Don and Tom question a surprising Wall Street Journal column arguing that annuities should become the default option in 401(k) plans. They explore why the idea is gaining traction, where the logic breaks down, and how the insurance industry benefits when complexity outpaces understanding. Along the way, they dig into the real shortcomings of annuities—fees, opacity, inflation risk, liquidity traps—and why “guarantees” often mask the true cost. Listener questions follow, covering tax-efficient stock cleanup at Schwab, spouse disagreements over individual stock picking, automatic ETF withdrawals at Vanguard, and building Dimensional portfolios inside Aspire plans.

0:04 Don’s rant: “What the world needs now is… more annuities?”

1:20 WSJ’s argument: make annuities the 401(k) default

2:05 Why income complexity doesn’t justify default annuities

3:01 Do annuities actually solve longevity risk?

3:29 Inflation, joint-life costs, and who really wins

4:20 Insurance industry reputation and the unanswered criticisms

5:15 High fees, opacity, and why mistrust is earned

5:59 Are annuity sales tactics the real barrier?

7:02 Should annuities be in 401(k)s at all? Don vs. Tom

7:36 Why annuities are mostly sold, not bought

9:10 Liquidity traps and major-life-event risks

10:01 Why “plans” matter more than “products”

10:57 Listener questions: why nobody calls anymore

11:14 Q1: Selling a brokerage full of individual stocks at Schwab

12:46 Q1b: How to convince a spouse who loves stock picking

14:21 Indexing vs. anecdotal evidence

16:21 SPIVA data and why active managers lose

17:02 Q2: Can Vanguard automate ETF withdrawals?

19:05 Fractional shares and why purchases are allowed

20:25 Q3: Aspire 403(b) options and DFA overload

23:46 How many DFA funds do you really need?

24:44 Micro-cap risks and portfolio sprawl

25:42 Tom’s pumpkin-patch grandkid cameo

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices