Populism (and anti-populism) with the self-employed

Being self-employed means riding a roller coaster of variable billing, with the safety rail removed. The weakest link in the labor system is also the favorite of politicians in the pre-campaign... and of the newspapers that support them. This is the only way to understand the dispersion of messages on newsstands when it comes to reporting on how the contributions that the self-employed must pay will evolve. There were media outlets, for example, that sounded triumphant trumpets. "The freezing of contributions will benefit 1.4 million self-employed workers," it said. The CountryAnd he was quick to add in the subtitle that "La Moncloa intervened to correct the initial proposal for Social Security." Superman cape for Sánchez, right now! If it weren't for, for example, The Vanguard He explains it differently: "The central government rectifies and the self-employed quota will rise to a maximum of 2.5%." In other words, the great savior saves us from the mess he himself had created.

On the other side of the ideological Rubicon, of course, they're doing everything they can to avoid giving the poor self-employed a sweet pill. "The self-employed won't approve the new quotas if social protection isn't increased," he says. The reason, which focuses on a future possibility rather than recording the actual, accounting benefit of the present. And The World ago: "The PP will take its plan to lower contributions for the self-employed to Congress." Once again, a potential candidate with an electoral promise who still has to get enough votes to form a government ignores a real measure that affects more than a million workers. Electoralism is infuriating, but it also has its reverse: hiding information to maintain a permanent state of discouragement. Naomi Klein spoke about the doctrine of shockPerhaps we should also talk about the doctrine of the daily journalistic fine mist, which is also more or less disguised sensationalism.