Should Australia Ditch Super?

Jason · 00:01Welcome to episode 287 of The Numbers Game. I'm Jase, I'm here with Nick. And, uh, Nick, first of all, mate, it's, uh, been a bit of a big week in The Numbers Game land. We've had some, uh, clips that have gone pretty, pretty viral and gone out there more than usual. And we've been making content and doing podcasts for 5 years, nearly 300 episodes.

Jason · 00:19And it got me thinking, uh, sometimes you can see a 60-second clip And it's missing a lot of that underlying information that would actually paint the full picture and the full story.

Nick · 00:31Context.

Jason · 00:32Yeah, context. And have you noticed that? I mean, we send each other stuff all the time and we get a bit carried away and fired up. Are you thinking the same as I am?

Nick · 00:40Yeah, definitely. And more so now than in the past because of what is happening in our country in particular. Dare I say it, budget and government, everyone's talking about it. So, there's a lot of this stuff floating around and it's— It's getting on a lot of people's nerves, I guess, depending on how they take that 60-second clip.

Jason · 00:59Yeah, 100%. And I think, you know, sometimes the 60-second clip happens and then it, you know, hopefully it leads people back to be able to unpack it in more detail by going and finding the episode or the long-form version of what they've listened to. Or otherwise, sometimes it just leads to a barrage of comments and unpacking it live online with a bunch of people on the internet.

Jason · 01:18But Nick, you came across one. Do you want to tell me a bit about how you came across it, what it was, and we might play it for the listeners?

Nick · 01:24Yeah, so Senator Jared Rennick was recently on the Karl Stefanovic Show, and I do follow that show, so I saw a clip. Talked about a lot of things, but this particular clip was talking about the superannuation system in this country and how it had failed.

Nick · 01:42And his argument was we should not get rid of it, but it should be voluntary. He made some really good points and I, in watching the clip, I know that I would, if I didn't know how our industry worked and my industry being financial planning, I'd look at that clip and go, you know what, he's got a really good point.

Nick · 02:04Super should be voluntary. I shouldn't have to put money into super. And if I had the choice, I probably wouldn't. I can see how people would think that. But I guess what we wanted to talk about today was, Okay, how does that— how would that really work?

Nick · 02:20Call it in real life, inverted commas. So, you know, that's one example we're going to unpack today. But there's so much of that stuff floating around, to your point, that if you just watch what they're talking about without the context and the full understanding, then you might be led down the wrong path.

Jason · 02:38Yeah, 100%.

Nick · 02:38You saw the clip. What did you think?

Jason · 02:41Well, I'm going to listen to the clip live here first with our listeners. I'm going to play it now, and then I think it's going to be a lot of fun for us to come back and unpack market and give the audience the detail of what's missing to simply think of the headline of, you know, should we ditch superannuation in Australia?

Karl Stefanovic · 02:56You're saying get rid of super?

Gerard Rennick · 02:57Make it voluntary. That's what I'm saying. 40% of people now retire with a mortgage. They take their money out of super and then they go and pay off their mortgage and then they go on the pension anyway. I hate compulsory superannuation because you've now got $3 trillion in capital that's managed by unelected— I mean, you talk about unelected bureaucrats, you've now got unelected fund managers.

Gerard Rennick · 03:16So there's $4 trillion in super, $1 trillion in self-managed super funds. The other $3 trillion is managed by unelected private sector bureaucrats, and they're all toadies.

Karl Stefanovic · 03:24You're talking about Wayne Swan, yeah?

Gerard Rennick · 03:25Oh, he's one of them. Classic example. I think Greg Combey is there as well. And there's 17 industry funds. They all use the same proxy advisor to vote at AGMs. This is how they control the boardrooms, right? So this is why our corporations are now driven by ideology and not productivity, right? But you can't on the one hand bag out BlackRock and all the globalists and then support centralized control of people's money.

Gerard Rennick · 03:46You know, if you're against vaccine mandates, you should be against wage mandates that takes 12% of your money and gives it to someone you've never met. There's no guarantee you're going to get that money back when you're 67, and it impoverishes people. So if you earn $80,000 today, you'll need $50,000 to live on. You might pay just under $20,000 in tax.

Gerard Rennick · 04:01What's 12% of $80,000? $9,600. So it might be 12% of your gross income, but it's 100% of your disposable income. And then you can't buy a house. It slows down the time you buy a house.

