Study On The Double Track System Of Pension

The “dual pension system” is defined as: the pensions for those who work withinthe system--the government and public institutions, and those who work forenterprises are different. As early as1993, China set up the new “basic enterpriseendowment insurance” model that individuals pay for the insurance together with theenterprises with people working for government and public institutions wereexcluded--they still enjoyed the fully funding endowment insurance by nationalfinance. That is how the “dual pension system” is formed, and how it lead to the widevariations of benefits between those two kinds of people mentioned. As time goes on,the ceaselessly rising pension outlays has caused widespread concerns andcontroversy, constantly sharpening contradictions, widely existed unfairness andinjustice in the society, and heavy burden to the government finance.Based on the basic principle of historical materialism, we can know that benefitsthat people working within the system enjoy are created by workers in the materialproduction industry, not by themselves. The total social products and their valuewould always be the originals of the wages and endowment pensions paid to thoseworking within the system. So the endowment insurance payment system can neverbe isolated from the productivity of labor in the material production industry As aresult, it is inevitable to transfer the dual system to a uniform one. However,considering the specific conditions of our country—the progress of the socialistmarket economic system progress and the existed urban-rural gap, it would bedisastrous if we blind ourselves with the inappropriate pursuit of the social insurancemerging. The project should be carried out under full arrangement of the government,with the target of narrowing the gap between pensions within or out the system,including enterprises in rural sectors. The social insurance merging can only be donewith long lasting efforts of the whole country.Under the guidance of materialistic dialectics, I studied the “dual pension system”in methods of comprehensive induction and comparative analysis. Historicism helps me in understanding the form of the dual pension system, comparative analysis in thegap between those two, comprehensive inductions in its bad effects and how to makeit better. To my way of thinking, it is better if we make reforms on endowmentinsurance systems within or even out the system. We may possibly have a nationaluniform pension system when we finally see fewer differences existed in fund raising,distribution, and treatment between those two systems. There is one more thing at last;the government should also concentrate on the equity and historical cost in the reformprogress.