Suchergebnisse

1. Aristotle's life and work -- 2. Style, structure and aim of the Ethics -- 3. The fulfilled life -- 4. Moral virtues and moral training -- 5. The key virtues of character -- 6. Practical wisdom -- 7. Responsibility -- 8. Moral failure -- 9. Relationships with others -- 10. Pleasure and the good life -- 11. Aristotle's moral world and ours.

The ageing, financial and labour market challenges facing the old age pension systems of the member states of the European Union are well known. Those who cast doubt on the ability of the present system of pension provision - at least to the extent that it is pay-as-you-go financed - to cope with the problems posed by these challenges are getting more vociferous. Increasingly there are calls for pay-as-you-go systems to be cut back and for funded systems to be expanded. This book contests the view that funding is the answer. It shows how adaptable the largely pay-as-you-go old age pension systems in the European Union are. Actuaries, economists, lawyers, political scientists, pension advisers, and sociologists, from nine European countries and the United States, consider four main themes: population ageing, competitiveness and retirement; pension financing and economic growth; adapting pension systems to meet change; and decision-making processes. They argue that pay-as-you-go-financed old age pension systems in the European Union have the ability to successfully adapt to economic and social change provided they do not take on too many non-insurance-related risks. Solving the problems of the labour market and controlling the direction and extent of economic development are beyond the powers of old age pension systems, regardless of how they are structured or financed. Separate budgets for separate risks is an indispensable principle if the complex processes of social protection are to be successfully managed, monitored, and made transparent. There can be no single plan for the future development of old age pension systems which would be universally valid for all the countries of the European Union. A single solution cannot take into account the special circumstances obtaining in every nation, and since respect for the special features of national systems is the basis of popular acceptance, the way forward is to reform existing systems in existing contexts

This book deals with the role of the State in pension provision as an employer, regulator and provider. Part I deals with problems and reforms of public sector pension systems in OECD countries. The countries covered are Denmark, Finland, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, and the USA. Part II considers the regulation of occupational pension schemes in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and whether there is still a role for the State in providing earnings-related pensions in the United Kingdom. Part III presents demographic projections for the next half-century, using Ireland as an example, looks at some of the options which have been used in Finland, and proposed in the United States, to cope with population ageing, and examines issues of intergenerational equity which are posed by these options. All the chapters deal with recent reforms. The chapters are written by acknowledged experts in their field who are independent of both the pensions industry and Government. Hence the chapters provide an informed critical account of current developments in relation to the reform of occupational pension schemes in the public sector and of the debate about the State's role as a regulator of private pension schemes and a provider of pensions based on the social insurance principal. The book is important as a source of information about pension schemes in OECD countries. It shows that there is not a unique model of occupational pension provision for public sector employees and that the pension benefits which are provided in different countries are quite variable. It also shows that public sector occupational pension systems have changed and are in the process of considerable further change in a number of OECD countries

The aim of this study is to analyse longevity insurance annuities as a possible addition to social security programmes. The research method is to analyse the strengths and weakness of longevity insurance provided by the private sector and by government, and to survey and analyse examples of longevity insurance benefit programmes that countries have already established. Longevity insurance annuities are deferred annuities that start payment at an advanced age at which a substantial proportion of the birth cohort has died. In developed countries, that would mean that these annuities would start for people in their early eighties, but when social security programmes were started in many countries, the age at which longevity insurance annuities would begin was substantially younger. This study finds that originally, public pension programmes in a number of countries were structured as a longevity insurance programme, with roughly 50 percent of those entering the workforce surviving to receive the benefits because of relatively high benefit eligibility ages. Over time, however, as life expectancy has improved, the benefits these programmes provide have slowly transformed into benefits that most people entering the work force ultimately receive. This paper argues that reintroduction of a longevity insurance benefit as part of public pensions could be an important policy in particular because this benefit is generally not provided by the private sector. These annuities would benefit some older retirees, particularly in countries with modest public pension benefits, but the private sector has problems in providing them, particularly when they must be provided on a unisex basis. A longevity insurance benefit is desirable in countries that rely on defined contribution pensions, where some workers take their benefits as phased withdrawals, and thus risk outliving their benefits if they live substantially longer than their life expectancy. This paper surveys countries that provide this type of benefit. The addition of these benefits to social security may be particularly desirable as part of a reform where other changes being made to maintain solvency are resulting in reduced generosity of benefits.