in excess of the Social Security wage base The company also matches, dollar for dollar, up to the first 4% of an employee’s voluntary contribution Yes, this is an extraordinarily generous DC plan, but it was designed to obviate the need for a DB plan And, as a plan participant for 63 years now— still focused importantly on Wellington Fund, but otherwise relying largely on Vanguard index funds—my retirement plan is the largest asset in my estate The magic of long-term compounding of investment returns, absent the tyranny of long-term compounding of investment costs, works! *** DC plans can work—and they must work DC plans already are the mainstay of our nation’s retirement system, and they become more important with each passing day But these one-time thrift plans must take on the best attributes of retirement plans They must be restructured, entailing the lowest possible cost burdens on investors and operated by managers that are held to a federal standard of fiduciary duty All of these improvements are within our reach, and it is high time we begin the long march toward their accomplishment End Notes Data source: Investment Company Institute Fact Book, 2014 The ICI expense table is entitled, incorrectly, “Expenses Incurred by Mutual Fund Investors Have Declined Substantially ” But expenses have actually increased by 81% It is expense ratios that have declined, but not total expenses Further, more than one-half of the drop in expense ratios has been created, not by managers selflessly cutting their fees, but by the explosive rise in index Testimony of John C Bogle … 97 funds, now almost one-third of all equity fund assets The expense ratios of activelymanaged equity funds averaged about 0.87% in 2013, vs the 0.74% reported by the ICI For what it’s worth, the average weighted expense ratio in 1950 was 0.60, at a time when fund assets were but $2.5 billion and total expenses of all funds combined were only $15 million! While a fiduciary standard is not required under the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Act’s preamble makes it clear that honoring the fiduciary standard is expected To wit, Section 1(b)(2) states that mutual funds must be “organized, operated, and managed” in the interests of their shareholders rather than in “the interests of [their] directors, officers, investment advisers underwriters, brokers, or dealers.” INDEX A access, 38, 46, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 75, 76, 88, 93 accounting, 76 adulthood, 59, 63 adults, 38, 58 age, vii, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 31, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 70, 71, 73, 79, 84, 87, 91, 96 agencies, 84 apples, 78 assessment, 35 asset building, 65 assets, 4, 6, 7, 10, 11, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 35, 36, 41, 42, 45, 49, 52, 53, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 65, 67, 75, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 95, 97 attitudes, 39, 51, 58 audit, automate, 59 automation, 54 average earnings, 24, 45, 71, 78, 80 B baby boomers, vii, 1, 4, 29, 38, 45 balance sheet, 42, 55 banking, 60, 62, 65 banks, 52 barriers, 50, 51, 53, 55, 59, 67 base, 4, 89, 96 basis points, 95 behaviors, 51 benchmarks, 23 beneficiaries, 6, 28, 45, 77, 80, 82, 83, 85, 88, 94 benefits, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 25, 27, 28, 34, 36, 37, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 52, 70, 71, 73, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82 bias, 56, 65 bonds, 19, 21, 72, 84, 86, 91 