Every American Deserves the Retirement System Congress Already Has.

This is a real risk, and we take it seriously. Three safeguards address it:

1. Lifecycle investing. Like the TSP's Lifecycle (L) Funds, the default investment automatically shifts from stocks to bonds as you approach retirement. A 60-year-old's portfolio looks very different from a 25-year-old's.
2. The guaranteed base benefit. The 6.4% that stays in the traditional system provides a floor — you still receive a base Social Security check regardless of market conditions.
3. Minimum benefit guarantee. If your combined income (personal account + base benefit) falls below a minimum threshold, the government tops it up.

No system eliminates all risk. The current system faces its own risk — a guaranteed 23% benefit cut by 2033 if nothing changes. The Prosperity Trust diversifies risk across both markets and government guarantees.

This is the hardest question, and we won't pretend it's easy. The 6.4% that stays in the traditional system continues to fund current benefits. During the transition (20–30 years), there will be a gap. We close it through five mechanisms:

1. Remove the earnings cap. Currently only the first $176,100 is taxed. Removing the cap generates an estimated $80–120 billion/year in new revenue — and high earners also build proportionally larger personal accounts, so it's a genuine win-win.
2. The Patriot Provision: Wealthy retirees who don't need SS can voluntarily waive benefits in exchange for a 75% Transition Tax Credit — saving an additional $50–70B/year.
3. Dedicated transition bonds: Making the implicit $25.1 trillion debt explicit. The debt already exists — we're acknowledging it honestly rather than pretending it away.
4. Gradual phase-in: Only workers under 50 in year one, expanding slowly.
5. Natural attrition: As legacy retirees pass and new retirees draw from personal accounts, the gap closes itself over time.

Combined, the cap removal and Patriot Provision alone close an estimated 52–76% of the annual transition gap. Chile managed its transition over 25 years. Australia phased in over 33 years. This is a generational project, not an overnight switch. The alternative — doing nothing — leads to automatic benefit cuts in 2033.

Disability: Fully preserved. The safety-net fund continues to provide disability insurance (SSDI) for workers who can't work. This is funded by the safety-net portion of the payroll contribution.

Survivors: Actually better under the Prosperity Trust. Under current Social Security, when you die, your family gets a reduced monthly check that eventually ends — and the contributions you paid over your lifetime vanish. Under the Prosperity Trust, your family inherits the full account balance, tax-free. A worker who dies at 55 with $400,000 in their account passes real, permanent wealth to their family — not a temporary government check.

For edge cases where a young worker dies before building significant savings, a small supplementary survivor insurance fund covers the gap. But for the vast majority of families, the inheritable account IS the survivor benefit — and it's far more valuable.

They won't have to make decisions at all — unless they want to. The default is a TSP-style Lifecycle Fund that automatically adjusts based on your age. Workers who want more control can choose from a small menu of pre-approved, low-cost index funds (just like the TSP's five fund options). There are no individual stock picks, no day trading, no predatory advisors.

The TSP has proven this works for 6+ million federal employees. The average participant doesn't need a finance degree.

No. Privatization would mean handing Social Security to Wall Street. This proposal uses government-administered accounts — the same infrastructure that runs the Thrift Savings Plan, with expense ratios of 0.04% (compared to ~0.42% for the average mutual fund). No Wall Street middlemen. No profit motive. Just low-cost index funds managed at government scale.

This is also not a replacement — it's a supplement. The guaranteed base benefit, disability insurance, and survivor benefits continue through the traditional system.

Two protections:

1. Progressive matching. The government contributes additional funds to the accounts of workers earning below the median income — making this system more redistributive than current Social Security, not less.
2. Guaranteed minimum benefit. Regardless of account performance, no retiree's combined income falls below a set floor.

Current Social Security is less progressive than it appears — lower-income workers have shorter average life expectancies and collect benefits for fewer years. They also leave zero inheritable wealth. Personal accounts with progressive matching address both problems.