Karl Stefanovic · 04:11So you're saying get rid of super?

Gerard Rennick · 04:12Make it voluntary. That's what I'm saying.

Karl Stefanovic · 04:13Hasn't it been a good system for the country?

Gerard Rennick · 04:15No, it hasn't at all. Median balance for women aged 60 to 64 is $158,000. For men, it's about $200,000. The start of the pension is about $320,000. $1,000. So the same number of people today as a percentage of retirees are still on the pension as what they were in 1992.

Karl Stefanovic · 04:31So Jared, you're saying let's get rid of super, give more cash back to people, let them make their own decisions.

Gerard Rennick · 04:36Yeah, absolutely.

Karl Stefanovic · 04:37Don't you then end up with a whole bunch of people who get to retirement age with nothing there potentially?

Gerard Rennick · 04:42No, because it's actually a false economy. Half the population earn $80,000 or less. They will be lucky to get to the end of their lifetime and pay their house off. And the evidence of that is 40% of people now retire with a mortgage. That's up from 10% in 1992. '92, they take their money out of super and then they go and pay off their mortgage and then they go on the pension anyway.

Gerard Rennick · 05:01Notwithstanding, Carl, that the Productivity Commission estimated it's 1% management fees to manage super. So $4 trillion in super, it costs $40 billion a year to manage it. This is just paper shuffling financial engineers. Full cost of super is about $53 billion. So the cost of running it is almost the same as what the cost of the pension is.

Jason · 05:20Wow, Nick, I don't know where to start and where to finish with that, but that is an awesome one to unpack. So should Australia ditch super?

Nick · 05:27Look, first thing I'll say is, how's the conviction on Senator Rennick? And, you know, I have to say that, you know, just based on the numbers, I agree. If you just look at the facts that he discussed there, and I'm just going to go over a couple of them because a lot of that would be hard to take most of that in.

Nick · 05:48But if you just look at the facts, you would listen to that and go, well, no, he's absolutely right. So just some of the facts that I think are important. 40% of people now retire with a mortgage, up from 10% in 1992. So that's significant. And as a financial planning business, we can— I can't exactly confirm those numbers, but we can confirm that people do retire with a mortgage, pull money out of superannuation, and then clear the mortgage with that money.

Nick · 06:15For some people, that's a legitimate strategy. If they're high-income earners, some people will choose to put money into superannuation money above their minimum contribution to claim a tax deduction, then pay off their mortgage quicker because financially it's better for them. But that's not everyone.

Nick · 06:30Same percentage of retirees on the pension today as there was in 1992. So that to me would say probably hasn't worked, hasn't gotten people off the pension. Another really interesting stat he gave here was 50% of the population earning under $80k and the impact that that has.

Nick · 06:50So at $80,000, as I said, as a gross income, 12% of that goes to super. So you've got $9,600 going to super. The numbers he suggested were, if you're on $80,000, you've got $50,000 to live. So you've got $30,000 less. $20,000 goes to the government as tax.

Nick · 07:07So you've got disposable income left on your $80,000 of $10,000 to do what you want with, which in most cases would be get ahead in life. So the super, $9,600 is basically 100% or you could double your disposable income. That's a really fair argument because, okay, I don't earn a lot.

Nick · 07:25I've only got $10,000 left to do something with. Why should— why does that other $10,000 have to go to super? Why can't I do something with that, such as pay my house off quicker?

Jason · 07:33Especially a bit of the underlying context of a lot of people don't even make it to retirement age. So the ability to live a little bit better now at the trade-off of maybe not making it to retirement at all, but not having as much in retirement that's been forced to squirrel away.

Nick · 07:47Yeah, yeah. But you know, at the same time, I think valid point. But most people go through life thinking they're going to get to retirement.

Jason · 07:54Correct.

Nick · 07:55And preparing for it. So, and look, the other really important stat he rattled off here was $53 billion a year to run the super system. So what that is exactly made up of, I'm not 100% sure, but he did mention it. It's a similar cost to run— that's similar cost to the pension.

Nick · 08:12So, you know, if you put more money into the pension, then maybe people would have more money as a pension. So there's things— Firstly, what I want to talk about is the one thing this doesn't capture, and Karl did mention it at the end, is the behaviour.

