A quick thought on saving, investing, and public policy:
If you're lucky enough to earn more than you need to spend, you have the ability to save. There are many reasons to save: to insure against unforeseen costs, to set aside enough to live when you no longer can work, for the sake of investing in something that can either make you money (equipment, a business) or make your life better (a car, a new house).
The simplest way to save, which people used to do, is to store money in your home. There are good reasons not to do this, such as the danger of fire or theft. So we put our money in banks.
Some people, who have more time, or for whatever reason have more knowledge of finance and businsess, go ahead an invest -- they buy stocks and bonds. In between the simple savers and the actual investors are me and most of friends, people who pick a few mutual funds into which to put some IRA and 401(k) money. We don't really know what we're doing, we just hope Charles Schwab, Fidelity, or Vanguard do know what they're doing -- and in exchange, we pay them fees, and hope the funds don't lose money.
Unless you are a financial professional, the more complex and sophisticated your financial undertakings get, the more you lose control over them, and the more you have to rely on -- and pay others.
Here's the policy upshot: Policies that push people towards even slightly higher finance are policies that disempower regular people and reward the financial industry. And the biggest government action that does that? I'll let Henry Blodgett and Warren Buffett answer that:
Over the long haul, Buffett explains, the asset class that most investors consider the "riskiest"—stocks—is actually the safest.
The asset class that most investors consider the "safest," meanwhile—cash—is actually extremely risky.
Thanks to even moderate rates of inflation, cash is basically guaranteed to lose huge amounts of value over time.
Stocks, meanwhile, have appreciated to the tune of ~10 percent per year,
One consequence of inflation is that you need to work harder to preserve the wealth that you earn but aren't spending. This drives profits for financial companies, discourages saving (thus encouraging overconsumption), and generally punishes people who have more demanding jobs and who are less savvy. In other words, inflation exacerbates inequality.
And inflation is not a force of nature. There are unpredictable market factors that drive inflation, but the value of the dollar is largely determined by the supply of dollars, and the supply of dollars is mostly determined by the Federal Reserve.
A more stable value of the dollar is better for people who just want to save. A steadily declining value of the dollar is better for people who have the time and skills to invest.