无基金社会保障体系中死亡率差异对增长和福利的影响

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Mark C. Kelly
{"title":"无基金社会保障体系中死亡率差异对增长和福利的影响","authors":"Mark C. Kelly","doi":"10.1177/10911421221101933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Several recent studies have examined the steady-state welfare implications of mortality differentials within unfunded Social Security systems, concluding that these differentials undermine the progressivity of the system and make society worse-off relative to alternative public pension schemes. This study is the first to systematically investigate the long-run implications of mortality inequality within the U.S. Social Security system. Utilizing an OLG endogenous growth model of the U.S. economy, I compare the current pay-as-you-go (PAYG) system to versions of the model without either mortality differentials or income inequality. I find that the assumption of mortality homogeneity biases the equilibrium growth rate and welfare analysis. The PAYG system is also compared to a fully funded system based on capital subsidies. The model predicts that PAYG suppresses growth and that, for a given range of subsidy rates, the fully funded system Pareto dominates PAYG in both the medium-run and the long-run.","PeriodicalId":46919,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","volume":"50 1","pages":"206 - 235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Growth and Welfare Implications of Mortality Differentials in Unfunded Social Security Systems\",\"authors\":\"Mark C. Kelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10911421221101933\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Several recent studies have examined the steady-state welfare implications of mortality differentials within unfunded Social Security systems, concluding that these differentials undermine the progressivity of the system and make society worse-off relative to alternative public pension schemes. This study is the first to systematically investigate the long-run implications of mortality inequality within the U.S. Social Security system. Utilizing an OLG endogenous growth model of the U.S. economy, I compare the current pay-as-you-go (PAYG) system to versions of the model without either mortality differentials or income inequality. I find that the assumption of mortality homogeneity biases the equilibrium growth rate and welfare analysis. The PAYG system is also compared to a fully funded system based on capital subsidies. The model predicts that PAYG suppresses growth and that, for a given range of subsidy rates, the fully funded system Pareto dominates PAYG in both the medium-run and the long-run.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"206 - 235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421221101933\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC FINANCE REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421221101933","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

最近的几项研究考察了没有资金支持的社会保障体系中死亡率差异对稳态福利的影响,得出的结论是,这些差异破坏了该体系的渐进性,并使社会相对于其他公共养老金计划更糟。这项研究首次系统地调查了美国社会保障体系中死亡率不平等的长期影响。利用美国经济的OLG内生增长模型,我将当前的现收现付(PAYG)系统与没有死亡率差异或收入不平等的模型版本进行了比较。我发现死亡率同质性的假设对均衡增长率和福利分析产生了偏差。PAYG系统也被比作基于资本补贴的全额资助系统。该模型预测,PAYG抑制了增长,并且对于给定的补贴率范围,完全资助的系统Pareto在中期和长期都主导PAYG。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Growth and Welfare Implications of Mortality Differentials in Unfunded Social Security Systems
Several recent studies have examined the steady-state welfare implications of mortality differentials within unfunded Social Security systems, concluding that these differentials undermine the progressivity of the system and make society worse-off relative to alternative public pension schemes. This study is the first to systematically investigate the long-run implications of mortality inequality within the U.S. Social Security system. Utilizing an OLG endogenous growth model of the U.S. economy, I compare the current pay-as-you-go (PAYG) system to versions of the model without either mortality differentials or income inequality. I find that the assumption of mortality homogeneity biases the equilibrium growth rate and welfare analysis. The PAYG system is also compared to a fully funded system based on capital subsidies. The model predicts that PAYG suppresses growth and that, for a given range of subsidy rates, the fully funded system Pareto dominates PAYG in both the medium-run and the long-run.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Public Finance Review is a professional forum devoted to US policy-oriented economic research and theory, which focuses on a variety of allocation, distribution and stabilization functions within the public-sector economy. Economists, policy makers, political scientists, and researchers all rely on Public Finance Review, to bring them the most up-to-date information on the ever changing US public finance system, and to help them put policies and research into action. Public Finance Review not only presents rigorous empirical and theoretical papers on public economic policies, but also examines and critiques their impact and consequences. The journal analyzes the nature and function of evolving US governmental fiscal policies at the national, state and local levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信