Why Was Universal Retirement Protection Called Unaffordable?

What did a 2011 commentary argue?

A May 2011 commentary said universal retirement protection was far-reaching and hard to reverse — any scheme must pass tests of personal and social affordability, sustainability, and resilience to external shocks. The World Bank’s 1994 three pillars (tax-funded safety net, mandatory contributions, voluntary savings) grew to five in 2005, adding non-contributory protection and informal family support.

How severe is ageing?

Advocates said MPF can’t support retirement or cover hundreds of thousands outside work; but with Hong Kong ageing, tax revenue may not sustain non-contributory benefits. Any system must demonstrably meet its policy goal — adequate protection for those in need.

What data was missing?

The Central Policy Unit wanted a fresh territory-wide household survey to project retirees’ conditions thirty years out. While waiting for conclusions, workers should tend their own accounts — start at MPF fund comparison.