The people are living longer while having fewer children. The proportion of the working population decreases in the total population, the demographic Change is in full swing. This now seems to know each child. And yet the reality left objectors nothing better comes to mind as a reduction (!) Of retirement age require. Then something called social. is in reality is the initiative as such barely disguised gift to the typical clientele SP (well-earning, working part-time state employees of the baby-boom generation). The thing stinks to high heaven ... guest author, smiling to left catilina AHV nonsense. Have fun!
pension age 62 for (almost) all
The "people's initiative for a flexible retirement age" will anyone with an income of less than 118,000 francs early retirement from age 62 Age allow. An early retirement is already possible to just have to accept it (actuarial) cuts the old-age pension. The initiative will now remove these cuts, which amounts to a de facto subsidization of early retirement. Proponents of the initiative argue that the financing of the AHV was rock solid and having in its income account surplus. The cost of the referendum, a year CHF 800 million according to the calculations of the steering committee (1.5 billion francs after those of the opponents of the referendum) are relatively small and manageable, also benefit from it, a significant proportion of the population. Now that billions for the big banks and the gamblers were issued to the stock market are, finally, the hard-working ordinary people sometimes turn.
This argument is contradicted by the economist Professor Monika Butler. In a newspaper article with the same title she argues that the targeted low-income earners, but people over 50 with middle and higher income (editor R.: = a big part of the SP-voters), the main winner of the acceptance of initiative would be. Their main arguments are as follows:
How much is actually the initiative?
The promoters considered income up to 10,000 francs per month as average income. Thus, 85% of men and 98% of women of a subsidized early retirement benefit (the wealthy who live off their investment income, and those who work do not even included !!!). Of course, it is argued that some of the costs could be saved in other areas, such as in the AI or the social welfare. Only we have a little problem: The total population is getting older on average. The (optimistic) annual 800 million are now no longer sufficient to fund the generous early retirement. In any case, the mean Overspending lower state pensions in the future or higher taxes (VAT, percentage of wages) now. After a few years caused by the initiative of the additional cost just by using the left hand heavily criticized exceed the financial sector.
Who actually benefited from this initiative?
They are the baby boomers in the middle income range. The initiative has a huge design flaw. The initiative is based on the generated income as a criterion for access to the full pension. However, anyone can determine to some extent myself, what his income is. A high-school graduates, who after a government-financed Higher education with a part-time job satisfied (editor R.: most of the SP-constituency working part time, because this is the state much easier than in the private sector) and an average annual income achieved by 110,000, also receives a full pension . Who is now in the range of 120,000 francs yearly income is careful not to do more, because then he loses his pension. He prefers to be reduced even. In middle and higher income, the proposal of the unions punished therefore work activity.
benefit the people actually have little income?
the little people, the initiative brings few benefits. If a shop today can retire early, they take a pension reduction for the OASI and pension fund buying. It comes but to benefit from additional services which guarantee an income of her 3,000 francs per month for single people or 4500 francs for married couples (excluding other medical services). If no assets exist that compensate for the losses due to supplementary benefits pension cuts completely. In addition, non-wealthy workers with monthly pre-retirement income is below about 4500 francs (single) or 6,000 francs (married), the pension income on early retirement from the age of 62/63 will not cut it today!
Who actually pays the initiative?
the old or existing pensioners: the additional expenditure of the AVS to be financed in the future, additional tax revenue. Increasing this case in the recent past, the VAT, then the existing pensioners dig deeper into their pocket. They also may be other consequences of the initiative have felt. The shortage of nursing staff will improve, not sure if the work is being punished for these people after 62 so obvious.
The boy or actual losers Until they reach the retirement age again be no more funds be available for such luxury services. The annual cost of a subsidized early retirement to come to the already dramatic financial shortfalls in the future. A 'yes' to pension age 62 is now called a "yes" to a higher retirement age tomorrow.
0 comments:
Post a Comment