@@thejollyviking8083 100%. I think Jacob goes a bit too far in his claims of "always immoral" and I agree that he should be called out for that. However, Trent goes so far as to promote 401ks, which I do not see any way that's a good (even if having one isn't always a sin).
New Magazine is out! You can purchase it at newpolity.com/single-issues . If you're a subscriber, it may still be in transit. Magazine review is happening next week
I have an unusual question for Mr. Benna. I've often wondered why there has never been a class action suit against employer matches by employees who chose, for whatever reason, not to participate in the 401-K. Perhaps they could not afford to defer any salary at the time. It seems the match is an inequitable profit-sharing plan. An employee doing the same job as another and contributing to the success of the company (i.e., profits) does not get to share in these profits unless they defer salary. Defined benefit plans (pensions) provided a more equitable profit sharing for 100% of employees using a predetermined formula (years of service, last years of salary, etc.). Pensions of course are in decline. It seems employers have not only transferred the entire risk and cost of pensions to employees via the 401'k while saving money by only contributing matches to a smaller subset of its human resources.
Around 32:00 you guys talk about weather the savings/investigate is causing the destruction of the relience on family and each other or the other way around... I think it's a trueism but it holds here that society reflects our collective goals and desire, I think this happens even in our churches
Question: Would Jacob and/or Marc also argue that salary deferral would also be a problematic situation? Mainly due to the fact that if a person can elect not to receive part of their salary and still live, be indication they are earning too much to begin?
Not at ALL. Someone can live with little money aquiring just the bare minimum and save the rest. Moreover, its not easy to determine when you can say someone os wining too much.
There are long term necessary or semi necessary expenses that do require long term savings as well (college/ professional training for self or kids, health care when you are old, mortgage down payment, etc), so strategies for saving money are not in themselves bad.
401ks provide for the middle class a small transfer of the excessive wealth of the corporate world to regular people. If people don’t see that they can and should then transfer familial wealth to the next generation to lift them up and cooperate with them to do so that’s due to a loss of family bonds and selfishness. But if we didn’t get that small amount we’d simply be poorer and the corporate folks would not obviously even be better off. The problem was going down the corporate road to begin with. But that horse is well out of the barn.
Trent horn reaction video?
In which he consistently and resolutely avoids discussing 401ks...
I love Trent, but his economic stuff I find to be exceptionally disappointing.
@@thejollyviking8083 100%. I think Jacob goes a bit too far in his claims of "always immoral" and I agree that he should be called out for that. However, Trent goes so far as to promote 401ks, which I do not see any way that's a good (even if having one isn't always a sin).
Wonderful video, gentlemen. I learned so much.
I haven’t even started watching but I love it already. Can’t wait to make time for this!
Fantastic interview! Very informative!
Whens the new magazine coming out?
New Magazine is out! You can purchase it at newpolity.com/single-issues . If you're a subscriber, it may still be in transit. Magazine review is happening next week
Fun fact about the rich fool in Luke 12: his nest egg from his superabundant harvest was around $400,000.
Seems like a good man.
I have an unusual question for Mr. Benna. I've often wondered why there has never been a class action suit against employer matches by employees who chose, for whatever reason, not to participate in the 401-K. Perhaps they could not afford to defer any salary at the time. It seems the match is an inequitable profit-sharing plan. An employee doing the same job as another and contributing to the success of the company (i.e., profits) does not get to share in these profits unless they defer salary. Defined benefit plans (pensions) provided a more equitable profit sharing for 100% of employees using a predetermined formula (years of service, last years of salary, etc.). Pensions of course are in decline. It seems employers have not only transferred the entire risk and cost of pensions to employees via the 401'k while saving money by only contributing matches to a smaller subset of its human resources.
As someone who's been slaving into a 401k for 10 years, this is disheartening. To put it mildly.
Around 32:00 you guys talk about weather the savings/investigate is causing the destruction of the relience on family and each other or the other way around... I think it's a trueism but it holds here that society reflects our collective goals and desire, I think this happens even in our churches
Question: Would Jacob and/or Marc also argue that salary deferral would also be a problematic situation? Mainly due to the fact that if a person can elect not to receive part of their salary and still live, be indication they are earning too much to begin?
Not at ALL. Someone can live with little money aquiring just the bare minimum and save the rest. Moreover, its not easy to determine when you can say someone os wining too much.
There are long term necessary or semi necessary expenses that do require long term savings as well (college/ professional training for self or kids, health care when you are old, mortgage down payment, etc), so strategies for saving money are not in themselves bad.
🫡🤙🫡
401ks provide for the middle class a small transfer of the excessive wealth of the corporate world to regular people. If people don’t see that they can and should then transfer familial wealth to the next generation to lift them up and cooperate with them to do so that’s due to a loss of family bonds and selfishness. But if we didn’t get that small amount we’d simply be poorer and the corporate folks would not obviously even be better off. The problem was going down the corporate road to begin with. But that horse is well out of the barn.
401ks are essentially a ponzi scheme with the appearance of economic backing.