Argentina may be losing – if it has not already lost them – its best years of existence to generate wealth, to improve the quality of life of its people in every sense, not only economically, but also socially, educationally and culturally. and, in addition, to build a solid and predictable foundation that could have guaranteed future generations a development platform with much less hassle and misfortune, suffering and regret than those that past and current generations had to pass through here, that stars in the present of the country.
The reflection comes from a fact of the economy and the social and pension situation of the country: it is estimated that in ten or fifteen years – around the year 2040 – Argentina will finish traveling a promising stretch that is considered, recognized and denominates the demographic bonus: let’s say that an ideal period that every society goes through in which the active population greatly outnumbers the economically dependent population, which is the one that goes from 0 to 14 years and from 65 onwards. That relationship today, in Argentina, is at its most beneficial: for every 100 assets there are 55 economic dependents. But, in 2050, dependents will rise to 61 and by 2100 they will be 72 due to the largest number of older people, a calculation always made on the basis of 100 assets. Such data is highlighted and highlighted by an in-depth study carried out by the World Bank on the demographic challenges of the country, entitled “The years do not come alone, opportunities and challenges of the demographic transition in Argentina.”
If we look at the urgencies and needs of Argentina in a broad sense, it is clear that we do not know very well where to start and start. But, much clearer still is that you must start with something. That something is what the Argentine political leadership has not agreed on because it cannot, does not want to or does not know. And the deep differences that distance the ruling party from the main opposition in too long a time of cracks and ideological fractures, added to a mutual contempt rarely seen between the two, aggravates the panorama.
The famous demographic bonus has not been taken advantage of, except for some time perhaps at the beginning of the century, when the tailwind of an economy that distributed dividends among the raw material producing countries brought its benefits to Argentina. After those years, which coincide with the government of Néstor Kirchner, the considered first Kirchner, public spending continued to expand to maintain in some cases and expand the levels of state assistance, but without genuine resources at hand. And, according to economists, excessive issuance together with indebtedness, also excessive, and, sometimes, both factors operating together and simultaneously, have done the rest: a decrepit state of affairs with no way out other than years of adjustment, or or the assumption of a longer path with a dose of gradualism in the inevitable reforms that is agreed, unanimously, will have to be carried out.
Among the emergency menu, the resolution of the complex pension situation in Argentina, as in other cases surely, does not withstand further delays. In this same space, days ago, the drama was described: some 5 million retirees earn the minimum of a little less than 26,000 pesos; The total universe of retirees is close to 8 million people, bringing together all the regimes and various State assistance, while the active, that is, those who work blank, are registered and make their contributions, is a little less than 7 million of people in a very precarious and unfavorable relationship between assets and liabilities, when the recommended account at the global level ranges from 3 to 4 assets for each retiree.
What Argentina will do to solve the problem that not only has today, but also moves its major losses forward, it is not known. And also the reality of a good time is determining that no more delays are bank; Citizen pressure and how it has been expressed for at least six years now in the elections that have been held are proof that, in the event of the slightest doubt of distractions or failures, it will be made known to the power in power. Some of all that was seen in September and on the 14th of this month.
Meanwhile, the World Bank has said about Argentina that “like any type of structural change, the aging of the population that would occur during the next decades will require modifications in the scope and design of public policies.” He adds: “Unlike similar studies carried out in developed countries, the Argentine case offers the complexity of evaluating the impact of demographic change on a basic scenario characterized by a high degree of instability. Consequently, the well-known challenge of ‘getting rich rather than old’ is incomplete and adds to the multiple demands that, in a society like Argentina, weigh on the State, especially referring to income distribution and social cohesion ” .
In The Years Do Not Come Alone, the World Bank, which carried out this work with the contribution of the editors Michele Gragnolati, Rafael Rofman, Ignacio Apella and Sara Troiano, deals in detail with the financing of the policies that Argentina should assume to correct a state of situation that leads to a black outlook in case it is not taken care of. To reach a reasonable state of adult protection, Argentina should face reforms that range from increasing the efficiency of spending on the health of that population and the anticipation of a greater demand for resources by other sectors at the same time.
And finally, he argues that “leaving aside the possibility of financing the greater demands for assistance through debt, since this would mean transferring the burden to future generations, there are two extreme situations: maintaining the levels of finance that can be financed with available resources, reducing average transfers per older adult, or maintaining benefits per adult by increasing tax pressure or reducing other expenditures ”. And in the latter, clearly, it is that the World Bank without mentioning it, without affirming it or making it explicit, because it is not necessary, is that it draws attention to one of the points that have caused the rift: the ideological point of the problem.