State expenditures, even after the cuts that are causing mayors, regional presidents, public offices of all levels to be torn apart, will continue to increase. The data processed by the offices of the Senate on the basis of government forecasts speak for themselves: current expenses compared to 2010 will rise in 2013 by another 20 billion euros, reaching a total of 820 billion.
In other words, once again cuts have been made with respect to the forecasts for an increase in expenses drawn up by the various administrations who don't know how and a slowdown in increases has been obtained, but no real decrease as it should be done instead. The bill, as usual, is paid by the citizens who will receive a tax blow of 100 billion. In fact, the increase in tax revenue between 2010 and 2013 amounts to a lot. All this money should be used to eliminate the deficit which in 2010 was 75 billion, but also to increase current expenses which will also benefit from the cut in investments for about 10 billion.
The weight of the state, therefore, is not destined to decrease. Caste managed to safeguard all of their command centers. And it's not just about the salaries of parliamentarians or their number, but about all that parasitic intermediation that our political class carries out with little efficiency and with a great waste of resources when not with real diversion of money in favor of private interests.
The questions that arise from reading these macroeconomic data are two: firstly, we must ask ourselves whether the maneuver (and indeed the two maneuvers of July and August together) is suitable for achieving the objective of a balanced budget in 2013; and secondly, what are the country's growth prospects given that citizens will be crushed by a tax burden that will exceed 45% of GDP, a level never reached before in our country.
The answer to the first question is simple. All government calculations are based on GDP growth rates of around 1.5% which are unrealistic today. Both the International Monetary Fund and the OECD have practically halved their growth forecasts for this year and for the next two years and, moreover, the effects of the maneuver based only on tax increases will cause a further slowdown in the economy. Therefore the objective of a balanced budget will not be achieved while there will be a further worsening of the employment situation and of private and public investments.
But there is an even more serious problem that arises when seeing the reactions of the various political and social groups to the measures proposed by the Government. And that is to hear the statements of the mayors and presidents of the regions, as well as trade unionists and the various lobbies of traders, pharmacists, cooperatives, etc. it seems that no one wants to give up anything, change something from old habits, offer willingness to make some sacrifices in view of a restart on more solid foundations. It is said that innovative drives have emerged from the social context that the Government has not taken into account, but in reality it seems that only conservation drives have emerged from the various categories.
Let's take the unions and in particular the CGIL. The contestation of article 8 which establishes a greater territorial or corporate articulation of the bargaining and which is absolutely essential to make an exchange between higher productivity and higher wages, has a sign of conservation of the current structure of industrial relations which is no longer suitable for the global competitive context in which we must operate.
In addition, Camusso, by proclaiming a general strike, barred herself from any avenue of negotiation to force the Government to use the VAT increase not as a stop-gap in its accounts, but to reduce the tax burden on labor and businesses, creating a sort of "fiscal devaluation" which could have helped to revive the development of production. And by dragging the Democratic Party into the streets, Camusso has prevented the party from fighting to change the direction of the maneuver, avoiding excess taxes and inserting more elements in favor of development.
But even mayors and regional presidents have not been outdone. They have threatened to cut commuter transport, social services and business support. No one has mentioned the possibility of reducing expenses, of cutting unnecessary expenses, of seeing real estate or public shareholdings that must also be sold for reasons of efficiency and to eliminate anachronistic monopolies. The presidents of the provinces were really pathetic. Instead of mea culpa for wrongful and perhaps fraudulent operations, such as the purchase by the Province of Milan of the Milan-Serravalle motorway, they limited themselves to indicating other possible cuts that in their opinion are more urgent than those of the Provinces.
The cooperatives have had no less than the support of the Vatican. The pharmacists survived. Merchants have limited the liberalization of the opening of shops to art cities only. The railways would like to limit competition by requiring all new entrants to apply their very onerous employment contract. Very little is said about the sale of public assets, both state and local, or such cumbersome procedures are adopted that they will in fact prevent any alienation.
All of this certainly does not diminish the faults of the Government which found itself completely unprepared for the arrival of the crisis and which tore itself apart internally in an attempt to defend the interests of this or that party instead of proposing a clear analysis of the situation and coherent recipes capable of giving a perspective of recovery and development in favor of future generations currently cut off from the world of work. But surely one wonders if Italian society really wants a recovery and a recovery of growth or if the culture of suspicion and the general distrust towards the ruling class have produced a widespread selfish cynicism for which one lives in the illusion of being able to protect one's own small or large privileges, disregarding the general situation.
After all, when such cynicism is practiced by government parties such as the League, which have now become defenders of the public sector at the cost of harassing taxpayers, one certainly cannot blame the individual categories that seek to defend their own particular interests. It is no coincidence that yesterday President Napolitano made a call to citizens, inviting them to overcome old habits and have more courage. But to obtain a change in the behavior of ordinary citizens, a ruling class is needed, primarily the political one, which does not propose fraudulent maneuvers and which above all does not seek to save its particular power to maneuver public spending to the detriment of the growth prospects of the whole Village.