budget deficit, 93 C capital accumulation, 62 cash, 86 Census, vii, 1, 3, 20, 39, 41, 44, 70, 71, 81, 91 certificates of deposit, 58 challenges, 69, 83 changing environment, 60 Chicago, 40, 60, 61 child development, 64 children, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 54, 55, 58, 63, 64, 70, 80, 85 citizens, 55, 84, 93, 95 clarity, 76 100 Index clothing, 46 coding, 35 cognitive biases, 51 collaboration, 55 common sense, 92 communication, 76 communities, 60 compensation, 19, 21, 87, 96 complexity, 45, 76 computer, 71 Congress, 59, 77 consensus, 22 consulting, 40, 76 consumers, 63, 78, 89, 90 consumption, 4, 22, 25, 26, 28, 29, 37, 38, 45, 66, 71, 81 consumption patterns, 4, 37 cooperation, 71 cost, 6, 22, 28, 55, 59, 62, 63, 76, 86, 87, 88, 89, 96 Court of Appeals, 90 covering, 58 critical analysis, 90 criticism, 95 CSD, 49, 55, 58, 60, 62, 63 customers, 94 D data set, 35 debts, 35 deduction, 52, 93, 95 defined benefit pension, 72, 73 Department of Labor, 2, 7, 34, 84, 94 Department of the Treasury, 34 deposits, 56, 62 depressive symptoms, 64 depth, 38, 67 directors, 97 disability, 31, 43, 71 discomfort, 78 distribution, 6, 13, 52, 66, 89 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 94 DOI, 64 DOL, 94, 95 draft, 2, 34 drawing, 43 dream, 87 E earnings, 5, 7, 26, 27, 41, 42, 45, 71, 72, 73, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 84, 88 economic performance, 61 economic resources, 81 economic well-being, 39, 46 economics, 45, 53, 71 economies of scale, 89 educated women, 77 education, 25, 27, 38, 39, 51, 58, 59, 65, 71, 75, 77, 85 egg, 85 emergency, 49, 51, 52, 53, 57, 58, 59, 63 employees, 24, 42, 54, 56, 75, 76, 93, 95 employers, 6, 54, 76, 93 employment, 5, 6, 27, 31, 56 enrollment, 53, 54, 72, 75 equities, 86 equity, 5, 7, 11, 15, 24, 25, 27, 43, 45, 86, 89, 97 ethnicity, 38 Europe, 79 evidence, vii, 1, 2, 4, 5, 27, 34, 37, 51, 58, 59, 61, 62, 64 exercise, 94 expenditures, 7, 23, 46, 66 F fairness, 85 families, 46, 49, 50, 57, 58, 61, 83, 85, 90 famine, 71 FDIC, 62 federal government, 6, 7, 42, 93 Federal Reserve, 1, 3, 4, 7, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 42, 46, 47, 61, 84, 92 Federal Reserve Board, 84, 92 101 Index financial, vii, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 11, 14, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 31, 33, 34, 36, 38, 39, 45, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 77, 78, 83, 88, 90, 93, 94, 95 financial condition, vii, 1, financial data, financial planning, 25, 93 financial resources, vii, 1, 2, 4, 10, 14, 26, 34, 39 financial sector, 64 financial shocks, 53, 56 financial stability, 56 financial support, financial system, 88 fiscal year, flaws, 88 flexibility, 88 fluctuations, 57 food, 46 force, 31 formula, 6, 36, 75, 77, 83 funding, 16, 39, 46, 85, 88 funds, 19, 21, 53, 57, 65, 72, 76, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 95, 96, 97 G GAO, 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 26, 30, 32, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47 government securities, 95 Great Recession, 63 growth, 61, 82, 85, 88 H health, 2, 22, 24, 28, 29, 31, 34, 45, 46, 70, 71 health care, 28, 45 health insurance, 34, 45, 46 health problems, 2, 31 health status, 71 high school, 75 hiring, 56 Hispanics, 46, 77 history, 5, 26 home ownership, 15, 36 homeowners, 22, 42 homes, 15, 20, 42, 52 House, 76 household income, 8, 16, 18, 20, 21, 29, 36, 44, 50 housing, 7, 22, 24, 25, 27, 42, 43 human, 40 hypothesis, 65 I ideal, 55 IMF, 79 immigrants, 77 improvements, 