The question of the hundred guns. What may be easy for a young student and incomprehensible to the Anapa reviewer
Proverbs as well as commonplaces do not always get us wrong, but sometimes they help us understand what is happening around us, as in the case of the phrase: "there is no deaf worse than those who do not want to listen". Thus it would seem when reading the reflections of an unknown columnist who, from the pages of another association, candidly asks himself if, despite the undoubted financial results achieved by the regenerated Pension Fund Agents, having returned the management to the agents, was good for the category and whether it is just as good, having broken down entry barriers to encourage new members, without penalizing the old ones.
Exhibiting an uncommon insight, however, the new Hamlet does not stop at the most obvious aspects and, with elegant nonchalance, outside the biggest question, that of the hundred guns: "it was agreed to renounce the 20 million euros that the Companies were willing to pay to obtain financial control of the FPA? ".
We do not know if he was right that well-known political exponent, who, speaking of the culture of the Italians, used to say that they had that of a student who did the middle school and not even in the front row. Given that the writer has never thought about it even for a brief moment, they are questions of their kind that make you strongly doubt as a fifth-grade child should understand that if something is yours, you probably have more care and interest compared to something else.
Even a first-grade student should come to understand that the increase in the number of taxpayers strengthens the financial stability of a fund, especially the actuarial one and therefore for a very long period. And if a second-grade student is asked, if 26 million of operating surplus, in addition 90 million of technical surplus of the year 2017, moreover after a closing in surplus also in 2016, are better or worse than the tip of 20 million of the Ania that claimed in exchange the dismemberment of the Fonage in thousands of individual PIPs with variable pension benefits under the total financial control of the individual companies, should not have so many doubts in this regard and respond to momentum: yes, it is agreed to renounce the offer inadmissible of the Ania and maintain the joint management of the Fund, as well as preserving the criterion of certain and defined pension benefits.
Not knowing the age of the anonymous critic, unfortunately we are not able to provide more precise information on his level of education and also on his good faith.
Michele Pocciante forgets perhaps that just three Generali agents have realized and spread the study on the retirement benefits of the post-rebalancing FONAGE compared to those of p.i.p. Generali, Allianz and Unipol. Result in favor of Fonage (even after the plan !!!) 3 to 0 very very evident. These are numbers, not words. Just inquire to avoid writing nonsense
Michele, it remains your idea that you evidently don't have the courage to question. At least take into consideration that if almost all of the Anapa founding groups have withdrawn support and returned to SNA after the Fonage case and after Cirasola and his companions' last "shoot the moon", as did almost all of their fellow agents , there will also be a reason ... Stay well among the few friends of the boss's friends and do as he says and good luck to you
Dear Alberto C. (who knows C for what is ...... free imagination), in all likelihood I missed the episodes, from what you write I know, however, that you also keep me company, surely you have people who are in charge of the film who spoke of the offers of ANIA ...... they were far beyond the unatantum ...... and the results could never have been worse than those had! Regardless, the doubt will always remain! And then what to say to Letizia (without surname), an apotheosis of comment .... without words .... if it is many years that on the "piece" and these are the results, well then we are put really bad as a category !! With these assumptions .... good luck FONAGE !!
by Michele let it go and think about getting general policies that maybe you can do better, if you don't know all the aspects of the old story you can't compete with those who have been on the piece for many years
dear Michele Poccianti, maybe you missed a few episodes: the ANIA offer that (only) SNA published included a twenty-one-year one-off contribution against cuts of up to 70% (seventy%) of the services, with the recalculation according to principle of the contribution ... informed before writing things that you don't know and to draw blatantly unfounded conclusions
The unknown columnist, with a modest schooling but absolute good faith, has a name and surname because he signed, unfortunately Alessandro (the surname is not visible will have "escaped" to put it .....) it may be true that I made the line three times when they distributed stupidity but believe me I was not alone, indeed in excellent company! To see from the comments made to the article of the "renowned" journalist Giacomo Anedda, in addition to the content of the same, I regret to take note that, for the umpteenth time, there are no precise and punctual answers to the questions posed, probably it becomes difficult to give if don't take note of serious mistakes.
1) but where is it written that by accepting the contribution of ANIA we would have "lost" the management of the Fund? We should have changed the defined service, to secure the Fund, but we certainly would not have suffered the cuts then made by the commissioner ...
2) the financial results of 2017 are independent of the acceptance or not of the ANIA contribution which was not only 20 million .... it is embarrassing that the great journalist makes a similar comparison and does not know the precise terms of the offer that ANIA had done .... but will not have escaped the attentive commentators ... in the meantime it would be advisable to inquire or "remember" better.
3) enlarge the membership base is certainly a way to give greater security to the Fund, in this case we are talking about 73 new members .. certainly not of numbers to change the history of the same ... on the contrary many colleagues have left or have suspended payments, but nobody says anything about this !! Absolute freedom! In my opinion it was not a good sign, an undoubted advantage was created for those who had never joined the Fund just while all the others were penalized !!
Who knows if one day someone will answer these questions, for a question of role the President of the most representative Union should at least do it, given that it is one of those 73.
The writer was a poor adherent of the FONAGE, BECAUSE IT IS GOOD TO PUT INTO LOVE THAT NOT ALL THOSE WHO FILL THE MOUTH IN WORDS WERE OR THEY ARE, JOINING THE FONAGE !!
if these aniapa communications are not even signed there will be a reason? However, reflections such as this by Giacomo Anedda, serve to reflect those who are unable to do so on their own
Excellent fully acceptable considerations. I have serious doubts about the possibility that the first recipient of the same - who is the anonymous writer of the Anapa piece - can understand them and make them their own (it is too integrated in that process of abdication of the neuronal functions that seems to characterize the leadership of that association ). However, I am certain that this clear talk will make the few Anapini who remain in the lists of paying members and who continue to have more and more doubts about the choice of joining that association, at the time made perhaps under pressure to which then, then, continue to have doubts. they couldn't resist.
Bravo Giacomo. After reading your timely comment, it is unlikely to manifest. He will have understood why he stood in line three times when the good god distributed stupidity. (cit. Konrad Adenauer)