According to opinion polls, 80% of the country's citizens perceive the idea of raising the retirement age sharply negatively. What does the head of state, Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, think about this?
The President of the Russian Federation has spoken about the pension reform more than once. And in each of his statements there was a thought that could be characterized by the words of V. S. Vysotsky: "It's not like that, guys …"
On the history of the issue of pensions
To understand the logic of the president's statements, one must turn to the history of the “pension issue” and recall how and when the modern type of pension provision emerged. For the first time, universal pension provision for all, without exception, residents of the country (then - the USSR) was introduced in 1937. It covered the urban population. At the same time, an age threshold for retirement was introduced: for women at 55 years old, for men - at 60 years old. Pension provision for the peasant population was approved later, from 1964.
The size of the pension depended on the size of the salary. The work experience, which allows calculating the amount of the pension, was 20 (for women) and 25 years (for men).
In connection with the requirements of the IMF, as well as with economic realities, including social changes, demographic picture and crises shaking the world economy, a number of intractable problems arose in the pension "mechanism". It is no secret that the liberal model of the economy is oriented towards making a profit, and a person, with his needs and abilities, within the framework of such a socio-economic model is often “overboard”. Therefore, the liberal government sees the improvement of the pension social mechanism, first of all, as an increase in the age limit, after which a person has the right to state support “in old age”. The age threshold is currently defined as follows: for women - 63 years old, for men - at 65 years old. There is no need to talk about justice here; in this case, no one delves into the intricacies of a simple human life.
Putin's position: what is behind his words?
We have been talking about pension reform in the country for several years. On the eve of the elections, the president said that in the next six years, if he is elected, the retirement age will not be raised. But already in June the issue was put on the agenda by the newly elected government.
For the first time, the President commented on the need for reforms in the field of pensions at a public event during the "direct line" on June 7, 2018. He said he was "extremely careful and careful about raising the retirement age." And he stressed that the main goal of the pension reform should be to improve the level and life expectancy of people, their well-being, and the level of income.
The fact that the main thing for the president is the interests of people, not business, was also emphasized by D. Peskov, the press secretary of the head of state. He also noted that the President is not a participant in the expert discussion of the reform, which will become the basis for a final decision on raising the retirement age.
The pension reform was adopted as a bill in the first reading at a meeting of the State Duma on July 19.
The next statement by the President on this issue was made at a meeting with volunteers at the 2018 World Cup. He pointed out that the decision has not yet been made, but “something needs to be done” with the pension reform, the authorities have no right to ignore the need to resolve the issue, otherwise it will be “cheating” of citizens. During the conversation, he emphasized once again that he did not like any of the proposed options.
Distribution and funded pension system
The problem of the pension reform requires a detailed study, and one cannot be guided by emotions in such responsible decisions. The trouble is that the government proceeds from the goal of raising the retirement age by any means. The president's goal is to improve the well-being of the elderly, to develop a mechanism in which "both the wolves are fed and the sheep are safe", and the budget "will not burst." The task is very delicate, delicate and difficult.
The current model of pension provision is based on the allocation of budgetary funds. For its normal functioning, a clear tax scheme for the receipt of funds into the treasury is required. And the legacy of the “saints of the 90s”, thanks to which many enterprises still pay “salaries in envelopes,” unfortunately, does not provide clear material grounds for this. At the same time, it is no secret that high profits and incomes are subject to more lenient taxes (to put it mildly) than the penny incomes of citizens who have been “saving” themselves for a long time. With such an unfair tax policy, the functioning of the pay-as-you-go pension system is unable to function normally, and in the long run may collapse altogether.
The liberal government is steadily pushing the country to change the pay-as-you-go model - to a funded one, in which "the rescue of the drowning is the work of the drowning themselves." But in modern realities this will mean only one thing: a huge number of "citizens who have not fit into the market" have re-emerged in the country. Raising the retirement age without social guarantees for those who cannot find a job due to real unemployment or are unable to work for health reasons - for some elderly citizens, let's face it, death is like death. In addition, to be honest, there are no mechanisms for accumulating funds to provide for oneself in old age, in a modern state, by and large. Many citizens do not trust banks, having negative experiences in the past and seeing the precarious position of the world order in the present. Pension funds do not appear to be reliable institutions to rely on for years to come. Therefore, any recommendations to remove social responsibility from the state for the life of a huge social stratum of elderly citizens looks, frankly, cynical.
Therefore, the president emphasizes the main idea: the matter cannot be reduced only to raising the retirement age, because it looks like shameless taking of money from the population, and in many cases - like depriving a part of the population of the right to life in the form of physical existence.
Intense battles are going on at the "top", rumors circulate in the blogosphere (not groundless, unfortunately) that the liberal government, which stands to death for the preservation of its own advantages, which the capitalist market gives them, would not mind altogether abolishing pensions, which now, years later, are perceived as an invaluable gift to citizens made by the Soviet government in 1937. Now they just want to take this gift away.
No decision has been made yet. V. Putin's position is understandable: he is on the side of the people. But it is not known what to do with the pension reform in order not to destroy the remnants of justice. The issue of pensions is currently one of the most acute and discussed in the social sphere. Moreover, it is explosive in the sense of social discontent.
