From Save to Safe – A Conversation on Rethinking Risk

What if the biggest risk in retirement planning isn’t market volatility—but believing you’re prepared when you’re not?

In Episode 38 of the Tao of Chao Podcast, Renee Scherzer interviews Philip Chao on the core philosophy behind his book From Save to Safe.

Drawing on decades of fiduciary experience, Philip challenges the traditional “401(k) mindset” and outlines a path to reach sustainable retirement income.

While modern systems have made it easier than ever to save, Philip argues they have most still under save and the system has not solved for what actually matters: opportunities and distribution methodologies in generating sustainable income in retirement. 

Using the Save to Safe framework, this conversation explores how “mindless participation” under the current employer sponsor defined contribution set up —combined with system design—can create a false sense of security and leave participants underprepared.

Key insights include:
• Why saving is only the first phase—not the outcome
• How the current system can create the illusion of readiness
• The hidden risks behind mindless participation
• Why fiduciary responsibility must extend beyond plan design
• How behavior and system structure together shape outcomes

📘 Get the book From Save to Safe: https://www.amazon.com/Save-Safe-Personalized-Fragility-Resilience-ebook/dp/B0FWXCMGQD

Listen to the full episode to understand why retirement planning doesn’t end with saving—and what it really takes to move from Save to Safe.

👓 Learn more about our HOST

Philip Chao
Website: https://philipchao.us
Follow Philip on LinkedIn

DISCLOSURE: Views expressed in the Tao of Chao podcasts are individual opinions and they do not represent the employers of each guest or the firm with which each guest is associated. Our podcasts are for educational and informational purposes only and should not be deemed or viewed as investment advice or recommendations. Please consult your personal financial advisor, investment expert, or investment fiduciary before taking any actions about your plan and investments.

Transcript

0:00

I'm excited to be hosting and turning the tables on Philip Chao today. Welcome to the Town of Chao podcast, where we will try to find balance and provide a clearer path forward in this uncertain world. Rene Cirstea is a senior vice president of retirement and Wealth division of One Digital and specializes in retirement plan consulting, focusing solely on the success of retirement plans for the benefit of employee and confidence of the employer. Her team's mission is to provide clients with strategies to empower their employees to build financial independence, while managing the fiduciary liability of organizations and their executives while navigating the ever changing regulatory environment. Renee is an investment advisor, representative, certified plan fiduciary advisor, and host a destination of Accredited Investment Fiduciary. I am Renee, host to series 63 and 65 securities registration through one Digital Investment Advisors, as well as various insurance licenses. She served as the president of the Napa in 2023, 24, and for six years on the Napa Leadership Council. She also served on the executive Board of the American Retirement Association Aera for two years, and is on various industry committees. And here is Renee. Well, I felt honored to be asked. So thank you, for giving me this opportunity to have more time with you. So first, you know, in reading this book, I can venture to guess where your heart was and what the purpose behind writing this was. But why don't you share with the audience what compelled you to write this book and put these beautiful thoughts and insights? I think I shared with you in reading it, I felt like I was just sitting at a table talking with you so beautifully, you know, very, very beautifully done. Thank you. So the genesis of this book really was, my marketing team who said to me, Philip, you really should put all your thoughts together. You have so many thoughts. I said, well, I don't know if anybody want to hear all my thoughts, but but I was told that I really should put together into a book and share, Sharing what? Really sharing about, my observation. I know, Renee, you you have been very clear about your mission in this industry. And I'm very fortunate to get to know you and others like you. And I will say that not everybody is like you think, thank goodness you are unique. But on the other hand, we really need everybody like you who are mission driven rather than business driven. There's a difference. And so, the motivation about writing this book is really probably twofold. One is to share my observation and sort of call for duty to do something. We have some show we've spent some time talking about. What are the threats, of average Americans not talking about Ford, Chao or Renee or any one individual. But on average, how we, not prepared, for, quote unquote, the golden years, of our lives. So that that's one obvious and number two, really thinking about the US retirement system. I don't think it's a good system. I don't think it's a bad system. It is a system by which we, as, professionals in this industry, should advocate the right processes to execute the right things to give the highest opportunity for individuals to have a good chance of retiring and dignity. So those are the two strands that really, you know, got me thinking about. Okay. I guess I have things to share. And I put it together. And as I was thinking through that, then the third and final strand came through, that I really thought about my mother and thought about, how much I learn from her without without even realizing what I have learned. Right. As to life, about fiduciary, and that our defined contribution system, will fall apart, or you will not reach its rightful destination. If we are not careful about not only, maintaining, but somehow even restoring the important role, of Sherry in that entire system. So that became sort of another piece. So those are the three parts that, got me, got me into writing this book. Well, and what I love about, what? I thought you did a really spectacular job out of this book is. It's not narrowly focused to the audience. That would get something from it. What I loved, and I even if you can see in my book I've got little post-it notes. I had pages, I have things underlined. On the statistics about it and, and the actual data behind it that not just myself as an a fellow advisor and, mission oriented advisor at that, but also just as a working American who also, you know, has the the gift and the ability to help influence others. But also sees the challenges we face. And so I love that the book was that anyone could read it and walk away feeling like they've gained some more knowledge. And so, I think you did a great job doing that. And I kind of want to love to walk through some of the chapters here because they all build upon each other. And in the first chapter, you talk about the American retirement crisis. And, you know, we talk about the pig through the that day. Going through a python is a challenge of the aging population and the young generation. Make the make up of gig workers, the makeup of the transitions of, you know, from our generation. We change jobs, you know, on average, seven times there was a Wall Street article that stated that although I think you and I have stayed doing the same thing the whole time, we're bringing that average down. But with the younger is at 26 times changing. So if you could share a little bit more about really where, where we exist today, where is this crisis coming from? And you also what I love that because you talked about the shift from the defined benefit to defined contribution, as well as we're a culture of consumption. And if you can also not just share about where we exist in the US, but share a little bit, as you do in chapter one about China and how things are done, and different differently, and maybe where we could learn from a cultural standpoint. That is a lot. I was I would do that my best. So let's take one at a time. I think the, aging is not just, confined to America is a global, global situation. Aging comes for for two reasons. Number one, certainly people are living longer. Because of the modern health care and, and our, our, our medical system, not only here but globally, have certainly, advance our ability, to live longer. So people are living longer. And so that's, that's the obvious part of aging. But the, the less obvious is that less people are getting married, less people are getting married. And having children. And when they do have children, they're having fewer children. So when you add the combination of people living longer, fewer babies are born. The the middle point of the demographics out, it doesn't work out. And so when we think about that, we think about a society, this is a society challenge. This is not just any one individual. Of course. We have focus on in our world is one client or one individual on the one the wealth side, thinking about how do we help that family of that company to save for retirement and that this is a this is a global phenomenon. And and you look at Japan, you look at Korea, and you look at Germany and all of them are aging, even faster right now. For some obvious reasons or some are not so obvious. I mean, Second World War wiped out a lot of lot of people in the middle. And so the people who survived lived on. And then you have a big hole in the middle, so to speak. So it is a global phenomenon, and it's a global phenomenon only because, because we're living longer, but also because, the system is less capable of supporting a growing number of people with a higher and higher and older and older average age. What is that? Medical, long term care, all the things that we know about and, and the loss of a mental acuity, you know, so we have a lot to deal with and not only a lot to deal with from a medical and health care standpoint, but the costs associated with those type of care historically have carried a much higher inflation rate. Yes, because of supply and demand. Reasons and many other complex issues, new medication, new machines coming in, new things, all that costs more than old things. That's always been the case. So we have a number of challenges, of an aging population. However, this is, you know, Python, you know, the pigs through a python. The the the diagram. You see, it's not something that we all of a sudden woke up and realize this. And as I mentioned in my book, when I went to college, which is many decades ago, I took a course in gerontology. Where are we talking about this? Where are you? Right. So there's nothing new, but we just didn't do anything about it. Some of it is politically very unfriendly and unable to to to make those changes. Until we absolutely have to and I think that we are getting there now. So that's sort of the one aspect. But the other thing that you mentioned, Renee, is about going from a defined benefit plan to defined contribution fund for for people who don't know the difference is defined benefit, as it says, defining the benefit. So when you when you were working for a for coal mine or for a for a for industry or labor, what have you. And you worked there for 40 years. You started in your, you know, late teens or early 20s and you end up late 50s, early 60s and say, I'm done. I've done my 40 years, and thank you very much. And you get your old go watching the old days of you have to be a go watch pat on the back and say that, don't worry, we will replace your income at 40, 50, 60, whatever the percentage is for the rest of your life. So. Great. That's. That's what I work all my life for, for that security, not only during working years, but also post retirement years. That has vanished for the very point that, Rene, you mentioned that we change our far too often. Almost nobody works for anybody for 40 years anymore. No, especially the especially we have traded, the longevity of a of a career and, with a higher pay by hopping jobs to job to jobs. It's not neither right or wrong. It is what it is. And so the today's environment does not does not offer the opportunity to have that type of life, lifetime employment, thus retirement lifetime income. So if I may, if I may conclude on that by saying from a defined contribution plan where the I'm sorry defined benefit plan, where the benefit is defined, that when you retire after a number of years, you get whatever X number of dollars to a defined contribution plan and say, hey, we're just going to put X number of dollars in. The rest is up to you. And what what the employer has done or what the society have done is shifted three risks, as you know very well, Renee, to 3 to 1 is to funding risk that instead of the employer funding it, by the way, they were not all wonderful companies. They were paying you a little less by taking that and funding it. Right. So it's not free funding. Funding risk is now put to individuals you funded yourself primarily to is the investment risk. Remember, in the old days, employers said, hey, you know, we are assuming a x percent return. Exactly. It makes sure that's taken care of. We as employees don't have to worry about how to invest or whatever asset, location, blah, blah, all that type of stuff. So the investment risk is push on to individuals. And finally, longevity risk is the risk that we will not outlive our income. All of those three risks huge exposure from an