Every day, elderly Americans stock grocery shelves at big-box stores — not by choice, but by necessity. Our nation’s retirement system is failing them at crisis levels. 

The recent preliminary disclosures by the Department of Government Efficiency about alleged Social Security payments to “individuals” age 100 to 150 has only confirmed what many have long suspected: the system is archaic and broken. Its design, oversight and operation need to be carefully reevaluated.

The approach of funding Social Security or other retirement programs with debt of the sponsor (government or private business) should be abolished. What bank would accept loans as collateral instead of property or other assets? We would never tolerate this arrangement in our personal finances, yet we have accepted it for our nation’s retirement system for generations. Utilization of debt may make sense as a unique exception in crisis situations, but such a policy should not be the norm. Putting the fiscal burden on future taxpayers isn’t just unfair — it’s unsustainable.

One potential solution is leveraging the power of ownership and equity through a U.S. sovereign wealth fund — a state-owned investment fund that allocates capital to a diverse range of assets, including stocks, bonds, real estate and alternative investments like private equity funds or hedge funds. In this model, every government bailout, international war settlement or major economic intervention would require equity stakes to be allocated to this fund. Rather than just spending taxpayer money, we would be investing in our collective future. Retirement age Americans would get their allocated sovereign equity fund or a floor Social Security benefit — whichever is greater. Such a benefit could be designed as a no-cost approach initially, and over time only be triggered as a guaranteed minimum benefit in the case of an unexpected financial crisis. Investment diversity features could be added to such a program to minimize citizen risk and the need for government intervention. Such a structure would limit the amount of government assistance required in the next financial crisis and protect citizens or workers so they could have a secure retirement benefit.

For decades, forward-thinking companies have used analogous hybrid structures called “floor-offset” plans. Conceived in the 1970s, the floor-offset plan protected employees against a company’s inability to fund its pension plan or defined benefit plan.

Companies establish an employee stock ownership plan, in which workers would accumulate equity in their company over their career. The company would also guarantee a defined, minimum pension plan. At retirement, workers would receive either the value of their equity stake as an annuity for life or the guaranteed pension — whichever is greater. This design protects workers if their equity underperforms while allowing them to benefit if it grows substantially. Companies benefit too, as the equity portion can reduce pension obligations when investments perform well.

Floor-offset plans have successfully weathered market downturns while providing superior retirement outcomes when compared to either defined benefit or defined contribution plans alone.

A Social Security floor-offset design, utilizing a sovereign wealth fund, can help alleviate current and future Social Security funding obligations. This design lowers costs and moves our country away from using debt in the form of treasuries as funding. If designed properly, the introduction of the sovereign wealth fund feature would not disturb the Social Security promise, but could potentially enhance it. The appreciation of the interest in the sovereign wealth fund would not only provide funding for Social Security but could potentially result in citizens in retirement receiving benefits that exceed their pre-retirement income.

A multidisciplinary task force should be formed immediately to develop this system for future generations. The goal must not be limited to retirement security, but wealth creation for all Americans. Now is not the time to simply talk about innovation, it is time to really innovate. Our seniors don’t need charity. They need a system that works — one that provides not just bare subsistence, but dignity and prosperity in their golden years.

Some may ask why utilize a piece of the sovereign wealth fund to help Social Security? The answer is simple: It allows the system to be funded for the next 50 to 100 years and limits Congress’ ability to divert funds for other initiatives. The Social Security Sovereign Wealth Fund offset design represents a rare opportunity to solve our retirement crisis while creating genuine economic security for all Americans.

Republican Senator Dave McCormick predicted a higher tax rate on millionaires won’t fly with the GOP-controlled Congress, throwing cold water on a proposal gaining support in the White House and among some of his fellow lawmakers. 

“I don’t think that’s likely to happen,” the former Bridgewater Associates chief executive said Wednesday in a Bloomberg Television interview. 

President Donald Trump is seriously considering ideas to raise taxes on the rich as a way to partially offset revenue losses from his tax package, according to a White House official. That includes a House proposal that would set a new, higher tax rate of 40% on annual income above $1 million.

The fact that Republicans are even considering raising taxes on the rich is a testament to the increasing populist influence in a party that typically rejected such ideas as class warfare.

It’s a tax hike that would have directly affected McCormick in his prior role as a hedge fund CEO. The newly elected Pennsylvania senator reported earning $22.5 million in salary from Bridgewater in 2021 and early 2022, the year he left the company.

McCormick, whose roots in the party establishment extend back to a senior role in George W. Bush’s Treasury Department, said Congress should stick to cutting federal spending as it looks for ways to offset tax cuts.

“We’ve got to reel in the spending,” McCormick said. “That’s going to require some tough choices. But we can’t do that by raising taxes, which slows the economy and hurts working families.”

Some Republican lawmakers are resisting proposed curbs to Medicaid health coverage for the poor and disabled, food stamps and other social programs. Senate Republicans have deployed a new budget gimmick to hide the full cost of the taxes, allowing them to be financed through debt. That in turn has provoked a backlash from House GOP deficit hawks. 

While Republicans control both the House and Senate, their majorities are slim. Party leaders need nearly every GOP lawmaker to vote for the tax package. 

The millionaire’s tax under consideration would add a new tax bracket on top of the current maximum rate of 37% for individuals earning more than $626,350 a year.

McCormick also said it will be important for Trump to roll out a series of trade deals in the coming weeks to stabilize the economy amid volatility from the tariff conflicts the president initiated. 

“I think that’ll be a calming force,” McCormick said. “Business leaders are trying to make investment decisions, and they hate uncertainty.”

U.S. homeowners saw their property taxes rise more slowly last year compared with 2023, while the number of counties where the average bill tops $10,000 continued its steady increase, according to a new study. 

The average U.S. homeowner paid $4,172 in property taxes last year, according to a report by real estate data firm ATTOM. That’s an increase of 2.7% from 2023 — roughly in step with headline inflation, which was 2.9% in the period, and down from the 4.1% average tax increase in 2023. 

The analysis is based on bills for 85.7 million single-family homes nationwide. Breaking them down regionally, the report shows that 19 counties had an average bill that exceeded $10,000 last year, the most on record. That suggests plenty of homeowners in those areas would need to come up with $1,000 a month or more, once insurance is included, even if their mortgage is paid off. 

New York was excluded from ATTOM’s 2024 analysis due to data availability limitations. Almost half of the most expensive counties that did feature in the report are in New Jersey — where the statewide average bill topped the $10,000 threshold — including high-population areas such as Bergen, Monmouth and Middlesex. 

Other places with high average taxes include the San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara metro area in California — where the average bill was $12,293 — along with San Mateo and San Francisco. 

By state, the highest average tax bills tended to be in the Northeast. Top-ranked New Jersey was followed by Connecticut ($8,402), New Hampshire ($7,723),  Massachusetts ($7,720) and California ($7,131).

In its 2023 analysis, which included data for New York, ATTOM’s data showed that counties such as Nassau, Rockland, Suffolk and Westchester all had average property taxes that exceeded $10,000.