All pension experts this week agreed that it was not appropriate to allow people to withdraw pension funds to face the crisis, however, the OECD did not completely close the door, and there are already two economists who have been in favor of this idea, under certain conditions.
This was announced by Joseph Ramos, who proposed taking up to $ 1 million, but on the condition that the retirement age be postponed. And now also joined the former president of the Central Bank, José de Gregorio, who in conversation with the Central Table of Channel 13, said that a mechanism could be devised to make it work as a loan.
Specifically, the dean of the Faculty of Economics and Business of the University of Chile, said that a social credit could be given while the crisis lasts, from the fund that each person has accumulated, where for example, a monthly fee could be withdrawn , which is related to the person’s past income, and showing that today they no longer receive income. “Then it is paid, ensuring that the amounts do not exceed 10% of income in the next three years,” he exemplified.
He explained that this would be for people who have not been receiving state aid in this crisis, and who have money in their individually funded funds, mainly the middle class. The idea that De Gregorio raises, “is a super secure loan, it can be at very low rates, and it is discounted over time as the person quotes,” he said.
In this sense, he believes that it is not necessary to liquidate the silver from the fund, and that it would not create a problem in the capital market. “I don’t think they are such massive amounts if you limit it to people who are not receiving any kind of income,” he explained.
He also commented that there are other economists, such as Joseph Ramos, who are thinking that there may be a mechanism to withdraw pension funds to face this crisis. “Why don’t we do the same thing that was done with the 16 economists, and a group comes together, and in two weeks they try to make a well-armed proposal?”
He added: “I understand that this is a serious discussion, I understand that they (government) oppose withdrawing the funds and being paid by the State, or withdrawing the funds against anything. What has to be is a social credit. That is what needs to be done, a social credit for people who are not receiving any kind of aid, and who have enough (savings) in their pension fund. ”
The economist mentioned that what catches his attention “is that it seems that in Chile the discussion is dominated by two groups of extremes, one that does not want to change anything, and everyone says that nothing should be changed because it is opening the door, and at the Opening the door a little bit will make us all fall, not realizing that the back door is being smashed to pieces. I call that those who believe in protected capitalism (…) Then there are those who want to change everything, who do not care what they propose, the backhoes, we could say “.
“But I think you can have a discussion in the middle hall, a reasonable, well-founded discussion, and for that there are two things that should not be confused. The first, what has happened in Peru with the withdrawal of funds, that when people retire they can take all the money for the house, or that they are now withdrawing up to 25%, that is very bad for pensions, “he said.
On the other hand, he commented that it is “very bad public policy” that the Antofagasta Court of Appeals determined, which ruled that a retiree can withdraw all her funds, although now the case is in the Supreme Court.
“Secondly, the idea that I have seen come out of Congress seems bad to me,” he added. This, referring to a proposal that allows people to withdraw 10% of their funds, which is then returned by the Treasury through a recognition bonus. “You could end up eating the $ 12 billion from this whole plan (of the deal),” he said. In addition, he commented that it is poorly focused.
–
