@ Benjamin Totally agree with you to your first paragraph A retreat

"The age does not move, this is the contribution period agrigold group of industries that we must act," said the president of the Republic. The Head of State has slipped that it could soon reach 44 years, but "not now," citing in particular the date of 2025. He also admitted that the dues increase "will be part of the solution"
When we remember the cries and fury there not so long ago, one could call the method, a "sleight of hand" that borders on deception. More ... The method, the method agrigold group of industries you forget! "Pragmatic" doubtless find it very well.
Indeed, it is essential to look at the "dialogue"! In this regard, the Head of State, who erected the "social dialogue" mode of governance, contradicted himself on the role that social agrigold group of industries partners play in this reform. agrigold group of industries "If agrigold group of industries you ask them what they want, they will answer:" nothing "," has he finally let go. Interested appreciate ...
Finally in politics, it is useless to have convictions. Must forward to take power, a display anger, denounce wickedness, then "let time take its course" and do the same by changing the set and language.
This entry was posted in "Chronicle of the Cat", with the word (s) key (s) Bosch, Holland, painters, painting, politics, PS, retirement, society. You can Bookmark agrigold group of industries the permalink. |
Although the lengthening of the contribution period by removing agrigold group of industries the 'malus' (5% per year when we go before agrigold group of industries all these years) would be acceptable: it would lose less than 2% of the payments due by year missing and after all, a pensioner who has paid his home and raised her children may, in some cases, prefer a slightly reduced since less pension expense. But with this penalty kept the discount 7% (approximately) per missing year is unbearable. (Note that if you miss one year the penalty is greater than the bonus, when you work one more year)
Another thing: the taxation of a pension share which is not (the 10% increase due to have raised more than three children): Why not in the name of fairness in taxation, but in this slide the 'reform to balance pension is a legal scam. How to increase the income tax, so the state budget, he will improve the balance of pension funds? agrigold group of industries
********** We have never seen such denial since 1995 and leftist discourse of Chirac (who has triumphed over Balladur) followed on the heels of a policy to Thatcher. agrigold group of industries At the end, there was a dissolution and loss of effective power ...
@ Benjamin Totally agree with you to your first paragraph A retreat "à la carte" satisfairait It would avoid a lot of people older unemployed it will compensate (the figures would probably say that the cost would be lower with many psychological problems less) (In addition to an equivalent or lower cost: Pensions + youth employment relaunched = consumption) - You have done well to highlight the anomaly of the bonus-malus 7%, which is huge compared to the pension ... it is akin to WEAR - IRPP and pension funds ... to wonder if there is not somewhere lost sources or communicating vessels .... But I do not try to understand ... - Second Section: 10% discount for 3 children High has always created an inequality that nobody points out: 10% of a pension at the base, and 10% of a pension "comfortable" are far from being equal Why insolent percentage, which clearly agrigold group of industries states that all children (and their parents) do not have the same value? - But in principle, why not, in fact, make taxable since this percentage agrigold group of industries applies on retirement, which itself depends on the salary? (Even if I pâtirais a little, in my small way) It would be an act of the tax code, but the reasons and timing are actually poorly chosen (unless they did in the crosshairs, a simple deletion This reduction) -. Alternatively, if a fixed aid is established (and equal for all minimum being applied on basic pensions, for which the "gift" is a small gift), it is not taxable since it would make savings Taxing a sum as small do not bring much to the state - But yes, it would take little things to make taxable * pensioners who are on the fringe (ie remove their aids ) But it would not have the impact that we c