96 income distribution, 23, 50, 52, 53 income replacement, 73 income tax, 55, 61 individuals, 5, 6, 26, 39, 42, 45, 50, 57, 71, 72, 75, 77, 78, 82, 92, 95 industry, 23, 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 95, 96 inequality, 66 inflation, 2, 7, 12, 16, 20, 28, 37, 42, 43, 44, 71, 72, 73, 80, 82, 83 infrastructure, 58, 59, 62 institutions, 58, 92, 95 integrity, 90 interest groups, 95 interest rates, 52, 57 internal controls, 35 Internal Revenue Service, 84 International Monetary Fund, 82 investment(s), 6, 10, 19, 21, 28, 34, 43, 56, 65, 72, 76, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91, 94, 95, 96, 97 investors, 59, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95, 96 IRS, 41, 42 issues, vii, 1, 3, 39, 67, 77, 82 102 Index K kindergarten, 56 medical care, 57 Medicare, 74 mental health, 58 methodology, 5, 27, 45 models, 4, 37, 72 L labor force, 50, 77, 82 labor force participation, 77, 82 landscape, 53 Latin America, 82 lead, 53, 57 leadership, 75 legislation, 54, 59, 66 legs, 83 life cycle, 50, 62, 71, 72 life expectancy, lifetime, 3, 16, 26, 27, 36, 37, 45, 47, 56, 66, 80, 91 light, 1, liquid assets, 57 liquidity, 57, 62, 67 loans, 43, 57, 63 local government, 84 longevity, 6, 85 Luo, 63 M magnitude, 35 majority, 42, 74 management, 75, 87, 89, 90, 94, 95 manipulation, 78 marital status, 80 market failure, 90 marriage, 71 married couples, 27, 75 married women, 77 matter, 87 measurements, 82 media, 62 median, 2, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 42, 43, 44, 50, 71, 73, 79, 80, 82 medical, 29, 33, 46, 57 N National Institutes of Health, 79 New Zealand, 77 next generation, 66 nursing, 45 nursing home, 45 nutrition, 57 O objective reality, 92 obstacles, 59 OECD, 79 Office of Management and Budget, 42 officials, 35, 75 Oklahoma, 54, 59, 60 old age, 58 omission, 94 opportunities, 49, 52, 53, 54, 58, 59 opt out, 53 organ, 54 oversight, 86 ownership, 10, 14, 90, 94 ownership structure, 90, 94 P parallel, 51 parents, 22, 28, 56, 58 participants, 4, 7, 37, 54, 56, 58, 85, 86, 88, 89, 92, 94 pathway, 55 payroll, 6, 22, 28, 76, 83 penalties, 52, 53, 88 Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 3, pension plans, 6, 36, 42, 77, 84 percentile, 12, 16, 93 103 Index Philippines, 60 platform, 59, 62 polarization, 93 policy, 39, 46, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 59, 60, 64, 65, 66, 71, 76, 78, 79, 93 policy makers, 79 policy options, 76 policymakers, 51, 53, 54, 56, 59, 70, 75, 84 polling, 29 pools, 95 population, vii, 1, 3, 25, 27, 35, 38, 39, 44, 77, 79 population density, 38 portability, portfolio, 85, 86, 89, 91 poverty, 20, 25, 27, 33, 39, 44, 46, 70, 71, 74, 77, 81 preparedness, 25, 56 present value, 36 President, 54 principles, 85 private sector, 3, probability, 27, 35, 38 producers, 89 professionals, 90 profit, 52, 90 profitability, 90 program features, 57 project, 22, 23, 72, 73, 74 protection, 37, 85 psychology, 87 public education, 56 public opinion, 38 public policy, 49, 93 public support, 67 publishing, 78 purchasing power, 28, 71 Q quartile, 23, 24, 29, 50, 52 R race, 38 reactions, 74 real estate, 19, 21 reality, 27, 73, 78, 79, 86, 92 recession, 31 recommendations, 37, 50, 53, 59 reform(s), 28, 52, 53, 77, 82 reliability, 35 rent, 7, 42 repair, 57, 85 replacement rate, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 45, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 78, 79, 80, 82 reputation, 90 requirement(s), 5, 42, 88, 94 researchers, 51, 53, 54, 57 reserves, 84 resistance, 61, 88 resources, 2, 