pension revision, this way i would? manifest my pension?

* My annuity manifest?

Last week annuity crisis “like this you evade” there was the special edition, this my “annuity manifest”" “Sunday everyday” of sale “.It was something where the intellectual of some person talks bold opinion to annuity amendment of the country, but it is shy, I commented.As for truth is the quick immature person where my something it gives an advise to the annuity amendment of the country, but whether also the opinion of truth from the young generation the importance reconsidering, it did story.

As for the article there were also circumstances of paper width, they were not possible to pick up all messages.Then, “we deliver my “annuity manifest” volume rise version” on the basis of the memo of that time.

Are those which country are necessary of future for the pension scheme just probably what? Also the “annuity manifest” it was significant, but already it doesn’t try starting thinking a little concretely?

[Table of contents]
– The large quantity the side which is paid in order to cancel “unfairness”
– How it should take a second look “toku” the side which receives and “unfairness”?
– Consumer tax or tax increase? n/a It bears how?
– How it should have made in order to change the “annuity infidelity” into relief, * the large quantity the side which is paid in order to cancel “unfairness”

Is the current pension scheme how changed?its first1theme of the unfairness of the insurance premium to pay is to eliminate the. they have led to complaints of unfairness to us there is generation of active duty monthly salary has been drawn a great deal is, still not a good system.

the current public pension system, male company employee is lifetime employment until retirement, women have been made based on the traditional family model that assumes the case was a full-time homemaker. but, for today’s young generation is often based on the model system has led to injustice these, you think that is going to be necessary first resolve.

for example,, of3insured (housewife, an office worker) the current system of national pension premiums will be free and, review is required. because, is a single male company employee, woman is a single company employee, part of the premium of working women who gave birth to a child even after being passed around is because insurance premiums for full-time homemaker. since this is clearly unfair, review will be required. have the full amount and the burden a little sudden, but do not say, should increase by lowering the insurance premiums for working women that minute.

also, national pension and can be arbitrarily at the will of his unpaid, there is still injustice between the employees’ pension can not escape the payment of insurance premiums if the company employee. such as self-employed and housewives will not be able to join even if they want to join the pension system of proportional compensation in order to have more to reverse the pension. this is also a funny story.

the pension role of the country has, (A) aspects and supporting the lives of old age as social security of people nobody, (B) would need to be a clear distinction between the part and receive the income of old age in proportion to the premiums for each individual. of all the national common2pension plan is not to storey. 1i think fairness is part of the story is also fixed to the company employee self-employed if the straight-line.

for insurance system now will at least need to be improved. for example,, people could not pay national pension premiums lifetime, that it is unfair to receive future welfare. a person who has paid the premiums seriously it is necessary that you do not lose devised so. than an effort to get insurance by paying a voluntary, do not think of a better technique is to be paid to the constructive force.

be levied in proportion to the level of consumption from all the people through the consumption tax may be reasonable in the sense that. the consumption tax is also it takes personal shopping to buy the company, it takes young people to pensioners. what is not fair consumption tax from the working generation will pay only work? (i would like to touch upon this topic again in the subsequent stage) receive side of the obtained and injustice what should be reconsidered if the

of2theme of the receive side or how to eliminate inequality in the, is. or have to get the side get a pension, without following this review if it is unfair, as the working generation to pay the insurance premium can not be convinced.

deflation over the past few years one of the characteristics of the generation to get a pension, in spite of the age cut wages, you may cut pension has not been. salary will be cut due to economic downturn, prices have fallen. year amount of the country, but also changes the amount that has been years in conjunction with the top and bottom of the price, when prices went up while also raising pensions, only when the price drops has been deferred pensions. the difference is already1.7%, on a nationwide scale1,000will also be one hundred million yen. 1,000side also get a pension billion is not that solve the. that it is raising insurance premiums for young people that haunt or it would not be funny?

also, current, pensioners are getting money as a company employee, but the mechanism has become the country’s pension will be cut, there is injustice here as well. elderly people have pension income, such as landlord of the country is even tens of millions of yen that income1a mechanism is not being cut yen. for elderly people have a large amount of property and high-income earners would be necessary to carry out more boldly cut through the country’s pension, such as tax return.

on the other hand, i think about the age of the country to receive the pension should not be easily raise. because, review of the system because it is only to damage suffered by future generations receive. speaking clearly has been postponed because can not pay the pension i do not think only with. also social65argument that the age of retirement age is raised will not be so easy.

