Jae-myung Lee, who said they would make a plan through the Pension Reform Committee, and Seok-yeol Yoon, who brought
out a card to raise insurance rates for the first time Sang-jung Shim
, who brought out a joint declaration on pension reform, Cheol-su Ahn
In the first TV debate on the 3rd of last month, there is a promise that all four presidential candidates agreed to.
That's pension reform.
At the time, candidate Ahn Cheol-soo of the People's Party proposed, "Let's make a joint declaration of four people that we will reform the national pension no matter who becomes president."
Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung said, "It's a good idea," and People's Power candidate Yoon Seok-yeol said, "I'm making a promise here. Because I can't do it. Because it's not a choice."
Justice Party candidate Shim Sang-jung responded with a smile without saying anything.
The national pension is a question of how much money can I get back a few decades from now (based on the age of 65).
And the trouble starts with the gloomy prospect that this money could be exhausted in the not-too-distant future.
According to the National Assembly Budget Office, the number of National Pension subscribers will steadily decrease from 22.34 million in 2020 to 15.39 million in 2050.
Conversely, the number of beneficiaries receiving pensions will explode from 4.34 million in 2020 to 14.32 million in 2050.
By 2060, it is estimated that the number of beneficiaries will exceed the number of subscribers.
As the number of people who pay is steadily decreasing and the number of people who need to receive it increases significantly, it is predicted that all the accumulated funds will be exhausted by 2057.
Some even say that those born in the 1990s may not be able to receive the National Pension during the receiving period.
Pension reform is in favor, reform methods are different
As mentioned earlier, both the opposition and opposition candidates are in favor of pension reform.
However, I have a slightly different opinion on how to change it.
(CEO Ahn Cheol-soo's promise to agree to unification will be mentioned as much as it may affect the policy of candidate Yoon Seok-yeol. However, I will refer to Ahn Cheol-soo as the nominee resigned.) Candidate Sang-jung Shim and CEO Ahn Cheol-soo are all four major pensions (public official, private school). , soldiers, and people) made a promise to unite.
The amount to be paid (insurance premium rate) and payment requirements (years of subscription, age of benefits) are different for each annuity.
Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung said that it was difficult to propose a reunification plan due to complicated interests. It is a position that should be reviewed and a national consensus should be reached.
So, will you pay more and get more, or will you pay less and get less in the future?
Candidate Sang-Jeong Shim and CEO Ahn Cheol-Soo are thinking of paying more and receiving more.
The goal is to reduce the burden on future generations by raising the insurance premium rate from the current 9%.
Candidates Jae-myung Lee and Seok-yeol Yoon announced that they would prepare a plan by forming a pension reform committee.
Rather than suggesting specific plans, he explained that he would form a government in the future and have a full-fledged discussion.
However, the two candidates pledged to 'gradually expand the coverage' for candidate Lee Jae-myung and to raise the amount received by Candidate Seok-yeol Yoon from 300,000 won to 100,000 won per month for the basic pension paid to the poorest 70% of the population.
< Korea's old-age income guarantee system >
I couldn't change it because I didn't know, the dilemma of past governments
However, this pension reform did not fail because they did not know how to do it.
The need for pension reform was raised every time the government changed, but the burden of putting a bell called pension reform around the neck of a cat has been repeated in each successive government because the people may protest if the premium rate, that is, the amount to be paid right away, is raised. will be.
The National Pension System was created by the Chun Doo-hwan government and introduced by the Roh Tae-woo administration.
In the beginning, as of 1988, the National Pension rate was 3% and the replacement rate (the ratio of money received) was 70%.
Literally, it was a system that provided reliable old-age security even with a small amount of money.
However, as the number of subscribers increased in this 'low cost, high-end pay' structure, financial problems were revealed.
The Kim Young-sam government later raised the premium rate by 6% according to the revised Pension Act, and the Kim Dae-jung administration raised it again to 9% in 1998.
At this time, the amount received (replacement rate) was also reduced from 70% to 60%, and the age at which the first pension is received will be lowered from 60 to 62 in 2020 and 65 in 2033.
The premium rate set at the time of 9% has not changed for over 20 years.
In 2007, the Roh Moo-hyun administration carried out the second reform to reduce the replacement rate by another 40% by 2028.
The insurance premium rate was also raised from 9% to 15.9%, but it was not passed by the National Assembly.
The reform of the National Pension System ended 15 years ago, and the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations raised the premium rate of the civil servant pension to 18%, twice that of the National Pension.
The current Moon Jae-in government also raised the premium rate to 12% in 2019 and suggested a slightly higher income replacement rate of 45%.
Former President Park Geun-hye (August 2015)
"(National Pension Reform) is a matter that needs to be approached as a different issue from the civil servant pension reform, and since the burden on the public increases significantly, it is an issue that must first seek the consent of the public. "
President Moon Jae-in (August 2018)
"I emphasize that there will never be a unilateral reorganization of the National Pension Service by the government without the consent of the people and social consensus."
The rate of depletion of funds is accelerating
However, the more the pension reform is delayed, the greater the burden on future generations will inevitably be.
Yang Jae-jin, a professor of public administration at Yonsei University, makes it easier to understand.
Yang Jae- jin
/ Professor of Public Administration at Yonsei University
If you delay the increase in your pension premium, you will lose all of that income, and if you do it in advance, it will be accumulated as compound interest, which will reduce the need for an increase in your pension premium later. "
Currently, our insurance premium rate (9%) is significantly lower than that of advanced countries.
Japan raised the insurance premium rate from 13.6% in 2003 to 18.3% in 2017, while Germany pays 18.7% and the US pays 12.4% (as of 2018).
In the 'Four Long-Term Fiscal Prospects and Implications' of the National Assembly Budget Office prepared in 2020, it is organized by scenario what the national pension finances will look like when the premium rate is raised or the pension age is delayed.
<National Pension Financial Prospect Scenarios and Changes in Reserves by Scenario>
Scenario ① does not show much improvement because only the pension age is delayed. However, in the case of scenarios ③, ④, and ⑤, where the premium rate is raised, the improvement was great. there was.
Ultimately, the key is politics.
It is easy to criticize Hunsu.
Solving the problem is difficult.
However, if the current pension finances are in place, the fund will run out by 2057.
However, as the fertility rate is falling, there is a prospect that it may be exhausted sooner.
The time of depletion of funds is getting faster and faster.
Ultimately, the key is politics.
It is the job of politics to mediate the diverse voices of the people and reach an agreement.
As all the candidates agreed to the pension reform, it is imperative that no matter who takes power, leadership that does not avoid problems and overcomes head-on through public debate in society is essential.