Military Review

FNPR proposes to abolish the funded part of the pension: the essence of the proposal and possible consequences

86

Russian trade unions called on the country's leadership to abolish the funded part of the pension. But what motivated such considerations of the FNPR?


In the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia itself, they argue that the participation of the funded component in the state pension insurance system has not brought any practical benefit, but it leads to numerous legal conflicts.

As you know, at the end of 2019, Vladimir Putin signed a law extending the freezing of the funded part of the pension until 2022. This implies that insurance deductions from salaries of currently employed Russians are being spent entirely on paying pensions to current retirees.

It turns out that Russians cannot independently use insurance contributions, which deprives the funded component of pensions of the meaning of existence. In this regard, the FNPR proposes to withdraw the funded component from the state system of compulsory pension insurance.

By the way, a year ago, representatives of the Duma Committee on Labor, Social Policy and Veterans Affairs came up with a similar initiative. Only they argued that non-state pension funds were illegally appropriating part of the profit from investing the funds of the funded part of Russians' pensions. It was proposed to make the savings voluntary, so that the citizen himself was responsible for them, but he could not pay this part without fail, as at present.

Compared to the size of the main part of pension payments - old-age insurance pension - the funded component is really low. According to the data of the Pension Fund of Russia, in 2020 the average funded pension was 956 rubles. per month. It is also worth noting that the method of paying the funded part of the pension is based on the analysis of the life expectancy of pensioners. By 2021, the period during which the funded part of the pension is to be paid will be 22 years. The FNPR believes that this discredits the very idea of ​​a funded pension: after all, the majority of Russians live on pension for much less than 22 years, especially when it comes to men.


Now pensions for older people are paid from the funded part of future pensions of young Russians


Now about the fate of the FNPR proposal. First, in our country, as you know, trade unions are to a greater extent a formal institution and do not have significant influence on the legislative policy of the state. Trade unions also have practically no tools to put pressure on the state in the current situation.

Secondly, the fate of the FNPR proposal will entirely depend on how this proposal correlates with the interests of the state as a whole. If the country's top leadership considers the proposal reasonable, then it will be taken into account and possibly. will form the basis of any draft law on reforming the pension system. If not, then the proposal will remain at the level of private initiative.

Considering that part of pensions is now being paid from the funded component of pensions to current pensioners, it is not yet profitable for the state to abolish the funded component. As a consequence, this may lead to the need to again change the approach to payment and accrual for existing pensioners. Indeed, in any case, these are additional funds that are transferred by the Russians to the PFR and are at the disposal of the latter, and the fund can already invest and direct them for any purpose. It is the latter circumstance, apparently, that will become the main argument in favor of maintaining the funded component of pensions. The state is unlikely to agree to give up "long-term money", especially without much difficulty collected from working Russian citizens.
Author:
Photos used:
Twitter / Pension Fund for the Ryazan region
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. prior
    prior 30 September 2020 11: 13
    31
    Calculating pensions in Russia is a simple mathematical scam.
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 30 September 2020 11: 16
      34
      Considering that part of pensions is now being paid from the funded component of pensions to current pensioners, it is not yet profitable for the state to cancel the funded component.

      What benefit can there be .. people have long earned their pension, and the state is looking for benefits from pensioners. Nafig this pension fund with all the thieving structure, the state should pay people directly and return the old retirement .. Bastards ..
      1. Ragnar Lodbrok
        Ragnar Lodbrok 30 September 2020 11: 30
        29
        Quote: Svarog
        Nafig this retirement fund with the whole thief structure

        The FIU has long been associated with a feeder for officials at public expense.
        Economist Mikhail Delyagin said that another economic crisis will come to Russia in the spring of 2021, which in turn will entail changes in the pension system. The expert is sure that this will be another scam, and the 2018 reform was only the first step towards global restructuring.
        Delyagin believes that it will not necessarily be about raising the retirement age. Perhaps this will be the introduction of additional features in the process of accumulation and payment.
        «It is necessary to liquidate the Pension Fund as a center of theft, - the Audit Chamber proved the latter to us. But even if we abstract from Kudrinsky research, the Pension Fund is an absolutely meaningless bureaucratic superstructure. "

        https://readovka.ru/news/62587
        1. ANB
          ANB 30 September 2020 12: 05
          20
          ... The FIU has long been associated with a feeder for officials at public expense.

          Not just a long time ago, but since its inception. Its organization began with the purchase of mansions, their euro renovations and the purchase of the coolest technology at that time.
      2. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 30 September 2020 11: 43
        13
        Quote: Svarog
        Considering that part of pensions is now being paid from the funded component of pensions to current pensioners, it is not yet profitable for the state to cancel the funded component.

        What benefit can there be .. people have long earned their pension, and the state is looking for benefits from pensioners. Nafig this pension fund with all the thieving structure, the state should pay people directly and return the old retirement .. Bastards ..