Nick · 08:28Now, you know, we've had our mortgage business for 18 years now. So we've seen a lot of clients in those times and The thing is that in an ideal world, if people had more money in their pocket, more disposable income, more money left, they would either save that money or they would invest that money to set themselves up for the future, or they would pay their home off quicker.

Nick · 08:55Mm-hmm. The reality is a majority of the population are terrible savers. So whilst the numbers stack up here, would people do what they were meant to do with that money? To make sure the numbers were backed up or the numbers came to fruition.

Nick · 09:13My opinion is no. And what Karl mentioned then, I think he's right. I think if you didn't have some kind of voluntary superannuation, you would have a lot of people getting to retirement and not having a cent to rub together. I actually think that would be the case.

Nick · 09:30The other thing I think we need to look at is Okay, well, if 40% of people are retiring with a mortgage now, 10% of people were retiring with a mortgage in 1992. I don't think super is the reason for that.

Nick · 09:46That's house prices. That's cost of living pressures.

Jason · 09:49I think my parents bought a house for about $25,000 in the early '90s or late '80s. So, you know, big, big difference in being able to pay that off versus what the average price of—

Nick · 09:59Yep.

Jason · 10:00Pretty much closer to $1 million these days.

Nick · 10:02Correct. So where I think we are qualified to talk about this possibly more than Senator Rennick, is he's nailed the numbers. Even though we are the numbers guy, we sit in front of the people. So we see behaviours, we understand how all this works.

Nick · 10:19And you know, it's all good and well again to say people might invest their own money, but they don't know how to do that. So they're still going to go— he's talking about fees— they're still going to go and source service from someone and then pay fees to get that money invested, assuming they're not just paying their mortgage off.

Nick · 10:35So I think, yeah, that's the main things I think we can start to unpack. What's your thoughts? You've clearly got clients, you know, for you it might be tax bills. People know they've got a tax bill coming. People know they've got to put money away for GST.

Nick · 10:52People know they've got to put money away for PAYG tax. Habits?

Jason · 10:57That's a perfect example. So if you look at, you know, the everyday Australian who's earning a wage, their tax is withheld, goes to the ATO already. They get back what they're entitled to when they do their income tax return at year-end. Great. You then look at the $50 billion-plus debt to the ATO from small business owners who, because they collect the tax, the 25% in their company or the gross amount, they collect the GST, they hold onto the pay-as-you-go withholding, and they're holding onto the employee super.

Jason · 11:26If they mismanage that money, it doesn't end up in the super fund or in the ATO's pockets in the form of taxes being paid. So, you know, that's just one example of what happens if you give people money that's not theirs in the first place. So likewise, the idea of people not having compulsory super put in, I think— and I always think back to being younger— that we don't learn the lessons of managing money properly when we're in our teens, when we're going through high school, when we get our job at McDonald's and we spend every bit, almost

Jason · 11:56every dollar that we earn. Most people generally will spend that money. I don't know any 15-year-olds that— many, I shouldn't say any, between 15 and 25 that have put $50 a week away and screwed away a couple of hundred grand.

Nick · 12:09No, most 40-year-olds can't do that either.

Jason · 12:11Yeah. What I did want to say though was on the 70% of retirees that still have the balances as well and has it worked. So the system there, we've only just recently gone to 12% in the total amount of super that goes in over the last couple of years.

Jason · 12:27Beyond that, we're now moving to payday super. So every 7 days, if you're on weekly, there is money hitting your super fund. Yeah, I think the time value of that money compounding and being in the fund over the next 10, 20, 30 years, we're going to see very different numbers to the amount of people that are going to have enough money in their super funds to be able to afford to retire without relying on the pension still.

Jason · 12:52So I think, I think there is a big swing that's going to continue to happen now. Thinking back that, you know, we were 9% not too long ago and it's gradually gone up to 12%. And then now instead of paid quarterly where somebody else had the benefit of that money in their account for 3 months, you're now getting it in weekly, fortnightly.

Jason · 13:10So there's a big difference that's going to make. So time will tell.

Nick · 13:13And I think if you even want to talk about timing too, we are still in this, like I think that it's the boomer population are really the first population to benefit from super. But their whole working life for some of them wasn't subject to super.

