The pension system will collapse.

In a forest in southern Europe, a colony of ants collected grains each spring for their community granary. Traditionally, each young or old ant contributed according to its capacity, ensuring that even in winter the oldest ones could feed without having to labor, however, with As time went by, the colony began to face a challenge: fewer and fewer young ants were born and the number of older ones continued to grow.

The previously overflowing granary began to shrink dangerously each winter, the young people worked tirelessly but their number was no longer sufficient to maintain the balance of the system, the colony was faced with that crossroads of reinventing its provision model or facing even more difficult times.

This Forest reflected the current dilemma of many solidarity-type pension systems where the balance between young workers and retirees is increasingly leaning towards the latter, challenging the sustainability of the system. It is increasingly important to be clear about how we are going to complement our pension. , are not guaranteed, they will not disappear, but they will be increasingly smaller or will result in greater tax pressure on those who do have to pay them.

With the metaphor of ants, it becomes increasingly relevant to look for, I don't know, alternatives to complement income during retirement and in that context, talking about savings plans that include, for example, a rate of return, is presented as a very attractive option that can be an effective solution to guarantee an additional source of income that also obviously complements the public pension, which also ensures greater financial stability for when we are older.

Population aging is an imminent challenge for global economies everywhere; projections indicate that developed countries will need millions of highly trained, working-age immigrants to counteract population aging and adjust the labor market.

It is clear that immigration has increased in these countries, especially post-"pandemic", and although these immigrants have a higher labor participation rate than natives, many of them occupy low-skilled positions due to a lower educational level and do not occupy a job. more specialized and does not contribute significantly to the solidarity pension model since it is nourished by larger contributions that they give and this demographic scenario also intensifies the pressure on the system.

The official media recommend a continuous and rigorous review of the financial sustainability of the system itself, considering that the current reforms may or may not have been able to fully compensate for the projected increase in the spending obligations that are going to come to us, that is what say the official establishments, it is the best way to inoculate us with a terrible idea.

We are going to have to raise social contributions or taxes or this will go bankrupt, of course unless you want half or more of the population to be foreign! It is understood where the plan is going.

According to official media, to guarantee pensions in a country the unemployment rate should not be above 6%, many countries are above that; and in this way it will be difficult to sustain the current model, add that these statistics and normally the data it handles focus on unemployed and employed people and ignores a large number of inactive people.

The issue is relevant because the income from contributions that pay pensions depends on the former (employed) and because the latter (unemployed + inactive) turn out not to contribute funds to the system, as they are not employed or looking for work, among them are retirees. obviously and specifically the aging of the population, the consequent increase in the inactive and the decrease in the active population poses a problem that leads us to the Perfect Storm of reluctance.