- #351
nismaratwork
- 359
- 0
BobG said:In one sense, it's the more honest solution. Everyone knows what the state or company is paying for and everyone knows the risks.
On the other hand, it's a worse deal for employees since governments are seen as more reliable than private companies when it comes to pensions.
The latter relies on some assumptions that might be a little shaky if the government is running high deficits on a routine basis. Just like with Social Security, you're relying on future voters choosing to honor those commitments by continuing to pay higher and higher taxes.
It's nice to say the government is legally and morally bound to honor the promises it made, but I tend to be just a little bit afraid that all of the young people in the nation might not see themselves morally bound to fulfill promises I made to myself (or at least promises the government I elected made to me).
You should be concerned, we don't.