employer to all of us in a defined contribution environment. We'll take in that human behavior component as you talk about and and we'll based we'll be talking about two because you in in your later chapters, you go through a step by step from a plan design. Because when you're shifting that ownership of the decision making authority, we do need to get back to a little of that defined benefit model because of human behavior. So my father in law and my brother in law, my father in law worked for a paper company, and my brother in law worked for GE for many years. They did their whole entire career there and they have pension plans. GE is a little bit different. They change their model, but they But right now what we're looking at, if I look at my siblings, their, their human behavior component, is getting in the way of them being getting to a place of retirement. And so we talk about, you know, what would we love for you to share a little bit more about China and how things are done differently philosophically, how are people you know, I do believe it's a cultural, distinction. We do determine our relationship with money at a very early age. So depending on the environment you're raised in, sometimes directs you into what your future is going to look like. And so but if you could, share a little bit because culturally in, in China things are done differently, it is different. And I don't want to sit here and say that China is better or worse. It's just different. So let's make sure I say that clearly, and that there's no right culture or wrong culture. There's no good culture and bad culture. Culture is code that there are the good parts of it trading off with not so good parts of it. So let's look at what China China has done. So China has about a 14,000. I'm just rounding it down to about $14,000 income per per capita. So how do you do that. You take the entire, GDP of China divided by the number of people, and you come up with the number. It's about 14, a little bit more than $14,000, which is not much money. I mean, I don't know if we can survive on or $14,000 country, but because they don't have the safety net that we have. So, for example, they don't have Social Security the way that we have it. They don't have Medicare or Medicaid the way we have it. Right. So Chinese citizens, always been very much self-reliant because they cannot rely on the government or a safety net, if you would, that even if I didn't save on this, I know there's something coming in, like social Security or I'll be taking care of. Yeah, so there's no such thing now, that's one of the reason why they end up having a an average saving rate somewhere close to 40%. So you can imagine $14,000 saving 40%. They're living of 60% or $14,000. A lot of people in this country think China is a competitive United States in the in the equal footing. They're not even close to equal footing. This this is barely middle income country China, right? Yes. They have big beautiful buildings. Yes, they have all that. But they are not America. America is way ahead of China in so many ways when it comes to retirement savings. We are fortunate enough back in the Roosevelt, they, they came up with this Social Security and and Medicare, for, for all they don't have that in China. So they understand that they need to save is that that's one number two, their culture is all about stability and no chaos. So as far as they're concerned, they want safety. They care. They put a lot of value on safety. So they understand if they don't safe they're not going to have safety. So the the culture is a different culture. Yes. Right here we talk about safety. But but we are risk takers in this country. I mean our country is founded on risk taking, you know, and that we are exceptional and we we're going to try and anything is possible. That's not their mentality. They are very different in that sense because of that difference in mentality. They worry about the future more than we do. Right? So I think I talk in the book how although unfortunately is chauvinist Stickley that they prefer sons and daughters. Yeah. Right. Well, you know. Oh, because they carry the family name. Well, yes, but that's not the real big reason. The real big reason is that sons gain a wife, loses a child. So what I mean by that is I have two daughters. If I'm in China, if I don't save enough, I'm going to lose the two daughters to somebody else who has support. Their family is no longer my family. But if I have two sons, I know they're going to gain two girls, and they're all going to help me, to support me in my old age. So for those with daughters and only daughters, especially with the one child policy where they only have one daughter, they have no other choice. They have to save even more because they absolutely have no way to rely on the daughter who is no longer one day getting married, no longer able to help son would. So that is definitely cultural. I'm turning to hitting on your anything, but I think it's interesting to say it because if it's culturally you're you're you grow up with that understanding and that belief. And I think we've always shared in the industry the importance of before we get someone gets our first paycheck because in America, where I grew up, neither my parents could afford retirement. My father has since passed. My mother is still working at 79 years old, in cutting hair and she, but I did the exact opposite. And then I went into the field about this. And so it's interesting. So for me, even if going into the younger schools, because you're fighting against a culture that doesn't align with, let's say, 40% or let's, let's say not carry debt. Yeah, but I love what you you start talking about this parable about the yesterday me, the today me and the tomorrow me, because I'm also someone who talks, I've talked and shared before about my inner mentor. And it's that's the future of me. So when you when I read that, you know, I thought that was really interesting because you're, you're taking ownership yourself. And who was I yesterday? Who am I today and who is the what's the future? Me. And if if you could share a little bit, a bit about, that, that, you know, how you eloquently put that I thought that was really interesting of our owning that ownership ourselves. So I think, I think back to that, that the imagery of America when I was young and learn about America is a frontiersman who came, they put themselves up in the bootstrap and they failed the fields they build, the houses, they they fit the family and they are proud people and they take care of themselves. I mean, that was the sort of the, the Western, view. Right? When you say, wow, you definitely made that. Okay. Wow. That's amazing. That's that's amazing. Yeah. So it's about self-reliance. Yeah. And so I think that somehow that has waned somewhat in this country. Yeah. At least I'm talked about in the frame of framework of, of, of retirement and retirement savings. And which go back to the earlier conversation is really we I hate to use the word entitlement. We, we feel that, you know, we deserve something. Yes. Rather than we have to fight for everything. Find it maybe too strong a word, or we have to earn everything and do everything ourselves. Yeah. So we think about the yesterday me, today me, and tomorrow me. Well, something that actually I, I use as a theme at one of the conferences that I was on a panel, and really just talking about, it was, three, very well known who have made a lot of money, when they were in the late teens or early 20s. They all turn to doing what we do, providing investment advice, for other athletes. And so I said, what a wonderful way to think about it is that yesterday me, today me and tomorrow me. And so we, we talk about what, what what will we do in the yesterday. What what what what, what were we what were our habits? What were we thinking about? What did we do? What did we not not do? And so today, me, we look back and we say, boy, if I, if I am 20 years old again, I will have started my IRA, even putting $5 more, $10 and 100 on them or whatever, even though, you know, maybe my parents have told me or I've heard that I just didn't pay any attention to it, so I didn't do it. And now, 20 years later and I say I'm in my 40s and I'm saying, oh my gosh, I wish, I wish, I wish, I wish I did something. Yeah, or I did do something right. And that aren't being able to be rewarded. I don't mean literally taking the money, but I, I look at my, balance in my statement. Wow. How astonishingly, how well I have done, by just putting a little bit away, for using that as an example. So looking into yesterday, me, in today's me standpoint, what have I done, what I learned from it. That is only step one. If we don't do anything because human nature tends to, you know, only want to do pleasant thing. Oh bias. Yeah, yeah. All kinds of bias. And if we don't do anything, we already know what the tomorrow is going to look like. Where are we. No. Tomorrow. Me, it's going to be stuck at the same place we were yesterday me and today me. So it's a really simple framework. We need to be more introspective. We need to be more mature. Yes. We need to take action. Yeah. And one thing, one thing humans can do uniquely is my understanding is that we can actually learn from others. Yes, we can't. I didn't say we do. We can, can and do is where divides us. Yes. Right. So they keep talking about history. Doesn't happen exactly. But it rhymes. You know all the things that we talk about all the time is because we have chose to not take actions based on lessons learned by others or ourselves from the yesterday or the yesterday us, so that today we take action so that tomorrow will not be a repeat of yesterday, me or us. And so that's the framework. If I hope that. I think that's fantastic. It's one thing. So I have, three kids. Yes. You at least we shared and my my they were all athletes are all still our athletes. At least my daughters. And one thing I tell them all, I tell them, especially my daughter, who's, you know, plays basketball. And then my youngest that runs track, I said, is never lose being coachable, because even at mom's age, I try to always be coachable. And you had mentioned to, you know, you look back of, you know, my past and and give yourself credit for what you did well learn from what you maybe could have done better. Yeah, learn from others. But if we think we have it all figured out, we get in our own way and we don't lose the, you know, our future, our future me is not going to reap the benefits of, you know, as we talk about the, you know, eighth wonder of the world compound interest. Right. So but you know, what's interesting is, you know, so you start working in chapters and you talked about some of the challenges we have today with our plan sponsors of the short termism, of the chapter title is, you know, and as fiduciary advisors, you know, we we are we are always trying to educate, not just the, the employees they serve or we serve, but also our plan sponsors and those who sit on the committees or having, intentional, engagement. And some part of the success of the plan, but the world as well, everything. When you start seeing a risk and you start seeing litigation and we hear that. So those are the big, you know, gleaming lights. And that's the fear is, you know, there there's that prioritization that you talk about, about the liability of, of making sure we're mitigating liability, not what exactly is this the goals of this, of this plan. And where do we need to get our employees to? And you talked a little bit about that. And, and I think if you can share a little bit more about that concept. Yeah, I, I think, this isn't a sometimes a disservice done by, advisors and consultants. And I want to be very careful. I'm not trashing any one individual. It's that we we really wear two hats when we walk into an employer's business or working with them. One hat is helping the business owner wearing the business owner hat or the business people, where we do need to help them to, to to minimize liability, to help them to, to to consider plan designs and so on. They're within their own limitations. Right? I mean, we all want to give as much money to the employees as we can, but this reality that doesn't happen have to work with, right? Yeah. It's neither right or wrong. It's just this is business. So when we walk in and help them to do plan design to think about, that's all wonderful. That is really consulting for the employer, not acting as a risk consultant. We are acting almost like a business consultant who happens to know a great deal about employee benefits, retirement space. On the other hand, we where is when we, with the committee or with the group that make decisions about investment investing and all those type of things? All the options are made available are selecting the options available for participants where we are a fiduciary with a big letter F, under RSA, which you mention. And that is where we do not talk about are you going to be liable? Oh, boy. But let's not do this because you as an employer may become liable for one of my committees. They took us so seriously about the way I talk about it, that we end up having two separate meetings on the same day. So I will go in, for a for an hour and a half meeting. The first hour is all to do with the fiduciary with the big F on serving solely in the interest of participants. And we don't talk about anything other than that. Then when that is done, the closest to book on