Is the article "social security is not everything" a precursor to the change of social security policy?

1998 implemented document No.26, and the pension should be paid from the overall account and individual account respectively, but it was not paid before (regardless of the pilot), so there was naturally no money in the account. As soon as the policy is introduced, the first thing to be solved is the issue of pension payment for retired and resigned people in recent years. Circular 26 takes 1998 as the time node. Those who have retired before this time have never paid the fee at all, so we call them old people. /kloc-people who joined the work before 0/998 and then retired are called China people. /kloc-those who join the work after 0/998 are called newcomers. The principle of handling is old methods, new methods and gradual transition in the middle. In other words, the old-age insurance should be able to ensure that the pension level of the elderly does not decline, and it should also be able to cope with the pension payment of the newly retired middle-aged people. Among them, the elderly have never paid the fee at all, and the middle-aged people have a short payment period, but when paying the fee, the working years before 98 are counted as payment. So from the beginning, it was a state of robbing Peter to pay Paul. In addition, the collection is seriously inadequate. How many enterprises pay fees in full accordance with the regulations, and there is no case of not paying or lying about the payment base? How many urban self-employed people have social security accounts? The payment base is the average monthly income of employees in the previous year. Note that it is not the basic salary. The full amount is very small, isn't it? Probably only some large foreign companies and (possibly) some state-owned enterprises can do it. This piece is also a loss.

?