[단독] “I am part of the “missing generation”, but the future generation only cares about their own old age”… The “absurd statement” of a pensions expert

2024-04-21 05:16:11

Kim Yeon-myeong, professor of social welfare at Chung-Ang University. [매경DB]

A refutation of the controversy over “intergenerational inequalities” in the retirement system

“9% parental support and 9% pension insurance premium”

Unlike my generation who cared for their parents privately,

The children’s generation claims to only pay their own insurance premiums

Experts criticize Professor Kim’s claims for ‘weak basis’

A retirement expert representing the national retirement theory of strengthening retirement income security publicly stated: “People between the ages of 40 and 60 need to take care of their parents’ retirement and their own retirement, but the generation of children only has to worry regarding their own retirement. .” To support the argument that the current pension system does not cause intergenerational inequality, it has been argued that future generations are freed from the responsibility of providing for their parents.

According to the coverage of Maeil Business newspaper on the 21st, Professor Kim Yeon-myeong of the Department of Social Welfare of Chung-Ang University announced this through an online learning video provided to 500 citizen representatives of the deliberation committee public as part of the special program on pension reform of the National Assembly. Committee. Professor Kim, who served as Second Principal Secretary for Social Affairs in the Moon Jae-in administration, is a representative expert who advocates strengthening retirement income security by increasing the income replacement rate (money received ). During the Moon Jae-in administration, he served as principal secretary for social affairs to the second president and pushed for pension reform, but it had a history of failure.

In the learning video, Professor Kim introduced himself as a member of the “Generation Group”. This is a generation that must prepare for both their parents’ retirement and their own. He said: “I used to send almost 9% of my salary (to my parents) every month for my living expenses,” and “9% is for insurance premiums to take care of my old age, and 9% is in terms of amount to take. I take care of my parents, so I pay 18% (in insurance premiums),” he said.

At the same time, he said: “Because I receive a sufficient pension, my children’s generation sends me little or no money privately for my living expenses,” and added: “My children’s generation my children just need to worry regarding their own retirement. and pay their own pension insurance premiums. In other words, unlike their own generation (the baby boomer generation), their children and future generations do not have a private responsibility to provide for their parents.

Professor Kim’s remarks are part of a rebuttal to the fact that the pension system harbors problems of intergenerational inequality. The pension system, which began in 1988 with an insurance premium rate of 3% and an income replacement rate structure of 70%, has remained unchanged for 26 years since the insurance premium rate was rose to 9% in 1998. In other words, the generation that paid for this part of the pension only had to pay a low insurance premium rate of 9%. However, insurance premium rates for the next generation are much higher than that. According to estimates from the Ministry of Health and Welfare, if the current system is maintained, the average lifetime insurance premium rate for college freshmen this year is 14.1%, and for third-year primary school students, 20.2%. The number of newborns born next year stands at 26.6%.

Professor Kim said: “It is true that there is injustice between generations when considering the amount paid and received from the national pension, but from the perspective of supporting the elderly as a whole, we need to think differently to know if the current generation is forcing a system that is so unfair to future generations.

However, there is no evidence that future generations will be freed from the obligation to provide for their parents. According to Statistics Korea’s Household Financial Well-being Survey, among the income sources of elderly households, private transfer income, which refers to living expenses received from children, is increasing from 2, 47 million won per year in 2012 to 2.55 million won last year. . In 2022, it reached 2.64 million won. According to a 2016 report from the Korea Institute for Health and Welfare, in 2015, the highest average monthly support cost was for people in their 20s (435,000 won), while those in their 50s recorded only 328,000 won.

Pensions experts have also criticized Professor Kim’s claims as having little basis. Yang Jae-jin, professor of public administration at Yonsei University, asked: “If private support (from Professor Kim’s generation) was so important, how can we explain the poverty rate among the elderly, which is currently the highest? lowest in the world? » This would contradict the representative theoretical foundation of income security theory. Yoon Seok-myeong, a researcher at the Korea Institute of Health and Welfare, also said: “The elderly poverty rate proposed by the income guarantee theory does not include private support, it is therefore doubtful that the same claim can be made even if statistics are included including this amount.

Average insurance premium rate per generation during pension reform

1713687712
#단독 #part #missing #generation #future #generation #cares #age #absurd #statement #pensions #expert