those minutes and that then we have a separate meeting half an hour for plan sponsored discussion where we do talk about liability. Do you talk about plan design? Do you talk about, you know, how do we become more effective in allocation, in the contribution that the employer gives and so on, so forth, or strategies so that we separate them. So they mentally understand these are two separate roles and they cannot they cannot join together, because you cannot serve solely an interest at the same time. Well, I'm worried about me getting sued. Well, hold on for a second then. You are not serving solely in the interest. Up to your point, I think that we as advisors need to be very clear minded when we walk in the door. What hat are we wearing? And we want to tell them that is the hat we're wearing. This moment when we talk, we should all be in the same hat, not different. Yeah. So I think it makes sense to you to. Yeah. Well, I think to, you know, we also are always looking to educate those who are sitting in those seats. Make sure they do understand there is that fiduciary hat and component and liability. But at the end of the, the other side is ultimately, though, our goal is to get their employees to a place of retirement, of dignity and grace. And, you know, we have such data at our fingertips that we can really drill in to that plan, design, and, and see where can we get the, you know, work with their finance team to the ROI on this spend also on this plan. So you're, you're, you're sometimes you're shifting gears. Am I talking, you know, strategy? Budgeting. And, I also, you know, liability protection. So data, as we kind of go into that, really there's plan design that you talk about and we absence, as we said earlier, of having that defined benefit structure where you step in and everybody, all the decisions are made, you know, you touch on that. You know, really there's from the expansion of coverage. First you start there of what what where are we at today with the limitations of, you know, the gig workers for people who don't have access to a plan, if you could touch on that, and some of the ways that kind of some of the state and governmental you know, changes are making to try to fill that, and then we'll kind of go into that plan design and the steps that you laid out in the book. Sure. I first got to know, this whole challenge, because I'm not a gig worker, so I don't, I don't think that I have eight jobs delivering from eight different places on, on six different platforms or what have you. I didn't think through that. I got, you know, people who research in that area, and really realize how challenging it is. So when you don't have one single employer, and you are just put, you know, you're just trying to get a job, get a job and make a living. And to bring enough income, because you could not get a full time job somewhere, or or you have a full time job, and, you you want to supplement your income with a, with a side gig? With a side job, and that's I job. Typically don't have any kind of ability for you to save for retirement. No, frankly, retirement is not something you probably spend all day. All night thinking about every time you on a bike delivering food or or delivering packages or whatever it is that you are doing. But over time, we go back to the yesterday me, today me, and tomorrow me if we don't think, laser shop up our savings. Tomorrow me at age 73, we will still be, doing gig work because we didn't save enough. And, and the and the compound interest in work for us. So, so the issue about gig workers, it it's really about the lack of coverage, lack of ability to not their ability, because there's always IRAs. It's it's really consciousness about paying yourself first, which is really what this is about, right? Don't don't spend it first. Less pay yourself first and then spend later, which goes back to the culture of Americans, which we, well, number one in the world, we are exceptional in so many ways. And that, we feel that tomorrow will always be better than today. Yeah. And that's a wonderful philosophy. But this in the may not be practically true for everyone. Yes. And so we need to sort of start thinking about, hey, we need to save for tomorrow, and we need to pay ourself first. So how do we do that for gig workers? And I think that, secure 2.0 is talk a little bit about it, but not on the federal side really state doing more work in the gig worker area. And hopefully that will force gig workers to have to put money away by the time when they file taxes that certain amount of dollars, go to an IRA or go into some form of a tax deferred savings. Now, unfortunately for gig workers, we don't have an employer who's going to make any matches contribution, but we need to do it either way. We will regret it over time. I, I one thing I am pretty certain, Renee, that with all your experience in both on the individual side as well as on retirement side, I don't think you have ever heard anybody pick up a phone at age 65, 67 and said, Renee, I have saved way too much for retirement. It's all your fault. I don't think you've ever heard that, and I don't expect anybody to hear it now. And what's interesting is I'm, I think most of us do. I talk to one of our colleagues and friends, Nicole, one time, and I laugh because we are at the end of an Uber drive. You know, we already know that that every history, all history about our driver. But I always talk to the gig workers, and I, I always ask them. I'm always curious about, do they have another job? And most do. Most of them do have another job or they have multiple gig type of jobs. And they're really just trying to make ends meet. They're just, you know, inflation is coming up and they're still getting hit just at the grocery store. A lot of the employers and we're seeing as to and plan design and obviously with secure 2.0 allowed for required for auto enroll, auto escalation for plans established Jan after January 1st, 2023. But as you and I have, have got a little we're a little OGs in the industry. We've got all these clients that still haven't moved into the auto, that auto, you know, plan of taking those decisions off of the employee. And so you really you, you start talking into plan design and, and what I like about it is you don't rush through that discussion. Do you delicately give each provision its own, chapter where a plan, sponsor or even an individual can go to their plan sponsor or producer can understand a silent one at each other. Are there build upon each other? What does this actually mean? And and so when you talk through about the auto enrollment, auto escalation, that personalizing the accumulation, if you could talk through intentionality that plans officers can have in their plan designed to help with some of these challenges. We've already been talking about. There's no perfection. Whatever come up with, we're always going to have some holes in these safety nets that people will fall through. But until until we have a net that has no holes, which is not anytime soon, but. And these were closing many of those holes. So the first thing is, and, you know, I know you champion this is, is auto enrollment. Auto enrollment basically means that anybody who walks into a employer as a first paycheck, they start putting certain amount of dollar aside into their retirement plan. And I think secure 2.0 suggests 3%. So wonderful start from zero. So 3% is good I think. Hopefully you agree, Renee, that, many studies suggest at no less than 10 to 15% is really where we need to be. And 15 sounds like a large number, but anywhere between 15 is really where we need to be saving for retirement. And if that's the case, 3% starting, it's going to take a long time to get to that 10 to 15%. Yes I do, voluntarily or otherwise. We should, we should. We can talk about the next chapter. So but we need to get everybody started. And so 3% okay begrudgingly we'll do 3%. I prefer to do 6%. Because we need to get people start savings and, and a lot of employers, push back for, for a couple of reasons. One is that, you know, we don't believe in forcing people to do anything. This is their money, blah, blah, blah. Well, the the the legislation of recognize, that, if you're taking money from people's paycheck is illegal. But they said in this case is not it is fine if you want to help people to save for retirement. So so this is this is more than acceptable. And and legislation and both legislation and regulation, have written out very clearly that this is not only fine, they are encouraging to do it. Yeah. So that's number one. Number two, I think a lot of employers says, well, if we do that, that means more money for matching. That means more money out of my pocket and, you know, all that type of thing. That is a that is a what they call a settler function. That's the plan sponsor function that people like you and me can sit down and coach them on. Now, if you give me a specific budget, we'll find a way to do it for you. Right? Right. We will cut here, put that there, and so on and so forth. And so we definitely encourage every employer. I don't suggest that even for me, I get 100%, there, employers just frankly refuse for the right or wrong reason. It doesn't matter. It just said I can I can only bring the horse to water. I can't force them to. But I tend to remind them. So what we do is auto, auto enroll everyone at a percentage. We are hopefully six. But we will do three. And then we also make sure that because on the, on the regulation that if you are forced to put somebody in it, that person has the right to say, no, I don't want it. And if that person does say that next year we will put that person back in again, we don't just let it go. We need to go ahead like you. Like so what you use intentionality. We we realize what we are doing it and it's a mission what band together to force people to recognize the importance that if they don't do something about it to about it today me, tomorrow me, it's going to look just like yesterday. So. So I think that you and I are both in the same camp, that we not only want to auto enroll people, but we want to repeat it for those who elected not to be in it the first time, the second time, maybe very legitimate reasons. I'm not saying they're bad people. I'm saying, well, they have specific issue. They can't afford it. Great. Let's give them another chance. Second year, they still didn't do it. Let's do it again. Good year. Every year will come back and re re enroll them and hopefully on time they will stick. Well I think that's some of the plan design that forgets. That is they leave them behind. And we have a very respected attorney and in our industry that with his own plan he says he re enrolls everyone every think an intentional decision each year to opt out. Yeah. And and and if you're at the 15% level you know and then they're auto auto, you know, they're also, defaulted. And so everyone's always properly allocated, which is fantastic. But we don't want the escalation part, you know, as well of getting people to that level. But one of the things that, I think as we talk about plan design of auto enroll, auto escalates, we can only start at six. We have to increase them each year. But also, what's that? That vehicle, which I love, that you shared is what you recognized in 2015 was some of the challenges of, that exist when we're looking at everyone the same age but from the same lens, and we have 245 year olds and one is a single mom struggling paycheck to paycheck, making $40,000 a year as opposed to an equivalent same age. Individual who has never had children has maximized and done the maximum, and it's got hundreds of thousands of dollars already put away. But we're in the age models of just a traditional target date. We're treating them the same. So if you could talk about, you know, what you've done and what you've also created in this model, by being able to really create a solution, that exists today. Right. Thank you for asking that. So, I think that, what we have done is we have very, very, very slowly, snail's pace moving into personalization. So if you remember way, way, way back, stable value was the default. Everybody just get savings for 30 years making 3%. It's like no you can do better. Yeah. So then we got into risk space and and portfolios where. Well are you a big gambler. Well you can take on more risk. But that's not the right approach either. But are beginning to sort of take you you the participant into consideration. Then the next step is really, well, why don't we do it a time base which is human capital base, which is what we call tech targeting fun, where we say, well, when you are young, you need to take on more risk for, for the, for for reasons that, it's not as intuitive because way to talk about human capital. But let's not worry about that. Let's say you can afford to take on risk, more risk when you are younger and you can afford to take on less risk when you are older. So over time, we go with your age. It's another form of, optimizing, optimizing to your personal data. Right. How do they do that? And I found out that a lot of people don't know. And I found out by being curious and say to, asset managers, how does target they fund really work? And they say, well, we put in we use national average. Yeah. The truth resources. One is the Federal Reserve has a lot of national average. You know, they do those studies and inquiry, which is one of our industry, nonprofit organizations. They are the authority of national