Retirement savings in the second pillar is an irreversible risk to the analyst

Economist Markta ichtaov is open to the fact that the pension reform is not going to enter the second sawmill. He considers this to be a very high risk, because the people will never be able to change it and decide to save in the funds and pay five percent of their income to them.

“The pension fund is still failing. Relying on anyone else but not yourself is always a risk. People have the freedom to secure their retirement in a way they see fit, ”said analyst Markta ichtaov. As he adds, the ongoing retirement system should never fail. “Although in nm I may have a pension, stay under debt.”

His team recently lost how to stick in a pension a hunter who will pay one twelfth of his income, ie one month’s salary, to the pension fund for 35 years. At the same time, analysts took into account not only inflation, economic growth, but also the growth of average life expectancy, which will be significantly higher in 35 years.

It was scary. “We found that the tax in the pension fund in 35 years has so much pension that will keep it in retirement for an average life of only eight months,” said the analyst.

Roughly 94 percent of people, according to the survey, still rely only on the state pension. How much should they take away from this idea?
I kind of disagree with this interpretation. Vnmm is that 94 percent of people sweat with the fact that they receive a pension from the state, but in addition they try to secure themselves. Pension reforms have been talked about for almost 20 years. The people understood that they could not rely only on stt. Pension reform is thus self-evident, nor would the state interfere. People have building savings, buy their own home and you also have real estate that they can sell in the future. Some have gold, some invest in action.

But most people do not know at all how the pension is in the future. How much according to vs is this gossip?
It’s absolutely a given. However, the government has not yet said how the pension will be in the first place, which is my biggest contribution to the planned pension reform. If we do not know what kind of pension we will receive, we do not have to decide whether or not it is interesting to support the second saw of the pension reform. When I take my pension to the second sawmill, my pension will change. The question, however, is whether the total “throw” more or less. And I will know the answer to this question, I will be able to decide whether or not I want to defend the second saw.

How should the people get the information to start how much they will receive in retirement?
The pay dog ​​should clearly write how the gross salary is, how much the employee and his employer pay for retirement, how much the people pay into the health system and how the income is paid. All these contacts should be clearly laid out so that the people can start pouring out how much their income is and how much it costs their employer. At the beginning, you at the Czech Point, people should have the opportunity to find out how many years they have worked, how many crowns they put into the system and how much they would reach at a given moment.

What motivates me to decide to volunteer for retirement in funds?
For a young hunter, the only motive may be the high contribution of the employer, who overcomes all the disadvantages and risks of the second sawmill. The question, however, is whether the employer will be willing to provide such a contribution at all. The main motive may also be that the people do not want to worry about how to secure their retirement. People who have less than 10 years of age may have a motive to enter the second sawmill. Those who retire for a short time are not exposed to such a high risk that there will be changes in society as a whole.

How to take into account that the decision to enter the second sawmill may be irreversible. How can the risks be?
People have the opportunity to join existing pension funds at any time, ten years before retirement. And in the same way, you can get out, even if at the cost of certain losses. In the second pillar, however, the reversible step is not grounded, which I criticize. Whoever messed up will never be able to get out. If the fund goes bankrupt, it will be tunneled, if there are a number of reforms, such as the changeover to the euro, there is enough money, in which nothing or just a little money may remain. Then people would like a good pension. Signing up for the second sawmill for a lifetime, when you are not sure how it will change in the future, is a well-known risk.

Is it possible for him to give clues that the voluntary kind of work has not changed in duty?
I can’t imagine any guarantee that could not change the system for five years. Even though this government is guaranteed, you can be guaranteed to be converted. Maai has been pushing for pension reform forever, the Poles in both countries underwent a reform of the reform. As soon as you do not have a pension, you can immediately rely on pension funds to get your pension out of them. It is a huge reserve of pensions, which is an attraction for the city. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the system settings will not change.

But now the government has announced that the type of saw will be voluntary.
It is clearly a good choice. In finance, the basic principle of each person has a tendency to risk, where he is of a different age and thus he has to be careful. If I have other property and I can afford to take other risks. But the government first considered that everyone, without distinction, will be obliged to associate with pension funds, because it is suitable for everyone. The original proposal, when we were all supposed to become mandatory gamblers, refused. When you need a different mix of risk.

What about the fact that when she retires, she will not be swallowed up by the sweat of her children?
It is not clear to me, for someone who does not have children, he should retire at another age, not those who raise children. It is a curiosity of our system. It is not about what is and is not fair, but rather about what the pension system is able to finance. Therefore, it is not possible to expect anything other than that the age for retirement will increase and that it will automatically unite in the future.

When do you guess you’re retiring?
I am 35 years old, which will be from thirty years from now. I’m guessing that even at the time when my retirement will be involved, it will be at least in the 70s, even later.

Related Posts