該文章有關(guān)養(yǎng)老金缺口

America’s public pensions have been underfunded for decades. The?crunch point?is coming soon

美國公共養(yǎng)老金已經(jīng)虧損了幾十年，他們即將到達危機的臨界點空扎。

MANY WORKERS?in the private sector no longer have them. But most public-sector employees in America are still?entitled to?a valuable benefit: a pension linked to their final salary. A long-standing problem is that states and cities, which fund their plans differently from the federal government, have been?lax?about putting aside enough money to cover these promises.

在私營企業(yè)工作的人雕拼，很多已經(jīng)領(lǐng)不到養(yǎng)老金了战坤，但那些在國營部門的員工任然享受著不菲的養(yǎng)老金待遇：與他們最終工資水平掛鉤。美國一個長期存在的問題就是各個州和不同城市養(yǎng)老儲備金不同于聯(lián)邦政府登馒，其他地區(qū)對待這些承諾態(tài)度隨意式曲，并不在意有沒有足夠的養(yǎng)老金用來支出。

The resulting black hole is becoming ever more alarming (see Finance section).?Although the American stockmarket has been hitting record highs, the average public-sector pension fund has a bigger deficit in percentage terms than it did in either 2000, or the start of this decade. In some states and cities schemes are less than 50% funded;?Illinois?has six of the worst.

由此產(chǎn)生的龐大養(yǎng)老儲備金空缺是引起了政府空前的擔(dān)憂发笔。雖然美國股市不斷創(chuàng)新高盟萨，但基本上所有國營部門的養(yǎng)老儲備金都出現(xiàn)了赤字，就比例而言還大于2000或2010年初的規(guī)模了讨。美國一些州和城市養(yǎng)老儲備金的收入只有不到50%捻激，伊利諾斯州更是倒數(shù)六個州之一。

The cost of pension promises has risen because people are living longer, so they end up taking more out of the pot.

人們壽命更長前计，領(lǐng)的養(yǎng)老金更多胞谭，從而增加了養(yǎng)老成本。

Some states and cities have responded by trying to wriggle out of their obligations and cut the benefits retirees get, but courts have often decided against them, ruling that a contract is a contract.

一些州政府和市政府設(shè)法逃避責(zé)任男杈，用削減退休人員福利的方法來緩解養(yǎng)老金赤字的問題丈屹，但法庭一般不會通過這樣的政策，合約不可破壞势就。

As a result states, cities and other public bodies are being forced to funnel ever more into pension schemes. Having chipped in the equivalent of 5.3% of their ordinary payroll bills in 2001, public-sector employers now pay in, on average, 16.5% a year.

因此這些政府和公共部門被迫擠出更多資金投入到養(yǎng)老計劃中泉瞻。國營部門的員工在2001年就已交出相當(dāng)于個人收入5.3%的高額養(yǎng)老保險，如今苞冯，平均每年繳付的養(yǎng)老保險占到了16.5%袖牙。

Even those contributions have not been enough. Politicians?have often failed to pay in as much as the actuaries recommend. In 2009 the actuaries for the Illinois Teachers scheme asked the state to cough up $2.1bn; it paid just $1.6bn. By 2018 the annual bill had risen to $7.1bn but the state paid only $4.2bn. The hole in the pension scheme deepened to $75bn in 2018, or about $6,000 for every citizen in the state. And that is just for teachers.

即使集體和個人已經(jīng)被壓榨到最低，對于巨大的空缺來說也是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的舅锄。政府資金收入往往達不到精算師建議的額度鞭达。2009年精算師要求州政府付出21億美元履行伊利諾斯州教師計劃，最后只繳付了16億皇忿。2018年畴蹭，當(dāng)年賬單變成了71億，州政府依然只能繳付42億鳍烁。2018年養(yǎng)老計劃的資金空洞擴大到了750億叨襟，也就該州平均每人6000美元的債務(wù)。而這幔荒，僅僅是教師一個行業(yè)的養(yǎng)老保險金糊闽。

The problem could yet worsen. Pension schemes are vulnerable to a market downturn and many were left?reeling?after the global financial crisis of 2008-09. Even if markets do not tumble, they would suffer in a long period of?sluggish returns. That looks plausible given that 30-year Treasury bond yields are just 2.4% and American equity valuations are stretched relative to their historical average.

