有關退休年齡, 退休制度的文章:
The Economist : PENSIONS 70 OR BUST (Apr. 7th 2011)
http://www.ecocn.org/article-861-1.html (中文翻譯出處)
我把中文翻譯部分作了調整, 原本文章有些句子我刪掉了:
本文重點: 應提高退休年齡
大意:
l 平均壽命增加
l 少子化雪上加霜
l 政府未來財政捉襟見肘
l 國營與私人企業遇到的難題
l 解決之道及在不同國之可行性
Article:
Current plans to raise the retirement age are not bold enough
目前提高退休年齡的計畫還不夠大膽
Text:
……Demography and declining investment returns are conspiring to keep you at your desk far longer than you ever expected.
…..人口結構和日益減少的投資回報導致你要工作更長得時間，超出你的預期。
This painful truth is no longer news in the rich world, and many governments have started to deal with the ageing problem. They have announced increases in the official retirement age that attempt to hold down the costs of state pensions while encouraging workers to stay in their jobs or get on their bikes and look for new ones.
這一痛苦的事實在發達國家已經不是什麼新聞，許多政府已經開始處理老齡化問題。它們已經宣佈提高正式的退休年齡，一方面試圖控制國家退休金的成本，另一方面又鼓勵勞工堅守崗位或尋找新的工作。
Unfortunately, the boldest plans look inadequate. Older people are going to have to stay economically active longer than governments currently envisage; and that is going to require not just governments, but also employers and workers, to behave differently.
不幸的是，最大膽的計畫看上去也還不夠。老年人將積極參與創造經濟效應的時間要比政府當前設想的要長。這表示除了政府外, 雇主和勞工都比須採取不同的行動。
Since 1971 the life expectancy of the average 65-year-old in the rich world has improved by four to five years. By 2050, forecasts suggest, they will add a further three years on top of that. Until now, people have converted all that extra lifespan into leisure time. The average retirement age in the OECD in 2010 was 63, almost one year lower than in 1970.
自1971年以來，發達國家的平均壽命由65歲增加了4-5歲。預測到2050年，將進一步增加3歲。迄今為止，人們把這些增加的壽命全部變成了休閒時間。2010年，經合組織會員國的平均退休年齡為63歲，幾乎比1970年時低一歲。
Living longer, and retiring early, might not be a problem if the supply of workers were increasing. But declining fertility rates imply that by 2050 there will be just 2.6 American workers supporting each pensioner and the figures for France, Germany and Italy will be 1.9, 1.6 and 1.5 respectively. The young will be shoring up pensions systems which……..are riddled with problems. (P.S. shore up : support,improve, strengthen)
要是勞工的供應在增加，那麼長壽命，早退休可能就不是問題了。但是下降的生育率表明，到2050年每位退休金領取者只有2.6個美國勞工支持了，法國、德國和義大利的這一數字到時將分別是1.9、1.6和1.5。年輕人將為….充滿問題的退休金制度提供支援.
Most governments are already planning increases in the retirement age. America is heading for 67, Britain for 68. Others are moving more slowly. Belgium allows women to retire at 60….. Under current policies the mean retirement age by 2050 will still be less than 65, barely higher than it was after the second world war.
大多數政府已經計畫提高退休年齡。美國準備提高到67歲，英國準備提高到68歲。其他國家的行動更加緩慢。比如，比利時的女性60歲就可以退休….根據目前的政策，到2050年，平均的退休年齡將仍然低於65歲，與二戰後的退休年齡沒有什麼差別。
Because life expectancy continues to rise—people in rich countries are gaining a little under a month a year—even the American and British plans are inadequate. In Europe the retirement age should be raised to 70 by 2040; America, with a younger population, can afford to keep it a smidgen lower.
由於平均壽命持續增長——發達國家的人們的壽命每年增長不到一個月——美國和英國的計畫也還不夠。到2040年，歐洲的退休年齡必須提高到70歲；由於美國的人口較年輕，退休年齡可以稍低一點。
Working longer has three great advantages. The employee gets more years of wages; the government receives more in taxes and pays out less in benefits; and the economy grows faster as more people work for longer. Older workers are a neglected consumer market….
工作更長時間有三大優勢。受雇的人可以多領取幾年的工資，政府可以獲得更多的稅收，減少福利方面的開支，更多的人工作更長的時間，經濟增長就會更快….較年老的勞工是一個被人忽視的消費者市場….
Yet too many people see longer working lives as a worry rather than an opportunity—and not just because they are going to be chained to their desks. Some fret that there will not be enough jobs to go around. This misapprehension, known to economists as the “lump of labour fallacy”, was once used to argue that women should stay at home and leave all the jobs for breadwinning males. Now lump-of-labourites say that keeping the old at work would deprive the young of employment. The idea that society can become more prosperous by paying more of its citizens to be idle is clearly nonsensical. On that reasoning, if the retirement age came down to 25 we would all be as rich as Croesus.
