It is the eternal paradox that brings together social security and assistance. Today it is Matteo Salvini’s words that link two measures that must not be on the same level. Pensions and citizenship income are neither comparable nor usable for an exchange of balance sheet items. The simplification, ‘we remove a part of the citizenship income to allow you to retire earlier’, as well as on the political level is questionable on a technical level. If the issue is to find resources, it would be more correct to do so by drawing from elsewhere, even assuming that the priority at this moment is that proposed by the League, in some way getting closer to the flag measure, ‘quota 100’, than the needs of the system. they diluted 102 and that from 1 January 2023, without interventions, would be definitively lost in the return to the Fornero Law. But if the choice is presented as an ‘equal’ exchange between less citizenship income and easier access to retirement, one enters a different playing field. Assistance policies, which obviously include citizenship income, must be linked to active employment policies. This passage, which represents the most important shortcoming of the current measure desired by the Cinquestelle, involves a detailed discussion on how and to what extent it is possible to correct the distortions of citizenship income. And, even if it were to be argued that it is not needed or that it is even harmful, it should be replaced by a new measure to support those who are unable to work or those who cannot find work. Therefore, using the resources that today are destined to the citizenship income for the same purpose and in the same direction. The barter between citizenship income and easier pensions does not hold even from a social security point of view. It is of little use to buffer the problem of early retirement with resources ‘distracted’ from another destination without an overall plan, which holds together the needs of those who have to retire, the aspirations of those who must enter the world of work and the sustainability of the system. Two in-depth and separate discussions would be needed: on the one hand an effective measure to support those who cannot produce income, on the other a structural reform of the social security system. Putting the two plans together, simplifying and shortening the way to go, risks bringing results only in terms of propaganda. (by Fabio Insenga)
