论文部分内容阅读
Recently， an experimental house-for-pension scheme has gained widespread attention. in september， the state council， china’s cabinet， issued a document pledging to establish a social care network for people over the age of 60 by 2020. the house-for-pension program， along with other policies like encouraging private investment in elder care services， is included in the pledge.
under the program， the elderly would be able to deed the housing property they own to banks or insurance companies and receive a certain amount of money every month based on the evaluation of the property and the owner’s life expectancy. the applicants would retain the right to use the house； but when they pass away， the house would be withdrawn by the financial institutions.
the program is said to be an experiment in al- leviating pressures brought by the nation’s aging population. china’s elderly population reached 194 million at the end of 2012 and is expected to hit 243 million in 2020， according to a report by china’s Research center on Aging.
the idea of mortgaging houses for a pension is not new in china. similar programs have been piloted in cities including Beijing， shanghai and Nanjing， but resulted in failure.
with the state council proposing the idea again， the public is divided. supporters believe the scheme will be an effective supplement to the current old-age security system and will help soothe stresses brought by china’s aging population. others maintain that the scheme challenges chinese traditional beliefs and is not suitable for china， where the real estate market is notoriously volatile and people have only a 70-year leasehold for housing property.
Chen Qingpu Media commentator
In essence， the house-forpension scheme is enabling citizens to count on their housing property to have a secured later life. I think the government should institute favorable policies to facilitate the program. China has a rapidly growing aging population， but still doesn’t have a sound social security system. Against such a backdrop， exploring more solutions to care for the elder like this program will benefit the nation’s development in the long run and improve people’s livelihood.
Also， some developed countries like the United States， Canada and Singa- pore have similar programs in place as a supplement to their pension systems， which proves to be quite successful.
But this experimental policy requires widespread support from the government and the public before it matures. In my opinion， at least three barriers have to be overcome. First， the traditional belief of “raising sons to support the later life and inherit property” should be changed. In modern society， with more and more single-child families as well as more old people with longer life expectancy thanks to improved medical care， young people are facing greater pressure to support the aging population. Mortgaging housing property for a pension will alleviate this burden.
Another barrier arises from the nation’s 70-year leasehold for real estate property. The pension under the program is determined by the remaining years of leasehold. To assure the scheme to gain widespread support， it is time to amend laws on the leasehold.
Third， the quality of buildings should be improved. If the average lifespan of buildings is not long enough， hous- es would have no value for mortgage， not to mention bringing property income.
yin Bocheng Real estate expert
The program will benefit not only the senior citizens， but also financial institutions and even the whole nation.
For the elderly， their housing resources can be improved through the program to support them with a better and well-off retired life. As a supplement to the current old-age security system， the program can also ease the elderly care fund shortage. And banks and insurance companies can also explore new business opportunities when the program is put in place.
But when implementing it， the government should have a long-term plan and should pilot it in certain areas to find out how best to implement it.
Huang Zubin Beijing Times
The barriers for China to implement such a house-forpension scheme are insurmountable.
First， willing possessions to offspring is a widespread and deeply entrenched tradition among Chinese people. Chinese parents are so dedicated to the well-being of their children that few of them would “selfishly” deed the housing property for a larger amount of pension.
Second， Chinese people only have 70-year leaseholds for housing property. When the elderly need to apply for the scheme， they have only limited years of leasehold left. Financial institutions would hesitate over accepting the mortgage as they worry the situation may undermine their interests.
And last， housing property in the future may not be as valuable as it is now. A possible plummet in housing price will add risks to taking housing property as a mortgage.
Chen lijun Media commentator Under a long-term unsound social security system for old people， Chinese have been sticking to the tradition of relying solely on their children to live out their later life. Those elders with no offspring or deceased children are doomed to living a lonely and miserable later life. The house-for-pension scheme will change the scenario. By mortgaging their houses to banks or insurance companies， elders could get cash income from the real estate while living in their own home.