if we consider that the young generation, individual differences in health status (surely65and able to work up to the age is not necessarily) or, considered the future to expand individual differences in lifestyle, age to retire you should be able to choose freely to individuals. also turned down benefit levels rather55is as good as the debate to increase the choice and receive from the age of. or consumption tax or tax increase? ……what to do with the burden

who or how much the burden, is a big problem because. current, basic pension (national pension) the payment of financial resources (insurance: tax=2: 1) from (1: 1) in order to study is being carried out. the opinions or say that they would take advantage of the sales tax to abolish the temporary tax cut that has come out for. you can squeeze from where the burden is a difficult problem. also, should be done first will review the waste of other budget.

but, problem of insurance premiums3minutes of1from2minutes of1i think just do not let the story end of the financial resources for. the basic pension, because it is just the role of social security for the elderly, to clarify their nature, what financial resources will be borne by the national treasury should not be the full amount originally. first, white to insurance premiums, white to the consumption tax, white to the end of the temporary tax cut, burden is that someone i do not have to change. how the burden should be considered fair and efficient as possible.

story of the consumption tax pay the as i said a little when you talk about, i think a simple and rational funding. from elderly people to pay taxes is not working for generations and children in proportion to the amount the company had a shopping. wealthy elderly people increases, that the working generation of savings and reducing the income, the pension in helping society as a whole what if it is not appropriate as financial resources rather.

however, one condition. if you were to tax the full amount at once, national pension insurance premium is zero yen, equivalent to the national pension premiums to be deducted from your salary monthly pension3~4%much lower. in doing so, pension system will increase the burden of the working generation forever can subvert that increase the image of the young generation, because the younger generation will be to regain the trust of.

by the way, about money that pension funds are preparing as financial resources for the payment of pension etc.150i some trillion yen, i think about this reversal is good to go faster. because it is possible to suppress the increased burden of the working generation thereby. the manifest of the democratic party50year degree, in the manifest of the new komeito100it has been over the years and unpile, personally50i think it is not good or even years or less.

after the reduction of future workers on the other hand reversal of the reserve, they increase the burden on the children of the future more, although you can not deny the anxiety that, for just this huge amount of assets100do not you think it is bigger risk of going asset management to ensure we not lose to inflation situation years away (stock will increase in the aftermath of the downturn has been much at a loss last year i) . distrust pension what can i do to alter the peace of mind

last but not, and pension system for the working generation lump of anxiety and distrust i think that it. burden continues to increase monthly pay, will continue to receive reduced pension, that they can not convince anyone. i think efforts need to ease the anxiety for change.

now, the final premium rate20%or fewer keyword is often spoken of as peace of mind when you look at the word. but, the current premium rate13.58%so, for us still than now5insurance premiums will increase also assigned is that. of annual income certainly26%world to be taken (now2double! ) than is now, story is quite autocratic.

also, insurance premiums20%if it becomes, will also increase the burden for companies that pay the half of it. company will be turning to lower the salary premium difference reluctant to this. will increase the part-time and contract employees to permanent employees fired or. for the current average premium or the maximum15%what i think should be kept at about.

this may not be able to guarantee the same level as the amount of years until now. all you need is there now to each their own information disclosure annually whether there is a right to receive a pension of just how is to. companies to shareholders, information disclosure by financial institutions to customers (disclosure) doing has become commonplace. as, is not going to go to the public disclosure of information about some countries pension.

to disclose information to the financial situation of course, basic pension, both the earnings-related pension, is required, such as going to explicitly point to amount to over years can be expected depending on the level of compensation and past enrollment period. at present every year in your receive a pension of ten thousand yen clear how much would you say if crelle.

if you excuse yourself if tamere is thought not enough to see the announcement from the country. we can take action if there is information that is at least clear. what is needed in considering the plan of retirement funds (1) years of the country amount, (2) corporate pension and personal pensions, (3) amount of property such as savings, the information is, in the pension of the country you can not calculate a retirement plan of such uncertainties it is the most.

i think that the future of the country’s pension, theme is very difficult. on the other hand the element is too complicated, weis powerless too. i have said this time also, may be impossible, and some said. but, we anxiety and distrust there is, i want that hope to improve this and should not be voiced without.

to maintain the system is important now, pension feel like if you became a fatal bug in the software has been accumulated by repeating a little bit can be customized. as soon as possible, want to connect to an upgraded version of the fundamental review, i think so.

end election, revision of the country’s pension system finally production. what we want to check carefully the future direction of.

if you leave here tecnifibre newsletter subscribe, after the update column, will contact you by email! all means your registration