income. that brings you back to the point, mainly that okay but all these people suddenly appeared out of the woodwork and said now would like to buy love treasuries because a yield level so high. what if the fed begins to a medically if interest rates? will this buyers sell? was a move around? will become to equities are cash? a lot of things that makes this discussion much more worrying because you have certainly a whole new set of buyers compared which had before. these buyers only came in because the level of yields without went up so much. >> michael, quickly. >> i would say, i disagree all is well. we have had the past decade a few events. on days like today when we don't see any issues, is because the hsg survived a lot of liquid and the return off is an event. i wouldn't say everything is fine but . i guess with the fed could do

one would details veto , i'm offended that because a ak with my book. in light of the other question, the idea of distinguishing accept treasury purchases into market functioning purchases and qe purchases. have done that maybe they would have kept to be going quite so long. >> there's reason why. we have to go. thank you so much. this is been terrific. thank you so much. i love we are color coded. we did that on purpose. thank you so much. [applau force. it so much. >> thank you for having us here today for this important event and deeper.

we've been working on this issue for many years. we ran on task force in 2010 that is the shadow and a few of the recommendations on social security and the secretary of education is president who committed to fiscal policy. one thing we are going to do is link the policy to the money policies stakeholders care about and explain why it needs to be invested. we are going to zero in on social security and i had a fantastic group of folks here

that help folks understand worried biden and where we might be going and what it could look like. our work with the program in the two of them. package to resolve social security packages. the situation has only gotten worse we continue to work on this issue. many members of congress are trying to work toward solutions almost and very few are eager to get out there but we can remain cautiously optimistic memory be movement and the importance of

vice. as a recent survey showed 80% of americans are worried are extremely worried social security will be available for the and that's understandable given the headlines but also a little perplexing benefits will be paid out so people shouldn't be buried worry that it will be all you could talk about how social security financial

security. >> will rely on it for security. we know what social security benefits are but we don't have great get. what percent of households rely on it for half or more of their income. it is crucial and 10 million more puzzled so it's an important program.

>> i think social security benefits progressive in the sense with higher earnings are benefits from their prior earnings. imagine the rest of the retirement they look at retirement essentially learning in the lowest income receiving

social security benefits so you wonder why they don't stay very much when you go to the middle and toppers 25% the door outside role social security retirees in this industry telling people it's working pretty well last week social security projections

a bond, nothing is different than the year before and if you could level we dive into the dark about where the government and why it is so i sometimes say you read the new york times article mark you pretty much know what you need to know this is. and it is the main challenge and social security is a retirement

program and often we think about finance, assume those emerge retirement program trust find something out and you are facing cash flow or people around dollars. the obligation is around 85 in the last of the disability system was the least well-funded

caching disability fund and the retirement. >> let me put social security in context you think about the challenges, is one of the one places following current law it's paying out one 100% full

social security is learned to not a different topic the details so we have a system where it's based on formula sought to be pay-as-you-go but if the demographics trained you can no longer afford casting vonnegut. the subset of automatic increase in tax but it's a formula we will have to do something and there's not enough coming in and you look at society, more people

and it's not going to be enough to finance agreement and focus. the retiree in their i think it's about three to one editorial three to one parameters for the program. >> it's important to remember it's because the coloring and the one thing that's not true is people are think longer so it's not an annual income sense so

that changes how you think somebody claiming benefits this year get the monthly benefit through percent higher so it goes back to the 70s so there is income replacement terms for thinking real dollar terms erect when you think about the elderly, it's rising with everybody else's standards

energy philosophy. >> we have things looking over this list 70s and 80s and talk about the parallels. >> one key difference is the problem is bigger and i would think two additional points for things that i think are different in the broader context of the federal budget, it's overall in worse shape going back to the first session that is around one 100% projected even higher by the time security

trust funds run dry. in the light 70s early 80s, it's like a third less room to maneuver any scientist but i think it's fair to say there's more political polarization the concern was that we were able to do it is important someone reading them ranking the dental is something will have to give in the rocky legislation but in 1979 projections for 30 years

and what happened was recessions but trust fund at that time was very small so you don't have a large trust fund in the list is session, you can have a system that appears they thought partially because they already have close to so it was much less thing you have to do now. have to do between two and four and a half times. was a larger problem to have the

same run right there is a recession program define now we are almost transition and now it is change 30, 40 years ago. >> they will look to reforms and was completely different causes and in 1983 people come back. he could have easily gone back with 2033, looking out for percent or minus 20% forever and

policymakers to appreciate logic basket hands. >> policymakers. to begin, we talked about given where we are now from is it realistic to think they want to maintain strictly pay-as-you-go fill the gap shows up in 2033 or early two part about wrote products. >> i think it's likely we are not. the money and go out for benefit

in the type of tax increase we are going to be acting right before, we don't have time filling and i think we are going to use it also respected. it means move beyond benefits and the payroll taxes resolve social security systems we're going to end up financing and it does not change the trajectory so i think we're going to end up doing that terms aren't enough and as the trust fund or

software. the thing about general revenue 80s and 1982 there is going to be pressure on the road so once they did the reform 75 years they built up trust funds to send them down about a month) for the past 30 years which meant there was a recession

encompassing issue so we get to the place little christian talking about social security again and then something bad happens you wanted to be. what is social security is a lot more optimistic so what it we did enough it will be 25 years

instead of 75 years. it's enough of wonder. some form of revenue things don't bring it back and whether or not they can borrow for the unemployment rate i don't know what but king about what the expectation is it's going to be wrong. you may be wrong on the other side.

