I use the term Trim (Instead of the politically correct Reform), because, ultimately, is that what we are talking about. And not surprising sluggish, passivity and lack of public resistance and citizens in general. Maybe it's because we've all come to accept that the alternative would be worse, or something.
 |
| A schematic illustration of the demographic pyramid (Source: finanzzas ) |
is clear that this cut is almost bound by a set of circumstances, known to all. The demographic pyramid, which threatens to retire in the next years of baby boomers and the shortage of revenue due to inactivity rate (or failure) excessively high, are the immediate triggers of having to deal with this reform now. The latest figures for 2010 issued by the Secretary of State for Social Security (in which a minimum surplus proceeds from the interests of the Reserve Fund) predict large bump in the coming years, if not change boundary conditions. That is, if not trimmed rights citizens to receive public pensions after retirement.
Unions (which often appear to be part of the state apparatus) have been sitting with the Government and agreed a number of changes (read cuts) on the contributory pension system. Basically delay the retirement age from 65 to 67 years, and also 37 years of contributions required to achieve the maximum pension. That is, overall, both variables are increased by two years.
There are a number of amending and recitals, which should be taken into account. The transition to retirement at age 67 will be gradual. Between 2013 and 2018 will increase as a result of one month per year, while between 2019 and 2027 will increase two months per year. In other words, children born to 1947 may retire at age 65. Those born after 1960 can not retire until age 67. And for those who were born between these two years we will be playing one in between.
 |
| The mill has not stopped flowing straight this bleeding issue (Source: IU ) |
Anyone can continue to retire at age 65, provided that he proves 38.5 years of contributions (which looks more like a prison sentence). And there are some special considerations for professional stage fellow, where there will be a formula stating that the contribution period (up to a maximum of two years, but I have not clear who would pay) and for women who have interrupted their working lives to care for their newborn children, for whom contributions will also count as a maximum period of two years.
But let the reality of the country and citizens. I have worked almost thirty years in a multinational, and only remember a person retiring at age 65 (and, coincidentally, was Director of Human Resources). The vast majority were invited to retire early under various forms of incentive . For example, for two years to collect unemployment benefits, and receive compensation to compensate for the years that are missing each for reaching the statutory retirement age. Or the simple statutory compensation for unfair dismissal.
In general, it seems clear (although we should let us look) that companies do not want to keep a professional staff well beyond the fifties and not many years. After fifty, the odds of being expelled from the labor market are very high. Until the age of retirement, each is looking for life, working as a freelance Chapucillas, doing some consulting (often even for the company that ousted him) or anything else to supplement income to a level that can be enough. And by establishing a special agreement with Social Security, pay it out of pocket for a few years, to suffer no reduction in the amount of the pension to have the right ending.
Moreover, young people are engaged in some type of college, there are many times that at thirty still are engaged in temporary employment schemes, with wages barely mileuristas and without any expectation of loyalty to the company contracts with fixed and / or career plans.
 |
| English citizen in full tasting. (Source: padylla ) |
Under these conditions, getting thirty years contribution and it seems a challenge, the more you get to 37. For a graduate of 30 years get a job stabilize at more or less fixed (or at least indefinitely), with reasonable salary and full contribution to Social Security, your only hope (rather useless) is to stay in work activity with virtually no interruptions to 67 years, which atesoraría the 37 years of contributions that would guarantee the maximum pension. Remember that any interruption, provided it is covered by unemployment insurance, has for all purposes as a period of insurance. But if at any time is dismissed and the grant runs out, the mirage of the 37 years of contributions as the mist vanishes.
This, in practice, means that the objective is that fewer workers reach retirement age are entitled to 100% of the benefit that corresponds, according to their contribution base . To this we add that to a certain level professionals, which in its normal working life can reach higher than the maximum compensation recognized by the Social Security System (in 2011 I think it's 3,230 Euros per month), even the maximum pension represent only part of the wage payment that can be perceived before retirement (Maybe even only around 50%).
Finally, all the machinery is prepared to reduce (until 2029, then the flow of income to the pension system will be directly the population pyramid) the number of people reaching the legal age retirement with pension rights, on the one hand and the other to reach it without the right to receive 100% of the pension attributable to them.
 |
| Rubalcaba and Valeriano Gómez (Labour), the last Friday presenting Reform. (Source: ultimahora ) |
With clarity, and to speak so as to understand, this is a reform that involves a cut in benefits that the state must pay citizens. Is the toll we pay to maintain a public pension system by the method of distribution. And, of course, is a stab in the so-called welfare state.
Although I do not know all the details (if any readers I may illustrate, I'd appreciate it), Sweden, who happens to be one of the leaders in this welfare state began reforming its pension system in 1993, to introduce a mixed system of distribution and capitalization. We must recognize that the Nordics are few but clever, and knows to anticipate the play.
Now what is left is to trust that when we emerge from the crisis and the economy growing again, the state known to be generous with the redistribution of that wealth, and check to increase the amounts agreed to pensions. Of course, with growth, it's easy to return inflation rates higher than we've had in recent years, which can be finished eating these increases.
I wonder, with all this, see the extremely responsible citizens who are English, we have accepted these cuts without hardly raised an eyebrow. The French, with similar initiatives had seven general strikes against Sarkozy, with a dramatic mobilization of the citizenry. Of course, eventually ended up swallowing cuts like a champion. Because the base is subject only addition and subtraction, and simple. And this is what you get.
far, Zapatero and his government have scored a point to reach agreement on this matter with the unions. Angela Merkel on Thursday in Madrid came to bless your diligent student, and have made pictures for everyone to use in the upcoming election campaign. The PP, in his dream life, and may be wondering if you said NOT to yield consistently positive. Because in this picture, of course, are not. And if they were the ones who occupied the Government in these days, it would have as much or more than the Socialists in applying the (same) necessary cuts. Only, if any, may have against the unions.
 |
| Angela Merkel, German Chancellor Zapatero, on his visit- examination on Thursday in Madrid. (REUTERS; Source: Faro de Vigo ) |
Really, I do not understand Rajoy. I suspect they are so convinced that the government born after 11-M is a usurper, and that 2012 elections will give them a big advantage, they seem to be only looking to spend time idling in his corner. Should be aware that the voter remembers those who have worked and have not given a stick to water. The power will not return to his hands just at the beginning unperturbed pendulum swing of history. Must earn it, fellas. Zapatero, with all these reforms like the European Union has gained a whole and see what they say the next polls. Today it is emerging as the candidate of the PSOE in 2012, something that seemed unthinkable only a few weeks ago.
And while the voters most radical left cursing walk the halls (and the comments to the news about cutting pensions) complaining that the Socialist Government is doing things were not in its election manifesto of 2008. Also they should abandon their dreams and to, again, down to earth. Do not think anyone will ask a government to resign for taking special funds to repair earthquake damage, only because "the earthquake was not in his electoral program."
And that is falling in economics is similar to an earthquake that undermines the foundations (brittle, so it looks) of a welfare state which we were all proud. Social democracy has died.
Luckily we will always have ham and wine, but the ham is of top dressing and the wine is young, which are not times for extravagance ...
JMBA
0 comments:
Post a Comment