[ad_1]
Anne Lavigne, a professor of economics of the University of Orleans, a former member of the Pension Monitoring Committee Analysis La Debache to Midi Report of the flash work of the auditor’s court in pension. Interview.
La Debache to Midi : Auditors’ court issued a report on pensions and what is said to be reform?
It is a little beginning to do the assessment. Reform confirms what we already know, that is, those who are already at work can postpone the retirement age, while others are forced to welding. If they are unemployed, they extend it, and if they have reached the end of the compensation period, they suffered a loss of income. The result of reform is that the employment rate of the elders will increase slightly.
Reform is not sufficient, because we see that a major lack is planned within 10 years (15 billion euros)?
The small criticism I can make in the auditor’s court is to present all the results in billions of euros. It does not talk to ordinary people. We, economists want to speak in GDP. If it is 0.2; In my opinion, there is no danger at home in GDP, in GDP. In the reform, I was a member of the Pension Monitoring Committee (CSR), and the organization coming from the horn to the bottom of the horn to make recommendations when the pension system is departed from the fixed purposes. In our recent report, we pleaded with less frequent reports. Under the pretext of enlightening citizens, they are immersed in the avalanche of statistics … every time we say “core wrong”, but things are formed, which is normal.
What do you think to be changed?
In CSR, we beg you to introduce a little more automatic piloting rather than reforms in jolts. We went very quickly from 62 to 64 years, for example, in Germany, fifteen years. Each generation takes more one month. To say “you will leave at 63 o’clock, a month” is still flexible to implement. Instead of rising the load, it is necessary to program it for a very long time.
Do we focus more on short and medium -term effects?
Yes I think. We may not have abandoned some levers, such as the Balance Fund for Pension, they are very effective. Allocation of this fund for repayment of social loan is uniform, but losing an precious income system.
The auditor’s court believes that “chase away the legal age of 65 at the age of 65 for those born between 1964 and 1968 can have a positive effect.”
No, there you have to remain silent at the age, we already have people on the street to leave at 64 am…. The general opinion is crystallized at the age of this law, while the subscription period begins to “bite” today. The generation who entered the work market will be with 42 years of verified legal period in 65 years.
Read more:
Retirement Reform: 62 % of the French people prefer to return to 62 years
Since the average pension is considered 1,500 euros and “favorable”, should retirees be used more?
I am one of the people who plead with the balance of all public funds. On the other hand, I am not in favor of touching the parameters of the pension system (index of pension). The system promises to maintain the power of buying when retiring assets. So we cannot declare the sub -code of the retirement revaluation because it will break the contract. On the other hand, a user can plan through the line field. Today, an employee and a retired who receives 2,000 euros per month does not have the same CSG rate (common social contribution). It seems to me that it is inequality and that the wealthy retirees can revamp the CSG rate with assets.
[ad_2]
Source link
