Don't mess with retirement!

The Planalto Palace team must already have been warned that the issue is met with considerable skepticism from most voters. This even leaves congressmen from the government's base somewhat undecided, no matter how committed they are to the Bolsonaro government's directives. Legend has it that the first year of any legislature is the ideal time to approve measures loaded with unpopularity like this one. After all, there would always be plenty of time left for deputies and senators to try to save face and count on the well-known forgetfulness on the part of those who cast their vote for them last October.

Tinkering with pensions is a very sensitive operation. So much so that the government is preparing a billion-dollar marketing and advertising campaign. The major media outlets sincerely appreciate it, quite moved by the gesture. The stated intention is to create a kind of "counter-climate" favorable to their privatizing and destructive intentions, through the so-called "public opinion." Following this attempt at collective brainwashing, will come the well-known polls reflecting supposed public support for the evils simmering in the kitchen of finance. As the preparation of the lies to be disseminated is in the hands of competent and very well-paid professionals for this inglorious task, it will be up to progressive forces and the broad social movement that is organizing itself every day to dismantle this farce once again and denounce the true liberal intentions behind the catastrophic discourse.

The main argument to defend the changes orchestrated within the headquarters of Paulo Guedes & Co. Ltd. will be a mix of lies. On one hand, the eternal blah-blah-blah associated with the lack of budgetary resources and a supposed structural unviability of the General Social Security Regime (RGPS) – this is the universe of INSS benefits. On the other hand, the also old and well-known drivel regarding supposed privileges existing within the public servants' retirement regime – the so-called Special Pension Regimes (RPPs).

The first aspect to be debated relates to the fiscal problem. It is not true that the government lacks available resources and that the imbalance in social security accounts is the major obstacle to the resumption of economic growth. This is information disseminated daily by the major media outlets, due to this commission sponsored by the financial system. As the explicit intention is the privatization of social security, the "fake news" model fits perfectly here. The major newspapers and television networks never tire of justifying the mediocre performance of economic activities due to the negative expectations of agents operating in the financial market.

With that, they immediately move on to the mantra of the urgent need for approval of what has been called the "mother of all reforms." Thus, in the understanding of these people, the Brazilian economy will continue to stagnate as long as the National Congress does not approve the package of atrocities suggested by Bolsonaro, through the hands of Paulo Guedes. A true blackmail, trying to use the majority of the population for their purposes of dismantling the public social security system. But the relevant point is that, contrary to the government's discourse, social security is not the biggest expense of the federal government. If the biggest obstacle to the resumption of GDP growth and employment were, sincerely and honestly, the solution of structurally deficitary budgetary arrangements, then everything would be easier.

The budget item that consumes the most public resources has never been subject to any reform. And here I am referring to the expenses contained in the accounting for interest payments and other services on the public debt. This is where the factor that weighs most negatively on the current fiscal regime lies. In 2018 alone, R$ 380 billion from the Union Budget was allocated to fulfill this type of commitment. And, unlike what happens with the accounts of the General Social Security Regime (RGPS), the Public Debt Financial Services Regime does not include resources from tax revenues. The account is eminently wasteful. In addition to being the account that most impacts the deficit of federal public accounts, it is a structurally deficitary budgetary unit. Thus, it has been – since its origins – in a systemic and structural imbalance.

But the interesting thing is that no one linked to defending the interests of finance even mentions these billions of dollars as the source for promoting any kind of strategy to solve fiscal solvency. To that end, they resort to the discourse of the "primary surplus," because this methodology cleverly removes financial expenses from the much-demanded fiscal effort. With this, the major newspapers begin to demand "fiscal responsibility" in bold letters. How so? Oh, no, but the sacrifice should only be obtained by strangling the accounts of health, education, social security, personnel expenses, social assistance, public investment, and other items. Financial expenses run free and unchecked, without controls or constraints. For the payment of interest on the public debt, the sky's the limit.

But fortunately, it seems that the social movement is once again awakening to the gravity and risks involved in this sad situation. Trade union organizations, research associations related to the topic, organizations defending retirees, and a broad range of professors/experts are mobilizing to denounce this veritable crime that is intended to be committed again against the poorest. The schedule of demonstrations should coincide with the timeline of the bill's progress through the National Congress. And this should be the way to prevent another attempt, as happened with Temer's proposal, from progressing within the legislature itself.

The government is trying to sophisticate its lies and claims that its proposal will end privileges. A lie! How can one say there are privileges in the General Social Security System (RGPS) when more than 99% of benefits in the rural sector are, at most, one minimum wage? How can one claim that the "rich" in the urban subsector, where more than 70% receive a maximum of two minimum wages in retirement, are privileged? Bolsonaro's proposal will not affect the truly privileged, as they are generously rewarded with a tax system that offers tax exemptions for profits and dividends, that has not implemented a tax on large fortunes, that turns a blind eye to major tax evaders, and so on. These privileges remain untouched.

Finally, regarding public servants' pensions, it's important to note that this equalization with the rules for private sector workers was already implemented in 2013. Therefore, employees who entered public service after that date will only receive the same INSS (National Social Security Institute) ceiling from the Treasury. The remainder will be supplemented through a pension fund, as is the case with other workers. As for the current and future retirees under the old rules, the focus should be on monitoring compliance with the ceiling rule, ensuring that no one receives more than the salary of a Supreme Court Justice. And let's agree that this doesn't require any constitutional reform.