        In Singapore, there is no pension fund and pension savings are kept in a bank account. Interest is charged on them and money works. The state simply withdraws this money from us, violating the law
        1. Hagen
          Hagen 30 September 2020 13: 18
          -12 qualifying.
          Quote: Pilat2009
          In Singapore, there is no pension fund and pension savings are kept in a bank account. Interest is charged on them and money works. The state simply withdraws this money from us, violating the law

          "..... Singaporeans retire at the age of 62-65, but with an average life expectancy of 82-83, it turns out quite well. The age of survival is about 23 years. The rate of pension contributions is higher than in Russia, but not much . Total deducted 36% - 16% paid by the employee and 20% - the employer .... "You personally, having received your salary, did you deduct something from it to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation? I think, it is unlikely ... And what, or rather how much, did the state withdraw from your salary? system of organizing savings on pension accounts. How is it with "them" and how is it with us ... In violation of the law, the same question - what law was violated by the state? Tell me, tomorrow I will file an application with the court. laughing
          1. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 1 October 2020 09: 02
            +4
            Quote: Hagen
            Quote: Pilat2009
            In Singapore, there is no pension fund and pension savings are kept in a bank account. Interest is charged on them and money works. The state simply withdraws this money from us, violating the law

            "..... Singaporeans retire at the age of 62-65, but with an average life expectancy of 82-83, it turns out quite well. The age of survival is about 23 years. The rate of pension contributions is higher than in Russia, but not much . Total deducted 36% - 16% paid by the employee and 20% - the employer .... "You personally, having received your salary, did you deduct something from it to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation? I think, it is unlikely ... And what, or rather how much, did the state withdraw from your salary? system of organizing savings on pension accounts. How is it with "them" and how is it with us ... In violation of the law, the same question - what law was violated by the state? Tell me, tomorrow I will file an application with the court. laughing

            The law on pensions has been violated. The accumulation part is funded because it is invested and the profit goes to it. By law, the funded part is transferred to a non-state fund. This is my money, my future pension. Putin, by his decree, withdraws it, no dividends are charged on it.
            1. Hagen
              Hagen 1 October 2020 10: 15
              -4
              Quote: Pilat2009
              this is my money

              "My money" is the money that I received for one reason or another and have the right and the ability to dispose of it. This money will be yours when it is transferred to your current account or issued in cash. And so this is all the rhetoric of an amateur.
        2. Comrade Kim
          Comrade Kim 7 October 2020 14: 17
          0
          In addition, the Central Bank severely punishes anyone who tries to spend NPF money on projects in the real sector of the economy.
          Several large banks, which included NPFs, were deprived of their licenses for directing their NPF funds for the construction, acquisition and modernization of production assets.
          Well, our Central Bank and Pension Fund do not need that NPF money would be useful in our country.

          PFR is a shameful gasket, managed by snickering officials, bloodsuckers.
          What is one nest of the head of the Pension Fund of Russia, a cozy apartment in the center of Moscow, for several hundred million rubles.

          And the initiative of the corrupt girl of capitalism, the Pseudo Trade Union Cloak, is a test of the pen: "We took 5 years of their lives from them, raising the retirement age, they humbly ate it. Let's try to take away the funded part, let them swallow that too."
      3. Machito
        Machito 30 September 2020 11: 53
        21
        The FNPR decided to promote itself, Mishka Shmakov wants to pick up points. Both the FNPR and the Russian Pension Fund must be dispersed to hell. There is no sense from them, a feeder for parasites.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 30 September 2020 11: 29
      +9
      Earning pensions ... is a simple mathematical scam.

      Not so simple. Rather akin to how to distribute 28 tanks into 7 companies with 13 vehicles in each:
    3. Oleg123219307
      Oleg123219307 30 September 2020 11: 37
      15
      Let's say a person receives an average salary of 35 thousand. The situation is pretty common today. He pays pension contributions 6%. Let him work from 18 to 65. That's 47 years old. During this time, he will earn - 47 * 12 * 35000 = 19740000r. He will pay deductions from them - 19740000 * 0.06 = 1184400r. Let this person live on average to 75 years. This is 10 years of pension payments. Total 1184400/10 = 118400r / year or 9870r / month. That's about how they pay, even more. I don't see where the fraud is. That's what we have for those who have not worked for a day at the expense of other social pensions, yes, this is a problem. As well as the fact that some "respected people" all their lives tearing themselves to bloody blisters in soft leather chairs in beautiful offices draw themselves billions in salaries and pensions. But all this is a drop in the ocean compared to a simple fact. To pay a pension of 35 thousand to everyone, the average income must be 120-150 thousand per month. And this can only be achieved by the general development of the economy. Taking and dividing won't work. All the wealth of our oligarchs will be enough for a year or two and that's it. The fight against corruption in general, too. They steal 5-7% on average. This is also a lot of money, but in order to ensure a really decent life, the total volume of GDP must be increased 4 times with the same population. The West is richer and lives because there this ratio is just higher. But this task is complex, and I don’t know where to get so much demand for our goods in the long-divided global market. Today we are essentially guests there, selling resources and food, in fact, for thanks and pieces of paper. Nobody allows us and will not allow us to occupy a significant share of technologically significant markets that could provide jobs and income for the entire country. I don’t know why our government supports this status quo, because as for me, we have few prospects now. My answer is the reorganization of the country into an empire focused on a closed internal economy and expansionary capture of foreign markets, both by economic and military-political methods, but I am aware that this approach is one-sided and not without global shortcomings. So unfortunately simple solutions don't always work ...
      1. Hagen
        Hagen 30 September 2020 13: 25
        -2
        Quote: oleg123219307
        The situation is pretty common today. He pays pension contributions 6%.

        Where did you get this figure from?
        Quote: oleg123219307
        Let this person live on average to 75 years. This is 10 years of pension payments. Total 1184400/10 = 118400r / year or 9870r / month.

