This year, I saw that all major factories were laying off employees, and I didn't pay attention to news such as retirement and pensions, but now I have to pay attention to these.
After reading a few news, I think it's a bit difficult to retire in the current situation.
Professor Peng Xizhe, a professor at Fudan University who specializes in the aging of the population, said in the column "Knowledge" that China's retirement age is relatively early, and in view of the fact that the average life expectancy will continue to extend in the future, which means that after retirement in the future, there will be nearly 30 years to receive a pension.
He suggested a flexible delayed retirement system, so that those who delay retirement would not crowd out employment opportunities for young peopleBecause these two groups are employed in almost completely different markets, young people are now focused on high-tech industries, while older people are now in traditional manufacturing, and these traditional manufacturing industries are not very young people want to go now。Industries or regions that have the conditions can take the lead and gradually treat retirement as the result of personal and market choices, rather than a mandatory institutional arrangement.
To put it simply, the pension will not be sufficient in the future, delaying retirement is the general trend, and delaying retirement will not affect the employment of young people.
Netizens didn't buy what this professor said at all, and frantically complained about Professor Peng's claims in the comment area.
I think this kind of public expression is to give people a vaccination, to tell others, be mentally prepared, delayed retirement is already a general trend, don't be unacceptable when the time comes, experts have told you in advance.
As for netizens complaining, Professor Peng doesn't care at all, it's useless for you to scold him directly, and he won't lose a few taels of meat.
But anger doesn't solve the problem, and emotions aside, perhaps delaying retirement is something we must accept, not subject to our will.
The basis for the maintenance of the pay-as-you-go pension system is:There are enough young peopleBut now the fertility rate is really miserable, even the lowest in the world, and we are not a big country of immigrants, so there will definitely not be enough young people in the future.
Therefore, if you want to maintain it, you must "open source and reduce expenditure".Reducing the amount of pension payments per personwithReduce the length of pension paymentsAll of them are means of "throttling".
Professor Peng chose the latter, for example, everyone can receive a pension for 25 years, and delay retirement for 5 years, then it will become a pension for everyone for 20 years, so that the total amount of pension received by such a person will be reduced by 20%, which can undoubtedly give the pension a wave of life.
In this way, delay is a bad move, but it's useful, so is there any other bad move besides this bad move?
If you want to "open source", is there any way? The future is not known, butIn the current situation of A-shares, it is a bit difficult for social security ** to make a lot of money
So I still have to think about "throttling and losing money".
First of all, we must be clear about who is receiving the pension, I have always had a misunderstanding, that is, the pension is closely related to everyone, and everyone can receive a pension.
But in fact, this is not the case at all, and there is a part of the population that does not receive a pension.
Take the people close to me as an example, in my family, my mother used to work as a weaver in a small workshop, and she did not have a pension. My father worked in a factory and paid the minimum social security.
When it comes to other relatives, the situation is not optimistic, among the matrilineal relatives, my second aunt opened a grocery store and had no pension, and my second aunt opened a chess and card store, which was also not.
My uncle works in a car repair shop, no, and my aunt doesn't have a job, either.
As for the paternal relatives, my uncle and uncle both ran grocery stores in their early years, and now they are retired, and in the countryside, there is no pension, and several aunts either work as textile workers or run fruit shops, and they also do not, so if you look into it carefully, you can see that most of my maternal and paternal relatives are about ten families, and most of them do not receive pensions.
Let's expand the scope a little more, the migrant workers on the construction site, the decoration workers of the decoration company, and the helpers in the restaurants, most of them have unstable jobs and must not have paid pensions.
Therefore, it is not difficult to see that in fact, a considerable number of people do not pay pensions, and they will naturally not be able to receive pensions in the future.
How many of these people are there?
According to Professor Peng, the average retirement age is about 56 years old, so we have to look at the birth population data from 1965 to 1970.
According to China's statistical yearbook, the number of births from 1970 to 1971 was 22.37 million, and even if the time is pushed forward by five years, from 1965 to 1970, the average annual population growth is still stable at around 20 million in five years.
According to the retirement data from 2021 to 2022, the urban retired population has increased by 4.87 million a year.
