(with Robert Costrell)
A recent “Policy Memorandum” in the Economic Policy Institute (“Making Mountains Out of Molehills:? Do Teacher Pensions Create ‘Peculiar Incentives’ for Retirement?”) by EPI researcher Monique Morrissey is sharply critical individuals article “Peaks, Cliffs, and Valleys:? The Peculiar Incentives of Teacher Pensions,” published this coming year in Education Finance and Policy (EFP), and published during the past year for general audiences in Education Next.
In our original Ed Next article, we observed:
Teachers typically earn relatively little in the way of pension benefits until they reach their early fifties, when bigger benefits set out to accrue. The device therefore pulls teachers to “put with their time” until then, whether they are extremely well suited for the profession. Beyond then, the pension system quickly actually punish teachers for staying while at work too much time, pushing them out of the door with a relatively young age, often within their mid-fifties, although these are still effective teachers. These “pull-push” incentives take hold in the patterns of pension wealth accumulation over teachers’ careers, patterns which feature dramatic peaks, cliffs, and valleys that could greatly distort work decisions with no compelling public-policy purpose.
Morrissey includes a volume of critiques your articles, though the main one, as the title suggests, is always that our metaphors are inappropriate, and there’s almost nothing “peculiar” about the structure of retirement incentives in teacher pensions.
Morrissey argues the fact that alternation in pension wealth seriously isn’t described as peaks and valleys, and then to turn this point she is the word for a graph that appeared within our articles. Unfortunately, Morrissey picks an incorrect graph which to base her critique