首页-日语 - 地盘 - 记录 - 日志 - 下载 - 查词 - 翻译 - 排行
F8键(暂停/播放)| F9键(重复此句)| 左键或ALT+Z(上一句)| 右键或ALT+X(下一句)
提示:听写播放器因为flash插件问题无法播放,请点击此处解决
听写窗口
译文窗口
注释窗口

您没有登录,系统不能保存您的听写记录和听写错词,点击此处登录

听写提交之后可查看原文
The U.S. system started out after World War II a bit like the Dutch system -- it was corporations providing pensions for people.
And that kind of fell apart during the 1970s, although there are some corporations with pensions still out there and there are definitely a lot of state and local governments that give them.
So what we switched to - is the Dutch put this emphasis on keeping it collective -- having everybody in an industry in a pension together or some large corporations have their own pensions.
In the U.S. when that system ran into trouble we moved into this totally atomized 401 K system where most people in the private sector are basically responsible on their own for saving for retirement.
So what can we take away from that system that we could possibly institute here?
One thing that's already happening is sort of automatically setting people up so that they save in an 401K.
I think more and more employers, my employer Harvard University just announced this, that unless you tell them not to, they're going to automatically start taking, I think it's 3 percent of your salary initially, and putting it aside.
And then increasing it every year by one more percentage point until you've reached statutory limit. And so that's already happening out there.
The other thing is on the payout end. Where here you retire at 65 and yea, you'll get Social Security but you're also likely to just to, if you did a good job and saved, have this big lump sum of money and have to figure out what to do with it.
暂无译文
暂无注释
听写注意
1.为防止灌水听写至少要输入超过10个单词方可提交同时听写内容不能粘贴;
2.标点符号不用填写,听写比对会忽略掉标点符号;
3.单词与单词之间要留有空格,同时数字(年月或金额)请用阿拉伯数字。
可友留言
加载中...
我来说2句
抱歉,您需要先登录后才能留言
谁正在听写
得分最高
最新听写
热门听写