Nick · 13:29So, you know, super is going to become more and more important as people in like my age and your age, we've had super since day one. So the other thing he mentioned there was just the amount of people that still retire on pension. One of the things that I looked up, one of the stats I looked up from the ABS, so Australian Bureau, said that between 2014 and 2015, the proportion of retired people of people with super being their main source of

Nick · 13:59income was 20%. As of 2024, 2025, it's now 28%. So the thing that he said there was the amount of people or the number of retirees that still retire on a pension. What he hasn't talked about there is the fact that not everyone gets the same pension.

Nick · 14:17So the pension is means tested. So basically any asset you've got outside of your family home, goes into that test. So you can, you can have a million-dollar home, you can have a $5 million home, it's excluded. And then assets that you've got outside of that, such as shares, you might have gold, houses, they're included in the means test.

Nick · 14:41So generally what we see happen is clients of ours will retire and they might receive no pension when they first retire. And as they sell down assets such as superannuation or investment properties to live, they sell down their asset values and then the pension starts to kick in.

Nick · 14:59So you might actually have a lot of people that are on a part pension, not a full pension. So that's important, I think. The people that mainly rely on superannuation versus the stat that he rattled off was this is the amount of people that are on a pension. You could have someone that's on a small amount of pension or that's getting the maximum pension.

Nick · 15:18So I think that's really important because you're slowly seeing the reliance on the pension— reliance in inverted commas— decreasing versus just the blanket everyone still retires on the pension. Anything else there that stuck out to you from a stats point of view?

Jason · 15:36Oh, look, I think just the sheer size of what Australia has been able to do with the pension fund or the super fund. I mean, the fact that, you know, we talked about— he talked about $4.4 trillion up until kind of March 2026, that was the balance. It puts us as the 5th largest pension pool globally.

Jason · 15:53So, you know, punch punching above our weight there. You know, we're coming behind Japan, you know, US, Japan, Canada, UK, and then Australia. You know, so the fact that from a wealth perspective, I think it's somewhere around, you know, the, the median wealth per household is $740,000.

Jason · 16:10It doesn't— it makes it sound like from a wealth perspective that we aren't doing too badly. And I think, you know, then it's— I, I just looked up the numbers pre-show, but then just comparing to, you know, our neighbors across the ditch in New Zealand where It's not compulsory, so it's up to them what they want to do.

Jason · 16:27And we're looking at a salary amount of 4% from April 2028 if you adopt into the system. Now, at the moment, it's 3% to 3.5% of salary and wages when you opt in. Looking at the average balance, you've got $36,000 as the average balance of a Kiwi super fund, KiwiSaver, versus $133,000 average balance for members in Australia.

Jason · 16:54So I think, you know, you look at those numbers and I have a feeling of, you know, I look at Casey and my balance and go, between the age of 25 and— well, between the age of 15 and 30, I wouldn't have put anywhere near that amount of money in if it was voluntary.

Jason · 17:10But now, how much that's going to mean to my super fund balance when I retire is just a phenomenal difference when it comes to that extra $50,000 to $100,000 compounding over the next 30+ years.

Nick · 17:23I can absolutely promise you that most of the clients who come through our door would not be in the position they are without super. Most people come in, if they've had super for a good chunk of their working life, they've got their owner-occupied home paid off and they've got money in super, they're okay.

Nick · 17:43They retire okay. Now, again, the argument is, well, if they didn't have that 12% which is what it is today, going to super, they probably would've paid their house off and maybe invested. But I would again suggest they wouldn't have. They might've paid their house off quicker, but they probably wouldn't invest in anything beyond that.

Nick · 17:59So the other thing I wanted to talk about was just the returns in super. So he mentioned there that, you know, you handle this money over, I think he mentioned—

Jason · 18:11To someone you don't know.

Nick · 18:12To someone you don't know. And you've got no guarantee that it's going to be there come retirement. Now, there has been some shocking cases of where super has gone wrong, and that has never been more exposed than it has been in the last 12 months.

Nick · 18:27But the government does have industry funds to protect people. And if you look at the average industry fund— so I just grabbed AustralianSuper because their returns are generally pretty good, and most of the industry funds are on par or at least close to AustralianSuper.

Nick · 18:43So over the last 10 years, this is— so they have what they call a MySuper investment strategy, which basically means based on your age, your investment risk is determined. So you're not sitting down and doing a risk profile with a financial planner.

Nick · 19:01They say, Jase, you're, you know, you're late 30s. We think your risk profile should look like this because risk profile is generally linked to how much longer you've got invested. So if you look at their, their MySuper returns, the last 10 years averaged 8.21%, last 15 years averaged 8.46%, since inception averaged 9.2%.