surveys of how much one makes. What is the average, contribution they make? What is the average, account size? What's the average outside asset? You know, all the things they input those and every every single target they funds series use the same average and they they build it. Now, of course, they are all different because they make different assumptions on amount of level of risk and so on. But it's still based on this standardized average, which is, by the way, average data. And so I thought, well, I don't like average. Maybe I feel that I'm not, you know, I'm not average. Maybe I feel I'm below average. That means I need to do something different. How do I do that? I can't, what is out there now? What is out there has been for almost 15 years is something you know very well called manage account. Well, man, allows you to put all of that data on the individual. Everything about you, you can enter into. And then they will create they the manage account provider will create a portfolio that is much more personalized to you. And I say, great. Why? Why isn't everybody in it? Well, not everybody in it because the cost number one. But you not everybody's as engaged as Rene. You and I would like them to be. Quite frankly, if you go out there to any coffee shop or any tiny dining room that you have shared that I share a meal with, you ask the patrons how many of you looked at your, last quarterly, retirement statement? I would say very few hands raise their hands. People are just not engaged. And when you sit in and forget it, one of the good thing is you set it and forget it. You don't make mistakes about investing, but so you are so not aware of how saved under invested you are. Yes. So. So what can we do to melt the two together to give you personalization without the high cost and involvement? So I came up with this idea and, I've already personalizing a target date solution, not a product, because no longer a product, which is basically taking the chapters from a manage account, reduce it to simplicity of a target date fund so that we can still low cost, which is really what has happened. And to allow at least five data which I mentioned your, your exact date of birth, not five year increments of age, your exact date of birth, your income, your, account size, which you already know because. Right, your contribution level and your employer contribution, these are not scraping the internet to learn about. Rene. No, no, no, this is already available from your, payroll data. So I would submit that it is, it is fiduciary, prudent. It's the right thing to have a fiduciary to do by taking available data and using it for each participant's benefit. So hopefully that makes sense to you as well. My 11 year assessment to you in the in the term you're used or the example you used, you just had in your in your in your due diligence process, was that no harm framework where no one was going to be harmed based on, where they were sitting and paying for a cost of something they did not need. And, and the other thing is, is that, you know, you use the example. I'll let someone read the book. Just I mean, this really is a fantastic book. And anyone who read to I should say it is not a heavy lift to read. You can read through it. But the example I do and I know from, respective everyone's time is the, the bus analogy versus the GPS car and that right off of the edge of that human capital, you know, where you have this at time versus that financial, asset as you get older, an income. I know as, as we're kind of closing, I know you just would love to, to touch, you know, to share that your IG isn't just the accumulation stage. You also address the fact that people are retiring and they need that paycheck for life, and you even expand it on their, and I think that is what's so fantastic of people just even get to the end of your book and read that part of the solution. You didn't drop somebody at retirement. You're carrying them through that deep accumulation stage. But as you know, we're closing. There's two questions I'd love to to ask you as, you know, one is, is that call to leadership. And I love what you gave and you shared about your mom being your first fiduciary and how the tables were turned on that, and if you just can share just to add in that what that, just that relationship taught you and what you feel the call to leadership is today. And again, you were built with the such a beautiful, example. Thank you. So I'll go by that sequence of, of your question. So the, it stands for individualized glide path solution that I, I was very happy that my path happened to be GPS, otherwise I wouldn't have it. Yeah. The notion was GPS being global satellite, you know, system. Where where, where helps us through a path forward, and adjust, appropriately. In this case, not traffic, but but how your personal data changed. And I thought that was a really important, and you're you're absolutely correct. And you know this very well, Renee. I know I hear you talk about it. You know, for instance, in other places, that. What is the purpose of retirement plan? The purpose of a retirement plan is not just an accumulation vehicle. That's only one first half of the retirement plan is how do I get them the biggest pile of money on the table so that when I retire, I'm going to be okay. But even if you have a whole pile of money and I'll give you an example, you've won lucky lotto. You got, you know, you know, $100 million. You still want an approach because you don't have a distribution plan and you have an accumulation plan, but you don't have a longevity plan. So we think about when we talk about plans with time plan sponsors, we we talk about what's the purpose. We asked what is the purpose? And it took us several questions later before they get to this moment that yeah, duh. Of course, retirement plan is to be able to have some kind of income in retirement. And yes, it makes sense for us to help all of this, but not only to accumulate assets, but how do we make sure distributing them at least in some ways, to do it? Yes. Right. So when I think about that, in my conversations, I always then now think about, well, just focus on accumulation is insufficient. How can I take it to the next level? And now we call it lifetime, which is converting a portion of the fixed income. Right. Which is bonds and what have you into an optionality of putting in annuities, which is a lifetime income, payment from an insurance carrier as an option. We're not forcing people to do it. We're saying at least when you go to 65 or 70, whenever you retire, you say, I have this money. How am I going to draw an income from it? My employer has given us one possibility is that I can convert, have the option to convert a portion of my savings into a income that I cannot outlive. Then you say, well, we should really personalize that. We shouldn't just say everybody should be the same. They all get $1,000 a month. Well, that's not that's not the answer. Yeah, yeah. So I intend to say we want to help you to replace your essential living expenses. What are those? Make sure your rent are paid. Your your utilities paid on Netflix. I'm sorry. Netflix are paid whatever else. And your medical bills. And so, so the basic needs are taken care of. The combination of what the retirement plan can give you, plus Social Security together can replace your basic needs, which is about 65% of your pre-retirement income. If we can accomplish that, then this week we know one of my worst imagery is you end up in a tent underneath a freeway bypass. That is not where we want you to be, right? At least you won't be there. Now, the fact that you want to go to Disneyland, every other or Disney World every other year with your grandchildren, that's your doing. But we at least know that you're not living with your grandchildren because you have nowhere else to live, right? So that is sort of the thinking of it. Yes. To extend beyond accumulation into accumulation by offering buy, integrating guaranteed lifetime income, not just lifetime income, but guaranteed lifetime income that you cannot outlive. Which goes back to our first conversation about deep people defined benefit plan, where there is a stream of income that you don't have to worry about. However, we don't force you to do that. We are saying that's just an option for you. If you want it, turn it on. If you don't want it, turn it off and get rid of it. Get all your money back. And because we're in the DC self-directed environment, we don't want to force anybody to have to do any one thing. We do want to force them to save. We do want to force them to escalate, but we don't force them to have to take a certain way of future distribution. But options should be made available. So that's sort of the thinking. I hope that makes sense. Yes it does. And as we close, just as your mother being your first fiduciary and setting that tone and the tables are turn, I thought that was a beautiful way. And and those who read your book are going to learn more. And I love that part. Of the story I just of the book, I think I love the alignment of that. And so from a call to leadership, you know, we talked you can you can really close as the call to leadership. And so what would what would the final words you be on, a call to leadership off of what you feel is imperative, as we, you know, move in to, where our, you know, our world is going. Yeah, I think, I think the, the, the the title of fiduciary really is leadership. Yes. At least a the type of fiduciary we need are really leaders, but more like servant leaders. We serve to lead with serving our client. If they know everything, they wouldn't need an advisor. They are asking for leadership without using that term. They're asking us, what should we do? How should we do it? And we should not be saying, well, I want I don't want to take on risk because it would be bad for me, you know? No, no, no no, no. Our job is to serve them. When I say them, I mean the plan sponsors, participants, not even plan sponsors is ultimately the participants. And we need to take on leadership role, meaning that we need to understand what is right, what are the right things to do and make it happen and not hide behind fiduciary, liability and personal this and personal that, all that is true. But I guarantee you if we do the right thing, nothing bad going to happen to us. Yeah. I always say, as a leader, you're the if you become a voice for the voiceless. And we have to help direct the ships and, and make sure that, you know, we're doing our part to, to really get more people to a place of, of, you know, of, dignity and grace and, and and being able to retire. And it's our role as your advisor. Renee, I know you are excellent at it is to be able to go out there and our differentiation is make things happen together, right? Yeah. And to and to and to discuss it and to take action with our plan sponsors and not to, you know, order taker advisors are not order takers. They wouldn't be advising they are servants. We're not servants or we're not we're not transactional leaders. We're not we're not we're not exactly. So yeah, end to end it by you asking about my mom is that, I won't give it away in my book. I really credit her to have been a shining example to me about serving others is about and and and debt. And then she gave me a final chance at the very end to turn the table to allow me to serve her at the time that, that she needed the most help when she's the most vulnerable. And I think that when we look at participants, I don't mean they are most vulnerable, but they are sometimes mindless. They are relying on us, then they are vulnerable, and we need to take on the duty to act in their best interest. And so I learned from my mom without even realizing it. And as I reflect on that on the book, when I was writing the book, as you asked earlier, I said, wow, mom already gave me the example. Let's just do that. And so hopefully that answer your question without going into details, I think that's a perfect way. Way to close. And this really is you did a fantastic job. And, I do encourage others, to read this because it's, it's there's great information. I, I was intrigued the whole time and I do this sentence. So I thought you did a fantastic job. And, the one thing I just haven't figured out how to do, though, is to get my own Philip child bubble test. So if I can get the bubble head, that's the only thing I need after this reading this book, I. I mean, one thing, even though we're taped, I will just say it. You and I talked about how you have a group of really champions in our industry, and I am so fortunate that after getting to know you better over the last two years, I got to know your friends who, who are of equal commitment and that each one of us should have a little bobble head that we can all just share with everybody. It becomes a group of bobbleheads. I think it'll be fun. Very valuable. And so. But thank you for giving me the opportunity to have this conversation with you, Philip. And and to turn the tables on you of your, fantastic podcast. But, you're a fantastic, leader and I industry, and I just feel very honored to know, Rene, thank thank you for the time. And thank you for your willingness to spend time with me. And I know we are friends, but, this is especially I know you have to read my book, and I ask questions. I know it's a it's a big undertaking. And I appreciate your time and willingness to to to do this with me. Thank you. My pleasure. Philip, thank