The Prime Minister, his party, cabinet and MPs persistently try to manipulate the writing of "Vijesti", "denying" something that they do not write, thinking that in this way they will save themselves from the truth. Yesterday, the target was the article "Higher salary now, lower pension tomorrow".
At the same time, they do it completely amateurishly.
First, around 10 a.m., the party sent a statement to all media, telling pensioners not to believe that their pensions will be reduced, even though the text is about future pensioners (with mandatory pre-election marketing, as PES and Government are the best "in Belgrade and in the world") . Among the pensioners who did not read the article in the printed "Vijesti", there were probably those who wondered in wonder who this imaginary, hateful enemy is who says that their pensions will be less. And a stunning prime minister who never lies. The announcement was published by many media outlets, which use autopilot to stamp party announcements, without context or explanation.
Then, around 13 p.m., the Prime Minister's office sent a similar "reaction" to the text in the newspaper to about 160 media and journalist addresses (among which there are journalists who no longer work or work in other media), with an indication that they were reacting to the article in the daily newspaper. Vijesti", which almost no one had reported until then, and it had not yet been published even on the Vijesti.me portal. Of course, that "reaction" was not published by anyone, except for a couple of their megaphones, who can't wait to publish anything negative about "Vijesti", without their readers having any idea what "Vijesti" was writing about.
Shortly after 18:XNUMX p.m., the Prime Minister's office confirmed with another statement that it "strongly denies... certain media analyses", this time without mentioning "Vijesti". Of course, the same autopilots from yesterday morning, duly announced that too, although their readers still do not know what the announcement refers to.
And now about the "reaction" of the Prime Minister's office, in which "Vijesti" is mentioned.
"The information that pensions will be smaller in the future is incorrect," is the first manipulation of the Prime Minister's cabinet.
It is not written anywhere, neither in the text nor in the title of the text to which they are "reacting".
Anyone who can and wants to read will see that it is written there that the starting pension for some categories of future pensioners would be higher if calculated according to the current rules and figures, than it will be after the rules from the law come into force, which the government claims reflect the PES program Europe now 2.
So, future pensioners from those categories, e.g. someone who has 40 years of service and an average gross salary and retires this month, will have a higher starting pension than if he retired, for example, in November, because he will have a lower personal coefficient from October. The amount of any increase in income from the PIO Fund depends on the starting, earned pension. The smaller it is, the smaller the increase will be.
DON'T MISS IT
The second manipulation attempt, that two other factors besides the personal coefficient influence the fact that pensions will grow, also serves only to smear the eyes.
No normal person disputes that pensions will grow. But for some future pensioners, it will be smaller than it would be now, because the third factor is smaller. Because, regardless of those other two factors, if the third factor for calculating your starting pension will be smaller than it is now, mathematics from the third grade is inexorable - the result of multiplying three numbers is always greater than the result of multiplying two identical numbers and one reduced number.
That is, if the amount of the coefficient for the starting pension remained the same, its amount would be higher than it will be when the coefficient is reduced for some categories of pensioners. And regardless of the future growth of the other two factors, they cannot affect the amount of the starting pension, because the third factor, the personal coefficient, will be smaller from October. So their pension will always be lower than it would have been if the personal coefficient had not been reduced. TO FUTURE PENSIONERS.
The third manipulation, that "Vijesti" wrote that someone's pension will be below the minimum, is - also manipulation.
The text clearly states that this is an example of calculating the starting pension. This calculation must be done for each future pensioner, so if the result is below the minimum pension, it is clear that that pensioner will receive the amount of 450 euros, whatever that result is.
It is worrying that the Prime Minister's office does not know how minimum pensions are calculated now. Since the beginning of the year, the PIO fund has been keeping double records - it calculates the actual pension for the user according to his coefficients, as well as the part that is added to that amount to get 450 euros in the end. For example, if someone's actual pension is 400 euros and it is increased by two percent through regular adjustment, it will amount to 408 euros and the Fund will add 42 euros. When his actual pension reaches 450 euros, then the state no longer adds anything to him and his income grows through regular adjustments.
This rule, that the minimum pension of 450 euros is not increased through regular adjustments, is valid until the beginning of 2026, unless the actual pension of the beneficiary does not exceed that amount in the meantime.
It seems that the Cabinet and the Prime Minister spend a lot of time reading (or writing for) the Ix order of the respected and world-renowned fact-checking organization "Fake News Dog", so the facts don't matter to them.
Here is a modest piece of advice to the cabinet, the prime minister, PES and MPs: you could hire a real fact-checking organization (or hire fact checkers, people who know how to do it, it doesn't matter, it's from a couple of citizens too), so that before rather than when the prime minister or someone of his makes a statement, they must first check it and see if it is correct or not, and only then the prime minister or someone of his says it publicly.
We would all be better off.
Bonus video:
