I have issues with nudging, but am unsure of whether I fit in one of your categories.  My issues are:<p>a) When a few people make de-facto decisions for everyone else, those decisions are prone to causing black swans because of a lack of (real) diversification of risk.  One example of this would be if 20 countries used the default retirement portfolio scheme (that is often used to support nudges), and in one country, the portfolio was not diversified against a type of risk (i.e. interest rate or mortgage default), that could cause severe malinvestment and economic calamity in one country.  It would have been much better for 1 in 20 people to make the mistake than 1 in 20 countries.<p>b) People&#x27;s decision making abilities are like any other skill (i.e. language, writing, arithmetic), in that they atrophy over time if they are not used.  If the people have no reason to look out for themselves, they may not realize when the nudgers are abdicating their responsibilities.  In addition to that, financial decisions give clear feedback and have good incentives for the individual, which allows and requires people to exercise their decision making abilities, that will be useful in other areas of life.<p>Perhaps I fit in to your &#x27;group 3&#x27;, but either way, I&#x27;d be interested to hear your thoughts (if you would be interested in giving any) on these two objections.