you so much. You can always find more episodes by visiting Philip child.us/podcast, or find us on your favorite podcast app. You can always leave us feedback, ask, question or request a topic for us to discuss by sending an email to p c at Philip chao.us. Views expressed in the Tao Chao podcast are individual opinions, and they do not represent the employees of each guest or the firm. Each guest is associated. Our podcasts are for educational and informational purposes only, and should not be deemed or viewed as investment advice or recommendations. Please consult your personal financial advisor, investment expert or investment fiduciary before taking any actions about your plan and investments. Rene Cirstea is a senior vice president of retirement and wealth division of One Digital and specializes in retirement plan consulting. Focusing solely on the success of retirement plans for the benefit of employees and confidence of the employer. Her team's mission is to provide clients with strategies to empower their employees to build financial independence, while managing the fiduciary liability of organizations and their executives while navigating the ever changing regulatory environment. She began her career at Dean Witter Reynolds. While attending Arizona State University, where she worked closely with mentors that valued the future of the retirement industry. Through these relationships, she gained experience working with different aspects of the financial services industry, including stock trading, investments, and managing assets. Shortly after college, she chose for one key plan to be her focus and left the Waterhouse environment to start her own firm. In 2020, she formed 41 K resources and in 2023 aligned with her husband's benefits firm and became a part of One Digital. The full integration of retirement plans, individual wealth benefits, human resources and corporate insurance allows her and her team to bring efficiencies and integration to their clients and employees, needed stock and integration to their clients and employees needs exceeding expectations. Renee is an investment advisor, representative, Certified Plan Fiduciary Advisor, and host a designation of accredited Investment Fiduciary. A.F. Renee host the series. Renee hosts the. Let me try that whole paragraph. Renee is an investment advisor representative, certified plan fiduciary advisor, and host a destination of accredited Investment fiduciary A.F. Renee hosts a series 63 and 65 securities registrations through one Digital Investment Advisors, as well as various insurance licenses. She served as the president of the Napa in 2023, 24, and for six years on the Napa leadership Council. She also served on the executive board of the American Retirement Association IRA for two years, and is on various industry committees. And here is Renee. Well, I'm excited to be hosting and turning the tables on Philip Chao today. For those of you who may not be familiar with Philip, he is the principal and founder of Experiential Wealth, as well as Nexus 338. But what we're going to talk about today, more importantly, he's also the author of the book from Save to Save. So, as a, someone who's been in this industry over 25 years, I plowed right through this book and highlighted underlying things. So I have a lot to talk to Philip about today. And I'm excited to take everyone on this beautiful journey. So welcome, Philip. Welcome to your podcast. And thank thank you. It's a little strange, right, to be turning the table. But Rene, thank you for for your willingness to, to do this, podcast with me. Thank you. Well, I felt honored to be asked, so thank you. For giving me this opportunity to have more time with you. So first, you know, in reading this book, I can venture to guess where your heart was. And what the purpose behind writing this was. But why don't you share with the audience what compelled you to write this book and put these beautiful thoughts and insights? I think I shared with you in reading it, I felt like I was just sitting at a table talking with you so beautifully, you know, very, very beautifully done. Thank you. So the genesis of this book really was, my marketing team who said to me, Philip, you really should put all your thoughts together. You have so many thoughts. I said, well, I don't know if anybody want to hear my my thoughts, but but I was told that I really should put together into a book and share. Sharing what? Really sharing about, my observation. I know, Renee, you you have been very clear about your mission in this industry. And I'm very fortunate to get to know you and others like you. And I will say that not everybody is like you think so? Thank goodness you are unique. But on the other hand, we really need everybody like you who are mission driven rather than business driven. That's a difference. And so, the motivation about writing this book is really probably twofold. One is to share my observation and sort of call for duty to do something. We have some show. We've spent some time talking about. What are the threats, of average Americans not talking about for Chao or Renee or any one individual, but on average, how we, not prepared, for, quote unquote, the golden years, of our lives. So that that's one obvious. And number two, really thinking about the US retirement system. I don't think it's a good system. I don't think it's a bad system. It is a system by which we, as, professionals in this industry, should advocate the right processes to execute the right things, to give the highest opportunity for individuals to have a good chance of retiring and dignity. So those are the two strands that really, you know, got me thinking about. Okay. I guess I have things to share. And I put it together. And as I was thinking through that, then the third and final strand came through, that I really thought of by my mother and thought about, how much I learned from her without without even realizing what I have learned. Right. Through life, about fiduciary, and that our defined contribution system, will fall apart, or you will not reach its rightful destination. If we are not careful about not only, maintaining, but somehow even restoring the important role, of Sherry in that entire system. So that became sort of another piece. So those are the three parts that got me, got me into writing this book. Well, and what I love about, what I that you did a really spectacular job out of this book is it's not narrowly focused to the audience. That would get something from it. What I loved and I even if you can see in my book I've got little post-it notes. I had pages, I have things underlined, on the statistics about it and, and the actual data behind it that not just myself as an, a fellow advisor and, mission oriented advisor at that, but also just as a working American who also, you know, has the the gift and the ability to help influence others. But also sees the challenges we face. And so I love that the book was that anyone could read it and walk away feeling like they've gained some more knowledge. And so, I think you did a great job doing that. And I kind of want to love to walk through some of the chapters here because they all build upon each other. And in the first chapter you talk about the American retirement crisis. And, you know, we talk about the pig through the pipe that day. Going through a python is a challenge of the aging population and the young generation, make the make up of gig workers. The makeup of the transitions of, you know, from our generation, we change jobs, you know, on average seven times there was that Wall Street article that stated that although I think you and I have stayed doing the same thing the whole time, we're bringing that average down. But with the younger is at 26 times changing. So if you could share a little bit more about really where, where we exist today, where is this crisis coming from? And you also what I love that because you talked about the shift from the defined benefit to defined contribution, as well as we're a culture of consumption. And if you can also not just share about where we exist in the US, but share a little bit, as you do in chapter one about China and how things are done, different, differently, and maybe where we could learn from a cultural standpoint. That is a lot. I was I would do that my best. So let's take one at a time. I think the, aging is not just, confined to America is a global, global situation. Aging comes for for two reasons. Number one, certainly people are living longer, because of the modern health care and, and our, our, our medical system, not only here but globally have certainly, advance our ability to live longer. So people are living longer. And so that's, that's the obvious part of aging. But the the less obvious is that less people are getting married, less people are getting married and having children. And when they do have children, they're having fewer children. So when you add the combination of people living longer, fewer babies are born. The, the, the middle point of that demographic isn't working. It doesn't work out. And so when we think about that, we think about a society, this is a society challenge. This is not just any one individual. Of course we are focus on in our world is more one client or one individual on the one the wealth side, thinking about how do we help that family or that company to save for retirement and that this is a this is a global phenomenon. And and you look at Japan, you look at Korea, and you look at Germany and all of them are aging even faster, right? For some obvious reasons or some are not so obvious. I mean, Second World War wiped out a lot of lot of people in the middle. And so the people who survived lived on. And then you have a big hole in the middle, so to speak. So it is a global phenomenon, and it's a global phenomenon only because, because we're living longer, but also because, the system is less capable of supporting, okay, a growing number of people with a higher and higher and older and older average age. What is that? Medical, long term care, all the things that we know about and, and the loss of a mental acuity, you know, so we have a lot to deal with and not only a lot to deal with from a medical and health care standpoint, but the costs associated with those type of care historically have carried a much higher inflation rate. Yes, because of supply and demand. Reasons and many other complex issues, new medication, new machines coming in, new things, all that costs more than old things. That's always been the case. So we have a number of challenges, of an aging population. However, this is, you know, Python, you know, the picture a Python, the the the diagram. You see, it's not something that we all of a sudden woke up and realize this. And as I mentioned in my book, when I went to college, which is many decades ago, I took a course in gerontology. Where are we talking about this? Where are you? Right. So there's nothing new, but we just didn't do anything about it. Some of it is politically very unfriendly and unable to to to make those changes. Until we absolutely have to and I think that we are getting there now. So that's sort of the one aspect of it. The other thing that you mentioned, Renee, is about going from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution fund for people who don't know the difference, is defined benefit as it's defining the benefit. So when you when you were working for a for coal mine or for a for a for industry or labor, what have you. And you worked there for 40 years. You started in your, you know, late teens or early 20s and you end up late 50s, early 60s and say, I'm done. I've done my 40 years, and thank you very much. And you get your old go watch in the old days or yes, could be a go watch Pat on the back and say that. Don't worry, we will replace your income at 40, 50, 60, whatever the percentage is for the rest of your life. That's that's what I work all my life for, for that security, not only during working years, but also post-retirement years that has vanished for the very point that, Rene, you mentioned that we change our far too often. Almost nobody works for anybody for 40 years anymore. No, especially the especially we had traded, the longevity of a of a career and, with a higher pay by hopping jobs to job to jobs. It's not neither right or wrong. It is what it is. And so the today's environment does not it does not offer the opportunity to have that type of life, lifetime employment, thus post-retirement lifetime income. So if I may, if I may conclude on that by saying from a defined contribution plan where the, sorry defined benefit plan, where the benefit is defined, that when you retire after a number of years, you get whatever X number of dollars to a defined contribution plan and say, hey, we're just going to put X number of dollars in. The rest is up to you. And what what the employer has done or what the society have done is shifted three risks, as you know very well, Renee, to three. Which one is to funding risk that instead of the employer funding it? By the way, they were not all wonderful companies. They were paying you a little less by taking that and funding it. Right. So it's not free funding. Funding risk is now put to individuals you funded yourself primarily to is the investment risk. Remember, in the old days employers say, hey, you know, we are assuming a x percent return. Exactly. It makes sure that's taken care of. We as employees don't have to worry about