The question of the generation gap, as well as the possible solutions connected to it, call into question the very principles of solidarity (art. 2) and equality (art. 3) enshrined in our Constitution: it is not possible, in fact, to be «equal before the law» or to exercise the same rights, both civil and social, if the conditions of inequality that prevent everyone from actually enjoying them are not first removed. This is the analysis contained in the latest report by the Bruno Visentini Foundation entitled “Generation gap between conflicts and solidarity. Comparing generations".
The research carried out a comparative survey of the main Italian experiences in terms of reducing the generation gap, through the update to 2030 of a specific Generation Gap Indicator (developed in 2015 in partnership with the FBV by the ClubdiLatina) and operating in the scope of the objectives indicated by the "2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development", signed in 2015 by all UN member countries.
A scissor – it emerged – whose blades triple their distance between 2004 and an estimated 2030. In other words, if a twenty year old in 2004, in order to achieve independence, had to climb over a 1 meter 'wall', in 2030 that wall will be 3 meters high and therefore impassable. And, if in 2004 it took the same young man 10 years to build an autonomous life, in 2020 he will need 18, and in 2030 even 28: he would essentially become "grown up" at fifty.
THE PROPOSALS
An intervention aimed at tackling the generational emergency and reducing this gap that undermines intergenerational solidarity must, in short, be envisaged at two levels: that of social discomfort in general - of which youth discomfort represents an important component - and that of the generation gap in particular. This is to ensure a clear and shared correlation between the subjects who are required to make an exceptional solidarity contribution effort, on the one hand, and the beneficiaries, on the other; in the context of an organic and systematic intervention that places the youth question at the center of political attention (a real Framework Law on the Youth Question).
With regard to the first level, the Foundation's proposal envisages a remodulation of the tax which, with a redistributive function, takes into account the fiscal maturity; in relation to the second, a solidarity contribution from the more mature generation that enjoys the most generous pensions: a duty, not only from an ethical point of view, but also from a social and economic point of view.
As part of the solutions, the involvement - for three years, in a real "pact between generations" - of about two million "subscriber" retired citizens, positioned in the top part of the pension brackets, with a rigorously progressive intervention is hypothesized with respect to both the ability to pay and the contributions paid; and called to 'contribute' to the development of an equally large number of 'NEET' (young people not engaged in study, work or training).
This through tax incentives and the creation of an adequate Solidarity Fund for youth policies capable of refinancing many of the measures put in place by the Government and mapped in the Report, as well as extraordinary contribution measures and the creation of financial instruments capable of multiplying the effect and support the outlined strategy, aimed at supporting at least the cost that our country bears for NEETs. With the aim of changing the scenario to 2030 of the new Italian generations, compared to those of the fathers
