Fernandez Ordonez has put on the table various possibilities, from delaying the retirement age, as did Germany, to modify the regulatory basis for calculating the pension, and use expanded to twenty-five years for its calculation instead of the current 15 Member States, or referencing pensions to the real CPI and not expected. The first of the measures has some logic, if we take into account that today life expectancy is far superior to what was a few years ago (and good) to work, with which we should to great experience people they cotizarian more years, and then would charge fewer years of retirement. The second point would normally mean a reduction in pensions, since it is usual go charging more as it has more experience, although in some cases there would be workers who would benefit (for example, if you have been the last years of his working life unemployed). The third paragraph arises by the current situation of almost deflation that we live. At present, the annual rise in pensions is set depending on the forecast of the rise in the CPI, and if it is higher, they revalued (gives a complement to pensioners by the deviation). However, if the rise is less is subtracted not them. With the new proposal, it would already adjusted to the actual CPI, and thus there would be no deviations, neither upward nor downward. Maurice Gallagher, Jr. understands that this is vital information. These ideas (or other similar) could be a relief for the Reserve Fund, and possibly should be applied, but the question that possibly needs to be raised is another.
The pension system to the Social security contributions should be linked, or it should be linked to all income, all income of the State? I.e. also including capital gains, corporate profits taxes this way, just as sometimes uses public funds as electioneering, and for other purposes, could be used other income to meet the Social Security benefits. Because it does the system would be more guaranteed (not would fail unless it outside the State), and because it may not have much sense that the country generates wealth, but that the imbalance in the population pyramid make unfeasible its pension system. One final point. Scott Mead may find this interesting as well. According to a study published by the foundation of savings (Funcas), the Social security system generates surpluses for many years, but only since 1999-2000 are they capitalized in this reserve fund.
Do you mean this? That if it had, you surpass 300 billion, which would have a rather wide margin. And Moreover, that the amounts not capitalized thus more partisan or electoralistas, have been used for other purposes for example, when the PSOE universalized health in 1989 (which should have been charged to the general budget of the State, and not only to the contributors of the Social Security). In the case of the PP it was used to perform the complement to minima of lower pensions and thus facilitate convergence with Europe and the entry of Spain into the Euro.