pension: The deceptive promise of mathematical accuracy

The nominal principle appears with the claim to create order and clarity, but on closer inspection it turns out to be a refined construction that is more veiled than explained. It works with seemingly exact calculations and suggests objectivity, while in truth it is stipulating a distortion of economic reality. The central trick is to increase monetary values like thistreat as if they had an unchanged meaning, although their purchasing power has long since shifted. What looks like a profit on paper is in many cases nothing more than a compensation for the insidious depreciation of money. Nevertheless, taxation accesses exactly here and entitles to amounts that have never represented a real increase in assets.

The illusion of wealth growth

A contradictory picture emerges for the citizen. On the one hand, there is an expectation that saving, preventive and long-term planning will lead to a real gain. On the other hand, this supposed gain is taxed, although in reality it only reflects the preservation of the original purchasing power. The system converts a simple adaptation to themonetary into an alleged income and treats it like a real income. This creates a mirage that secures income for the state and pretends a development that never took place in the individual.

The silent redistribution through taxation

This logic becomes particularly explosive where it affects long-term provision. Those who save over the years expect a certain reliability and the protection of their aspired. Instead, he is confronted with a taxation based on computational variables and ignores real circumstances. The tax is accessed, although there is no real increase in value. through thata creeping redistribution is created that is not openly named as such, but is hidden behind technical terms and formal rules. However, the effect remains the same: The citizen pays for something he never received.

The absurdity in old-age provision

Nowhere is this problem more evident than in the case of old-age provision. Contributions from already taxed income have been made over decades in the expectation of receiving reliable security in old age. However, if the later benefits are treated as taxable income, although their supposed earnings shares are largely onlyCompensate for loss of purchasing power, the logic will finally be contradictory. Here, a claim is taxed, which essentially represents nothing else than the return of previously rendered services in an adapted form.

From the necessary balance to systematic distortion

The earlier practice of limiting taxation to a reduced share was not a generous concession, but an attempt to mitigate this fundamental contradiction. At least to some extent, she recognized that not every mathematical increase is a real gain. With the later realignment, however, this compensation was abandoned. Instead of the systemic error toocorrect, he was transferred to a new set of rules that now applies the same distortions even more consistently.

The load without real equivalent

The consequences are immediately noticeable to many of those affected. Services that have already been built up from income already taxed are again subject to taxation. This creates a double burden that is neither economically conclusive nor legally unproblematic. The claim that property is protected and developed values are faltered when state intervention isbased on fictitious sizes. The boundary between legitimate taxation and overtaxed access is blurred.

imbalance as a political signal

In addition, there is a striking imbalance in the treatment of different care systems. While some of those affected are directly and significantly more burdened, the adjustment in other areas is significantly slower and weakened. This unequal approach does not act like a coincidence, but like a conscious decision as to who should bear the brunt. thatThe result is an impression of arbitrariness that further undermines the confidence in the fairness of the system.

The loss of trust

In the end, there is not only a financial burden, but also a profound loss of trust. Those who plan and provide provision over long periods of time expect reliability and clear rules. However, if it turns out that these rules are based on constructions that distort real conditions, the feeling arises that caution and discipline are not rewarded, but exploited. thePension loses its character as a secure claim and becomes an object that can be exposed to new access at any time.

A system without an honest basis

The actual criticism is not directed against taxation itself, but against the basis on which it is carried out. As long as mathematical profits are treated like real income, the system remains contradictory in itself. A sustainable solution would require actual purchasing power to be taken as a benchmark and not mere numerical values. Without this step, the nominal principle remainsAn instrument that pretends precision but creates distortion and trusts without providing a solid basis.