Giubergia Michelangelo is the UCR national deputy and vice president of Budget and Finance Committee. For The Chronicle
Discussion on the draft of the opposition to give the 82% minimum retirement mobile has highlighted the double standards that usually always present the national government. Given the importance of the issue and the fairness of the initiative, a whopping four government ministers and the Director of Anses were forced to hold contradictory positions with which they themselves have been holding on economic issues.
one hand, the interior minister said the increase for retirees is inflation. At this raises several questions, how can it be explained that on one hand the sharp rise in infrastructure spending, social security benefits, or the same universal child allowance is not what consider inflation and jump at this proposal hysterical voices against you?.
If other costs are not the source of the evident and growing inflation that people face every day, neither can this set of assets. The reason for the complaint alleges that the initiative did not start from the Executive. That is the only true reason.
If unjustified increases in costs we speak, look for the causes increases occurring in the SIDE, which doubled during the Kirchner government, or the price of public works, gas oil imports in football for all the unnecessary and lavish spending on advertising.
Meanwhile, the Minister of Economy, which should be the voice of economic logic in the government, said that providing 82% mobile phone 'get resources to retirees. " Boudou not understand if the proposal is being given to retired resources that belong to them, to be applied to the sector, which has not been the practice of these years of the Kirchner Anses, which spends huge sums to finance any type of activities not related to retirees.
Much of resources Anses, spent freely without control the national government, was entitled to the provinces and native, transferred when carried on the pension reform of 92 and never returned to them by the national government's strong opposition to this measure.
Aníbal Fernández, in his usual style, said the proposed increase for retirees is 'disgraceful' and that makes the opposition are 'insane'. His chief Nestor Kirchner went further and predicted 'that would break the country. " The
kirchneristas mobility are scared to retirement, but not flushed with the parallel existence of an embassy in Venezuela, or the few transparent sharing transportation subsidies, or see a Antonini Wilson with a suitcase full of dollars, nor Jaime business, or substantial assets of the secretaries of the president.
The government's strategy is to delay the time, distort the background discussion, which clearly in the case of 82% mobile for retirees is the existence of abundant resources that are known, but in fairness and transparency of its distribution . It is giving retirees what they deserve and that the executive looks at the moral obligation to explain why an institution like the Anses, which says it has a surplus of over $ 15,000 million a year, can not give this benefit, but if you can give money to the Treasury to finance without any kind of control spending.
Discussion on the draft of the opposition to give the 82% minimum retirement mobile has highlighted the double standards that usually always present the national government. Given the importance of the issue and the fairness of the initiative, a whopping four government ministers and the Director of Anses were forced to hold contradictory positions with which they themselves have been holding on economic issues.
one hand, the interior minister said the increase for retirees is inflation. At this raises several questions, how can it be explained that on one hand the sharp rise in infrastructure spending, social security benefits, or the same universal child allowance is not what consider inflation and jump at this proposal hysterical voices against you?.
If other costs are not the source of the evident and growing inflation that people face every day, neither can this set of assets. The reason for the complaint alleges that the initiative did not start from the Executive. That is the only true reason.
If unjustified increases in costs we speak, look for the causes increases occurring in the SIDE, which doubled during the Kirchner government, or the price of public works, gas oil imports in football for all the unnecessary and lavish spending on advertising.
Meanwhile, the Minister of Economy, which should be the voice of economic logic in the government, said that providing 82% mobile phone 'get resources to retirees. " Boudou not understand if the proposal is being given to retired resources that belong to them, to be applied to the sector, which has not been the practice of these years of the Kirchner Anses, which spends huge sums to finance any type of activities not related to retirees.
Much of resources Anses, spent freely without control the national government, was entitled to the provinces and native, transferred when carried on the pension reform of 92 and never returned to them by the national government's strong opposition to this measure.
Aníbal Fernández, in his usual style, said the proposed increase for retirees is 'disgraceful' and that makes the opposition are 'insane'. His chief Nestor Kirchner went further and predicted 'that would break the country. " The
kirchneristas mobility are scared to retirement, but not flushed with the parallel existence of an embassy in Venezuela, or the few transparent sharing transportation subsidies, or see a Antonini Wilson with a suitcase full of dollars, nor Jaime business, or substantial assets of the secretaries of the president.
The government's strategy is to delay the time, distort the background discussion, which clearly in the case of 82% mobile for retirees is the existence of abundant resources that are known, but in fairness and transparency of its distribution . It is giving retirees what they deserve and that the executive looks at the moral obligation to explain why an institution like the Anses, which says it has a surplus of over $ 15,000 million a year, can not give this benefit, but if you can give money to the Treasury to finance without any kind of control spending.
0 comments:
Post a Comment