PJ Media

Seerak,

In the context of a 401k, what do you think not having someone defaulted into the program is other than a “choice” being made by the government, when it originally designed the program. The thinking was that people would recognize their self-interest and voluntarily opt in. The results is that the average Baby Boomer has less than $50K saved for a retirement that will last an average of 30 years (I know all the actuarial projections behind all this stuff, but feel free to look it up yourself) and will run out of money from savings before 7 of those years in retirement are over, even after utilizing home equity. These are the results of a “choice” that the government made to set up 401ks and not allow employers to auto-enroll their employees.

Oh, and by the way, one of the groups that pushed for auto-enrollment was the employers, even though it costs them more because now they have to match a much-larger group of employees’ contributions. Why did employers want this? BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T WANT TO SEE PEOPLE WORKING FOR THEM STARVE TO DEATH IN RETIREMENT, YOU NITWIT!

you are telling us that if the grasshopper decides to loot the ant, it’s the ant’s fault.

In all seriousness, you are so blinded by ideology that you don’t see the bigger picture. The ant and the grasshopper is a zero-sum game. The “nudge” in the 401k example is not. Essentially, the “nudge” turns the grasshopper into an ant, thus precluding the Hobbesian battle for resources described in the parable.

You clearly haven’t thought these things through with any degree of thoroughness. You should just quit now.