
The main difference is who bears the risk. For pensions, it’s the employer, who has to make extra payments if the pension fund falls behind it projected obligations, or surrender its management to PBGC. That open-ended risk is why most companies have abandoned pensions. For SS, it’s the government (although they do have the power to change their legal obligation). For annuities, it’s the recipient, who will just get less money if the annuity’s investments underperform during the accumulation phase.
If she hadn’t personally suffered for Trump’s policies, she’d still have the same nasty values.
What’s difficult for me is - now that she’s learned the Leopards-eating-peoples-faces party will happily eat her face - can she extend that lesson to the Leopards-eating-peoples-legs party or the Bears-eating-peoples-faces party. Because if these people have to personally experience each of the obvious and horrible consequences to realize that the next charismatic ghoul is a charismatic ghoul, then we are no closer to a better world.