michael hurd rand and nber
DESCRIPTION
Discussion of Changing Progressivity as a Means of Risk Protection in Investment-Based Social Security. Michael Hurd RAND and NBER. Can risk of low rates of return from Private Retirement Accounts be partially offset by increased progressivity in (reduced) Social Security program?. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Discussion of
Changing Progressivity as a Means of Risk Protection in
Investment-Based Social Security
Michael Hurd
RAND and NBER
![Page 2: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Can risk of low rates of return from Private Retirement Accounts be
partially offset by increased progressivity in (reduced) Social
Security program?
Interesting alternative to pure insurance against bad outcomes on rates of return
![Page 3: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Done through simulation
Here are the steps
![Page 4: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Simulation of lifetime earnings
• Cohort born in 1973 age 30 in 2003
• Take distribution of earnings from cross-section estimate of log normal
• First order Markov with high persistence
![Page 5: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Age 30 Age 67
Forecast and back-cast earnings from age 30 in 20003
Low earning person in 2003
Range of wage outcomes
![Page 6: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Age 30 Age 67
Forecast and back-cast earnings from age 30 in 20003
![Page 7: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Age 30 Age 67
Forecast and back-cast earnings from age 30 in 20003
![Page 8: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
At each age
• save 2% of earnings
• into PRA in bond-stock portfolio
• augment PRA by random draw from historical rates of return
![Page 9: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Calculate Social Security benefits for each path based on current law
Repeat many times
![Page 10: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Distribution of Social Security Benefits
Scheduled: E(B) = $21.8k
![Page 11: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
But current law not sustainable, so reduce benefits by 40%
![Page 12: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Reduced Distribution of Social Security Benefits to close actuarial gap
Reduced by 40%: E(B) = $13.1k
Scheduled: E(B) = $21.8k
![Page 13: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Redistribute to increase progressivity…example
E(B) = $13.1k
E(B) = $13.1k
Topped up at, say, 25th percentile and then reduced
![Page 14: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Then add in private investment account: Distribution of Social Security Benefits + PRA
E(B) = $13.1k 2% annual earnings invested in ½ stocks and ½ bonds, annuitized plus Soc. Sec.
![Page 15: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Calculate E(U)
![Page 16: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Repeat for other investment programs
2% annual earnings invested in ½ stocks and ½ bonds, annuitized plus Soc. Sec.
2% annual earnings invested in bonds, annuitized plus Soc. Sec.
Calculate expected utility for these and variants
![Page 17: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Compare utilities (certainty equivalents) for variation in
• Risk aversion
• Rates of return on equities
• Fraction of earnings in Private Retirement Accounts
![Page 18: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
My main question:Whose utility?
Thought experiment:
• Draw a worker from population.
• Calculate wage path
• Calculate saving path with stochastic rates of return
• Calculate utility
• Repeat and average
![Page 19: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Whose utility
Stochastic elements: wage level w, wage growth (u), rates of return (v)
What is calculated:
, , , |( ) (( ) | )w u v u v w wU c dP U c w dP dP
![Page 20: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Thus average (over workers) of individual expected utility
• Not utility of any individual• Is this quantity a desirable social
objective?
, , , |( ) (( ) | )w u v u v w wU c dP U c w dP dP
![Page 21: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Alternative…utility of individuals
• Begin with a worker (w)
• Calculate wage and saving path
• Utility for that worker
• Replicates for that worker
• E(U)
![Page 22: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Utility of individuals
• Repeat for many workers
• Study distribution of E(U)– E.g. How many workers have their E(U)
improved and how many reduced under each alternative
– Effects on workers in lower part of wage distribution compared with workers in upper part.
![Page 23: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Additional advantage
• Workers indexed by initial wage
• Use more realistic life-cycle wage paths
![Page 24: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Real earnings of cohort born in 1940-45
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
25-29 35-39 45-49
Age
16+ years education
9-12 years education
![Page 25: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Question about utility calculation
• Consumption in retirement equals Social Security plus annuitized Private Retirement Account
• But most have other resources• Variation in marginal utility from earnings
uncertainty and investment returns will vary with other resources
• Other resources positively correlated with initial wage and therefore position in Social Security benefit distribution
![Page 26: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Conclusion
• Package of increasing progressivity in Social Security along with PRAs can lead to higher resources along with some protection for low wage or unlucky workers.
• Moves in direction of some European public pension systems– Politically feasible somewhere in world
• Excellent contribution to debate
![Page 27: Michael Hurd RAND and NBER](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022102909/56813409550346895d9afe05/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Conclusions (cont.)
But reservations about utility calculation
• Ex ante random worker– Interest in distribution of E(U)
• No accounting for differing rates of growth in earnings
• No accounting for other resources