Why is the proportion of social insurance contributions in China the highest in the world?

China's social insurance payment ranks first among 18 1 countries. The sum of the five social insurance statutory contributions in China is equivalent to 40% of the wage level, and even reaches 50% in some areas, exceeding most countries in the world. This is the research findings of Bai Zhongen, a professor in Tsinghua University. Social insurance is called "the second finance". Although it is used for people's pension, unemployment and medical care, it still has the nature of taxation. If the proportion of social security contributions is too high, it will be a heavy burden for the people, and the rate of nearly 40% of wages will naturally affect citizens' consumption, thus affecting the quality of life. At the same time, it will bring heavy pressure to enterprises and institutions, which is not conducive to their development. What's more, people still don't know how to use this huge fund, and some places abuse social security funds for investment and other purposes. Why is the social security contribution ratio so high? There are historical factors. However, as the country has more and more wealth, it needs to be adjusted in time. The high social security rate reflects the defects of the social security system and the irrationality of the domestic fiscal revenue distribution system. The national fiscal revenue has always been higher than the GDP growth rate, but the investment in social security has never increased, which naturally requires enterprises, institutions and individuals to pay a higher proportion. However, there are many domestic debts to social security, and it is reported that the social security fund gap is at least 10 trillion. Originally, the investment was not high, and now the gap is so big that it really doesn't make sense. Moreover, from a deeper perspective, the problem that hinders the overall planning of social security in the country is now far behind in different regions, and it also needs to increase investment and overall planning at the national level. It is impossible to "balance the rich and the poor" by enterprises, institutions and people everywhere.