Professor, the voltage on pensions salt packet, as is inevitably the case in view of the law of balance that must allocate the necessary resources. The unions say that a half billion euro is not enough and ask for at least 2.5 billion. You can arrive at this figure?
” As we said at the table with the unions together with the Labour Minister, Giuliano Poletti, the real figure will arrive in September near the law of financial statements – answers Undersecretary to the Prime Minister, Tommaso Nannicini -. I do not understand this summer debate over completely invented figures, like that of 1.5 billion euro. The will of the Government expresses the government, not anonymous sources. Of course, if there had been an intention to invest resources, we would not have started a debate on measures that have a cost. “
“The macro picture we will see him in September. I remain hopeful that since this law of balance you can give concrete answers and inspired by a criterion of social equity. I think the workers with contributions in several operations that no longer have to pay charges for heinous rejoin, to early, the employed in strenuous work or risky, pensioners with low income ‘.
->
The new pensions
The bank loan and the penalties for those who choose the Bee
Professor Francesco Giavazzi wrote in the “Courier” on Wednesday that the government increases the uncertainty assuming solidarity measures to help young people with discontinuous careers. A formula, fears the economist, which prefigures a redistribution at the expense of higher pensions. It is that it?
“I do not share. The public discussion is the lifeblood of democracy. The transparent comparison of different options reduces uncertainty rather than increase it, unless you think that decisions can be taken the night before by four technocrats locked in a room. “
But there will be solidarity surcharge on high pensions?
“There will be no contribution. The measures at issue in this law of balance are other and notes. I just remember. My suggestion in that callback interview by Professor Giavazzi concerned another “Phase Two” of the confrontation with the union on the revisions to be made to the contribution system. ”
“In contributory, that is, for those who began working after 1995, wages above 100,000 euro – wages not pensions – already enjoy the right not to contribute more than the public system; in other countries, this “opting out” is not free but subject to a small contribution to help those who remain in the public system. I think it can be discussed. But it is not an issue for today and with pension checks is not involved.
the secretary of the CGIL, Susanna Camusso, instead attacks the merits of the proposals, in particular the Bee, the pension advance, saying it will be a flop because it would be unnatural for a worker in order to borrow career for 20 years on own retirement.
“the controversy of Camusso seem to me back a few months. Which it is already a step ahead because sometimes the CGIL, discussing protection in the labor market, appeared back a few years. What interests me is the substance. And the matter is that you begin to understand that with the Ape a significant audience of beneficiaries in need receive an income bridge to retirement without having to pay back, thanks to a tax bonus. “
It is necessary to put half of the banks and insurance companies to provide you with a loan the pension Advance?
“it is if you do not have access to between 5 and 10 billion to solve the same problems. At the table with the unions we asked if there were better solutions provided they are not costed tenfold. No answers came. I want to be clear on one thing, though. Even if you do not find an agreement, the confrontation with the unions will be proved useful, because going down into the merits is allowing us to improve our proposals. If it were an agreement, however, despite the diversity of platforms and proposals of each, the agreement will be comprehensive, including Bee. They do not make a menu arrangements. We are not at the restaurant. “
Renzi said we have to find the money to raise minimum pensions . Been thinking about the 3.5 million integrated checks to a minimum, or on the lowest pensions, those who benefit from the fourteenth? Or the increase in the no-tax area? Or both or three things together?
“It could increase their 14th for those receives it, widen the range of beneficiaries to the thousand-euro pensions, and also complete the course the no-tax area that equates to that of retired employees. interventions that are not mutually exclusive. And all produce beneficial effects on lower retirement income. Depend on the resources available. “
No comments:
Post a Comment