In China， many senior citizens may have several houses， but are short on cash. They work hard all their life to pay the mortgage of the house they bought when young. And finally when they get the full leasehold after retirement， it is nearly time for their children to inherit the housing property. For themselves， they have no source of income besides the house， while living on a limited amount of pension. This situation undermines senior citizens’ welfare. If they deeded the houses for pension， they could live a better retired life.
Admittedly， as an emerging solution to caring for the elder， the program will encounter challenges. But it provides a promising option.
Ni Jinjie Guangzhou Daily
Mortgaging houses for pension is suitable for the reality in foreign countries. But in China， it is not a viable option as Chinese people only have 70-year leasehold for houses. Many young people are not able to afford a separate house because of current high housing prices， and have to share with their parents. If their parents deeded the house for pension， where should this young generation shelter themselves after the property is withdrawn by banks or insurance companies？
Besides， the aging population in the vast rural area is barely covered by the nation’s pension system. However， it is far from possible for them to trade houses for pension. In China’s rural areas， the leasehold of houses people bought is actually not recognized by the law. And those houses that villagers built on legitimate house sites are generally not valuable enough for financial institutions to take as mortgage for monthly pension.
One crucial premise for the house-for-pension scheme is that China’s housing prices will keep rising； at least remain high in the future. But actually， the prospect of the real estate market is unclear.
Zhou Junsheng Media commentator
The house-for-pension scheme is subversion to Chinese traditional family values， including that children are supposed to support their aging parents. I believe the elderly prefer enjoying the happiness of family union instead of a well-off life with more pension. The housing property is the wealth they accumulated after a life-time hardworking and is an important bond to maintain the relationship with their children. In fact， it has become a tacit agreement that children support their aging parents and inherit the houses. Asking the elderly to exchange houses for care in old age deprives them of the right to enjoy family happiness and also deprives their children of the right to inherit family possession.
Providing the elderly a secured life should be one of the government’s responsibilities. The elderly generation made great contributions to the country when they were young. After they retired， the government should provide them a sound care service rather than gain profits from what they own.
As for those who resort to this program because of anger on maltreatment， what the government should do is safeguarding the elderly’s right by guiding children to show filial piety instead of worsening the precarious relationship with such an impersonal program.
under the program， the elderly would be able to deed the housing property they own to banks or insurance companies and receive a certain amount of money every month based on the evaluation of the property and the owner’s life expectancy. the applicants would retain the right to use the house； but when they pass away， the house would be withdrawn by the financial institutions.
the program is said to be an experiment in al- leviating pressures brought by the nation’s aging population. china’s elderly population reached 194 million at the end of 2012 and is expected to hit 243 million in 2020， according to a report by china’s Research center on Aging.
the idea of mortgaging houses for a pension is not new in china. similar programs have been piloted in cities including Beijing， shanghai and Nanjing， but resulted in failure.
with the state council proposing the idea again， the public is divided. supporters believe the scheme will be an effective supplement to the current old-age security system and will help soothe stresses brought by china’s aging population. others maintain that the scheme challenges chinese traditional beliefs and is not suitable for china， where the real estate market is notoriously volatile and people have only a 70-year leasehold for housing property.
Chen Qingpu Media commentator
In essence， the house-forpension scheme is enabling citizens to count on their housing property to have a secured later life. I think the government should institute favorable policies to facilitate the program. China has a rapidly growing aging population， but still doesn’t have a sound social security system. Against such a backdrop， exploring more solutions to care for the elder like this program will benefit the nation’s development in the long run and improve people’s livelihood.
Also， some developed countries like the United States， Canada and Singa- pore have similar programs in place as a supplement to their pension systems， which proves to be quite successful.
But this experimental policy requires widespread support from the government and the public before it matures. In my opinion， at least three barriers have to be overcome. First， the traditional belief of “raising sons to support the later life and inherit property” should be changed. In modern society， with more and more single-child families as well as more old people with longer life expectancy thanks to improved medical care， young people are facing greater pressure to support the aging population. Mortgaging housing property for a pension will alleviate this burden.
