Why Italy’s public pension system is failing

By now most people in Italy are aware of the dramatic increase in public pension costs.

The government’s latest estimate is that by 2020 the public pension plan will be in crisis.

And with this latest announcement, Italy is about to have its first national crisis since the start of the financial crisis in 2008.

But how is Italy’s pension system doing?

Are its public pensions funded by its own resources, or are they managed by private pensions funds?

And what does that mean for the public sector?

As a result of the crisis, Italy has been forced to adopt a series of measures to reduce the number of public pensions.

These measures are designed to limit the scope of public sector pension schemes.

These include limiting the scope and duration of pension plans, as well as limiting the amount of contributions and the age at which they can be paid.

The most important measure for the Italian public sector is the limit on contributions.

The Italian public pension scheme, or PPP, is the single largest source of public money in the country.

The pension system employs almost one in five workers.

It is this large public sector, coupled with the government’s refusal to reduce its own contributions, that has created the biggest challenge for the system.

As a consequence, the Italian PPP is being funded primarily by the private sector.

While the PPP has a very high level of funding, the private pension funds are now the largest source in Italy.

It is estimated that they have contributed approximately €200 billion ($234 billion) to the public system, of which about 60 percent has been paid by the PDP.

The other big public sector fund, the public employer, has a much smaller role, as the government has decided that it wants to focus on the private-sector pension schemes instead.

However, the fact that the government is relying on the PEPP for its public pension contribution amounts to a significant increase in the scope for the private funds to contribute.

The main reason for the increase in private contributions is the government wants to avoid a financial crisis.

As part of this process, it has been using a combination of two strategies to keep the public service in check.

The first strategy is to reduce private contributions.

Since the crisis began in 2009, the government reduced its contribution to the PPA, which accounts for approximately 12 percent of total public pension contributions.

But this was not enough.

In response to the crisis the government decided to introduce a cap on contributions to the private PPP and the private employer, which means that contributions to these private funds will be capped at the level of the PPI.

The public sector has thus been forced into making even more contributions to cover its deficit.

The second strategy is for the government to make sure that public sector employees can continue to benefit from the PPE.

The PPE has a limited number of participants, meaning that it is only accessible to those who have already received a pension.

This means that the state has been trying to make up for the shortfall by paying out a large share of its own pension contributions to its employees.

The result has been an extremely large and costly increase in pension contributions, and the public services have had to respond in many different ways to the problem.

The most important example is that many of the government institutions that are funded by the public PPE have been forced by the crisis to increase the number and scope of their contributions.

This means that for the most part, the state’s own pension system has been able to cope with the crisis.

But as the state pension fund is so big, it is no longer able to maintain the same level of financial support.

In this way, the system has also been unable to manage its own finances.

The amount of money coming into the system from private sources has been insufficient to cover the expected costs of the next crisis.

The situation is particularly acute for public sector pensions.

The current situation is an example of what happens when a public sector system is dependent on a private pension fund.

In order to continue functioning, the PPG will need to continue to provide large amounts of contributions to keep its finances in order.

In this way the state is paying out large amounts to the pension funds that are supposed to be funding the PPD.

This is a very big mistake, because this is what causes the PPUP to have a problem with financial sustainability.

This is an important question for Italy.

There are two possible ways that Italy can manage its public sector finances: it can either reduce its contribution levels, or it can increase the size of its contributions.

This can be done either by raising the public pensions or by reducing the number or duration of the private pensions.

Either way, it must be managed in a way that makes sense for the current financial situation.