        The law defines a survival period of 258 months in 2020. Therefore, all your other calculations are far from reality.
        Actually, in order to discuss a topic that suggests some specific numbers, it would not be bad to get acquainted with the topic a little in the main documents. It will be both easier and more useful. At the same time, there will be notions of who is cheating or stealing from whom, and is this the very phenomenon in real life
        1. Oleg123219307
          Oleg123219307 30 September 2020 14: 17
          +1
          Quote: Hagen
          Quote: oleg123219307
          The situation is pretty common today. He pays pension contributions 6%.

          Where did you get this figure from?
          Quote: oleg123219307
          Let this person live on average to 75 years. This is 10 years of pension payments. Total 1184400/10 = 118400r / year or 9870r / month.

          The law defines a survival period of 258 months in 2020. Therefore, all your other calculations are far from reality.
          Actually, in order to discuss a topic that suggests some specific numbers, it would not be bad to get acquainted with the topic a little in the main documents. It will be both easier and more useful. At the same time, there will be notions of who is cheating or stealing from whom, and is this the very phenomenon in real life

          OK. Let's count it according to the law. The same introductory, only we change the deductions by 22% and the term for 258 months. We will receive 4342800r contributions, spread over 21 years - about 16,5 thousand pensions. Not that wealth, either. And I do not understand the often declared principle - if I live longer, you still pay me my pension at the expense of others, but if I die earlier, then why my savings go to the state and not to the heirs. Then let's be honest and capitalistically - dare to live longer than the average age - all pensions are skiff. If we approach the question this way. Because in reality, many people live longer than middle age. Many have never worked or have worked as black and receive a social pension. And we must either accept the fact that our payments go to their pensions too, which equalizes the amounts, or live completely according to capitalism, but why then do we need pensions at all? Fold by yourself. Well done, no, die of hunger. I do not argue that 5-10 percent are taken away. But a qualitative increase in the standard of living in retirement is possible only by increasing the general level of income of the population.
          1. Hypertension
            Hypertension 30 September 2020 16: 23
            +6
            Quote: oleg123219307
            And I do not understand the often declared principle - if I live longer, you still pay me my pension at the expense of others, but if I die earlier, then why my savings go to the state and not to the heirs. Then let's be honest and capitalistically - dared to live longer than average age - all pensions skiff... If we approach the question this way.

            You have a direct road to work in the FIU, if you are not already there.
            Quote: oleg123219307
            Because in reality many people lives longer than middle age.

            "Too many" and "unfortunately" You probably wanted to write? Well, judging by the leitmotif of your comment ... In reality ... In a drug?
            Honestly - for the FIU you are just a golden frame.
          2. Hagen
            Hagen 30 September 2020 16: 44
            -6
            Quote: oleg123219307
            OK. Let's count it according to the law.

            If by law, then cross out your calculations, go to public services, request the state of your accruals, and you will receive a document in which something may become clear - how much the employer has contributed to your account, how many points you have accumulated, the point price at the time of the request and the estimated pension for today. Something like that...
            Quote: oleg123219307
            but if I die before then why do my savings go to the state and not to the heirs

            Because you have nothing to do with these savings in the FIU. You yourself have not invested anything there. It's all the government's job to tax the employer and make him pay at the prescribed rate. What do you have to do with it? Therefore, it (the state) itself manages this fund. In addition to pensions, there are other payment obligations there. When the fees from employers (22% of the payroll) are not enough to close all payments assigned to the FIU, the state supplements the missing amounts from the budget. Now, if you join an NPF and use your money to create an additional pension for yourself, then these funds are inherited. Pension systems of different countries differ in the ways of accumulation, but, unlike ours, there in almost all countries the employee contributes some of the money he earns himself or through an employer, like we do personal income tax. We use the practically established principle in the USSR, in which an employee does not make his contributions, but at the same time does not have some rights over savings collected by someone else's hands in his name.
            Quote: oleg123219307
            But it is possible to qualitatively raise the standard of living in retirement only by increasing the general level of income of the population.

            Of course, you will not object here, but it is worth adding that every employee who intends to live up to retirement and wants to live on it in a big way, may well collect an additional pension for himself by personal contributions. Of course, the earlier you start such a program, the more money you get. Moreover, in this manner, you can get away from raising the retirement age. All this is your will.
      2. Living7111972
        Living7111972 30 September 2020 13: 37
        +1
        I pay from 80000, and they consider my pension until 1999-2001. But since 2004 I have been making about a bucks a month on a regular basis. And my pension is 12 pieces, and this is from 22% of my salary, which, if you count in no way less than 20 thousand, is deducted to the Pension Fund. For 16 years, I have transferred roughly $ 300 a month ~ $ 55-58 thousand, about 4 million rubles.
        I was supposed to retire next year, as the army does not count for me with privileged service. But I found out, I'll get it in three years. It will be 50, during this time I will throw some money in the PF. And he will still pay well if 200, I think 158-180 per month. Where's the justice? 40000000 divided by 12000 is how many months, 333, or 28 years. Average duration 68 years, solid fat. 10 years at least.
        1. Oleg123219307
          Oleg123219307 30 September 2020 14: 19
          +1
          Quote: sala7111972
          I pay from 80000, and they consider my pension until 1999-2001. But since 2004 I have been making about a bucks a month on a regular basis. And my pension is 12 pieces, and this is from 22% of my salary, which, if you count in no way less than 20 thousand, is deducted to the Pension Fund. For 16 years, I have transferred roughly $ 300 a month ~ $ 55-58 thousand, about 4 million rubles.
          I was supposed to retire next year, as the army does not count for me with privileged service. But I found out, I'll get it in three years. It will be 50, during this time I will throw some money in the PF. And he will still pay well if 200, I think 158-180 per month. Where's the justice? 40000000 divided by 12000 is how many months, 333, or 28 years. Average duration 68 years, solid fat. 10 years at least.

