论文部分内容阅读
笔者将国民年金计划目前面临的问题总结为两大方面。首先,由于缴费和待遇之间的不平衡和人口老龄化的加剧与寿命的增长,该计划面临着资金不稳定的问题,使得韩国必须进行养老金改革。其次,虽然公共养老金体系于1999年覆盖了城市的自我雇佣人员,但是还有470万人游离于这一制度之外。这是由国际货币基金组织经济危机期间的大规模失业造成的,表现为缺乏准确的收入信息、低迷的经济增长率,以及人们缺乏对养老金的理解等。本文旨在从覆盖率、缴费与待遇、净值和可持续性等方面对国民年金计划的特点和问题进行一个总体上的分析。同时,本文还从发达国家的养老金改革中吸取经验和教训,并分析如何进行改革才能使年金计划在即将到来的老龄化社会之前达到安全与可持续发展的目的。颇具争议的养老金改革计划争论的焦点主要集中在两种提案之上。一个是有关参数改革的提议,主要注重基金的稳定性。另一种提案是进行结构改革,主要是关注税收—财政普遍基本养老金。尽管如此,社会还没有在对哪种提案更为可行上达成一致的意见。因此,我们又如何对这两个方案进行折中呢?如果政府的增加缴费率和削减待遇的改革法案得以通过的话,这就很难实现全覆盖和足够的待遇的政策目标了。尽管存在待遇水平和覆盖率等几个方面的问题,以国民年金计划的财政可持续性为首务的政府法案似乎是快速老年化社会不可逃避的选择。换句话说,尽管对于引进税收—财政普遍基本养老金计划是解决待遇不足和覆盖不完全的方法的呼声很高,但政府法案将会优先考虑方案的可行性和合理性。剩下的问题由其他的以特定群体为目标的政策方案来解决。在这种情况下,对社会弱势群体的公众辅助项目将会扩大,这将有益于使西方发达国家在他们的养老金改革过程中遇到的政治反弹最小化。
The author summarizes the current problems faced by the national pension plan in two aspects. First, due to the imbalance between payment and treatment, the aging of the population and the increase of its life expectancy, the plan faces the problem of instability of funds, making it necessary for South Korea to carry out pension reform. Second, while the public pension system covered urban self-employed people in 1999, an additional 4.7 million people were excluded from the system. This was caused by massive unemployment during the IMF’s economic crisis, manifested by the lack of accurate income information, sluggish economic growth rates, and the lack of understanding of pensions. The purpose of this article is to provide an overall analysis of the characteristics and problems of the National Pension Plan from aspects of coverage, contribution and treatment, net worth and sustainability. At the same time, this article also draws lessons from the pension reform in developed countries and analyzes how to carry out the reform so that the pension plan can achieve the goal of safety and sustainable development before the imminent aging society. The controversial debate over the pension reform plan has focused mainly on the two proposals. One is the proposal on the reform of the parameters, focusing mainly on the stability of the fund. Another proposal is to carry out structural reforms, focusing primarily on taxation - the basic general pension for finance. In spite of this, there is no consensus in society on which proposals are more feasible. Therefore, how can we make a compromise between the two programs? If the government’s reform bill to increase the contribution rate and reduce the treatment is passed, it will be very difficult to achieve the policy goal of full coverage and adequate treatment. Despite several issues such as the level of treatment and coverage, government bills that focus on the financial sustainability of the National Pension Plan appear to be an inevitable choice for a rapidly aging society. In other words, although the introduction of tax-finance universal basic pension plans is a high-profile solution to underemployed and under-covered methods, the government bill will give priority to the feasibility and rationality of the program. The remaining problems are solved by other policy programs targeting specific groups. Under these circumstances, public support projects for the underprivileged will be expanded, which will help to minimize the political rally the developed western countries face during their pension reform.