Recent anti-aging movements retirement in Paris have some similarities with those in Athens in 2001. In our country (mild, as it turned out later) insurance they met with a furious reaction from everyone (parties, including the government of the time, trade unions, media, public opinion) and were finally abandoned by the Simitis government. In France, thanks to the expanded powers of the President of the Republic, (also mild) proposals Macron will be implemented, despite the opposition of the majority of deputies.

“The Defeat of Democracy” in France? In a sense, yes. In another sense, no. Macron’s persistence, despite the political cost, can be seen as redressing the failure of democracy whenever those with political rights (voters today) plunder the commons at the expense of those who don’t (the generation of our children and their generation). children).

On the contrary, in Greece in 2001 “democracy won”. Of course, in a few years the country went bankrupt with the decisive contribution of the most wasteful and unscrupulous insurance company in Europe.

Note slices (whatever they were called) weren’t “horizontal”. The reductions ranged from 16% to 46%, depending on the size of the pension and the pensioner’s age at the time the measures were taken. But again, despite the cuts, pensioners continued to receive higher pensions than they and their employers were contributing. Moreover, in recent years, the poverty of older people has decreased and their relative position in the income distribution has improved.

How did it happen; First, because pensions have fallen less than wages. Secondly, because low pensions fell less than high ones. Thirdly, because pensions, albeit reduced ones, continued to be paid, which was not the case with the wages of those who lost their jobs. Fourth, because new generations of pensioners are entitled to higher pensions than the previous ones.

Today, the average pension (basic and supplementary) is 935 euros per month. Not so bad, considering that the average gross earnings of private sector employees do not exceed 1176 euros per month.

For all these reasons, the widespread demand to “repair the losses of pensioners”, and even the wealthiest ones, which is claimed by almost the entire political – and judicial – composition of the country, cannot be supported by serious arguments. Despite occasional mistakes, the correction of the previous decade was of historic significance. For the good of the country, it must be preserved.

Recent events show that this has not been understood. With the weakening of the influence of creditors, the country is gradually returning to the practices that led it to bankruptcy.

In a more serious country, elections would be an opportunity to bring issues up for debate. This is unlikely to happen in our country.

The first refusal concerned the so-called “personal difference”. In May 2017, Parliament approved Law No. 4472/2017 introduced by the Government of SYRIZA (at the suggestion of creditors), which, among other things, provided for a gradual redefinition of pensions in line with the system of Law No. 4387/2016 (which itself was established). At the end of 2018, the government solemnly abandoned the implementation of the relevant provision with the tacit consent of the opposition (and creditors).

Then a second retreat followed. Under the weight of the decisions of the State Council declaring certain provisions of law 4387/2016 unconstitutional, the SYRIZA government proceeded to reduce the contribution rate of self-employed professionals and farmers to 13.33% (from 20%), taking the main step to reverse the consolidation of the rules of the insurance system, taken thanks to the insistence of creditors. This development was secured in February 2020 by the government of North Dakota. reinstate, through Law 4670/2020, the low “flat rate” (i.e. non-income related) contribution regime for the self-employed and farmers that was in place until 2010. Through this law, the current government, a general practitioner or a lawyer can (by law) pay less in retirement than a janitor or builder.

The third failure was the tacit refusal of the government (with the tacit consent of the opposition) to periodically review the retirement age as life expectancy increases. (In 2021, the total limit was to rise to 68, or 63 with 40 years of insurance.)

At the same time, court rulings are returning wealthy pensioners incredible sums for pensions they never contributed to. And the list of withdrawals continues.

Meanwhile, serious newspaper reports analyze the “loopholes” of the laws in detail, explaining, for example, how a worker who had a minor child born in 2011 can retire in 2023 at the advanced age of 52.

All this creates an image of a society that has not learned anything from the adventure of memorandums, and a political class that is ready to repeat the same mistakes that led us to bankruptcy.

In a more serious country, elections would be an opportunity to bring issues up for debate. This is unlikely to happen in our country. We are running at full speed for another “victory of democracy”.

Mr. Manos Matsanganis is Professor of Public Economics at the Technical University of Milan and Head of the Greek and European Economic Observatory ELIAMEP.