但是許多人將更長的工作時間視為一項憂慮而不是一個機會-這不僅僅是因為他們將繼續被工作綁住。一些人擔憂，工作機會將不足。這種誤解曾經被用來辯稱，女人應該主持家務，養家糊口是男人的事。經濟學家將這種誤解稱為“勞動總合謬誤”。現在[勞動總合謬誤論者]表示讓老人繼續工作會使年輕人無法就業。為公民提供更多的退休金，讓他們無所事事，社會就會更加繁榮，這種想法顯然荒唐的。按照這種邏輯，如果退休年齡降到25歲，我們都和克羅伊斯（注：Lydia最後一代國王，以財富甚多聞名）一樣富裕了。
Raising the official retirement age is only part of the solution, for many workers retire before the official age. Martin Baily and Jacob Kirkegaard of the Peterson Institute in Washington, DC, reckon that raising actual EU retirement ages to the official age would offset the impact of an ageing population over the next 20 years.
提高正式的退休年齡只能解決部分問題，因為許多勞工都提前退休了。華盛頓特區的皮德森研究所的 馬丁•貝利 和 雅各•寇克加 推算，將歐盟的實際退休年齡提高到正式的退休年齡將抵消今後20年老齡化所帶來的影響。
For that to happen, working practices and attitudes need to change. Western managers worry too much about the quality of older workers. In physically demanding occupations, it is true, some may be unable to work into their late 60s. The incapacitated will need disability benefits. Others will need to find a different job. But this should be less of a problem than it used to be now that economies are based on services not manufacturing. In knowledge-based jobs, age is less of a disadvantage. Although older people reason more slowly, they have more experience and, by and large, better personal skills. Even so, most people’s productivity does eventually decline with age; and pay needs to reflect this falling-off. Traditional seniority systems, under which people get promoted and paid more as they age, therefore need to change.
要使這種情況變為現實，工作慣例和態度必須改變。西方管理人員對較年老的勞工的素質過於擔憂。在需要體力的工作上，的確一些人工作到近70歲可能就無法工作了。殘疾人將需要殘疾補助。其他人需要尋找不同的工作。但是由於現在的經濟以服務業，而不是以製造業為基礎，與以往相比，這應該不是什麼問題了。對於必須運用知識的工作，年老並不算什麼劣勢。儘管較年老的人反應較遲緩，但是他們經驗豐富，總體而言，擁有更好的個人技術。儘管如此，大多數人隨著年齡的增長，產能確實最終會下降，工資可以根據生產率下降的情況來定。傳統的資歷制度必須改變，因為按照原來這種制度，人們隨著年齡的增長會升官並獲得更高的工資。
The huge cost of pension schemes is being dealt with in the private sector. Final-salary schemes are hardly ever offered to new employees these days. In the public sector, however, they are still standard. In Britain the recent report by Lord Hutton made some sensible suggestions for reform. The accrued rights of workers should be maintained but their future pension rights should be based on the state retirement age (many public-sector workers currently retire early) and on a career average, rather than final salary. That would both prevent abuses and make part-time working easier.
私人企業已經著手處理退休金計畫所需的巨大成本。如今，新招收的員工幾乎已經無法享受到按最終退休金給付計畫了。但是，在公家機關，它們仍然是標準。在英國，赫頓爵士在最近發表的最近報告中提出了一些合理的改革建議。應該保持勞工逐漸增加的權利,但是他們未來的退休金權利應該基於國家的退休年齡（目前許多公家機關的勞工提前退休），以及職業生涯的平均薪資而不是最終的薪資。這樣既可以防止濫用，又可以使做兼差工作變得更加容易。
The public-sector pension problem is sharpest in American states. The deficits in their pension funds may amount to $3 trillion. They face legal and constitutional constraints that prevent them from following the British lead. Unlike wages, pension promises have been deemed, weirdly, to be permanent and sacrosanct. But as budget pressures bite, politicians are going to have to change laws and constitutions.
美國各州的公家部門退休金問題最為嚴重。他們的退休金基金赤字可能達3萬億美元。法律和憲法的限制使它們無法追隨英國的腳步。與工資不同，退休金承諾被荒唐地認為具有永久性並且神聖不可侵犯。但是隨著預算壓力的增大，政治人物將不得不修改法律和憲法。
Private-sector workers face a different problem. The demise of final-salary pensions leaves them facing two big risks: that falling markets will undermine their retirement planning, and that they will outlive their savings. So governments should encourage workers to save more, nudging them into pension schemes by requiring them to [opt out] rather than [opt in]. And the basic state pension should be high enough to give those unlucky elderly with insufficient savings a decent income, without penalising those who have been thrifty. That is the least people deserve in return for toiling until they are 70.
私人企業的勞工面臨一個不同的難題。[最終工資退休金]的結束使他們面臨兩大風險：下行的市場將破壞他們的退休計畫、他們的儲蓄將不足。因此，各政府應該鼓勵勞工多存錢，通過讓他們“可選擇退出”而不是“可選擇加入”來鼓勵他們加入退休金計畫。基本的國家退休金應該足以為那些沒有足夠存款的不幸老年人提供可觀的收入，也不對一直節儉生活的人加以懲罰。這是人們辛辛苦苦工作到70歲應該獲得的最低回報。
文章定位：
