A of all people At the Deutsche Börse reception, Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced a general attack on pensions. There will be a “paradigm shift,” he said. In the future, the pay-as-you-go statutory pension should only be a building block, while the funded private and company pension provision should be massively expanded. He promised around 850 people from exactly this industry that this would also trigger a significant boost on the capital market.
It is striking how openly the Chancellor serves the wishes of the financial industry – of which he himself was a member as a Black Rock representative until a few years ago.
Statutory pension insurance has always been an object of desire in the financial sector. Gigantic sums of money flow through their coffers. What Merz has in mind is the reallocation of enormous amounts of money from this system to the capital market – at the expense of today’s workers. Because they will have to withstand reductions in pensions and bear the risks on the capital markets with additional provisions.
In the discussion about pensions, those who mean cuts when they talk about reforms have the upper hand. Their roadmap: Companies should pay fewer social contributions for their employees and the capital markets should benefit from the additional pension provision that employees need because of lower pensions. This is made palatable to citizens with the questionable promise that they would then also benefit from the booming stock markets – but that only lasts until the next financial market crash.
Reforms yes, but in a different direction
In fact, the pension system needs reforms. But in a completely different direction. People with severe stress should be able to retire well before the age of 67 without any deductions. Employers would have to participate more in the additional retirement provision of their employees. A minimum pension that guarantees a living is necessary so that poverty in old age does not increase further.
Anyone who calls for something like this is currently on the defensive. Nevertheless: Alternatives to the ideas of Merz and Co must become more visible. The sovereignty of interpretation must be taken away from them. This includes countering the narrative that the pension system is not stable.
This narrative is false. The costs will continue to be manageable in the future, as shown by a study by the trade union-affiliated Böckler Foundation. Yes, the state puts billions into the pension fund every year – because it finances the benefits it wants politically, such as the “mother’s pension”. The share of pension spending in German economic output has fallen over the past 20 years.
An initiative by the German Federation of Trade Unions is promising. He has convened his own pension commission. If this commission presents a convincing concept, the discussion could turn around. It would be necessary.