          You have some kind of mess with numbers. Either 4 million, or 40, or 12 thousand pensions, or 200. Sorry, I did not understand. Could you correct the numbers, but I cannot give a reasoned answer in this form.
          1. Living7111972
            Living7111972 30 September 2020 15: 51
            0
            12000 pension, that's about 200 bucks. I have already paid out about 4 million in 16 years, it is easier to calculate in dollars.
            I have always equalized my salary to the course. I received 1000 (+ -100) in my hands, in the PF I paid 200-220 monthly, respectively, for 16 years. It turns out ~ 55-58 thousand dollars, about 4 million rubles.
            1. Living7111972
              Living7111972 30 September 2020 15: 53
              0
              I am 47, I will work, God willing, like my grandfather and father, up to 75 years old. How much will I give and what will I get? I do not drink or smoke, I am physically mobile
        2. Comrade Kim
          Comrade Kim 7 October 2020 14: 25
          0
          Totally agree with you!
          You correctly think about the FIU and this is not enough.
          Apparently in their bins "the mouse hanged itself."
          It is high time to disperse this opaque, through and through deceitful structure.
          But they will stand to the last clerk, so long as our money (pension contributions) does not end up in personal accounts.
      3. Not_invented
        Not_invented 30 September 2020 13: 38
        0
        6% is the funded part of the pension. The note says that at present the average funded pension is 956 rubles. So, judging by your calculations, it turns out that 90 percent are being stolen.
        There is also an insurance part - 16%. So we pay not 6%, but 22%.
        1. Oleg123219307
          Oleg123219307 30 September 2020 14: 20
          +1
          Answered above with recalculation. It turned out more, but not really. The problem is the same. How not to share a small slice of bread, a bucket of pies will not work.
        2. Hagen
          Hagen 1 October 2020 06: 07
          -4
          Quote: Not_invented
          So we pay not 6%, but 22%.

          And show on the payroll that you can pay? You don't pay anything ... Except for 13% personal income tax. The employer pays this.
          1. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 1 October 2020 09: 13
            +1
            Quote: Hagen
            Quote: Not_invented
            So we pay not 6%, but 22%.

            And show on the payroll that you can pay? You don't pay anything ... Except for 13% personal income tax. The employer pays this.

            From the rearrangement of the terms, the amount does not change. I work, I make a profit, the employer pays tax from the profit. You can do it differently - not to tax the employer, but to collect tax from the employee, it will just be more difficult for the state to collect.
            1. Hagen
              Hagen 1 October 2020 10: 19
              -2
              Quote: Pilat2009
              The sum does not change from the permutation of the terms

              And you try to rearrange, and you will see that everything will change a lot. Do you think that having the opportunity not to pay the state 22%, the employer will give you everything? Ha ... keep your pocket wider. What you agreed to when applying for a job, you will get it if you do not impose a fine, for example, for an extra smoke break laughing
          2. d4rkmesa
            d4rkmesa 6 October 2020 08: 50
            0
            This is already dumb sophistry. It is the employee who pays the personal income tax. The employer is an intermediary, an agent, nothing more.
            1. Hagen
              Hagen 6 October 2020 10: 23
              0
              Quote: d4rkmesa
              It is the employee who pays the personal income tax

              That's exactly what I'm talking about. Personal income tax is paid by the employee, and 22% in the PFR is paid by the employer. Some employers do not want to pay this, and therefore deliberately show a penny payroll and pay extra in "envelopes". Workers are always aware of this because they almost always receive this supplement in cash. And then they make round eyes when the pension is lower than expected.
              1. d4rkmesa
                d4rkmesa 6 October 2020 14: 04
                0
                Well, I guess they don't always get a supplement. My friend gets 70 blacks, for example, but he doesn't care and he could easily find a job for the same money or a little less, he just doesn't want to fuss with the impending quarantine.
                1. Hagen
                  Hagen 6 October 2020 15: 24
                  -1
                  Quote: d4rkmesa
                  he does not care

                  Then he will tell you what a bad country, that he will give him a minimum pension ...
                  1. d4rkmesa
                    d4rkmesa 6 October 2020 15: 51
                    0
                    Nevertheless, the state must fulfill its function. I do not understand the Federal Tax Service with the Pension Fund of Russia, which has not yet taken by the gills of the organization where they pay + - the minimum wage.
  2. Doccor18
    Doccor18 30 September 2020 11: 15
    12
    How can these people’s money give them rest ... Everyone is looking for ways to take, but not return ... They have a difficult task .. They need to give milk for harm.
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 30 September 2020 13: 45
      +3
      Quote: Doccor18
      How can these people’s money give them rest ... Everyone is looking for ways to take, but not return ... They have a difficult task .. They need to give milk for harm.
      And it is better to give them blizzard, but more. If the Soviet system worked flawlessly, then why should it be broken and muddled with state and non-state funds, during the transition in which billions of rubles disappeared without a trace and none of the "entertainers" were punished? Maybe it would be more effective to shoot a dozen other "near-retirement retirement" officials and things with pensions would improve?
  3. Woodman
    Woodman 30 September 2020 11: 18
    +7
    I am for cancellation. Mainly due to the fact that inflation will still multiply all savings by zero. I propose, in addition to the regular pension, to make substantial additional payments to pensioners, depending on the number of children born and reached the age of majority. This will be fair. From the point of view, that now a person without children often has advantages in building a career, and, accordingly, a higher salary, which is spent on himself by the "beloved", and his pension will turn out to be more than that of workers with many children. It is not right. In fact, the state is lonely, and the children will build the state when their parents retire.
    Maybe he wrote messy, but I guess everyone will understand what I wanted to say.
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 30 September 2020 11: 24
      +3
      I propose, in addition to the regular pension, to make substantial additional payments to pensioners, depending on the number of children born and reached the age of majority. This will be fair.

