Scott Galloway, a popular author, podcaster, and New York University professor, recently shared his insights on investing for retirement and his bold opinions on how Social Security should be financed. In a conversation on his Pivot podcast with prominent business journalist Kara Swisher, Galloway emphasized, “For the most part, don’t believe you’re smarter than everybody else. I strongly believe that low-cost index funds are the way to go.
You want to reduce your fees and be totally diversified.”
“You don’t need to find the needle in the haystack. You want to buy the whole haystack,” he added. “I would do something along the lines of 50% of an S&P fund or maybe QQQ (Invesco QQQ Trust) if you want a little bit more exposure to aggressive tech companies.”
Galloway also emphasized the importance of avoiding high fees.
“There are a lot of great financial advisors on social media, where you can find advice tailored to your specific situation. The key is to avoid high fees. Consider placing 50% in a low-cost S&P fund or a similar fund from Schwab or Vanguard, 30% in an international index fund or a credit fund, and perhaps some in Treasurys for liquidity.”
Furthermore, Galloway believes serious reform is necessary for Social Security.
Earning $16 million annually, he suggests that wealthy individuals, including himself, should forgo receiving Social Security benefits.
Galloway advocates for means-testing benefits
He advocates for the adoption of means-testing to determine eligibility, aiming to ensure that Social Security resources are directed toward those who genuinely need financial support during retirement.
Galloway’s views highlight the need for a strategic approach to retirement planning, emphasizing diversification, low fees, and the potential for Social Security reform to better serve those in need. However, his statements have raised concerns among current and future Social Security beneficiaries. Many fear that a reform based on means-testing could reduce or eliminate their benefits.
Additionally, the idea that a significant portion of recipients “shouldn’t” collect has been seen by some as a lack of recognition for years of contributions to the system. Nonetheless, others support the proposal, arguing that the current system favors the “wealthy generation” and that it needs reform to ensure its long-term viability. According to a report from the Social Security Administration, if no changes are made, the fund could be depleted by 2033, resulting in a 25% reduction in monthly payments.
Scott Galloway’s opinion has ignited a crucial debate about the future of Social Security in the United States. While some view his proposals as a necessary solution to preserve the system, others see them as a threat to acquired rights. With an aging population and growing financial challenges, the discussion about who should receive Social Security payments is more relevant than ever.
Photo by; Magda Ehlers on Pexels