Eduardo Bolinches, economist: "The fewer people suck from the pension fund, the better. They are costing us 13.5 billion euros a month, which is like buying 400 iPhones a day"

Eduardo Bolinches, economist: “The fewer people suck from the pension fund, the better. They are costing us 13.5 billion euros a month, which is like buying 400 iPhones a day”

a month ago, Social Security confirmed that the reversible retirement was very close. For this reason, the debate on the future of pensions in Spain with the new proposal has once again occupied a central place on the political and social agenda. The accelerated aging of the population, added to the withdrawal of the baby boom generation from the labor market, has highlighted the need to seek innovative formulas that guarantee the financial sustainability of the public system.

Reversible retirement, conceived as a more flexible version of what is currently known, aims to offer room for maneuver to both workers and the system itself, allowing pensioners to partially re-enter the labor market and make your pension compatible with a salary. However, this is a project still pending parliamentary approval.

What the economist says about reversible retirement

In this context, Eduardo Bolinches, guest economist on the program ‘And now Sonsoles’, explains that the new modality aims to prevent “everyone from arriving at once” into the pension system, since this could put the financial viability of Social Security in check. “Now many baby boomers are coming to retire, this is about to overflow and this is the problem,” he warns.

For the expert, “the idea is good because it has two purposes: that there are fewer people or, in other words, that fewer people go to suck from the pension fund, because the fewer people there are, the better,” he argues, since “they are costing us 13.5 billion euros a month, which is like buying 400 iPhones a day.”

A model designed to relieve pressure on the system

Reversible retirement would make it possible to make the pension compatible with part-time employment (between 40% and 80% of a full day). The closest precedent, the active retirementalso requires the hiring of a young person in comparable conditions and a minimum stay of two years.

“That exists, but we need the involvement of the employer,” explains Bolinches, who warns that, if the new formula is approved, it will mean continuing to contribute to Social Security while receiving the pension, although this would be reduced proportionally according to work dedication.