山东省城镇养老金制度的特征分析

目前山东省的城镇养老金制度存在很大差异,事实上是一种“二元体制”的养老金制度,即企业与机关事业单位的职工实行两套不同的养老金制度,这种“二元体制”不仅违背了社会公平原则,而且制约了人员的合理流动和加剧了财政负担。通过分析两种养老金待遇存在差距的原因。提出城镇养老金制度改革的对策,逐步缩小企业职工养老金待遇与机关事业单位职工养老金待遇之间的差距。     

山东省城镇养老金制度的特征分析

目前山东省的城镇养老金制度存在很大差异,事实上是一种"二元体制"的养老金制度,即企业与机关事业单位的职工实行两套不同的养老金制度,这种"二元体制"不仅违背了社会公平原则,而且制约了人员的合理流动和加剧了财政负担.通过分析两种养老金待遇存在差距的原因,提出城镇养老金制度改革的对策,逐步缩小企业职工养老金待遇与机关事业单位职工养老金待遇之间的差距.     

微观视角下的养老金替代率与居民消费行为

老龄化背景下,中国养老金“并轨”开始启动,低替代率问题逐渐显露。本文借鉴缓冲储备储蓄理论,首次从微观角度基于养老金并轨和替代率两方面研究养老金制度对于家庭消费行为的影响。结论显示,我国养老金“多轨制”和养老金替代率均显著影响居民消费行为。机关事业单位人员比企业及其他人员消费倾向更高;在控制养老金“并轨”问题后,提高养老金替代率有助于刺激城镇居民增加消费支出。这些均对低收入和女性户主家庭更为明显。     

缩小企业与机关事业单位退休职工养老金差距问题研究

企业与机关事业单位退休职工养老金存在较大差距,从2002年开始,这个差距在400元以上;企业退休职工平均养老金占机关事业单位平均养老金的70%及以下,这极大地损害了社会保障制度的公平原则。缩小企业与机关事业单位退休职工养老金的差距需要加快事业单位分类改革、分阶段实施养老金“双轨”改革、完善企业（职业）年金制度等。     

浅析企业最低基本养老金标准问题

文章以保障企业退休人员基本生活水平为根本，沿着理念-制度-政策的研究路径，结合企业实际，提出建立最低基本养老金标准的初步构想。旨在建立起一种能够规避企业退休人员基本养老金水平下降风险，保障退休人员基本生活水平，缩小企业与机关事业单位养老金待遇差距，减少矛盾，促进社会公平，逐步实现共建共享，促进社会安定与和谐的养老金收入保障机制。     

数字

尽管国家连续9年提高企业退休人员养老金水平，但与机关事业单位差距仍大。中国社会科学院2013年初发布的《社会保障绿皮书》和《中国社会保障收入再分配状况调查》显示，在被调查者中，75．4％的职工养老金不高于2000元，92.3％的机关事业单位退休人员养老金却都高于4000元。     

关于缩小企业与机关事业单位养老金差距的研究述评

受养老保险制度"碎片化"影响,我国机关事业单位与企业的养老金存在较大差距且逐渐拉大,成为社会保障制度建设中不得不解决的问题。制度分割导致的养老金"双轨"运行,是导致企业与机关事业单位养老金待遇差距的主要原因。要缩小这种差距必须从改革模式和制度设计两方面入手。而公务员养老制度能否和事业单位一起改革、第二支柱养老保险能否真正发挥作用、养老保险改革是否会联动其他制度改革等问题,直接影响养老金制度改革的成败。     

关于养老金并轨改革问题的探讨

养老金双轨制,是指机关事业单位人员和企业退休人员实行的两种不同的退休养老金制度,是我国社会保障体系中难以解决的重点问题之一.为此,国家做出了一系列改革,但收效甚微.2015年1月14日,中华人民共和国国务院以国发[2015]2号发布《关于机关事业单位工作人员养老保险制度改革的决定》,终于迎来了双轨制终结的“破冰之旅”.本次改革必将改善长久以来双轨制带来的事业单位和企业的养老差距问题,但同时也面临一些阻力和困难.因此,要彻底排除阻力,克服困难,推进改革方案,还需要加倍努力.     

解决企业与机关事业单位离退休人员养老待遇差异的政策建议

1.加快机关事业单位养老保险改革,构建全民统一的基本养老保险制度。现有机关事业单位养老保险制度的缺陷在于个人不缴费,责任完全由国家承担。不仅国家的负担较重,而且引起缴费人群企业职工的不满,形成新的社会不公平感。从养老金领取结果来看,大部分企业退休职工只领取基本养老金,而机关事业单位退休人员则领取全额养老金,造成了企业退休职工与机     

我国城镇养老金制度的二元化特征分析

目前的城镇养老金制度,事实上是一种“二元体制”,即企业与机关事业单位实行两套完全不同的养老金制度,这种双轨制度不仅违背了社会公平原则,而且制约了人才的合理流动,加剧了财政负担。因此,加快机关事业单位养老金制度改革,建立与企业养老金制度有机衔接的三层次的机关事业单位养老金制度,已成为完善中国养老保障体系的迫切要求。     

城镇职工基本养老保险制度财务平衡与可持续性研究

随着退休职工的不断增加,城镇职工基本养老保险基金将面临支出的压力。根据我国现行城镇职工养老保险制度的收支办法,建立养老保险基金收支预测模型,并利用安徽省的有关统计资料,对未来20年安徽省城镇职工基本养老保险基金收支进行预测。预测结果表明:从2026年起,安徽省城镇职工基本养老保险基金收支开始出现缺口,以后缺口逐年扩大。因此,应采取措施弥补基金收支的缺口。     

The public–private sector gender wage differential in Britain: evidence from matched employee-workplace data

This article shows that little of the gender earnings gap in the public and private sectors in Britain are explained by differences in employee characteristics. The differences in workplace characteristics, however, make a significant, sizeable contribution. It is shown that performance related pay and company pension schemes are associated with higher relative earnings in the private sector, whilst increased provision of family-friendly employment practices in the public sector is associated with higher relative earnings for women.     