這個問題還會繼續(xù)惡化。養(yǎng)老計劃在市場低迷時期尤其脆弱爹梁，大部分在經(jīng)歷了2008至2009年的全球經(jīng)濟危機之后幾近崩潰邊緣右犹。就算市場穩(wěn)定，該類計劃也會經(jīng)歷一個長期的緩慢恢復(fù)姚垃。30年的長期國債收益僅為2.4%念链，美國資產(chǎn)評估僅勉強達到平均水平。

Some schemes are betting on “alternative assets” like hedge funds and private equity to fill the gap. But hedge-fund returns have been disappointing over the past decade, and the private-equity industry is not large enough to absorb $4trn of public-sector pension assets.

一些計劃指望著如對沖基金和私有債券等“替代資產(chǎn)”來填補這個空缺，但整個私有債券行業(yè)也無法負(fù)擔(dān)公共部門四萬億養(yǎng)老資產(chǎn)的債務(wù)掂墓。

And there is a final problem: the schemes’ accounting. When working out how much they need to put aside today, all funded schemes must calculate how much they are likely to pay out in future. This means using a rate to discount the cost of tomorrow’s pension payments. The higher the rate used, the lower the cost seems to be. Public-sector pension schemes are allowed to use the assumed rate of investment return as their?discount rate, even though they will still have to pay pensions whether they earn that return or not. This has naturally led to a degree of optimism about future returns: many assume 7-7.5% a year.

最后還有一個問題：養(yǎng)老保險資金的缺口會越來越大谦纱。當(dāng)政府為眼前應(yīng)該支付的養(yǎng)老金而疲于奔命，所有計劃未來將要支付的金額還在不斷上漲梆暮。假設(shè)用更高的投資收益率來計算服协，成本似乎就會越低绍昂。政府養(yǎng)老計劃事實上是用預(yù)期的投資收益利率作為他們的貼現(xiàn)率啦粹，而無論投資收益是否符合預(yù)期，他們都要出這個錢窘游。這就讓政府自然而然地對未來收益抱有一定程度的樂觀：因為他們預(yù)期的收益率在每年7%到7.5%之間唠椭。

In the private sector, a?pension promise?is seen as a debt and has to be?discounted?at?corporate-bond yields, which are at historically low levels. This makes pensions look more expensive and explains why many companies have closed their?final-salary schemes. If the public sector had to use the same approach, its?average funding ratio?would be a lot lower than today’s 72% and the resulting hole, currently $1.6bn in total would be a lot bigger.

私營部門把養(yǎng)老承諾金看作是一筆債務(wù)，當(dāng)企業(yè)債券收益率創(chuàng)歷史新低的時候忍饰，必定要大打折扣的贪嫂。企業(yè)收益降低，養(yǎng)老金相較之下則越來越高艾蓝，這就是為什么很多公司已經(jīng)終止了最終薪資計劃力崇。如果政府選擇用同樣的方式來應(yīng)對，其平均提存比會低于目前的72%赢织，而養(yǎng)老金的缺口也會比現(xiàn)在的16億更大亮靴。

Public bodies are going to have to boost their contributions even further. A study by the?Centre for Retirement Research?found that in the worst-affected states—Connecticut, Illinois and?New Jersey—pension costs in 2014 were already 15% of total revenues. That will trigger a squeeze on the public finances, as other spending has to be cut or taxes have to be cranked up. Either will be especially hard on younger people and workers in the private sector, who do not get the same benefits.

國家必須要實施更大程度的激勵政策，退休研究中心一份報告顯示于置，在收入不景氣的州茧吊，如康涅狄格州、伊利諾斯州和新澤西州八毯，2014年養(yǎng)老支出已經(jīng)占到總收入的15%了搓侄。養(yǎng)老成本繼續(xù)增大，將會使公共財政緊縮话速，政府不得不削減其他方面的支出或者強行提高稅收讶踪。無論是哪種途徑，對于私營企業(yè)的年輕人和員工來說都不是好事泊交，因為他們已經(jīng)享受不到同等的福利待遇了乳讥。

The pensions crisis has been rumbling on for years, but some states and cities will soon enter a downward spiral, in which pension costs lead to bad public services or tax rises, in turn encouraging workers and firms to move out, which then shrinks the tax base, making promises even less affordable. When that happens some states and cities will tumble into a black hole.

長久以來對于養(yǎng)老問題的抱怨就沒有停止過，但一些州市即將卷入下沉漩渦活合，養(yǎng)老金成本增加導(dǎo)致公共服務(wù)水平下降或者稅收上升雏婶，從而導(dǎo)致員工和公司遷移到其他地區(qū)，那么就會降低該州市的基礎(chǔ)稅收白指，養(yǎng)老支出更是難以為繼留晚。假如這種情況繼續(xù)下去，這些州市將陷入一個無底洞中。