Outside Economics

Experience In Demand: The Aging Workforce

Wendell Brock — Tue, 10 Mar 2026 05:00:00 GMT

Experience In Demand: The Aging Workforce

Wendell Brock
Mar 10
2 min read

If your team is adding a new employee this year, don’t be surprised if your newest coworker remembers the screech of dial-up internet or the thrill of an AOL “You’ve got mail” alert. The average age of new hires in 2025 climbed to around 42, up from 40½ in 2022 and 40 in 2016, according to workforce data firm Revelio Labs.

This shift reflects an aging workforce and employers’ growing focus on experience in a rapidly changing economy. Hiring patterns have diverged sharply by age: since 2022, the share of workers 25 and under has fallen, while hiring of workers 65 and older has surged. Entry-level inflows are down significantly compared with pre-pandemic levels, even as older adults return to (or remain in) the workforce in record numbers.

Customer-facing roles such as sales, real estate, and office support have also skewed older, with average ages rising notably over the past decade. Traditionally, tight labor markets boost younger hiring, but today employers often prefer candidates who can “hit the ground running,” especially as technology and AI reshape job requirements. Experience, institutional knowledge, and adaptability have become even more valuable.

Demographics are a major driver. Americans are living longer, staying healthier, and often delaying retirement due to financial uncertainty. Many also simply want to stay engaged.

Workers 55 and older have become the fastest-growing labor force segment and now make up a substantial share of total employment. Industries like utilities, manufacturing, and wholesale trade rely heavily on seasoned employees with long tenure and specialized skills.

An older hiring profile offers both advantages and challenges. Experienced workers bring stability, mentorship, and deep expertise, strengthening teams and supporting knowledge transfer. Multigenerational workplaces thrive when collaboration is encouraged.

But the shift can tighten entry-level pipelines. In fields where experienced employees hold roles longer, younger workers may see fewer openings or slower advancement. Some industries could face future skills gaps if younger talent doesn’t enter at scale.

Meanwhile, concerns about age bias persist. Many older job seekers still worry about discrimination, even as employers increasingly depend on their skills.

The rise in older new hires reflects demographic realities and strategic choices. Employers are balancing immediate productivity with long-term workforce planning, often leaning toward experience during uncertain times. For younger workers, this means building skills early and showing readiness. For organizations, it highlights the need to preserve entry pathways while leveraging seasoned talent.

Today’s workplace is fully multigenerational. Companies that intentionally support collaboration across age groups will be best positioned to sustain strong talent pipelines and remain competitive.

Photo by: KIMDAEJEUNG

2 views

0 comments

Post not marked as liked

Marginal vs. Effective Tax Rates

Wendell Brock — Tue, 10 Mar 2026 05:00:00 GMT

Marginal vs. Effective Tax Rates

Wendell Brock
Mar 10
2 min read

When people talk about taxes, phrases like “I’m in the 22% bracket” or “I pay about 13% in taxes” often get used interchangeably. But those statements describe two very different concepts: marginal tax rate and effective tax rate. Understanding the difference between them is essential for smarter financial planning, clearer budgeting, and avoiding costly misconceptions about how taxes actually work.

The U.S. tax system is progressive, meaning income is taxed in layers, or brackets. As your income increases, only the portion that falls into a higher bracket is taxed at a higher rate—not your entire income. This is where marginal and effective tax rates come into play.

Your marginal tax rate is the tax rate applied to your last dollar of income. In other words, it’s the rate you’ll pay on your next raise, bonus, or additional income. For example, if you fall into the 22% federal tax bracket, that does not mean all your income is taxed at 22%. It means the top portion of your income, the amount that spills into that bracket is taxed at 22%.

This rate matters most for decision-making. When evaluating whether to take on extra work, sell an investment, or convert retirement assets, your marginal tax rate helps estimate how much of that additional income you’ll actually keep after taxes.

Your effective tax rate, on the other hand, tells a different story. This is your average tax rate across all your taxable income. It’s calculated by dividing the total tax you paid by your total income from all sources. Because income is taxed progressively, your effective rate is almost always lower than your marginal rate.

For example, someone earning $120,000 as a married couple filing jointly might fall into the 22% marginal bracket. However, after accounting for lower brackets and deductions, their effective tax rate could be closer to 13–14%. This number is helpful for understanding your overall tax burden, comparing year-to-year changes, and planning household cash flow.

Confusion between these two rates is common and it often leads to bad financial assumptions. Many people believe that earning more money will push all their income into a higher tax bracket, resulting in less take-home pay. That’s simply not how the system works. Only the income above each threshold is taxed at the higher rate, which means earning more almost always results in more net income, not less.

Deductions can further complicate but improve the picture. Taxpayers can reduce taxable income by choosing between the standard deduction or itemized deductions, whichever is higher. For most people, the standard deduction makes sense because it’s simple and generous. For others especially homeowners, high charitable givers, or those with large medical expenses itemizing may lower their tax bill even more.

The key takeaway is this: your marginal tax rate affects future decisions, while your effective tax rate reflects reality. One tells you what happens to the next dollar you earn; the other tells you how much you actually paid overall.

Understanding the difference helps you make better choices, avoid unnecessary fear around tax brackets, and plan with confidence. Taxes may be complicated but knowing how these two rates work puts you firmly back in control of the conversation and your financial strategy.

AI Doesn’t know You, But It’s Advising You Anyway

Wendell Brock — Wed, 04 Feb 2026 06:00:00 GMT

AI Doesn’t know You, But It’s Advising You Anyway

Wendell Brock
Feb 4
2 min read

Artificial intelligence has quickly become a popular source of financial guidance, with tools like ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Google Gemini increasingly used for budgeting, investing, tax questions, and retirement planning, especially among younger generations.

The appeal is understandable: AI is fast, free, nonjudgmental, and available 24/7, and in just a few years it has gone from a novelty to being treated by many as an authority on personal finance. However, research and real-world experience show that relying on AI for financial advice can carry serious and sometimes costly risks.

Multiple studies find that AI systems frequently produce inaccurate or misleading information. One major analysis found that nearly 45 percent of AI-generated answers contained significant errors, outdated details, or fabricated information known as “hallucinations,” while other research shows AI-powered search tools return incorrect answers in up to 60 percent of queries. These issues are not rare glitches but structural limitations of large language models, which generate responses based on probability and patterns rather than verified, real-time facts.

When these errors affect financial decisions, the consequences can be immediate. A survey by Pearl.com found that about one in five people (27 percent among Gen Z users) who followed AI-generated financial advice lost at least $100. While that amount may seem modest, it reflects a broader pattern. In multiple studies, more than half of users reported making a poor financial decision after acting on AI advice, including mistimed investments, flawed debt strategies, unexpected tax bills, and compliance mistakes.

Real-world examples reinforce these findings. Wealth Strategies Journal reported on a user who turned to ChatGPT to learn stock trading; although he initially made a profitable trade, he later lost money because the AI relied on outdated market data. This highlights a critical weakness of general-purpose AI tools: they cannot reliably access real-time financial information or adapt to rapidly changing markets.

Several structural issues explain why AI advice can be risky. Hallucinations allow AI to confidently present incorrect information as fact, while generic, one-size-fits-all guidance fails to account for individual income, tax situations, risk tolerance, time horizons, or emotional factors. Additionally, AI lacks emotional intelligence and accountability, important elements in financial decision-making, especially during periods of market volatility.

There is also a behavioral risk. Many people turn to AI to avoid the embarrassment of asking “basic" financial questions, which can encourage learning but may also lead users to bypass qualified professionals and place undue trust in a tool never designed to manage real financial risk.

Financial professionals widely agree that while AI can be a helpful educational tool, it is not a replacement for human judgment, experience, or ethical responsibility. AI can serve as a starting point, not a final authority, and its guidance should always be verified and, when appropriate, reviewed by a qualified financial professional. As AI becomes more embedded in everyday life, critical thinking and human judgment remain essential because when it comes to your money and your future, convenience should never replace sound decision-making.

Gold, Silver, and Their American History

Wendell Brock — Thu, 22 Jan 2026 06:00:00 GMT

Gold, Silver, and Their American History

Wendell Brock
Jan 22
2 min read

For thousands of years, gold and silver have served as trusted forms of money, valued for their scarcity, durability, and universal acceptance. By the time the United States was founded, precious metals already lay at the heart of global commerce. America’s monetary story began with silver coins in colonial pockets, passed through a formal gold standard, and ultimately arrived at today’s world of fiat currency and modern investing.

Before the U.S. minted its own money, everyday transactions relied heavily on foreign silver coins, especially the Spanish dollar. Early experiments with paper money under the Articles of Confederation produced the infamous “Continentals,” which collapsed in value without precious-metal backing. The lesson was clear: stability mattered. When the founders designed a monetary system, they anchored it to gold and silver.

That vision took shape with the Coinage Act of 1792, which established the U.S. Mint and defined the dollar in terms of both metals. This bimetallic system allowed citizens to bring gold or silver to the Mint for coinage. However, the fixed silver-to-gold ratio conflicted with market prices, causing gold to disappear from circulation, an early example of Gresham’s Law.

In 1834, Congress adjusted the ratio, bringing gold back while silver flowed out. Major discoveries like the California Gold Rush expanded metal supplies, and although bimetallism remained official policy, the U.S. increasingly functioned on a gold standard.

The Civil War disrupted that balance. To fund the conflict, the government issued greenbacks, America’s first true fiat currency, sparking inflation. After the war, officials worked to restore confidence in metal-backed money.

A decisive shift came in 1873 when free silver coinage ended, placing the U.S. firmly on a gold standard. Political backlash followed, famously culminating in William Jennings Bryan’s 1896 “Cross of Gold” speech. Gold ultimately prevailed, and the Gold Standard Act of 1900 made it official.

The gold standard supported rapid industrial growth until the Great Depression. In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt suspended domestic gold convertibility and outlawed private gold ownership, revaluing gold and expanding the money supply. Gold continued to anchor the dollar internationally under Bretton Woods after World War II, but mounting deficits eroded confidence.

In 1971, President Nixon ended gold convertibility entirely, turning the dollar into a pure fiat currency. Inflation surged in the 1970s, and gold prices soared. When private ownership was legalized again in the mid-1970s, gold and silver entered the modern investment era.

Today, both metals trade freely through bullion, coins, and ETFs. Silver plays a growing industrial role, while gold remains a reserve asset for central banks. Even in a fiat-currency world, gold’s long history of preserving purchasing power continues to resonate.

Photo: Dash Cryptocurrency

The Economics Of Disaster

Wendell Brock — Wed, 17 Dec 2025 06:00:00 GMT

The Economics Of Disaster

Wendell Brock
Dec 17, 2025
2 min read

Natural disasters like wildfires, hurricanes, floods are becoming more frequent and intense, and their economic impact stretches far beyond immediate damage. In recent years, these disaster events have reshaped not only community resilience but national macro-financial trends.

From 1980 to 2024, the U.S. endured 403 weather and natural disasters, each costing at least $1 billion, amounting to a staggering $2.9 trillion in total damages. Bloomberg has reported that in just the first half of 2025, floods, fires, and storms caused over $101 billion in economic losses.

How do disasters hit the Economy? We’ve seen the destruction of capital; physical assets like homes, factories, roads, and power infrastructure are destroyed or heavily damaged. That’s a direct hit to productive capacity. When capital is lost, labor has less to work with, which reduces workers’ productivity and lowers GDP.

Disaster recovery demands large injections of Federal spending. In recent years, disaster-related federal spending has soared. In fact, Bloomberg Intelligence estimates that over $7.7 trillion of U.S. GDP growth since 2000 has been tied to recovery and resilience spending.

On the flip side, sectors like insurance, construction, self-storage, and energy infrastructure benefit from rebuilding. Bloomberg’s “Prepare and Repair Index,” which tracks companies tied to disaster recovery, has outperformed the S&P 500 by ~6.5% annually over the past decade.

At the local level, the effects of disaster are felt deeply. Disasters disrupt employment and business activity. Factories may halt, roads may collapse, and supply chains break, reducing economic output immediately. Poorer regions struggle most, while wealthier areas can mobilize resources to rebuild quicker,. Marginalized communities often lack the capital and insurance coverage to fully recover. Public infrastructure, such as schools or hospitals damaged in disasters, may not get rebuilt to previous levels. In some cases, populations shrink, as residents relocate permanently.

Beyond infrastructure, disasters inflict trauma, displace families, and degrade natural capital. Many of these losses aren’t captured in GDP: mental health, environmental degradation, and disrupted social networks fall through the cracks of traditional economic metrics.

“Recovery Booms” can be misleading. It’s tempting to say disasters are "good for the economy" because rebuilding creates work. But economists caution against this view. The broken window fallacy shows that destruction doesn’t create real wealth. Repairing damage, like a broken window, stimulates spending but diverts resources from productive uses, meaning no net economic gain occurs. Rebuilding after disasters or crises may create visible activity, but it doesn’t replace what was lost or generate true growth wealth.

Even if GDP ticks up during recovery, that growth often masks destroyed value. Total output has declined, capital has been permanently lost, and long-term social costs remain.

As disasters intensify, policymakers and investors should rethink their priorities. Building resilient infrastructure, improving building codes, and expanding insurance access are no longer just moral or planning issues, they’re economic imperatives.

From a macro perspective, disaster risk is now a driver of growth in some sectors. But at the community level, resilience is a lifeline.

Photo by Chris Gallagher

Photo by Angelo Giordano

The Shutdown No One Asked For

Wendell Brock — Wed, 03 Dec 2025 06:00:00 GMT

The Shutdown No One Asked For

Wendell Brock
Dec 3, 2025
2 min read

In October 2025, the United States entered the longest federal government shutdown in its history after Congress failed to pass full-year appropriations for fiscal year 2026. The lapse began on October 1 and dragged on for 42 days, 22 hours, and 25 minutes before lawmakers finally reached a funding deal in mid-November.

The standoff centered on spending levels, with Senate Democrats rejecting a short-term Republican funding bill. Much of the dispute revolved around health-care funding, particularly ACA tax credits. Without a continuing resolution, all non-essential federal operations ground to a halt.

The economic fallout was immediate. Goldman Sachs estimated each week of the shutdown reduced annualized GDP growth by about 0.2 percentage points and cost roughly $15 billion in lost economic activity. The Congressional Budget Office projected permanent losses of $7–14 billion even after recovery. Consumer demand weakened as hundreds of thousands of workers missed paychecks, and uncertainty spread across industries dependent on federal contracts. Key programs, from CHIPS Act initiatives to semiconductor and quantum manufacturing, faced delays, according to Democratic lawmakers.

Roughly 900,000 federal employees were furloughed, with hundreds of thousands more working without pay as “excepted” personnel. Thanks to a 2019 law, most were guaranteed retroactive pay once the government reopened. Still, delays in economic data, passport services, and other federal functions eroded public confidence.

Shutdowns also tend to worsen the deficit. Restarting agencies and catching up on delayed work often requires extra funding, meaning the government ultimately spends more than if operations had continued uninterrupted.

Congress finally approved a funding package on November 12, ending the shutdown. The agreement extended current spending through January 30, 2026, and fully funded three of the twelve appropriations bills, Agriculture; Military Construction & Veterans Affairs; and the Legislative Branch (naturally, the branch responsible for the shutdown ensured its own funding). The deal also reversed recent workforce cuts, halted further layoffs, and formalized back pay for furloughed employees.

In practical terms, the shutdown disrupted normal economic activity and cost taxpayers more money, all while federal employees endured what amounted to a 42-day paid vacation while Congress had a paid temper tantrum. As David Wessel of the Brookings Institution observed, shutdowns inflict real-world economic damage far beyond political theater.

The 2025 shutdown serves as a reminder of how fragile political consensus can undermine economic stability, and how essential it is for Congress to do its job.

Protect What Matters Most

Wendell Brock — Tue, 21 Oct 2025 05:00:00 GMT

Protect What Matters Most

Wendell Brock
Oct 21, 2025
2 min read

You probably don’t think about it every day, but everyone has an estate—everything you own, from your home and savings to your favorite collectibles. The question is: what happens to all of it when you’re no longer around? That’s where estate planning comes in. Think of it as a way to ensure your wishes are honored and your loved ones are cared for, without leaving them to navigate a messy legal maze.

Estate planning isn’t just about a will. It’s a set of documents that guide what happens if you can’t manage your finances or healthcare—or when you pass away. At a minimum, a solid plan includes a will, durable power of attorney, healthcare power of attorney, living will, and HIPAA authorization. Many people also use a revocable living trust to simplify things further. A will lays out your wishes and names an executor and guardians for minor children, but it doesn’t avoid probate—the public, court-supervised process that can slow asset distribution and add stress to your family.

A durable power of attorney lets someone you trust handle financial matters if you’re incapacitated. Similarly, a healthcare power of attorney allows someone to make medical decisions on your behalf. A living will spells out your healthcare preferences, including end-of-life wishes, while a HIPAA form gives caregivers access to your medical information so they can make informed decisions.

For those wanting privacy and to avoid probate, a revocable living trust is a game-changer. Assets in a trust pass directly to beneficiaries without court involvement, and trusts can protect heirs from unnecessary stress or financial mismanagement. Families with larger estates or complex situations might also use irrevocable trusts, spousal lifetime access trusts (SLATs), or special-needs trusts to reduce taxes, protect assets, and manage distributions carefully.

Even if your estate is modest, planning matters. Joint accounts, payable-on-death accounts, small estate affidavits, and annual gifting strategies can simplify transfers and reduce taxes. For anyone with minor children, having a plan is critical—without it, the state decides who cares for them and how your assets are distributed.

The bottom line? Estate planning is about more than money—it’s about protecting loved ones and making your wishes clear. Regularly reviewing and updating your plan ensures it keeps up with changes in your life, finances, and the law. A well-crafted estate plan can prevent family disagreements, reduce stress, and provide peace of mind knowing everything is taken care of exactly the way you want.

Whether your estate is big or small, now is the time to make your plan. Work with an estate planning attorney to navigate legal and tax considerations and give yourself—and your family—the clarity and security they deserve.

Obviously these explanations are very general—each document has its own purpose and details. The key is getting this part of your financial plan checked off. We’re happy to walk through the documents and help you gather the information an attorney will need to draft them. Reach out and we’ll set up a time to make it happen.

The Most Common Question

Wendell Brock — Tue, 14 Oct 2025 05:00:00 GMT

The Most Common Question

Wendell Brock
Oct 14, 2025
2 min read

When it comes to personal finance, one of the most common questions people ask is whether they should focus on paying off debt first or start investing right away. It can be a tricky decision, and the right answer isn’t the same for everyone. Your choice depends on several factors, including interest rates, financial goals, and even your personal comfort level with carrying debt.

Many people dream of building wealth through investing, but they feel weighed down by the burden of existing loans. Common financial challenges often include not knowing where to start with investments, struggling to create a realistic retirement plan, failing to balance immediate expenses with future goals, and facing tax season without professional guidance. Unfortunately, ignoring these challenges doesn’t make them disappear — they tend to snowball, creating more stress and insecurity over time.

A helpful guideline often referred to as the “rule of 6%” can provide clarity. If your debt carries an interest rate of 6% or more, it generally makes sense to pay it off before investing extra money toward retirement. This rule assumes that you’ve already built an emergency fund. Why 6%? Because balanced investment portfolios have historically returned around 6–7% annually. If your debt is costing you more than that, the math says debt repayment comes first.

Not all debt is created equal. For example, paying down credit card balances with rates between 16–24% should be a top priority since the cost compounds quickly. On the other hand, federal student loans at around 5% or a mortgage at 3.5% may not demand aggressive repayment if you could potentially earn more by investing. In those cases, investing while maintaining minimum payments may provide a better long-term outcome.

Still, math isn’t everything. Feelings matter, too. Debt can be emotionally exhausting, and many people prefer the peace of mind that comes with becoming debt-free, even if the numbers suggest investing would generate higher returns. If debt keeps you awake at night, there’s nothing wrong with prioritizing repayment. On the other hand, if you’re comfortable carrying low-interest “good debt,” investing alongside repayment can help your money grow.

There are also foundational steps to put in place before making the debt vs. invest decision. Experts generally recommend establishing an emergency fund of three to six months’ expenses to avoid falling back into debt when unexpected costs arise. Capturing an employer 401(k) match is another must, since it’s essentially free money. With these building blocks in place, you can then focus on choosing between debt payoff and investing.

The general rule of thumb is: High-interest debt (7–8% or more): Pay it off first; low-interest debt (under 5%): Invest while keeping up with minimums. Middle-range debt (5–7%): The decision depends on your goals and tolerance for risk.

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer. The decision comes down to both math and mindset — comparing interest rates with expected investment returns, while considering your personal comfort with debt.

Life Insurance Awareness Month

Wendell Brock — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 05:00:00 GMT

Life Insurance Awareness Month

Wendell Brock
Oct 1, 2025
2 min read

Every September, we recognize Life Insurance Awareness Month, an important campaign dedicated to increasing public understanding of life insurance and urging people to take action and financially protect their loved ones. Despite broad acknowledgment of its importance, millions of Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. Life moves fast, and between work, family, and day-to-day responsibilities, it’s easy to push financial planning to the back burner. But life insurance is one of those things that the peace and security enjoyed far out weights the hassle factor of getting a policy.

You might be surprised to learn that while about half of Americans own life insurance, more than 100 million adults either don’t have any coverage or feel they don’t have enough. So why do so many families go without? A big reason is cost. Many people assume life insurance is too expensive. That begs the question, expensive compared to what? A quick evaluation of personal spending can often put things in perspective.

Another hurdle is confusion. Between terms like “whole life,” “term life,” and “universal life,” and many others, the language can feel intimidating. In fact, studies show that less than a quarter of people feel confident they fully understand their options. Without someone to break it down, it’s easy to keep putting the decision off. This is where procrastination can be extremely expensive.

And of course, nobody really likes to think about what would happen if they weren’t around anymore, it’s human nature to avoid tough topics. After all, the sun will come up tomorrow, right?

Life insurance is really about love and responsibility. It’s a safety net for the people who count on you most. If something were to happen to you, your family wouldn’t have to struggle to cover the mortgage, keep up with bills, or figure out how to pay for education, let alone pay for the funeral expenses. Instead, life insurance gives them financial breathing room so they can grieve and heal without the added stress of money worries.

Beyond the practical side, it brings enormous emotional relief knowing your family won’t be left in a difficult spot; think of it as a gift of stability.

While many people see life insurance as just a “what if” plan, it actually comes with some surprising benefits. Certain policies build cash value over time, which you can borrow against and use for future goals. Policies also typically provide benefits tax-free to your loved ones, giving them the full amount when they need it most.

Life Insurance Awareness Month is more than a campaign—it’s a nudge to pause, reflect, and make sure your family is protected. Whether you’re starting a family, buying a home, or just wanting to be proactive about the future, now is the perfect time to explore your options. Even a small policy can make a big difference.

At the end of the day, life insurance isn’t just about money. It’s about love, care, and making sure that, no matter what, your family is taken care of. And that peace of mind is priceless. So, go forward and Secure Tomorrow.

The Hidden Wealth In Life Insurance

Wendell Brock — Wed, 01 Oct 2025 05:00:00 GMT

The Hidden Wealth In Life Insurance

Wendell Brock
Oct 1, 2025
2 min read

In the world of financial strategy, few headlines raise eyebrows quite like this one: Paul Atkins and his wife own 54 life insurance policies. At first glance, the number sounds excessive, but behind it lies a sophisticated case study in estate planning, tax efficiency, and generational wealth management.

When nominated for Chairman of the SEC, Atkins disclosed a net worth of about $327 million. Of that, $6 million is allocated across 54 life insurance policies. While most families own one or two policies at most, Atkins’s portfolio reflects an intentional approach to leveraging insurance as an advanced wealth-building and preservation tool.

Individuals face strict contribution limits on retirement accounts like IRAs and 401(k)s. Permanent life insurance, especially whole life and indexed universal life, offers an alternative. These policies grow a tax-deferred cash value, which can be accessed tax-free through loans or withdrawals, while the death benefit passes to heirs income tax-free.

For Atkins, life insurance isn’t about basic income replacement, it’s a private, tax-efficient asset class that compounds quietly, sidestepping many restrictions of other financial tools.

Families also face the challenge of efficiently passing their estate to the next generation, minimizing income and estate taxes, and administrative costs upon death. Such policies can provide immediate liquidity, helping heirs avoid selling illiquid holdings, such as real estate or closely held businesses, during market downturns.

Atkins’s policies may be held individually, within trusts, or by separate entities, each serving a distinct purpose. Some could be earmarked for specific heirs, while others might fund charitable trusts or philanthropic commitments. In each case, the structure is efficiently designed to preserve and transfer wealth economically.

Owning dozens of policies also brings risk diversification, not only across insurance carriers, it also provides a more balanced use of financial resources. The cash value buildup in policies tends to be a high-quality use of cash with reasonable dividends paid in the policies. This allows for potential higher risk assets on the other side of the investment spectrum. It’s a similar principle that drives investors to diversify across stocks, bonds, etc.

It’s also possible that not all of these policies insure Atkins himself. Some are likely on his wife and children.

With Atkins back in the public spotlight, this level of insurance ownership shines a light on how Americans can use life insurance in ways most households never considered.

Whether managing hundreds of millions or building a modest nest egg, Atkins’s approach underscores that life insurance can do far more than simply replace income. It can: grow wealth tax-deferred, provide income tax free estate liquidity, and diversify financial risk, transfer assets tax-free.

Fifty-four policies are beyond the needs of the average family, but the thinking behind them offers valuable lessons. For those seeking to elevate their financial planning, it’s a compelling case for looking into life insurance not just as protection, but as a strategic part of any financial plan.