Nick · 19:27Now, better than most interest rates, better than most deposit rates if you went and put money in the bank, which is what most people would've done. So when you understand this stuff and you know you've got a super fund, you know, once you get a bit of a decent balance in there, people come in and they're blown away at what their super's done over the last 12 months.

Nick · 19:48So I think it's important to talk about that as well because it's not this— for most people, if they go to the right provider, and if you're not sure about that, just go to a good industry fund, your money will get managed and you will get a good return and you will be able to to pull that money out of retirement.

Jason · 20:07I think the other one just on that as well, when it comes to the advantages of the super fund, that when you wrap it up in super, the tax concessions— I'm trying to find a way to get to tax as an accountant, as I do— but you're looking at losing in your earnings, it's 15% tax. So the contribution's 15% and then the tax on your earnings, 15%.

Jason · 20:27Now, if you were to keep all that money in your own pocket and invest it and earn, you're likely to be paying 30% or more as an average rate of tax. Now, again, over a long period of time in the market, losing over 30% of your investment earnings versus 15% has a considerable difference in the amount of money you have left over at the end.

Jason · 20:45So that also can't be discounted, that if you were to let people not put it into super and again, whether they pay off the house or put it into their own savings.

Nick · 20:54Yeah.

Jason · 20:54Obviously the house is a different scenario, but if they've got their own investments outside, they're losing more to the taxman than they would be if it was in super.

Nick · 21:02Yeah, for sure. And, you know, smart people know that. And again, like even those he talked about, make it voluntary. If you made it voluntary, most people that have spare cash that understand the system will still put money in super. You'll have some people out there say, I'm not putting money in super because who knows what the government's going to do with it?

Nick · 21:18Well, where else are you going to put it? Because the reality is if you put in any kind of investment, the government can change the tax on it.

Jason · 21:24And do you think that is, you know, being gamed by the wealthy? So one of the numbers that we had or that I've got here is that the voluntary contributions surged 19% to $66 billion last year. So, you know, it's the idea that if people didn't like super, why would they be putting extra money into it?

Nick · 21:41And I think it's the carry-forward rule. Yep. You can go back 5 years and use up any unused concessional contributions that you hadn't.

Jason · 21:48Which at tax planning time, it's one of our, you know, as tax accountants trying to get a tax saving for our clients, obviously we can't make investment advice. But when we talk about the tax saving, we bring up that 5-year— basically in the ATO portal, you've got a tab that shows is the 5 years' worth and it runs a little running balance of what's going to drop off in the 5th year if you don't use it.

Jason · 22:08So we often sit there with our clients at Tax Planning and say, hey, look, this is a big opportunity. You've got 5 years' worth of your unused cap to be able to catch that back up. Yep. You didn't put— you missed the cap by $10,000 5 years ago. You can chuck that in extra this year and use that cap and then you've still got the other 4 years to carry forward.

Nick · 22:27We had a particular case in this office where we saved a self-employed couple So both had a lot of unused concessional contributions, sold an investment property close to retirement. We saved them $90,000. So their capital gains tax bill went from $110,000 to $20,000.

Nick · 22:45And then so saved them $90,000 less the 15% on the way in. But to your point before—

Jason · 22:54Massive difference though.

Nick · 22:55Yes.

Jason · 22:55And how happy would those clients have been?

Nick · 22:57They're stoked because they were about to retire, so they'd get the money out in the next year anyway. Now, to your point there, the original question, yes, the wealthy do use this because they're smart enough to realise that, well, that's a good way to reduce or minimise my tax. And I know that it's only getting invested in the same way it would if I was to go into a managed fund or shares outside of the superannuation environment.

Nick · 23:18But I think another important thing to talk about is if we get rid of super and we make it voluntary, not get rid of it, but get rid of it as a necessity and just make it voluntary. What are some alternatives? Because the reality is people will not save money.

Nick · 23:33And I'm talking about most people. Some people definitely will, and some people will probably be better off by having access to that money themselves, but a lot of people will not be. So your options, I think, are we need to increase the pension because the current pension, if you're on maximum— so this is through, I think $330,000 is the cap, as long as your assets outside of your house are no more than that.