Another barrier arises from the nation’s 70-year leasehold for real estate property. The pension under the program is determined by the remaining years of leasehold. To assure the scheme to gain widespread support， it is time to amend laws on the leasehold.
Third， the quality of buildings should be improved. If the average lifespan of buildings is not long enough， hous- es would have no value for mortgage， not to mention bringing property income.
yin Bocheng Real estate expert
The program will benefit not only the senior citizens， but also financial institutions and even the whole nation.
For the elderly， their housing resources can be improved through the program to support them with a better and well-off retired life. As a supplement to the current old-age security system， the program can also ease the elderly care fund shortage. And banks and insurance companies can also explore new business opportunities when the program is put in place.
But when implementing it， the government should have a long-term plan and should pilot it in certain areas to find out how best to implement it.
Huang Zubin Beijing Times
The barriers for China to implement such a house-forpension scheme are insurmountable.
First， willing possessions to offspring is a widespread and deeply entrenched tradition among Chinese people. Chinese parents are so dedicated to the well-being of their children that few of them would “selfishly” deed the housing property for a larger amount of pension.
Second， Chinese people only have 70-year leaseholds for housing property. When the elderly need to apply for the scheme， they have only limited years of leasehold left. Financial institutions would hesitate over accepting the mortgage as they worry the situation may undermine their interests.
And last， housing property in the future may not be as valuable as it is now. A possible plummet in housing price will add risks to taking housing property as a mortgage.
Chen lijun Media commentator Under a long-term unsound social security system for old people， Chinese have been sticking to the tradition of relying solely on their children to live out their later life. Those elders with no offspring or deceased children are doomed to living a lonely and miserable later life. The house-for-pension scheme will change the scenario. By mortgaging their houses to banks or insurance companies， elders could get cash income from the real estate while living in their own home.
In China， many senior citizens may have several houses， but are short on cash. They work hard all their life to pay the mortgage of the house they bought when young. And finally when they get the full leasehold after retirement， it is nearly time for their children to inherit the housing property. For themselves， they have no source of income besides the house， while living on a limited amount of pension. This situation undermines senior citizens’ welfare. If they deeded the houses for pension， they could live a better retired life.
Admittedly， as an emerging solution to caring for the elder， the program will encounter challenges. But it provides a promising option.
Ni Jinjie Guangzhou Daily
Mortgaging houses for pension is suitable for the reality in foreign countries. But in China， it is not a viable option as Chinese people only have 70-year leasehold for houses. Many young people are not able to afford a separate house because of current high housing prices， and have to share with their parents. If their parents deeded the house for pension， where should this young generation shelter themselves after the property is withdrawn by banks or insurance companies？
Besides， the aging population in the vast rural area is barely covered by the nation’s pension system. However， it is far from possible for them to trade houses for pension. In China’s rural areas， the leasehold of houses people bought is actually not recognized by the law. And those houses that villagers built on legitimate house sites are generally not valuable enough for financial institutions to take as mortgage for monthly pension.
One crucial premise for the house-for-pension scheme is that China’s housing prices will keep rising； at least remain high in the future. But actually， the prospect of the real estate market is unclear.
Zhou Junsheng Media commentator
The house-for-pension scheme is subversion to Chinese traditional family values， including that children are supposed to support their aging parents. I believe the elderly prefer enjoying the happiness of family union instead of a well-off life with more pension. The housing property is the wealth they accumulated after a life-time hardworking and is an important bond to maintain the relationship with their children. In fact， it has become a tacit agreement that children support their aging parents and inherit the houses. Asking the elderly to exchange houses for care in old age deprives them of the right to enjoy family happiness and also deprives their children of the right to inherit family possession.
Providing the elderly a secured life should be one of the government’s responsibilities. The elderly generation made great contributions to the country when they were young. After they retired， the government should provide them a sound care service rather than gain profits from what they own.
As for those who resort to this program because of anger on maltreatment， what the government should do is safeguarding the elderly’s right by guiding children to show filial piety instead of worsening the precarious relationship with such an impersonal program.