The German Savings Puzzle

Germany has one of the most generous public pension and health insurance systems of the world, yet private savings are high and remain positive until old age, even for most low income households. How can we explain what we might want to term the “German savings puzzle”? We provide a complicated answer that combines historical facts with capital market imperfections, housing, tax and pension policies. The first part of the paper describes how German households save, based on a synthetic panel of four cross sections of the German Income and Expenditure Survey (“Einkommens- und Verbrauchsstichproben”) collected between 1978 and 1993. The second part links saving behaviour with public policy, notably tax and pension policy.     

农民工养老保险统筹收入再分配研究

农民工养老保险统筹收入再分配集中体现着养老保险全国统筹的缩小收入差距和有利于流动人口养老金异地接转两大主要功能。本文从收入再分配入手研究农民工养老保险全国统筹的合理性及实现路径,构建了农民工养老保险统筹收入再分配系数总模型和分系数模型,提出了农民工养老保险全国统筹“两类型”和“五方案”, 并对农民工养老保险统筹给付水平、收入再分配系数进行了定量分析,最后通过生存公平和劳动公平检验确定了替代率10%的中央统筹模式为现阶段农民工养老保险全国统筹起步最优方案,进而提出了具体政策建议。     

Globalization,Neoliberalism and the attack on social security

Neoliberal political movements advocate privatization of public pension systems. Globalization imposes pressure on nations to conform to neoliberal policy views with respect to the design and structure of social insurance, including public pension systems. The paper begins with an investigation of the economic, ethical and ideological dimensions of the privatization debates in the U.S.; it argues that privatization advocates may be largely moved by ideology, since the other reasons advanced appear weak or unfounded. The second part discusses the history of Social Security, the purposes for its creation, and some of its economic effects. Differences between public and private pension systems are considered. A brief international comparison of some aspects of public pension system finance and benefit structures is presented. The final section considers the ethical, macroeconomic and distributional implications of privatization, prefunding and payroll tax funding, and argues for a pay as you go system financed with income taxes. In order to promote equity, economic security, community, and social cohesion, public pension systems should be universal in coverage. In order to reduce the inequality, income insecurity, and aged poverty generated by market economies, public pension systems ought to be progressive: benefit/contribution ratios should be inversely proportional to income, and progressive income taxes should finance the system. To promote economic growth, the systems should be financed on a pay-as-you-go basis, and should not be prefunded except for an emergency reserve. The fiscal policy recommendations partially depend upon the theory developed by Abba Lerner in the 1940s, and recently advanced by Wynne Godley and Randy Wray: Lerner's “principle of functional finance.”     

A SAVINGS SUBSIDISATION SYSTEM IN A MODEL OF ENDOGENOUS FERTILITY AND ENDOGENOUS GROWTH: AN EXTENSION OF WIGGER (1999)

Population ageing is now an established demographic characteristic of many economies. Economists working in the endogenous growth theory tradition have sought to model the relationship between public pensions, financed on a 'Pay-As-You-Go' basis, and the growth in per capita incomes. The resultant intergenerational wealth redistribution from young to older people seems to decrease private savings, diminish capital accumulation, and lower the growth of per capita incomes. The underlying transmission mechanism appears to be a crowding out effect in private capital markets contingent upon the introduction of public pension systems. A growing literature exists on the interrelationships between public pension schemes, fertility rates and endogenous growth. Following Wigger's (1999) pioneering overlapping generations endogenous growth model, we extend this model to examine the effects of a savings subsidisation system on the rate of per capita income growth, fertility and voluntary intrafamily wealth transfers, where parents view children both as an insurance good and a consumption good. Moreover, children care about the consumption levels of their parents. An increase in contributions to a savings subsidised public pension scheme will crowd out private intergenerational transfers from the young to the old and thereby negate the usefulness of children as an insurance good.     

养老保险参保行为理论及实证研究

依据中国最新的基本养老保险政策,采用养老保险精算方法构建基本养老保险参保模型分析参保人的行为模式,研究不同个体特征对参保人行为的可能影响后发现,在现行政策条件下,基本养老保险制度吸引力十分有限.结果显示,随着年龄的增加,参保人参保的积极性也提高;而收入水平与参保率之间存在显著的正相关.另外,居民教育水平、用工形式、单位性质、制度透明度等因素也是影响参保率的重要因素;而参保人性别与参保概率没有显著相关性.     

Public or Private Orientation of Pension Systems in the Light of the Recent Financial Crisis

This paper studies the appropriateness of a public or private orientation of pension systems in the light of the recent financial crisis, which has underscored the difficulties and contradictions associated with each system. The different institutional arrangements, in which public or private pension systems are embedded, are key components when assessing their responses to the crisis. Particularly, private pension systems are intertwined with financial markets, while social insurance-based pension systems are linked to the labour market mechanisms. This paper compares the British and French pension systems, as “archetypes” of private-oriented and public-oriented systems, respectively, the first relying on the market and private pension schemes, and the second on mandatory social insurance. This paper shows that the crisis has upheld the founding principles of the public (French) and private (British) pension systems to maintain the existing institutional configurations. At the same time, both systems have strengthened the role played by means-tested benefits and minimum pensions for low-income groups to offset the weaknesses of one or the other system, as emphasised by the crisis.