Signed by Marco Ruffolo, on Saturday 10 February La Repubblica published a report in which - with the collaboration of the writer and Stefano Patriarca - the possible burdens of the proposals contained in the electoral programs of the major parties and/or coalitions are estimated in the matter of pensions. The estimates – which are based on evaluations either by the proposing subjects themselves when available or on data that can be used by institutional subjects – highlight their onerousness as a general figure, but also their vagueness and incompleteness, to the point that additional costs are presumed . In some cases, there are equivocal formulations that can mislead the voters themselves. Let's try to articulate a synthetic comment that summarizes the various aspects.
Assuming and not granting that the issue of pensioners (apart from their number as voters) is a priority, the disproportion between the resources used for this part of the population (which is added to what has already been allocated during the legislature) and those reserved for employment, especially youth. Having said that (as we will see, the discussion is different as regards the Pd programme) in the reconstruction of the charges some ''traps'' have been highlighted in the proposals of the M5S, Lega and Forza Italia, presumably destined to produce new charges. For example: it is believed that for the old-age treatments in relation to the age of female workers, the requirements in force before the 2011 reform will be returned; it is also presumable that the automatic connection to life expectancy will disappear from the horizon. This would lead to emerging damages and unsustainable lost profits (ie higher expenses now and lower savings in the future).
Then there are some "underarm foxes" regarding the "rich prizes and cotillions" that Forza Italia promises for minimum pensions: it is not clear whether the criteria will be the same as the "million" of the 2001 (limited to those who do not receive other incomes except their pensions) or if it will become a measure for everyone without realizing that guaranteeing a thousand euros a month regardless of the contributions paid, not only sends the contribution calculation to hell, but encourages the evasion. It will also be necessary to begin by saying that many of the minimum integrated pensions can also be the effect of a working life that pays little attention to the payment of the expected contributions. As for housewives, we are talking about the millions of women who carry out unpaid care work (perhaps between the ages of 60 and 65, giving them a monthly allowance of one thousand euros) or the few hundreds of housewives registered or already retired in the fund at INPS?
Comparison of pension proposals: look at the table
Anyone can then notice that the proposals of the M5S and those of the League seem to be written using carbon paper or, if we want to be more modern, the photocopier. Both proposals do not concern themselves with the old-age treatment (which is a central aspect for the retirement of female workers), but aim to restore the old-age pension with the requirements existing before the Fornero reform (and obviously immortalized and unchangeable over time). In essence, the fuse under the barrel of TNT on which the Italian pension system sits is re-triggered, if only one considers that in the 2017 Fpld flows there were 180 early pensions for every 100 of old age and that the expenditure for the stock of the former is double that of the latter (60 billion against 32 billion in the Fpld and an average of 24 thousand euros per year against 11 thousand).
This trend is not destined to end anytime soon, but to accelerate, because from now until 2030, baby boomers will continue to have access to retirement, who will be able - given how they were able to stay on the job market by entering it early and remaining there for a long time in a stable and continuous way – to reach the threshold of 41 years or 100 (by adding age and seniority) around 60-61 years of age (above all if the link to life expectancy ends up being cavalry as everything leaves believe).
As for the proposal by the Democratic Party, it must be recognized that - beyond the electoral needs - it moves along the path traced in the legislature to respond to the offensive unleashed against the Fornero law: those who present a condition of particular need are protected with more favorable requisites as elders (this is the logic of the Ape and Rita). It is certainly a difficult trench to defend, because there will be pressures to expand the number of disadvantaged jobs and protected categories. Also noteworthy is a proposal for a guarantee pension for young people (with obviously deferred costs), as envisaged in the pact signed at the time with the trade unions. One last clarification: the data of the estimates concern the first year of the effects of any changes, assuming that it is 2019.
