Private pensions and government guarantees: clues from Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pension Benefits Guarantee Fund (PBGF) was established in the province of Ontario in 1980, thus creating in Canada a rare opportunity for intranational empirical research on the impacts of governmental protection on private plans and their participants. This paper examines Canadian data on pension plans for effects attributable to Ontario's government guarantees for some plans. We find that significant variables related to an increase in the number of pension plans in Canada are higher interest rates, a larger labour market, and, consistent with the deferred compensation theory from labour economics, lower real disposable income of workers. The number of members in pension plans is related significantly to the same variables and also to tax rates and unemployment. The analyses show that the Ontario environment for pension plans is significantly different from the rest of Canada. Those plans covered by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Fund exhibit a lower degree of funding per participant than do the remainder of the plans in the sample, supporting the argument that a government guarantee is related to a moral hazard problem in Ontario pension financing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it