how to invest or whatever asset allocation, blah, blah, all that type of stuff. So the investment risk is pushed on to individuals. And finally, longevity risk is the risk that we will not outlive our income. All of those three risks huge. A push from an employer to all of us in a defined contribution environment. We'll take in that human behavior component. As you talk about and and we'll based we'll be talking about two because you in in your later chapters, you go through a step by step from a plan design. Because when you're shifting that ownership of the decision making authority, we do need to get back to a little of that defined benefit model because of human behavior. So my father in law and my brother in law, my father in law worked for a paper company. And and my brother in law worked for GE for many years. They did their whole entire career there. And they have pension plans. GE is a little bit different. They changed their model, but they But right now what we're looking at, if I look at my siblings, they're at their human behavior component, is getting in the way of them being getting to a place of retirement. And so we talk about, you know, we love for you to share a little bit more about China and how things are done differently philosophically, how people you know, I do believe it's a cultural, distinction. We do determine our relationship with money at a very early age. So depending on the environment you're raised and sometimes directs you into what your future is going to look like. And so but if you could, share a little bit because culturally in in China things are done differently. It is different. And I don't want to sit here and say that China is better or worse. It's just different. Okay. Let's make sure I say that clearly. And that there's no right culture or wrong culture. There's no good culture and bad culture. Culture is code and that there are the good parts of it trading off with not so good parts of it. So let's look at what China China has done. So China has about a 14,000. I'm just rounding it down to about $14,000 income per per capita. So how do you do that. You take the entire, GDP of China divided by the number of people, and you come up with the number. It's about 14, a little bit more than $14,000, which is not much money. I mean, I don't know if we can survive on or $14,000 country, but because they don't have the safety net that we have. So, for example, they don't have Social Security the way that we have it. They don't have Medicare or Medicaid the way we have it. Right. So Chinese citizens, always been very much self-reliant because they cannot rely on the government or a safety net, if you would, that even if I didn't save and this I know there is something coming in like Social Security or I'll be taking care of. Yeah. So there's no such thing now, that's one of the reason why they end up having a an average saving rate somewhere close to 40%. So you can imagine $14,000 saving 40%. They're living of 60% or $14,000. A lot of people in this country think China is a competitive United States in the in the equal footing. They're not even close to equal footing. This this is barely middle income country China, right? Yes. They have big beautiful buildings. Yes, they have all that. But they are not America. America's way ahead of China in so many ways when it comes to retirement savings. We are fortunate enough back in the Roosevelt, they they came up with this social Security and and Medicare, for, for all they don't have that in China. So they understand that they need to save is that that's one number two, their culture is all about stability and no chaos. So as far as they're concerned, they want safety. They care. They put a lot of value on safety. So they understand if they don't save, they're not going to have safety. So the the culture is a different culture. Yes. Right here we talk about safety. But but we are risk takers in this country. I mean our country is founded on risk taking, you know, and that we are exceptional and we we're going to try and anything is possible. That's not their mentality. They are very different in that sense because of that difference in mentality. They worry about the future more than we do. Right? So I think I talk in the book how although unfortunately is so often mystically that they prefer sons and daughters. Yeah. Well, you know. Oh, because they carry the family name. Well, yes, but that's not the real big reason. The real big reason is that sons gain a wife. Loses a child. So what I mean by that is I have two daughters. If I'm in China, if I don't save enough, I'm going to lose the two daughters to somebody else who is support their family. It's no longer my family. But if I have two sons, I know they're going to gain two girls and they're all going to help me, to support me in my old age. So for those with daughters and only daughters, especially with the one child policy where they only have one daughter, they have no other choice. They have to save even more because they absolutely have no way to rely on the daughter who is no longer one day getting married, no longer able to help son would. So that is definitely cultural. I'm turning to hitting on your end, but I think it's interesting to say it because if it's cultural, you're you're you grow up with that understanding and that belief. And I think we've always shared in the industry the importance of before we get someone gets our first paycheck. Because in America, where I grew up, neither my parents could afford retirement. My father has since passed. My mother is still working at 79 years old, in cutting hair. And she. But I do the exact opposite. And then I went into the field about this. And so it's interesting. So for me, even of going into the younger schools, because you're fighting against a culture that doesn't align with, let's say, 40% or let's, let's say not carry debt. Yeah. But I love what you you start talking about this parable about the yesterday me, the today and the tomorrow me because I'm also someone who talks, I've talked and shared before about my inner mentor, and it's that's the future of me. So when you when I read that, you know, I thought that was really interesting because you're, you're taking ownership yourself. And who was I yesterday? Who am I today and who is the what's the future? Me. And if if you could share a little bit, a bit about, that, that, you know, how you eloquently put that I thought that was really interesting of our owning that ownership ourselves. So I think, I think back to that, the imagery of America when I was young and learn about America, is a frontiersman who came, they put themselves up in the bootstrap and the powder fields. They build the houses, they they fit the family, and they are proud people. And they take care of themselves. I mean, that was the sort of the, the Western, view. Right? When you say, wow, you definitely made. Oh, okay. Wow. That's amazing. You that's that's amazing. Yeah. So it's about self-reliance. Yeah. And so I think that somehow that has waned somewhat in this country. Yes. At least I'm talking about in the frame of framework of, of, of retirement and retirement savings. And which go back to the earlier conversation is really we, hate to use the word entitlement. We, we feel that, you know, we deserve something. Yes. Rather than we have to fight for everything. Find it maybe too strong a word or we have to earn everything and do everything ourselves. Yeah. So when we think about the yesterday me, today me and tomorrow me, well, something that actually I, I use as a theme at one of the conferences that I was on a panel, and really just talking about, it was, three, very well-known who have made a lot of money, when they were in the late teens or early 20s, they all turn to doing what we do, providing investment advice, for other athletes. And so I said, what a wonderful way to think about it is the yesterday me today and tomorrow me. And so we we talk about what, what what will we do in the yesterday. What what what what, what were we what were our habits? What were we thinking about? What do we do? What do we want, what not do. And so today, me, we look back and we say, boy, if I, if I am 20 years old again, I will have started my IRA. Even putting $5 more, $10 more,$100 or whatever, even though, you know, maybe my parents have told me or I've heard that I just didn't pay any attention to it. So I didn't do it. And now, 20 years later and I say, you know, I'm in my 40s and I'm saying, oh my gosh, I wish, I wish, I wish, I wish I did something. Yeah. Or I did do something right. And that aren't being able to be rewarded. I don't mean literally taking the money, but I, I look at my, balance in my statement. Wow. How astonishingly, how well I have done, by just putting a little bit away, for using that as an example. So looking to yesterday, me, in today's me standpoint, what have I done, what I've learned from it. That is only step one. If we don't do anything because human nature tends to, you know, only want to do pleasant thing. Oh bias. Yeah, yeah. All kinds of bias. And if we don't do anything, we already know what the tomorrow is going to look like. Where are we know tomorrow me is going to be stuck at the same place we were yesterday. Me and today me. So it's a really simple framework. We need to be more introspective. We need to be more mature. Yes. We need to take action. Yeah. And one thing, that one thing humans can do uniquely is my understanding, is that we can actually learn from others. Yes. We can't. I didn't say we do. We can, can and do is where it divides us. Yes. Right. So we keep talking about history. Doesn't happen exactly. But it rhymes. You know, all the things that we talk about all the time is because we have chose to not take actions based on lessons learned by others or ourselves from the yesterday knee or the yesterday us, so that today we take action so that tomorrow will not be a repeat of yesterday, me or us. And so that's the framework. If I hope that. I think that's fantastic. It's one thing. So I have, three kids. Yes. You at least we shared and my my they were all athletes are all still our athletes. At least my daughters. And one thing I tell them all, I tell them, especially my daughter, who's, you know, plays basketball. And then my youngest that runs track. I said it's never lose. Being coachable, because even at mom's age, I try to always be coachable. And you had mentioned to, you know, you look back of, you know, my past and and give yourself credit for what you did well learn from what you maybe could have done better. Yeah, learn from others. But if we think we have it all figured out, we get in our own way and we don't lose the, you know, our future, our future me is not going to reap the benefits of, you know, as we talk about the, you know, eighth wonder of the world compound interest, right. So but you know, what's interesting is, you know, so you start working in chapters and you talked about some of the challenges we have today with our plan sponsors of the short termism, of the chapter title is, you know, and as fiduciary advisors, you know, we're we're always trying to educate not just the, the employees. They serve our we serve, but also our plan sponsors and those who sit on the committees or having, intentional, engagement and some part of the success of the plan, but the world as well, everything. When you start seeing a recession, you start seeing litigation. And we hear that. So those are the big, you know, gleaming lights. And that's the fear is, you know, there there's that prioritization that you talk about, about the liability of, of making sure we're mitigating liability, not what exactly is this the goals of this, of this plan. And where do we need to get our employees to? And you talked a little bit about that. And, and I think if you can share a little bit more about that concept. Yeah, I, I think, this isn't a sometimes a disservice done by, advisors and consultants. And I want to be very careful. I'm not trashing any one individual. Is that we we really wear two hats when we walk into an employer's business or working with them. One hat is helping the business owner wearing the business owner hat or the business people, where we do need to help them to, to to minimize liability, to help them to, to to consider plan designs and so on. They're within their own limitations. Right? I mean, we all want to give as much money to the employees as we can, but this reality that doesn't happen, you have to work with them, right? Yeah. It's neither right or wrong. It's just this is business. So when we walk in and help them to do plan design, to think about, that's all wonderful. That is really consulting for the employer and not acting as a risk consultant. We are acting almost like a business consultant who happen to know a great deal about employee benefits, time and space. The other how do we where is when we, with the committee or with the group that make decisions about investment investing and all those type of things? All the options are made available are selecting the options available for participants, where we are a fiduciary with a big letter F, under RSA, which you mentioned. And that is where we do not talk about are you going to be liable? Oh, boy. But let's not do this because you as an employer may become liable for for one of my committees. They took us so seriously about the way I talk about it, that we end up having two separate meetings on the same