PR
HNが思いつかん..
Sorry! Japanese and English only.
カレンダー
カテゴリ
10行エッセイ もしくは未分類・未編集
(225)10-line essays
(436)音楽10行エッセイ
(91)ライブレポ
(184)Music 10-line essays
(58)お知らせ Information
(46)お気に入り・お勧め紹介
(29)Favorite, recommendation
(89)自己紹介・ブログ紹介代用バトン
(20)日記代用バトン
(207)バトン置き場
(407)フリーページ
2021年10月19日
テーマ： 年金プラザ(496)
カテゴリ： 10-line essays
Today, I'd like to leave this weblog while I can, I mean, while I'm still the one to pay public pension premium.
Every time I see news related with National Pension, I cannot help wondering how long current annuity system goes on that grants current pensioners with pension premium collected from younger working generation.
This system is on the assumption that population keeps on growing.
But needless to say at this late date, birth late is declining for four decades, and it's obvious to be impossible that population keep increasing.
This is partly why only women are abused for not reproducing future pension payers , which is another story for today.
Why don't they shift to accumulation plan? Then more people might be willing to pay premium cost for the sake of themselves.
To explain simplistically :
In our state, the amount of old-age pension is calculated on the basis of nominal wages for pensioners less than sixty-eight-year-old.
For sixty-eight-year-olds or older, on the basis of commodity price for sixty-eight-year-old or older, but if nominal wage is lower than commodity price, the calculation is on the basis of nominal wages.
Besides, the premium of employees' pension is according to the amount of salaries.
Now both wages and prices are decreasing on the whole.
It means collected premium decreases as well, and pension revenue source shrinks, too.
Also, working generations' wages decline, then pension payments also decline. -Is it fine as explanation?
Employers and older generations shall regret for reducing labor costs when it's their turn to have worse pension.
In other words: If they want better pension in the near future, they must not pinch pennies on salaries.
However... If there is something to say for Panjandrums, they don't need to worry about pension funds so seriously.
Because life expectancy cannot gain forever
-Or more like:
Surely, for a few decades, baby-boomers are over seventy-five and the number of old-age pensioners keeps increasing.
So annuity cost keeps on increasing, too.
But average life-span of current working generations might decrease because of labor exploitation, and they tend to be less moneyed than current age people.
Thus, in the future, less people will live long enough to receive old-age pension for as long time as current aged generation.
Panjandrums are also anticipating scenario like that, aren't they?
I declare that Centenary-life
-Me? I might survive at least to become pensionable age, but I don't think I live very long life enough to be accused behind my back by younger working generation, because I'm already in delicate health.
I felt it's surprising that while the population of working generation is shrinking, collected national pension premium is increasing.
It's because the number of young international workers are increasing, and regardless of nationality, residents in our state are obliged to join the national pension plan in our state.
Let me place to be careful that our state is eager to welcome cheap international labors, partly as pension payers.
Allow me make an explanation -or excuse that it's not antiforeignism.
Other nations need not to get involved with exploitation system in our state.
Just our nation is enough to be exploited by our state.
◆ ：Ready to place summery if asked
Every time I see news related with National Pension, I cannot help wondering how long current annuity system goes on that grants current pensioners with pension premium collected from younger working generation.
This system is on the assumption that population keeps on growing.
But needless to say at this late date, birth late is declining for four decades, and it's obvious to be impossible that population keep increasing.
This is partly why only women are abused for not reproducing future pension payers , which is another story for today.
Why don't they shift to accumulation plan? Then more people might be willing to pay premium cost for the sake of themselves.
To explain simplistically :
In our state, the amount of old-age pension is calculated on the basis of nominal wages for pensioners less than sixty-eight-year-old.
For sixty-eight-year-olds or older, on the basis of commodity price for sixty-eight-year-old or older, but if nominal wage is lower than commodity price, the calculation is on the basis of nominal wages.
Besides, the premium of employees' pension is according to the amount of salaries.
Now both wages and prices are decreasing on the whole.
It means collected premium decreases as well, and pension revenue source shrinks, too.
Also, working generations' wages decline, then pension payments also decline. -Is it fine as explanation?
Employers and older generations shall regret for reducing labor costs when it's their turn to have worse pension.
In other words: If they want better pension in the near future, they must not pinch pennies on salaries.
However... If there is something to say for Panjandrums, they don't need to worry about pension funds so seriously.
Because life expectancy cannot gain forever
-Or more like:
Surely, for a few decades, baby-boomers are over seventy-five and the number of old-age pensioners keeps increasing.
So annuity cost keeps on increasing, too.
But average life-span of current working generations might decrease because of labor exploitation, and they tend to be less moneyed than current age people.
Thus, in the future, less people will live long enough to receive old-age pension for as long time as current aged generation.
Panjandrums are also anticipating scenario like that, aren't they?
I declare that Centenary-life
-Me? I might survive at least to become pensionable age, but I don't think I live very long life enough to be accused behind my back by younger working generation, because I'm already in delicate health.
I felt it's surprising that while the population of working generation is shrinking, collected national pension premium is increasing.
It's because the number of young international workers are increasing, and regardless of nationality, residents in our state are obliged to join the national pension plan in our state.
Let me place to be careful that our state is eager to welcome cheap international labors, partly as pension payers.
Allow me make an explanation -or excuse that it's not antiforeignism.
Other nations need not to get involved with exploitation system in our state.
Just our nation is enough to be exploited by our state.
◆ ：Ready to place summery if asked
お気に入りの記事を「いいね！」で応援しよう
[10-line essays] カテゴリの最新記事
-
Sequel: Correcting unfairness -or simpl… 2024年11月17日
-
Sequel: Do they have to change? 2024年11月03日
-
Sequel: Look before you leap -or fly hi… 2024年10月13日
【毎日開催】
15記事にいいね！で1ポイント
© Rakuten Group, Inc.