      Everything is clearly written and fair .. Whoever has more children should have a bigger pension. The same children still need to be helped, but as a plus, people were able to raise children in this difficult time, thereby contributing to the demography, and the children were paying taxes.
      1. Hagen
        Hagen 1 October 2020 08: 28
        -2
        Quote: Svarog
        Whoever has more children should have a larger pension. The same children still need to be helped

        A pension to an employee who has lost his ability to work due to age or other reasons is compensation for the lost income. In this case, children are taken into account when crediting the retirement experience of a mother who is divorced from work during periods of childcare. Who do you want to increase the pension for children? Father or mother? As for helping children, somehow, it is not very logical. Children should help disabled parents if the need arises. And parents must educate their children so that they are able to support themselves and their families on their own.
    2. dauria
      dauria 30 September 2020 11: 42
      +9
      Maybe he wrote messy, but I guess everyone will understand what I wanted to say.

      What they wanted to say is understandable. How to implement - no. They are struggling with this in all developed countries. And they receive a camp of Arabs or blacks living on child benefits.
      Your model will be functional only under the "Soviet system" - the district police officer comes to the parasite in 3 months and explains the prospects of "chemistry". No entrepreneurs, all are hired and work for the state. Property is more than salary - write explanatory notes. It was already. So is the childlessness tax. It ended with the Potanins and Abramovichs.
      1. Woodman
        Woodman 30 September 2020 11: 46
        -3
        Quote: dauria
        Your model will be efficient only under the "Soviet system" - the district police officer comes to the parasite in 3 months and explains the prospects of "chemistry".

        But this is a real way out. No children - a tax on childlessness. There is a child, but you are unemployed - the prospect of "chemistry". Hard. But everyone should work for the good of the state. With no exceptions.
    3. Rubi0
      Rubi0 30 September 2020 12: 05
      +1
      One loving self raised and taught 1 child of a designer, the second riveted 5 criminals who are fed by the state and even cannot drive them to a logging site to work out a bowl of soup, how will you distribute? there is no need to reinvent the wheel and distribute money, if a person thumps and does not save for old age, then it is his choice to live here and now with a full life, lowering his entire salary and he most likely knows that he will die before 60, and someone puts it under the pillow and wants to 90 to travel around the world is everyone's choice, no need to pull everyone.
      1. Woodman
        Woodman 30 September 2020 12: 12
        +1
        Quote: Rubi0
        how will you distribute?

        Since I wrote above - one child, the amount of pension is one, five children - the amount is much higher. For it is impossible to educate a designer; only a person can be educated. And the constructor must be learned. And this is done by the state. And the state is primarily rich not in resources, but in people. And about the criminals:
        Korolev was convicted by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR on September 27, 1938, charges: Art. 58-7, 11. Sentence: 10 years of labor camp, 5 years of disability. 10.06.1940/8/1944 the term was reduced to XNUMX years of labor camp (Sevzheldorlag), released in XNUMX.
        1. Rubi0
          Rubi0 30 September 2020 13: 15
          -4
          and if you are a narcissistic narcissist or God forbid you are generally gay, then what should you take away everything from you and give it to many children? what kind of scoop are you offering?
          1. Woodman
            Woodman 30 September 2020 13: 20
            +2
            Quote: Rubi0
            then what to take away everything from you and give to those with many children?

            Where from me even a word about "take away"? And, if it comes to that, why should someone's children in the future provide a pension for "a narcissistic narcissist or, God forbid, even a gay"?
            1. Rubi0
              Rubi0 30 September 2020 13: 27
              -5
              after all, this is exactly what you are suggesting that the state should somehow think about and adopt taxes laws that redistribute resources from the rich to your children. Why don't you yourself think about how to ensure your old age and the future of your children, why do you want someone to think for you?
              1. Woodman
                Woodman 30 September 2020 13: 29
                +2
                Quote: Rubi0
                who redistribute resources from the rich to your children.

                Not "resources for my children," but "resources for my children." If you take the trouble to read what is written above, you will see that we are talking about pensions, not child benefits.
                1. Rubi0
                  Rubi0 30 September 2020 13: 36
                  -2
                  you wrote about "additional payments from the state depending on the number of children", and not about "resources of my children." I tell you that your resources and the resources of your children are only your accumulated benefits and the state should not somehow regulate it, and even more so someone should pay extra for nothing from your resources. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the best survives.
                  1. Woodman
                    Woodman 30 September 2020 13: 57
                    +3
                    Quote: Rubi0
                    I tell you that your resources and the resources of your children are only your accumulated benefits.

