Both “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: The Retirement Industry is a Minefield – But Here’s the Answer” and “4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked” both argue that the Fiduciary Rule would only be beneficial to consumers. The Fiduciary Rule is a professional obligation that requires financial advisers to put their client’s best interests ahead of their own. Before this rule was instated, many financial advisers were having their clients do things that are beneficial for the advisory and many of these clients had high interest rates, which according to “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: The Retirement Industry is a Minefield – But Here’s the Answer” can add up as “paying a 2 percent fee, [could mean] losing two-thirds of savings over a fifty-year time period” (Lee, 2016).
Looking at both of these articles from a consumer point of view, the John Oliver one was easier to understand. As I am a 20-year-old Nutrition major, I know next to nothing about business, therefore, I know next to nothing about financial advisers and how they operate. I do recognize this as being a problem, however, I have always thought that I would start saving for retirement after graduating college, and that retirement worries can wait till then, for now I just need to figure out how I am going to afford housing, food, and gas at the same time. I think this may be true for many consumers this age, the exception being those who are studying business. If the consumer is well-informed or currently saving for retirement, then “4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked” might be more helpful. For instance, in this article’s first point, it states that the government cannot reclaim a consumer’s assets “unless you’re a criminal” (“4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked”). This was news to me as I thought that the government could reclaim anything and everything depending on the level of debt that person may be in. Another thing that I, and most likely many consumers, was unaware of is that “some advisers receive commissions for their financial counsel” (“4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked”). While I knew that financial advisers needed to be paid by their clients, I was not aware that they could also take commission from the prosperous investments made by their clients. To summarize, I believe that “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: The Retirement Industry is a Minefield – But Here’s the Answer” provides better baseline information for those who are uninformed about the business world whereas “4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked” provides better information for those who are more informed about the business and retirement world.
Lee, K. (2016, June 14). LAST WEEK TONIGHT WITH JOHN OLIVER: THE RETIREMENT INDUSTRY IS A MINEFIELD — BUT HERE’S THE ANSWER. Retrieved October 25, 2017, from https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/last-week-tonight-john-oliver-retirement-industry-minefield-here%E2%80%99s-answer
4 Arguments Against the Fiduciary Rule Debunked. (n.d.). Retrieved October 25, 2017, from http://www.truemeasureadvisors.com/2016/04/20/20164145-argument-against-the-fiduciary-rule-debunked/