Please read:
Although finance is needed by people as they work to achieve their life goals, there is a problem according to Alexa Von Tobel [One Life-Changing Class You Never Took]: many people lack basic financial knowledge and therefore they often make costly financial mistakes. Loewenstein and Ubel [Economics Behaving Badly] list a number of sub-optimal financial behaviors and wonder what would be the best way for governments to design policies to combat these negative behaviors. 
If you think about it, the essential goal of any policy is to change behavior. With that in mind, there are two primary ways to design policies. One option is to “force” the change in behavior by levying some sort of penalty (let’s call this “option one”). A second way that the government can design policies is by “encouraging” the appropriate behavior (“option two”).
In approximately 200 words, argue whether option one or two is “better” (where “better” means that the policy is more likely to achieve its purpose). You must provide an argument as to why you believe your choice is the more appropriate one. Keep in mind that at the end of the day, this is an exercise on how well we understand human nature and behavior.