social security we have all of this money. in keeping it more likely to have and recognize it. >> a couple thoughts in the next nine years. in terms of america and it's

also important being dramatically unfair something that is often overlooked and how you can time accurately. >> if i had to make a prediction, or think is general revenue and i consider that a significant protection. one of the conference i have

deadline of 203435 defending on how you look at, i think there is a political a benefit of having a deadline like that, it was actually in a situation where incentive is to procrastinate can to issue that so i think there is value in an artificial deadline like that. i appreciate the concern dropping that will get out of whack and we have to make adjustments so it will be quick to have a rule of faith. i do appreciate that. >> i think there is a risk and opportunity.

adverse announcement we are going to cover the social security going forward about it at first. at the same time general revenue opens up opportunity. higher taxes on the middle and upper, higher and higher benefits. combined security benefits right around three times in retirement

savings for americans. the issue at some time for higher earners or retire or 96000. and how other countries are like uk, canada and then facilitate

that and everybody has a retirement plan. this is not an unsolvable problem. >> in this administration to the right is how and either of us

think the tax programs when you intend to find more people substituting people might save a little bit more on the government side close to 200 million a year. on the far end willingness to cut social security part everyone.

it is a benefit and rollback the retirement payment. pond whatever form and we can depend on that. at the same time the private side rollout, uk where every worker is a supplementary retirement plan the space of a decade the private sector participation rate was 86% so it you transition from what we currently have universal counts,

it solves your financing problem is a reasonable way to go about it. >> hebron about sinema politically and the bipartisan proposals that. >> that there first thing reducing benefits for higher partners. what i want to say is there is testing and social security in

the sink back if you are a rare honor, the monthly benefit is going to be smaller because the benefit formula based. one right and social security making the formula even more progressive. the nice thing about the way the testing is done, it's an average of your earnings, there are some proposals i will be the current system but i don't think that's the right way to go. the current income during requirement is not as accurate based on current income during requirement taxes.

older people are more sensitive that they are likely to reduce working hours. the existing benefit formula does it right we want to go away increasing productivity. >> one advantage the advantage of the benefit is not lowering benefit.

in this retiree and you look further up be productive 10%, that's where we have the problem so as not just the low end but it gives people confidence. i'm going to tell people and reduce a benefit you will save more on your own. i can guarantee you will and retire. our elderly poverty rate will be 0% we don't have that many poor people but if you are in poverty, it's one 100%.

to build confidence and willing to take risk if i really half that. back on the benefit side and we can't just continue longer and longer retirement. and protect them.

early retirement and re- go to retire he will benefit so you could and why have an early retirement age general?

think the retirement benefits mark it is always true richer people live longer than poor people and you really haven't seen you want about this from a they will a long time and make up for it and that your.

normal retirement so it's not one 100%. how that happens. i do think it makes sense about getting people to work longer, i'm not sure this is the best way. this is a political economy, you totally change social security from public. the formula is in, i don't

actually have an opinion on this, i think we get a lot less as you do that and there's budget amount. the benefits of social security reversal and get out. >> the program for the poor support program in a captiva. it's tested transfer program presently like 1%.

the idea benefits is helpful for the strength of the program it's one thing to tell people we lower the payment, i didn't burn it when people told and you are to them, i will fight changes and the reality and the projections for people retiring in the mid- 2030s. that group on average is premised something like 27% higher lifetime passes.

they didn't pay for the benefits, we know that. think there when they are not so ultimately this idea benefits. if it's not true it's harder to make the changes. the trust from finances and combined with got it worked wonders the security worker

benefits and sport delaying benefits leading a plane will not more generous people are living longer so it turns out it could be a big deal for many people so that is the personal-finance site but i do think working longer have to be part of the solution. we are working a little longer but retirement has increased so there are things we could do to facilitate number lines. one thing i looked at business social security benefits from the other things i could be proved?

>> effectively improve people's individual retirement security. >> would you talk about who doesn't pay payroll taxes and up later. >> it is a problem. [laughter] >> the clergy can and there you go. she died at 58 so figures

government employees and retirement systems. social security i get that it's range idea and cap force them to participate there's rules in place for the benefit will be on the size of pension. the reality is they are not at the benefit form in the sense of people of i can come and they low income. it would transfer to them and we have provisions in place.

and i try to explain it and work out. >> this is something right off with legislation in recent years because money are having this conversation. make sure goals are not getting it as a result. people think there social security benefits are stripped away treated unfairly but the bill right now would repeal and

give them a windfall and cross a lot of funny. it is a bipartisan bill that has a lot of support. the debate is not likely to go away. >> i like the idea of phasing out 4o1k and ira. i'm reminded of the very important research in part

sponsored by aei led by phil gramm which that anytime you talk about incomes and property, you have to look at the old monopoly of transfer programs of the bottom. this affects the top. as in the income distributional there is an african sleeping. we want people to be able to do something save for retirement. when giving money people who have risk of poverty in this

type benefit, we are not doing that either but on the economics, what made me think about this is the way it plays out is when you eliminated some up so this framework helps explain why you don't see a reaction to the economic studies not presenting incentives about

and are getting to do anything and we have taxes for retirement savings out there, home mortgages and not the same, it strikes me as an area where you can look at opportunity getting money medicare benefits. >> getting a brother tax advantage and a lot of people agree. there is a tax benefit.

>> behavioral effect and should we get rid of this? for many european countries we have even after distribution. anks. >> thanks, alan. and this particular talk -- a little bit