                    Do you think that a pension is "accumulated benefits"? Remember (well, or google, if due to age there is nothing to remember) salaries and prices 20-30 years ago. And compare with what we have now. All "pension-accumulated benefits" by the time of retirement are set to zero by inflation. This means that the state will pay you a pension, including a guaranteed one, and not just a funded one, from the contributions of working citizens. And the more of these citizens there are, the higher the state will be able to pay you a pension.
                    Quote: Rubi0
                    The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the best survives.

                    This passage of yours is completely out of topic.
                    1. Rubi0
                      Rubi0 30 September 2020 18: 45
                      -1
                      Well, I suspect you yourself understand that in order for a solidarity system to work, either demography should grow exponentially, or labor productivity, but in fact something is about zero, but inflation is not. The state already stimulates through the mortgage mat capital hectare, etc., but as you can see now the generation of the golden calf, everyone wants an iPhone villa for a car, and not diapers from 5 children
              2. Kronos
                Kronos 30 September 2020 14: 06
                +6
                Socialism is the best system.
    4. Kronos
      Kronos 30 September 2020 12: 33
      -5
      Childless is no worse than childless.
    5. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 1 October 2020 09: 16
      0
      Quote: Lesovik
      I am for cancellation. Mainly due to the fact that inflation will still multiply all savings by zero. I propose, in addition to the regular pension, to make substantial additional payments to pensioners, depending on the number of children born and reached the age of majority. This will be fair. From the point of view, that now a person without children often has advantages in building a career, and, accordingly, a higher salary, which is spent on himself by the "beloved", and his pension will turn out to be more than that of workers with many children. It is not right. In fact, the state is lonely, and the children will build the state when their parents retire.
      Maybe he wrote messy, but I guess everyone will understand what I wanted to say.

      Or maybe do it differently, let the children support their parents, and those who do not have children, the state pays a pension. No, you don't want to?
  4. paul3390
    paul3390 30 September 2020 11: 19
    +4
    Yes, they would have abolished pensions altogether, and calmed down .. And along with the rest of the gains of socialism - free medicine, education, etc. .. All this, and so it goes under the leadership of the beloved president .. Every year of his rule - it only gets worse. And this is not surprising - you can only force the bourgeois to share. And he is just a henchman of the big bourgeoisie, and he acts exclusively in its interests .. So if our children live around the beginning of the 19th century, they will still be very lucky. Judging by what is happening, it is quite possible to fail before neo-feudalism .. Or it is possible to finally return Soviet power. As the only option for the survival of the country and people in this world ..
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 30 September 2020 11: 25
      +5
      Quote: paul3390
      Yes, they would have canceled pensions altogether, and calmed down ..

      Then they will rest ... but they will not calm down .. Of course, our people are patient, but the boiler is boiling ..
      1. Rubi0
        Rubi0 30 September 2020 11: 59
        -10 qualifying.
        If you have not made any savings and investments in the future for 30 years of capitalism, then who are you a doctor. It burns up from the fact that the stock market is poorly developed and there are no trusted funds and brokers who made at least a couple of percent a year, and not from pensions and other remnants of socialism.
        1. Kronos
          Kronos 30 September 2020 14: 07
          +4
          savings burned out for many with the depreciation of the ruble.
          1. Rubi0
            Rubi0 30 September 2020 18: 38
            -1
            And you, knowing that savings in rubles are depreciating, give the rubles to the state and want to stay with your own people in 50 years? Officials in the pension fund are not investors in the stock market, God forbid, they will correctly calculate your experience on a calculator
    2. Galleon
      Galleon 30 September 2020 11: 28
      12
      You can personally refuse your pension, but I ask you not to refuse mine for me. I am not going to give them part of my work, they are fed well as it is.
      1. paul3390
        paul3390 30 September 2020 11: 31
        +1
        You might think - someone will ask you .. Have you been interested in your opinion for the last 20 years?
        1. AlexVas44
          AlexVas44 30 September 2020 11: 50
          +7
          Quote: paul3390
          Have you had a lot of interest in your opinion over the past 20 years?

          It seems to me alone that this is far from 20 years, but much more, the whole life lived (for everyone, of course, in his own calculation)?
        2. Galleon
          Galleon 30 September 2020 14: 07
          +4
          Quote: paul3390
          You might think - someone will ask you

          However, what reason do you have to be so arrogant? I didn't borrow money from you. You can refuse your pension, but you don’t need to do it for everyone.
  5. Asad
    Asad 30 September 2020 11: 23
    +8
    Trade unions are a formal institution !! They are a Useless Rudiment!
    1. Van 16
      Van 16 30 September 2020 12: 24
      +1
      Sometimes there are exceptions. As far as I know, there was a fairly serious trade union at Ford, in Vsevolozhsk. And so you are right, in the overwhelming majority it is an absolutely useless organization. I left for a long time and I don't regret a bit
  6. 7,62h54
    7,62h54 30 September 2020 11: 24
    +5
    Well, no, this is some kind of cabinet of curiosities. Tereshkova suggested zeroing the deadlines, these ghouls - canceling savings. When will the diarrhea of ​​the brain end there.
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 30 September 2020 11: 24
    +3
    the participation of the funded component in the state pension insurance system has not brought any practical benefit, but it leads to numerous legal conflicts.