Nick · 23:57The maximum pension at the moment in this country is $1,200 per fortnight, $600 a week for a homeowner. Now, that's just not enough money. Now, this is assuming they own a home. For a couple, it's $1,800 a fortnight, so $900 a week each.

Nick · 24:13So it's not enough. So I think without superannuation, and anyone who knows anyone who's living on the pension knows it's not a great life. So If you don't have superannuation to top this up, which in most cases, as I said, it's a combination of the pension and the super for a lot of clients, you probably need to increase the pension.

Nick · 24:33Maybe you can do that if you're not spending $53 billion to run the super funds. The other thing I would think is, this goes back to my first point, people are really good at paying debt off and they're really good at, well, they're really good at paying debt off, they're not good at saving.

Nick · 24:50So the only other thing you could do is if you're going to make super not voluntary, you find a way to force people into smaller loan terms. So, you know, you're guaranteeing that you're gonna pay debt off because if you've got someone with a million-dollar mortgage paying $5,000 a month, if you make them pay $5,500 a month, they'll probably find a way.

Nick · 25:13If you make them only pay $5,000 a month, they'll find a way to spend the $500. I can absolutely guarantee you that. So I was just thinking about how could you, what are some of the changes you could make? Well, one, you've got to make sure the pension's more because people can't live on $1,200 a fortnight, particularly today.

Nick · 25:28And then second to that, you've got to find a way to force people to drive good behaviours because they generally won't do it off their own back. Shorter loan terms can do that.

Jason · 25:38Yeah, 100%. Yeah, I think that's exactly right. If you are going to give them double their disposable income, especially in that $80,000 example, you go from having $10,000 to nearly $20,000. Forcing that, well, forcing it into paying off debt so that you do get ahead even faster rather than a 30-year loan term.

Jason · 25:56I think that's a fantastic example.

Nick · 25:59So I actually really like Senator Rennick. I like what he talks about, not just in regards to super, he covers a lot of things on that particular podcast. And the numbers don't lie.

Nick · 26:16Like the numbers are the numbers, but I I think there's more to it than that. And, you know, I think with what's going on in society today with access to information, social media, everyone's got short attention spans. You know, we're looking at things really quickly. People are putting up clips or reels or posts or stories trying to get a reaction.

Nick · 26:37I just think we really need to unpack things a little bit more. And as someone who is sitting in front of clients— or not anymore, but has been in the past— understanding behaviours. I think the superannuation theory and system is fantastic in what it provides.

Nick · 26:55Could it be better based on some of the things he's spoken about here and how it's managed? Absolutely, no doubt. What, what in the government couldn't be managed better? Yeah, but I'm all for super being compulsory. What's your thoughts?

Jason · 27:13I'm with it. We can't ditch super. I just think it's even from an accountant point of view and a business owner point of view, it's such an important area that we work with, with our clients. And as I said, I've watched people's wealth grow year on year through the ability to have compulsory super going in.

Jason · 27:29And I agree that if you give people the choice, a lot of the time the choice is going to be the couch and or spending the money rather than investing. So I'm full on super.

Nick · 27:40Yeah. And I just want to say one more thing because I know what people will be thinking watching this. Oh, he's an accountant and he's a financial planner. Of course they want superannuation. My choice, my individual choice, I personally would be happy if it wasn't compulsory because I'm confident I'll do something with the money.

Nick · 28:00So I just want to get that out there. I look at these numbers, I go, yeah, I don't think it should be compulsory based on the numbers and based on the fact that I can then do what I want with the money. I'm talking about the behaviour and I think most people won't use the fact that it's not compulsory to their advantage.

Nick · 28:19That's the point.

Jason · 28:22I think that's a great point. And on that, I'd love to throw it back to our audience. We have a new website. Visit www.thenumbersgamepodcast.com.au. You've got the ability to go and leave us a voice note or send us a message. So if you've listened to this episode and you have an opinion on should Australia ditch superannuation so that you can have more disposable income in your pocket, please let us know.

Jason · 28:43You can You can also like, comment, share on YouTube and Spotify and everything else. We appreciate you tuning in. And until next time, you can argue about who controls your super, but you cannot argue with compound interest. Game over. This podcast is for educational and informational purposes only.

Jason · 29:01The conversations are of a general nature and do not qualify as financial or tax advice. We recommend before you make any financial decisions, you consult a licensed professional. Individuals on the podcast may hold positions in the companies discussed.