It could be called a "desire for flexibility", counting it among the rich series of "cupio dissolvi" (because only a collective madness could induce the Government and Parliament to dismantle the pension reform made by Fornero under the watchful eyes of the European Union and, above all, of the markets). And yet, when Minister Pier Carlo Padoan , in a meeting with the Labor Commission of the Chamber (the ancestral headquarters of the social security ''junkyards'') let slip a sarcaponesque phrase that combined some words together without giving them a complete meaning, the sleepless talk shows, that same evening, and the newspapers, the following day, opened up on this (non) news, announcing new signals on the terrain of the coveted flexibility-ty-ty output. This, despite the fact that the undersecretary to the Prime Minister Tommaso Nannicini had hastened to remind that such an operation would cost from 5 to 7 billion a year depending on the requirements for accessing it.
The beauty is that Padoan hasn't given up on hitting the hoop after having inflicted a robust one on the barrel. The holder of the MEF began to expound on the great virtues of the Fornero reform, as regards the stability not only of the pension systembut also public accounts. But if we went to manipulate that system on the retirement age side by resurrecting (actually he never died but he still survived alive and well) early retirement / seniority, what would remain of those acclaimed virtues?
As a backup, on the day of the retirement madness, the handyman (and all-saying) president of the INPS could remain silent, Tito Boeri? Ours took the opportunity to fantasize about a very sad future for young people born in the 80s, forced to work (who knows why?) up to 75 years of age. Boeri then reiterated the urgency of measures flexibility-ty-ty for the elderly, at the same time that he said it is time to protect the young. The fact is that there are not enough resources to "think" of a system capable of providing for the working and social security conditions of young people and, at the same time, allowing the elderly to retire when they could still work. Then making the young people pay the heavy bill again. You have to choose. And honestly we're bored with giving priority to elderly people who have already had many advantages.
On page 31 of a recent INPS document, in the part in which the most important regulatory changes on pensions are summarized, we read under the title Decree Law 6 December 2011 n.201 (“Salva Italia'', “Riforma Fornero''): retirement for workers with reference to whom the first contribution credit starts after 1.1.1996 (or the subjects to whom the contribution calculation applies, ed): 63-70 years''. So? When do you stop chasing butterflies under the Arch of Titus?