    Ha, do not want to call a spade a spade ... so it's called WEDDING RIPE!
  8. Galleon
    Galleon 30 September 2020 11: 25
    +7
    We know very well that legislative initiatives from insignificant (I almost wrote "actors") subjects can either be an independent initiative "about nothing", and then they write about it just to write about something, or the government launches so particularly disgusting things for people, like the pension reform or the zeroing initiative, which Valentina Nikolaevna explained to the correspondent with the following words: "People, people! Ordinary people asked for this simply. They asked!"
    Therefore, when I hear about the initiative of "ordinary people" upstairs, whether it is a precursor of the coming changes or just someone croaking in a swamp, it becomes somehow bad.
  9. Alien From
    Alien From 30 September 2020 11: 29
    0
    In the photo, it looks like a bullet ... they want to give out a pension together with one patron ... so think pensioners ... have already dumped these flirting with pensions ... am
  10. iouris
    iouris 30 September 2020 11: 58
    -2
    Ultimately, pensioners will be canceled.
  11. rusich
    rusich 30 September 2020 12: 14
    +2
    Help the state, die to retirement
    1. Van 16
      Van 16 30 September 2020 12: 26
      +1
      They will not wait! hi
      1. iouris
        iouris 30 September 2020 16: 28
        0
        They don't wait!
  12. Hagen
    Hagen 30 September 2020 13: 07
    -5
    The state is unlikely to agree to give up "long-term money", especially without much difficulty collected from working Russian citizens.

    A question to the author. How much "long money" did you personally voluntarily pay to the FIU? Give at least one reliable case of money transfer by working citizens of Russia to the FIU. As far as I know, everything that the FIU collects without the participation of employees is transferred by the employer. According to the law, citizens have the right to make their own contributions to the FIU, but they are voluntary, and to be honest, I do not know anyone who would transfer something to the FIU himself. In NPF - as much as you like, but this is completely different.
  13. nikvic46
    nikvic46 30 September 2020 14: 43
    0
    And no one talks about the notorious points. You retire. You count on a certain amount. And you are told that by points you are not entitled to such an amount. And these points are hidden in some unknown regulations. In our cities, there are many companies that are not listed in the city register. This is good, I managed to get a certificate. And what if this company left?
  14. Virus-free crown
    Virus-free crown 30 September 2020 14: 47
    +1
    "Never gamble with the state" (c) from the classics of the genre wassat laughing
    The first (and last) time I played about 15 years ago - I went to work and receive a salary in white only ... The salary for the last 15 years (white !!!) is below 100.000 rubles. did not go down until this spring (when our company went bankrupt because of the crown) ... During this time - if my memory serves me - 5 times there were major changes in the payment of pensions ... I think so - and this is not the last time wink "Take everything away from everyone and give nothing to anyone" is the motto of the modern Russian state ... bully

    I just counted on a calculator this summer when, unsuccessfully at 51, I tried to get a job again - if I worked in black, then I could have retired this summer with the money that is saved on tax deductions ... personal, personal .. . from my own beloved)))
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 30 September 2020 15: 12
      0
      Quote: Corona without virus
      I just calculated it on a calculator this summer when, unsuccessfully at 51, I tried to get a job again - if I worked in black, then I could already this summer to retire ... personal, personal ... from one of your beloved ones to save money on tax deductions)))

      Could, but on one condition - if the state does not zero the deposits, as it was in the 90s. What was left after the "Pavlovsk-Gaidar" reform was denominated, depreciated and was devoured by hyperinflation, and after that was once again destroyed by default. However, stability is needed! Or you need timely investments in tangible objects of ownership (gold, real estate, antiques, etc.) purchased on "candy wrappers" that have the property of periodically burning without fire and smoke. Where to get it, this stability?
      1. Virus-free crown
        Virus-free crown 30 September 2020 15: 20
        +1
        Quote: Nyrobsky
        Quote: Corona without virus
        I just calculated it on a calculator this summer when, unsuccessfully at 51, I tried to get a job again - if I worked in black, then I could already this summer to retire ... personal, personal ... from one of your beloved ones to save money on tax deductions)))

        Could, but on one condition - if the state does not zero the deposits, as it was in the 90s. What was left after the "Pavlovsk-Gaidar" reform was denominated, depreciated and was devoured by hyperinflation, and after that was once again destroyed by default. However, stability is needed! Or you need timely investments in tangible objects of ownership (gold, real estate, antiques, etc.) purchased on "candy wrappers" that have the property of periodically burning without fire and smoke. Where to get it, this stability?

        What nafig contributions ?! belay Only cash, in evergreens ... Eh ... but then he could buy 25 ... and today sell 75 ... eh ... good
        1. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 30 September 2020 15: 25
          +2
          Quote: Corona without virus
          What nafig contributions ?! Only cash, in evergreens ... Eh ... but then he could buy 25 ... and today sell 75 ... eh ...

          Who knew? As I say, stability is needed. Here "knowledgeable people" say that the evergreen will soon also fade and become quite light green. request
          1. Virus-free crown
            Virus-free crown 30 September 2020 15: 30
            0
            Quote: Nyrobsky
            Quote: Corona without virus
            What nafig contributions ?! Only cash, in evergreens ... Eh ... but then he could buy 25 ... and today sell 75 ... eh ...

