Is Goldwell Elumen Good?

Pensions: a deficit in another

Pension reform has, without doubt, two political objectives.

Proving his electorate that Nicolas Sarkozy is able to take "painful" measures to raise France from its slow decline, send a message to financial markets, who are believed to threaten any country failing to reduce its budget deficit.

These two reasons make it an ad hoc action taken in emergency without consultation.

A small apothecary account is enough to understand that for this reason, the reform might move problems, and therefore to live even the endless cycle of pension reforms (there is the 5th in 15 years, if my counting is correct).

For this reform to work, it is necessary that the age structure of employment rate shifts of two years. In other words, there, in 2018, many people who work 62 years compared to persons 60 years old today, many people 63 years of the 61 years from now, etc..

If this is not the case, this reform is either a cynical maneuver, or a failure. Indeed, this would reduce the deficit of pension funds by reducing pensions: workers who could retire at full rate now, and who can do more with the reform would reduce their pension as they would be unemployed or forced inactivity before the legal age of retirement (d Hence a haircut). There would certainly less for pensions, and therefore less of a deficit, but at the cost of a variable combination of: 1) a deterioration of the fate of retired 2) an extension of the deficit of pension funds for that of 'UNEDIC, who cares elsewhere. What would please little financial markets, who do not care that generate deficits.

look is what this means. If one follows the predictions INSEE, there will be approximately 1.914 million people aged 60 to 62 in 2018 (I took the data of 2020).

The employment rate for 55-59 year olds is currently 63%. Apply it to our 60-62 year 2018, since that is the prerequisite for the success of the reform: the pyramid employment rate shifts of two years. That makes 1.23 million of additional assets.

must therefore be created 1.23 million jobs over 2018. There are currently 2, 615 million unemployed in France. If it fails to create these jobs, it means that the number of unemployed increase by almost 50% (probably less, of course, a number of them are daunting and it occurs more job center). The first calculation

apothecary gives us a measure of the challenge, and helps explain the fears of UNEDIC.

can clarify this challenge. There are 1, 23 million jobs to be created around, which can add about 400,000 jobs to find an unemployment rate of 8% and more or less stable unions UNEDIC. That is 1.6 million jobs, or about 6% more than before.

If we take the scenario The most pessimistic of the NRC on the evolution of per capita productivity of labor (+ 1.5% per year), this means that the French economy has a growth rate of 2.1% annually average in the seven years between now and early 2018. If the most optimistic scenario is confirmed NRC (+1.8% increase in labor productivity) will require 2.6% growth.

But the crisis, which prompted him to act in emergency situations, makes this type of growth completely illusory: the crisis will probably succeed for years of low growth. In January 2010, OFCE established three scenarios growth between 2011 and 2018. Black expects 1.3% annual growth. Pink, 2.1%.

All this is completely rough, of course. But it gives an idea of orders of magnitude that we are going to face.

One thing becomes clear: Nicolas Sarkozy will have to really go for growth with his teeth very long, it is true.

Unless, of course, have negotiated a reform with MEDEF to require that companies change their strategies for hiring older workers, who make at present these creations even more illusory employment of older workers. And a spreading of the implementation of the reform realistic, given the current capacity of the economy to create jobs. Indeed, this response of all countries that have adopted such reforms, even before the crisis, as recalls COR (p.5).

was the political courage that we can, it is true.