Contents page 1 — intended To pay lots more? Page 2 — double: Please not at the expense of the Childless! On a page
Yes, the CDU politician Jens Spahn is right: Children should be more in the care and the pension Deposit as a parent.
It is not a punishment of childless, such as the claims about the SPD. What a grotesque way of thinking! Punishment is simply the wrong category for a social security debate. To seek punishment as an Argument, only to stir up envy.
© Jakob Börner, Monika Pilath
to the author of the page
It’s not a question of whether someone is intentionally or unintentionally childless. This is not of interest to the state, children get private. Children have, however, is for our social system is relevant. The state is obliged qua basic law, to ensure social justice and security. Therefore, it is necessary, on the distribution of the burden between Children and talk to parents in the pension insurance.
Jens Spahn fuelled this debate to distinguish himself in the battle for the CDU presidency. He linked to a topic that concerns all, with the important personnel decision, he who follows Angela Merkel.
For children, pensioners, the children of other
are clear: Without the parents of today, there are no contributors of tomorrow. The without offspring benefit directly, because the pension is a PAYG system, the contributions of the profession are not working as in insurance, but will be channelled directly to the respective pensioners. This means: For children of their retired numbers the children of others. to have
children, is not yet sufficiently appreciated. According to calculations by the Federal Statistical office the average expenditure of parents with a child up to the age of 18. Birthday at more than 120,000 euros. The crediting of child-raising periods in the pension there is no adequate compensation.
The Federal constitutional court has already in the year 2001, at that time in terms of long-term care insurance, a system-specific advantage for Children found. It is also noted that for the System, not only the Numbers of contributions, but also the education of the children was constitutive. “No longer will be paid the second component regularly of all, parents will be charged specifically in this System, what needs to be balanced, therefore, within the system,” concluded the court. In the nursing care insurance, the claim by the court is implemented a long time ago. Without children pay 0.25 percentage points more in long-term care insurance as parents.
It would be fair to do that with the pension. Because of the generation contract has two sides: The young pay for the Old and the young get the children to secure themselves in old age. Take advantage of the pension system twice.
A basic principle of social insurance is that strong shoulders to bear more than the weak. On the labour market for parents, especially single parents, tend to be at a disadvantage. Are you the one with the weaker shoulders. Who cares in the night to a crying baby, in a phased manner walk off the Job and little time for training, jeopardized his career, and an associated higher income, including private Provision for old age.
An objection of the opponents of the Spahn assault is perfectly right: There are more elegant solutions, parents better, such as the abolition of income splitting. But that is demanded for decades, without anything happened. Also, you could do one without the other. What is the use of families, uses of the society as a whole.