Therefore, we can probably speculate that the number of people who can receive pensions in this article accounts for less than a quarter of the population who were born at the time, and they are among those who were born in that year."A handful
But then, in the three years from 2010 to 2012, there was a surge in the number of people participating in pension insurance, and the retirement situation after the surge was completely different from today's retirement situation, so the data we discussed next had certain limitations.
According to the above data, it can be known that there are 136 people, according to China's statistical caliber, pensions are mainly divided into urban and urban and rural two parts, of which the urban is also divided into two parts: enterprise employees and government institutions and institutions, these two parts are the key parts to be analyzed. But that's not enough, you also have to know how much pension these people have received.
According to the "National Social Insurance ** Expenditure Final Statement" and the "China Statistical Yearbook", I found several data.
It looks okay, right, in the past three years, the monthly pension of enterprise employees has increased by 100 yuan, and it has stabilized around 3,000 yuan, which seems to be a reassuring number, more than 3,000 yuan a month, from now on, it is enough to live.
But note that this is only an average, and the average does not fully reflect the average of the group, such as alreadyWang Shi, the former boss of Vanke, has a pension of more than 10 million a year, one person has raised the average pension of several hundred people.
We don't know the "median" of the central data that can really be fed back to the sample, but according to the current income distribution pattern, the "median" pension should be lower than the average.
Let's take a look at another part of the group, the personnel of government agencies and institutions.
You probably guessed it,The average pension of people in government agencies and institutions is about twice as much as that of employees in enterprises, but after all, when they pay, they pay according to the most grades, and it is normal to receive more when they receive it, as for saying that it is reasonable to pay more, I will not discuss it here.
Seeing the data here, you can come up with another "bad move": reduce the expenditure of per capita pension.
It is only necessary to adjust the pension received by the employees of enterprises and the personnel of government agencies and institutions to about 2,800, which can achieve the same effect as delaying retirement for five years.
As for whether people in government institutions do it or not, hehe, I'm not a government agency or institution, and it's my business, just like Professor Peng is not an ordinary enterprise employee.
The above loss trick seems to be useful, but I think the loss part accounts for the majority, and the real effect is actually up for debate.
In the second half of the first half, Professor Peng emphasized that this part of the people who delay retirement will not affect young people to find jobs, because now young people are concerned about IT and finance, while the former workers are in the traditional manufacturing industry, belonging to two different job markets, which seems to be reassuring young people and making them less disgusted with this plan.
There was another reason he hadn't said here, but it was obviously inconvenient for him to say it.
Nowadays, the fewer workers who go to the traditional manufacturing industry, the advantage of cheap labor will slowly eroded, and one way to maintain this advantage for a longer period of time is to let these manufacturing workers work a little longer. Of course, if Professor Peng says this reason, it will cause even more disgust, in order to keep labor cheap, you have to sacrifice their retirement life, who wants to do this?
In view of this problem, the above loss can be changed again, considering that the job needs of ordinary enterprise workers follow the market, and the positions of organs and institutions are basically a radish and a pit, if you do not retreat, others will have to work hard if they want to be promoted, and the organs and institutions still have to retire.
It can be changed to,The pensions of government agencies and institutions are discounted by 4%, and the retirement of employees of ordinary enterprises is delayed
This not only alleviates the labor shortage of the traditional manufacturing industry, but also really reduces the expenditure of pensions, isn't it beautiful.
In fact, neither of the above two methods can really solve the problem, the increase in life expectancy is unstoppable, and the decline in the total population is inevitable, and the latter directly determines whether the current system can be sustained.
Moreover, judging from the situation of income and expenditure, the situation is not optimistic.
PensionIncomesituation
PensionExpendituressituation
From the point of view of data, the per capita amount of social security and pension is not the same level at all, the average monthly recipient is 3569, but the average monthly payment of 411 is 411, and 8 people need to pay social security to ensure that 1 person has a pension to receive.
According to this trend, it must be wishful thinking that I will be able to receive a pension when I retire.
So what are the best ways to save yourself?
A friend who is engaged in finance told me that they began to buy all kinds of hedging things in their circle a few years ago to prevent it, and they never counted on social security.
But now that the hard currency of ** is quite high, is it really appropriate to enter at this time? Headache.
Probably put more energy into the areas you are familiar with, and then accumulate more wealth for yourself in order to truly allow yourself to live out your old age.