8, 10, 14, 15, 20, 24, 25, 28, 36, 46, 51, 57, 72, 93 restrictions, 51 retail, 62, 94, 95 retirement age, 4, 5, 11, 22, 24, 28, 33, 34, 37, 42, 43, 84, 92 revenue, 7, 42, 93 risk(s), 2, 6, 23, 28, 29, 39, 45, 52, 63, 65, 70, 77, 85, 86, 88 rules, 94 S sample design, 35 sampling error, 35, 38, 46 savings account, 6, 10, 44, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 60, 63 savings rate, 59 school, 55, 56, 75 scope, securities, 94 security, vii, 1, 3, 4, 28, 29, 33, 34, 37, 50, 51, 59, 64, 65, 69, 70, 71, 72, 75, 78, 85, 93 self-control, 64 104 Index self-employment, 31 Senate, 3, 49, 69, 76, 83, 95 services, 57, 60, 62, 65, 76, 90 sex, 39, 42, 47 shape, 79 shareholders, 84, 89, 90, 94, 97 shelter, 46 shortfall, 24, 76 showing, 51 Singapore, 58 small business(es), 54, 76 social norms, 92 Social Security, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 34, 36, 37, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 50, 60, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 90, 93, 96 Social Security Administration, 3, 5, 34, 69, 70, 71, 76, 77, 81, 84 Social Security Disability Insurance, 42 society, 79, 93 South Korea, 58 spending, 51, 53, 92 Spring, 62 SSA, 3, 5, 24, 45, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 82 SSI, 71 stability, 57 stakeholders, 37 standard of living, 2, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 50, 70, 71, 72, 79, 86, 87 state(s), 38, 49, 56, 70, 79, 84, 94, 97 State of the Union address, 54 statistics, 24, 25, 26 stock, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91, 96 storage, 65 stress, 46 structure, 18, 26, 66, 87, 92, 95 style, 78, 79 subgroups, 46 survivors, 5, 43 target, 2, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 45, 55, 78, 80 tax deduction, tax incentive, 93 taxation, taxes, 5, 22, 28, 42, 46, 76, 93 taxpayers, 56, 59 technical comments, 2, 34 telephone, 39 testing, 5, 35, 36, 39, 55 tics, 60 tracks, 72 transactions, 51 transformation, 93 transparency, Treasury, 34, 57 treatment, 7, 54 Trust Fund(s), 6, 28, 42, 45, 81 turnover, 86 U U.S Department of Labor, 41, 42 U.S Department of the Treasury, 56 U.S Treasury, 84, 91 uniform, 95 United Kingdom, 58, 77 United States, v, 1, 3, 35, 39, 41, 42, 59, 60, 62, 79, 81 United Way, 64 universe, 95 urban, 66 Urban Institute, 23, 26, 40, 45, 61, 66, 67, 71, 81 V variables, 36, 38 vehicles, volatility, 57, 67 W T wages, 5, 27, 51, 79 tanks, 76 105 Index Washington, v, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 49, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 81, 82, 95 wealth, 4, 22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 37, 43, 45, 52, 60, 62, 63, 66, 86, 88 welfare, 62, 90 well-being, 4, 38, 39 WIC, 71 Wisconsin, 72, 74 withdrawal, 91 workers, vii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 34, 37, 39, 43, 46, 52, 54, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82 workforce, 77 workplace, 2, 31, 52 World Bank, 79, 82 worry, 69 Y Yale University, 66, 90 yield, 39, 88, 91 ... the e-book tab RETIREMENT ISSUES, PLANS AND LIFESTYLES RETIREMENT SECURITY ENDANGERED BY LOW SAVINGS ASSESSMENTS AND ANALYSES RAYMOND W GREENE EDITOR New York Copyright © 2016 by Nova Science.. .RETIREMENT ISSUES, PLANS AND LIFESTYLES RETIREMENT SECURITY ENDANGERED BY LOW SAVINGS ASSESSMENTS AND ANALYSES No part of this digital document may... ADEQUACY OF RETIREMENT SAVINGS AMONG WORKERS AND RETIREES Studies of Retirement Savings and Income Adequacy Conclude Different Things about U.S Retirement Security, Largely Because of Different Savings