            Who knew? As I say, stability is needed. Here "knowledgeable people" say that the evergreen will soon also fade and become quite light green. request

            About the "sunset of the evergreen" I recalled an anecdote from the Soviet era - I give its analogue drinks

            They took a man to work, sit on the Ostankino tower and
            look out for the rise of communism. And they gave him a salary of 200r / month.
            He sits looking out. Suddenly sees the Eiffel Tower too
            the man sits and looks out for something. He asks that guy:
            - What are you looking out for?
            - The decline of socialism.
            - And how much do you get paid?
            - $ 10000 per month.
            Well, our man raised a scandal. Says he's such an important thing
            is engaged, and he is paid less money than a man on Eiffel
            tower. To this he was answered:
            - So his job is temporary, and yours is permanent.


            So here too ... back in the early 90s, the Government of the Russian Federation swore and swore that our ruble is the most stable in the world laughing tongue
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 6 October 2020 08: 56
      0
      In fact, rarely does an employer give this money to an employee. You should not consider them your own, except that once a year you can estimate how many taxes are paid there. And in general, it is foolish to regret not having bought dollars, Apple shares, etc. Rarely do anyone manage to retire profitably. Because the very nature of money is such that it must be spent.
  15. solzh
    solzh 30 September 2020 14: 54
    +5
    FNPR proposes to cancel the funded part of the pension

    Let's cancel. Who will get better from this? Not for us. Most people do not have a good pension in the future ...
    The situation with pensions will change only when employers pay normal white wages. From today's news: Research conducted by Otkritie Bank showed that a third of Russian companies have cut their employees' salaries. According to experts, part of the earnings could go into the shadow zone ...
    in 2020, 35% of organizations were forced to cut the salaries of their employees during the pandemic, and another 25% of companies went to reduce the number of staff members ...
  16. imobile2008
    imobile2008 30 September 2020 18: 38
    +2
    So wait, I'm deducting bablishko. I was going to retire, but the age was thrown... Can I return it? there the amount of sickly has accumulated. I feel I am being fooled again, so pay taxes!
  17. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 1 October 2020 09: 19
    0
    the participation of the funded component in the state pension insurance system has not brought any practical benefit, but it leads to numerous legal conflicts.
    That's really what the truth is true! Simple calculations show that the screams that allegedly "the young do not work enough to feed the old" are the worst lie. People, during their labor activity, accumulate enough funds to receive a pension consisting exclusively of these funds for at least 15 years. And considering how many people do not live up to retirement at all, or do not last more than 5-10 years on it ...
    It is also well known why the pension fund is always in short supply. Because they are being plundered at the root. And with the funded part, one fuss! As soon as you steal it, as usual, this damned pensioner runs to court! Unthinkable !! Where have you seen this - respectable officials stole a person's pension, and he does not wipe himself off, but is suing for it ?! One trouble ...
    How are we there, has the doctrine of state meanness already been adopted, or are they still shy?
  18. storm
    storm 1 October 2020 09: 28
    +3
    Just a few steps are needed:
    1.Cancel the payment of two pensions to officials
    2. limit the maximum amount of pension to 50 thousand rubles for ALL !!!
    3. Raise the retirement age for military personnel, the National Guard and other "siloviki" and pay pensions only for the actual service life of 25 years and the actual achievement of 50 years of age (except for injuries, injuries, disability).
    4. to abolish the payment of pensions to citizens of other states who do not officially have work experience in Russia or it is less than 15 years.
    5. Establish a single retirement age for all categories of citizens, men and women, at 60 years.
  19. Vikxnumx
    Vikxnumx 1 October 2020 10: 31
    0
    Dear Accountants!
    The sense from your calculations is zero point horseradish !!!
    Half of the men do not live up to retirement. Where do their deductions go?
    And the government talks about the increase in life expectancy.
    And about a good average salary in the country ...
    Give people the opportunity to pay their taxes! All taxes!
    We are equal to the States! So let's level up here too!
    Everyone will pay all their taxes ONCE A YEAR !!!
    And I'll look at how OUR government ...
    Yes, 95 percent of the people will spend everything they earn on themselves and their children!
    And not from a good life! And then it’s better to go to trample the zone ...
  20. iouris
    iouris 1 October 2020 12: 41
    0
    Quote: "A couple of more years of such prosperity, and everyone who has both kidneys can be attributed to the wealthy strata." End of quote.
  21. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 2 October 2020 08: 02
    0
    There is a tradition: to accept something, then try to improve it for 5-10 years, and then return to the original version. But during all this time, the developers received a lot of money, plus the costs of programs and administration.
  22. d4rkmesa
    d4rkmesa 6 October 2020 16: 00
    -1
    That "funded" part of the pension is a relic of a dead system, which nevertheless continues to work. Well, let's say I looked, formally I accumulated 200 sput in those years, along with interest - this is an average amount approximately, thanks to VEB too. Only the state wants to give me my funded part for 22 years. If you just figure it out, you get from 1 to 2 thousand. You cannot remove them, bequeath them too. It would be better if it was completely covered up and converted into a truly funded part, then the people would have an incentive to engage in savings.
  23. Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 7 October 2020 14: 34
    0
    Quote: d4rkmesa
    You cannot remove them, bequeath them too.

    You're wrong.
    And you can withdraw the entire amount (upon reaching age) and bequeath it.
    Go to the website of any NPF and see if there are standard forms of will statements, withdrawals in full, in parts.
    But if the initiative of the venal wench of capitalism-Trade unions accept, then you will suck a paw.

    Many of my acquaintances have savings accounts of several hundred thousand rubles.
    Instead of investments (as in Norway for example), this money is used by the state to solve its problems.
    And now they generally decided to take away from it.