An excellent Editorial from El Diario, photo “arrangement” is provided by Bolivian Thoughts:
4.5% GDP does not guarantee growth
The case of a probable payment of the second Christmas bonus, in spite of the crisis that the country is going through, causes concern not only in the business sector but in the population in general. The government believes that a growth of 4.5% of the Gross Domestic Product “will allow the payment of the second Christmas bonus”.
The truth is that even if the GDP was greater, the radical difference that exists between the companies of the country, its generally controversial situation, its difficulties to have capacity of payment for its most elementary necessities, such as the payment of wages and salaries, taxes , social security and acquisition of raw materials, without counting other many obligations that need to be paid in a timely manner, show how difficult and problematic the situation of private entrepreneurship is (ED 7/20/18).
The government considers that, rationally, “state companies that have a good financial situation” may pay the second Christmas bonus and not those that show critical situations and can not cover the new obligation. According to the business community, the government could apply the same measure to the private sector; but, it does not consider that, to act under that premise that “pay what they can”, creates very serious differences and discriminations, both between employers and in the personnel, because each one will be able to show rational situations or not and, in the case of the workers, would awaken susceptibilities for the marginalization that they would feel.
If there is a provision and this allows disbursements outside current budgets, the double bonus could be paid if indeed the possibilities allowed; to do it under the principle of simple cabals or suppositions is contrary to the rational, to the honest and frank procedure with the workers. If there is a law that covers everyone, it is correct; but to legally dispose of differences and preferences is contrary to any principle of equity, prudence and future prospects. It should not be forgotten that the second Christmas bonus is simply electoralist and can not be qualified as a “permanent benefit”, that is, it is momentary, circumstantial and temporary. The rational and legal until now is and has always been the traditional Christmas bonus, of which no one disputes its payment.
To believe that the GDP of 4.5% is a guarantee, is to distance oneself from the reality and rationality of the economy. Only the production and generation of wealth and creation of employment can guarantee both possible increases in wages and salaries and the payment of extraordinary bonuses, as is the second Christmas bonus. Neither the government nor the private entrepreneurship nor the community itself can hope that the percentage of growth is a “magic wand”, which is fine for childhood dreams, and not for real life that is categorical and strict in its principles and consequences.