day. So I will go in, for a for an hour and a half meeting. The first hour is all to do with the fiduciary with the big F on serving solely in the interests of participants. And we don't talk about anything other than that. And when that is done, that closest a book on those minutes and that, then we have a separate meeting half an hour for planned sponsored discussion where we do talk about liability. Do you talk about plan design? Do you talk about, you know, how do we become more effective in allocation in the contribution that the employer gives and so on, so forth, or strategy for that? We separate them so they mentally understand these are two separate roles and they cannot they cannot join together, because you cannot serve solely an interest at the same time. Well, I'm worried about me getting sued. Well, hold on for a second then. You are not serving solely in the interest. To your point, I think that we as advisors need to be very clear minded when we walk in the door. What hat are we wearing? And we want to tell them that is the hat we're wearing. This moment when we talk, we should all be in the same hat, not different. Yes, I think it makes sense to you to. Yeah, well, I think to, you know, we also are always looking to educate those who are sitting in those seats, to make sure they do understand there is that fiduciary hat and component and liability. But at the end of the, the other side is ultimately, though, our goal is to get their employees to a place of retirement, of dignity and grace. And, you know, we have such data at our fingertips that we can really drill in to that plan, design, and, and see where can we get the, you know, work with their finance team to the ROI on this event and also on this plan? So you're, you're, you're sometimes you're shifting gears of, am I talking, you know, strategy, budgeting. And I also you know, liability protection. So the of the as we kind of go into that really there's plan design that you talk about. And in the absence, as we said earlier, of having that defined benefit structure where you step in and everybody, all the decisions are made, you know, you you touch on that, you know, really there's from the expansion of coverage. First you start there of what what where are we at today with the limitations of, you know, the gig workers for people who don't have access to a plan, if you could touch on that and some of the ways that kind of some of the state and governmental, you know, changes are making to try to fill that and then we'll kind of look, go into that plan design and the steps that you laid out in the book. Sure. I first got to know, this whole challenge, because I'm not a gig worker, so I don't, I don't think that I have a job delivering from a different place on, on six different platforms or what have you. I didn't think through that. I got, you know, people who research in that area, and really realize how challenging it is. So when you don't have one single employer, and you are just put, you know, you're just trying to get a job, get a job and make a living. And to bring enough income, because you could not get a full time job somewhere, or or you have a full time job, and, you you want to supplement your income with a, with a side gig, with a side job? And that's my job. Typically don't have some any kind of ability for you to save for retirement. No, I frankly, retirement is not something you probably spend all day, all night thinking about every time you're on a bike, delivering food or or delivering packages or whatever it is that you you're doing. But over time, we go back to the yesterday me, today me and tomorrow maybe if we don't think, laser sharp up our savings. Tomorrow, me at age 73, we will still be, doing gig work because we didn't save enough. And, and the and the compound interest in work for us. So, so the issue about gig workers, it it's really about the lack of coverage, lack of ability to not their ability, because there's always IRAs, is really consciousness about paying yourself first, which is really what this is about, right? Don't don't spend it first. Let's pay yourself first and then spend later, which goes back to the culture of Americans, which we, well, number one in the world, we are exceptional in so many ways. And that, we feel that tomorrow will always be better than today. Yeah. And that's a wonderful philosophy. But this, that may not be practically true for everyone. Yes. And so we need to sort of start thinking about, hey, we need to save for tomorrow, and we need to pay ourself first. So how do we do that for gig workers? And I think that, circa 2.0 is talk a little bit about it, but not on the federal side really state doing more work in this sort of the gig worker area. And hopefully that will force gig workers who have to put money away once by the time when they file taxes that certain amount of dollars, go to an IRA or go into some form of a tax deferred savings. Now, unfortunately for gig workers, we don't have an employer who's going to make any matches contribution, but we need to do it either way. We will regret it over time. I one thing I am pretty certain, Renee, that with all your experience in both on the individual side as well as on the retirement side, I don't think you have ever heard anybody pick up a phone at age 65, 67 and said, Renee, I have saved way too much for retirement. It's all your fault, is that I don't think you've ever heard that, and I don't expect anybody to hear it now. And what's interesting is I'm, I think most of us do. I talk to one of our colleagues and friends, Nicole, one time, and I laugh because we are at the end of an Uber drive. You know, we already know that that every history, all history about our driver. But I always talk to the gig workers, and I, I always ask them. I'm always curious about, do they have another job and most do. Most of them do have another job or they have multiple gig type of jobs. And they're really just trying to make ends meet or just, you know, inflation is coming up and they're still getting hit just at the grocery store. A lot of the employers and we're seeing as to and plan design and obviously what secure 2.0 allow for required for auto enroll auto escalation for plans establish Jan after January 1st, 2023. But as you and I of us have got a little we're a little OGs in the industry. We've got all these clients that still haven't moved into the auto, that auto, you know, plan of taking those decisions off of the employee. And so you really you, you start talking into plan design and, and what I like about it is you don't rush through that discussion. Do you delicately give each provision its own, chapter where a plan sponsor or even an individual can go to their plan sponsor, or if they do, sure can understand a silent one at each other. Are there build upon each other? What does this actually mean? And and so when you talk through about the auto enrollment, auto escalation, that personalizing that accumulation, if you could talk through intentionality that planned sponsors can have in their plan designed to help with some of these challenges we've already been talking about. There's no perfection. Whatever come up with, we're always going to have some holes in the safety nets that people will fall through. But until until we have a net that has no holes, which is not anytime soon, but. And these were closing many of those holes. So the first thing is, and, you know, I know you champion, this is auto enrollment. Auto enrollment basically means that anybody who walks into a employer as a first paycheck, they start putting a certain amount of dollar aside into their retirement plan. And I think secure 2.0 suggests 3%. So wonderful start from zero. So 3% is good, I think. Hopefully you agree, Renee, that, many studies suggest that no less than 10 to 15% is really where we need to be, and 15 sounds like a large number, but anywhere between 15 is really where we need to be saving for retirement. And if that's the case, 3% starting, it's going to take a long time to get to that 10 to 15%, yes, either voluntarily or otherwise, which we should. We can talk about the next chapter. So but we need to get everybody started. And so 3% okay. Begrudgingly we'll do 3%. I prefer to do 6%. Because we need to get people start savings and and a lot of employers, push back for, for a couple of reasons. One is that, you know, we don't believe in forcing people to do anything. This is their money, blah, blah, blah. Well, the the the legislation to recognize, that, if you're taking money from people's paycheck is illegal. But they said in this case is not it is fine if you want to help people to save for retirement. So so this is this is more than acceptable. And and legislation and both legislation and regulation, have written out very clearly that this is not only fine, they're encouraging to do it. Yeah. So that's number one. Number two, I think a lot of employers says it. Well, if we do that, that means more money for matching. That means more money out of my pocket and, you know, all that type of thing. That is a that is a what they call a settler function. That's the plan sponsor function that people like you and me can sit down and coach them on. Now, if you give me a specific budget, we'll find a way to do it for you, right? Right. We will cut here, put that there, and so on and so forth. And so we definitely encourage every employer. I don't suggest that even for me, I get 100%. Yeah. There are employers just frankly refuse for the right or wrong reason. It doesn't matter. It just said I can I can only bring the horse of water. I can't force them to. But I tend to remind them. So what we do is auto, auto enroll everyone at a percentage. We are hopefully six. But we will do three. And then we also make sure that because on the under regulation that if you are forced to put somebody in it, that person has the right to say, no, I don't want it. And if that person does say that next year we will put that person back in again, we don't just let it go. We need to go ahead like you. Like so what you use intentionality. We we realize what we're doing it and it's a mission. What band together to force people to recognize the importance that if they don't do something about to talk about it today me, tomorrow me is going to look just like yesterday. So. So I think that you and I are both in the same camp, that we not only want to auto enroll people, but we want to repeat it for those who elected not to be in it the first time and the second time, maybe very legitimate reasons. I'm not saying they're bad people. I'm saying, well, they have specific issue. They can't afford it. Great. Let's give them another chance. Second year, they still didn't do it. Let's do it again. Good year. Every year we'll come back and re re enroll them. And hopefully one time they will stick well fill up. That's some of the plan design that forgets. That is they leave them behind. And we have a very respected attorney and in our industry that with his own plan he says he re enrolls everyone every right. And that's what I think an intentional decision each year to opt out. Yeah. And, and and if you're at the 15% level, you know and then they're ordered auto, you know, they're also, defaulted. And so everyone's always properly allocated, which is fantastic. But we don't want the escalation part, you know, as well of getting people to that level. But one of the things that, I think as we talk about plan design of auto enroll, auto escalate, so we can only start at six, we have to increase them each year. But also what's that? That vehicle, which I love, that you shared is what you recognized in 2015 was some of the challenges of, that exist when we're looking at everyone the same age but from the same lens, and we have 245 year olds and one is a single mom struggling paycheck to paycheck, making $40,000 a year as opposed to an equivalent same age. Individual who has never had children has maximized and done the maximum, and it's got hundreds of thousands of dollars already put away. But we're in the age models of just a traditional target date. We're treating them the same. So if you could talk about, you know, what you've done and what you've also created in this model, by being able to really create a solution, that exists today. Right. Thank you for asking that. So, I think that, what we have done is we have very, very, very slowly, snail's pace moving into personalization. So if you remember way, way, way back, stable value was the default. Everybody just get savings for 30 years making 3%. It's like no you can do better. Yeah. So then we got into this space and and portfolios where. Well are you a big gambler. Well you can take on more risks, but that's not the right approach either. But they are beginning to sort of take you. You the participant into consideration. Then the next step is really, well, why don't we do it a time base which is human capital base, which is what we call target targeting. One where we say, well, when you are young, you need to take on more risk for, for, for for reasons that, it's not as intuitive because way to talk about human capital. But let's not worry about that. Let's say you can afford to take on risk, more risk when you are younger and you can afford to take on less risk when you are older. So over time, we go with your age. It's another form of, optimizing, optimizing to your personal data. Right. How do they do that? And I found out that a lot of people don't know. And I found out by being curious and sent to, asset managers. How does target they fund really work. And so they said, well, we put in we use national average. Now there are two, three sources. One is the Federal Reserve has a lot of national average. You know, they do those studies and inquiry, which is one of our industry, nonprofit organizations. They are the authority of national surveys of how much one makes. What is the average, contribution they make? What is the average, account size? What's the average outside asset? You know, all the things they input those and every every single target, they fun series use the same average and they they build it. Now, of course, they are all different because they make different assumptions on a mound, a level of risk and so on. But it's still based on this standardized average, which is, by the way, average data. And so I thought, well, I don't like average. Maybe I feel that I'm not, you know, I'm not average. Maybe I feel I'm below average. That means I need to do something different. How do I do that? I can't, what is out there now? What is out there has been for almost 15 years is something you know very well called manage account. Well, manager allows you to put all of that data on the individual. Everything about you you can enter into. And then they will create they, the manage account provider will create a portfolio that is much more personalized to you. And I say great, why? Why isn't everybody in it? Well, not everybody in it because the cost but you, not everybody's as engaged as Renee. You and I would like them to be. Quite frankly, if you go out there to any coffee shop or any diner dining room that you have shared that I share a meal with, you ask the patrons, how many of you looked at your, last quarterly, retirement statement? I would say very few hands raise their hands. People are just not engaged. And when you set it and forget it, one of the good thing is you set it and forget it. You don't make mistakes about investing, but so you are so not aware of how underserved under you are. Yes. So. So what can we do to melt the two together to give you personalization without the high cost and involvement? So I came up with this idea and, of really personalizing a target date solution, not a product, because no longer product is, which is basically taking the chapters from a manage account, reduce it to simplicity of a target date fund so that we can still low cost, which is really what has happened. And to allow at least five data which I mentioned your, your exact date of birth, not five year increments of age, your exact date of birth, your income, your, account size, which you already know because. Right, your contribution level and your employer contribution, these are not scraping the internet to learn about. Rene. No, no, no, this is already available from your, payroll data. So I would submit that it is it is fiduciary, prudent. It's a right thing for have a fiduciary to do by taking available data and using it for each participant's benefit. So hopefully that makes sense to you as well. I love in your assessment too. In the in the term you're used or the example you used, you just said in your in your in your due diligence process was that no harm framework where no one was going to be harmed based on, where they were sitting and paying for a cost of something they did not need. And, and the other thing is, is that, you know, you use the example. I'll let someone read the book. Just I mean, this really is a fantastic book and anyone to read to, I should say it is not a heavy lift to read. You can read through it. But the example I do, and I know from, respect of everyone's time is the, the bus analogy versus the GPS car right off of the edge of that human capital. You know, where you have that, that time versus that financial, asset as you get older and income? I know as, as we're kind of closing, I know you just would love to, to touch, you know, to share that your IG isn't just the accumulation stage. You also address the fact that people are retiring and they need that paycheck for life. And you even expand it on there. And I think that is what's so fantastic of people just even get to the end of your book and read that part of the solution that you didn't drop somebody at retirement, if you're carrying them through that accumulation stage. But as you know, we're closing. There's two questions I'd love to to ask you as, you know, one is, is that call to leadership. And I love what you gave and you shared about your mom being your first fiduciary and how the tables were turned on that, and if you just can share just to and that what that, just that relationship taught you and what you feel the call to leadership is today. And again, you were built with the such a beautiful, example. Thank you. So I'll go by that sequence of, of your question. So, it stands for an individualized glide path solution that I, I was very happy that glide path happened to be cheap, otherwise I wouldn't have it here. The notion was GPS being global satellite, you know, system, where where, where helps us through a path forward, and adjust, appropriately. In this case, not traffic, but, how your personal data changed. And I thought that was a really important, and you're you're absolutely correct. And you know this very well, Rene. I know I hear you talk about it, you know, for instance, in other places, that what is the purpose of retirement plan? The purpose of retirement plan is not just an accumulation vehicle. That's only one first half of the retirement plan is how do I get them the biggest pile of money on the table so that when I retire, I'm going to be okay? But even if you have a whole pile of money, I'll give you resample. You one lucky lotto you got, you know, you know, $100 million. You still want an approach because you don't have a distribution plan and you have an accumulation plan, but you don't have a longevity plan. So we think about when we talk about plans with time plan sponsors, we we talk about what's the purpose. We asked what is the purpose. And they take a several questions later before they get to this moment that yeah, duh. Of course, retirement plan is to be able to have some kind of income in retirement. And yes, it makes sense for us to help our participant not only to accumulate assets, but how do we make sure distributing them at least in some ways, to do it? Yes. Right. So when I think about that, in my conversations, I always then now think about, well, just focus on accumulation is insufficient. How can I take it to the next level? And now we call it lifetime, which is converting a portion of the fixed income. Right. Which is bonds and what have you into an optionality of putting in annuities, which is a lifetime income. Payment from an insurance carrier as an option. We're not forcing people to do it. We're saying at least when you go to 65 or 70, whenever you retire, you say, I have this money. How am I going to draw an income from it? My employer has given us one possibility is that I can convert, have the option to convert a portion of my savings into a income that I cannot outlive. Then you say, well, we should really personalize that. We shouldn't just say everybody should be the same. They all get $1,000 a month. Well, that's not that's not the answer. Yeah, yeah. So I intend to say we want to help you to replace your essential living expenses. What are those? Make sure your rent are paid. Your your utilities paid on Netflix. I'm sorry. Netflix. I paid whatever else. And your medical bills. And so, so the basic needs are taken care of. The combination of what the retirement plan can give you, plus Social Security together can replace your basic needs, which is about 65% of your pre-retirement income. If we can accomplish that, then this week, we know one of my worst imagery is you end up in a tent underneath a freeway bypass. That is not where we want you to be, right? At least you won't be there. Now, the fact that you want to go to Disneyland, every other or Disney World every other year with your grandchildren, that's your doing. But we at least know that you're not living with your grandchildren because you have nowhere else to live, right? So that is sort of the thinking of it. Yes. To extend beyond accumulation into accumulation by offering by integrating guaranteed lifetime income, not just lifetime income, but guaranteed lifetime income that you cannot outlive, which goes back to the first conversation about the people defined benefit plan, where there is a stream of income that you don't have to worry about. However, we don't force you to do that. We are saying that's just an option for you if you want to turn it on. If you don't want it, turn it off and get rid of and get all your money back. And because we're in the DC self-directed environment, we don't want to force anybody to have to do any one thing. We do want to force them to save. We do want to force them to escalate, but we don't force them to have to take a certain way of future distributional distribution. But options should be made available. So that's sort of the thinking. I hope that makes sense. Yes it does. And as we close, just as your mother being your first fiduciary and setting that tone and the tables are turned, I thought that was a beautiful way. And and those who read your book are going to learn more. And I love that part. Of the story, I just of the book, I think I love the alignment of that. And so from a called a leader that, you know, we talked you can you can really close as the call to leadership. And so what would what would the final words you be on, a call to leadership off of what you feel is imperative, as we, you know, move in to, where our, you know, our world is going. Yeah. I think, I think the, the, the, the the title of fiduciary really is leadership. Yes. At least the type of fiduciary we need are really leaders, but more like servant leaders. We serve lead with serving our client. If they know everything, they wouldn't need an advisor. They are asking for leadership without using that term. They're asking us, what should we do? How should we do it? And we should not be saying, oh, I want, I don't want to take on risk because it would be bad for me. No no no no no no. Our job is to serve them. When I say them, I mean the plan sponsors, participants, not even plan sponsors is ultimately the participants. And we need to take on leadership role, meaning that we need to understand what is right, what are the right things to do and make it happen and not hide behind fiduciary, liability and personal this and personal with that all that is true. But I guarantee you, if we do the right thing, nothing bad is going to happen to us. Yeah. I always say, as a leader, you're the you become a voice for the voiceless. And we have to help direct the ships and and make sure that, you know, we're doing our part to, to really get more people to a place of, of, you know, of, dignity and grace and, and and being able to retire. And it's our role as your advisor. Renee, I know you you are excellent at it is to be able to go out there and our differentiation is make things happen, right? Yeah. And to and to and to discuss it and to take action with our plan sponsors and not to be an order taker. Advisors are not order takers. They wouldn't be advising their servants. We're not servants or we're not we're not transactional leaders. We're not, we're not, we're not you. Exactly. So yeah, end to end it by you asking about my mom is that, I won't give it away in my book. I really credit her to have been a shining example to me about serving others is about and and and debt. And that she gave me a final chance at the very end to turn the table to allow me to serve her at the time that, that she needed the most help when she's the most vulnerable. And I think that when we look at participants, I don't mean they are most vulnerable, but they are sometimes mindless. They are relying on us, then they are vulnerable, and we need to take on the duty to act in their best interest. And so I learned from my mom without even realizing it. And as I reflect on that on the book, when I was writing the book, as you asked earlier, I said, wow, mom already gave me the example. Let's just do that. And so hopefully that answer your question without going too deep. I think that's a perfect way. Way to close. And this really is you did a fantastic job. And, I do encourage others to read this because it's it's this great information. I, I was intrigued the whole time. And I do this sentence. So I thought you did a fantastic job. And, the one thing I just haven't figured out how to do, though, is to get my own Philip Child bobblehead. So if I can get the bobblehead, that's the only thing I need after this reading this book. I mean, the one thing, even though we're taped, I will just say it, you and I talked about how you have a group of really champions in our industry, and I. I'm so fortunate that after getting to know you better over the last two years, I got to know your friends who, who are of equal commitment and that each one of us should have a little bobblehead that we can all just share with everybody. It becomes a group of bobbleheads. I think it'll be fun. Very valuable. And so, but thank you for giving me the opportunity to have this conversation with you, Philip, and and to turn the tables on you of your, fantastic podcast. But, you're a fantastic, leader and I industry, and I just feel very honored to know you.