Due to copyright restrictions, this file is not available for public download
Click here to request a copy from the OU Author.
|DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link:||http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2011.00811.x|
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
The neoliberal consensus is that state funded pensions are not sustainable in the long term, due to declining fertility and longevity. In response, policymakers have pointed to the advantages of privately funded pension systems. This article compares the social provisioning of these two systems using the circular flow of income as an organizing framework. A series of pitfalls in the private model are examined, including inequality of provision, mis-selling of investment products, and punitive charges.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2011 American Journal of Economics and Sociology Inc|
|Keywords:||pensions; circular flow; state pensions; private pensions; social provisioning|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Politics, Philosophy, Economics, Development, Geography
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Innovation, Knowledge & Development research centre (IKD)|
|Depositing User:||Jonquil Lowe|
|Date Deposited:||16 Jan 2012 09:31|
|Last Modified:||04 Oct 2016 16:57|
|Share this page:|