Accessibility Tools

DIRECTDEMOCRACYS
Direct Democracy — Collective Ownership — Shared Leadership
POLITICAL, ECONOMIC PROGRAM,
FINANCIAL AND SOCIAL
FOR ITALY
2025 – 2035
Critical analysis of the real situation · Diagnosis · Concrete solutions · Expected consequences
Edition 1.0 — May 2025
directdemocracys.org
This program is developed according to the founding principles of DirectDemocracyS (DDS): logic, common sense, research, adherence to reality, the search for truth, internal coherence, and mutual respect. This is not a traditional electoral manifesto, built on impossible promises and empty slogans. It is a technical-political document that analyzes Italy's real situation, identifies the structural causes of its problems, and proposes concrete, measurable, and verifiable solutions, with explicit timelines and consequences.
DDS belongs neither to the traditional right nor the traditional left. It is not populist, it is not demagogic, it does not manipulate consensus through fear or unrealistic promises. It operates according to the principle that every citizen, adequately informed and equipped with the right tools, can and must participate in the governance of their community.
Each section of this program follows the same structure: diagnosis of the current situation with real data, identification of the causes, detailed solution proposal with concrete examples, implementation plan, and forecast of short-, medium-, and long-term consequences.
|
STRUCTURAL NOTE This program is intended for official DDS members and Italian citizens who want to truly understand what isn't working and why. The data cited comes from verifiable sources: ISTAT, Bank of Italy, OECD, Court of Auditors, Eurostat, and IMF. Each proposed solution has been assessed for feasibility, impact, and risk. The expected consequences also include the negative effects of transitions, as hiding them would be dishonest. |
— PART I — DIAGNOSIS: THE REAL SITUATION IN ITALY —
Italy is the only G7 country with a per capita GDP lower in real terms than in 1999. Between 1999 and 2024, average annual GDP growth was 0.3%, compared to 1.2% in Germany, 1.4% in France, and 2.3% in the United States. This is not a cyclical problem: it is a deep structural crisis rooted in clearly identifiable systemic elements.
Italy's GDP in 2024 is approximately €2.1 trillion. Public debt has exceeded €2.9 trillion, equal to approximately 137% of GDP. Debt interest payments absorb approximately €80-90 billion annually, resources that are not invested in healthcare, education, infrastructure, or research.
|
Indicator |
Italy |
Germany |
France |
Spain |
EU average |
|
Average GDP growth 2000-2024 |
+0.3% |
+1.2% |
+1.4% |
+1.1% |
+1.3% |
|
Public debt / GDP (2024) |
137% |
64% |
112% |
107% |
88% |
|
Youth unemployment (2024) |
20.3% |
6.1% |
17.0% |
28.0% |
15.5% |
|
GDP per capita PPP (2024) |
€35,800 |
€49,200 |
€42,300 |
€33,200 |
€38,100 |
|
R&D Spending / GDP |
1.3% |
3.1% |
2.2% |
1.4% |
2.1% |
|
Productivity (OECD index) |
88 |
116 |
108 |
96 |
100 |
Italy's stagnation is not an inevitable fate. It is the result of poor political choices, a dysfunctional institutional system, organized interests blocking reforms, and a bureaucratic culture that punishes initiative. The main causes are:
Italy has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world: 1.20 children per woman in 2024 (the replacement rate is 2.1). The population is aging rapidly. Today, there are 3.2 workers for every pensioner; by 2040, there will be 1.8. The public pension system, already strained, will become unsustainable without radical reforms and increased labor force participation, especially among women (54% versus 72% in Germany) and young people.
The emigration of skilled young people is a silent hemorrhage: between 2000 and 2023, over 1.2 million Italians with university education emigrated, primarily to Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States. This represents a huge loss of human capital, paid for by Italian taxpayers and given away to other countries.
Northern Italy's per capita GDP is 40-50% higher than that of the South. Unemployment in the South is structurally double that of the North. The quality of public services—healthcare, schools, transportation, local bureaucracy—is systematically inferior in the South. Decades of welfare policies have created dependency without development. The problem is not a lack of resources: the South receives enormous transfers from the central government. The problem is the model: welfare instead of productive development, clientelism instead of meritocracy.
Italian political parties, with very rare exceptions, are not democratic organizations. They are vertical power structures where a few leaders decide everything: candidacies, alliances, programs, appointments. Members and voters are spectators, not protagonists. This model produces mediocre ruling classes, selected for loyalty rather than competence.
The result is that Italian parliaments are filled with people who owe their positions to devotion to their leaders, not to competence or merit. The laws passed often reflect particular interests or party survival logic, not the common good.
The Italian electoral laws of the last thirty years (Mattarellum, Porcellum, Italicum, Rosatellum) were designed, often deliberately, to concentrate power in the hands of party leaders through blocked lists. Citizens vote for a party but do not choose who will represent it. This severs the connection between elected officials and voters and turns parliamentarians into party soldiers.
The cost of maintaining Italy's political and institutional apparatus is excessive compared to any European benchmark. The costs of regional governments, local authorities, boards of directors of public entities, and subsidiaries have soared decade after decade without corresponding improvements in services. The proliferation of institutions, agencies, authorities, and commissions creates duplication and structural inefficiencies.
The National Health Service (SSN) is one of the greatest achievements of the Italian Republic. But it is under increasing pressure: chronic underfunding, intolerable waiting lists, a shortage of doctors and nurses, a huge gap in quality between North and South, and growing private healthcare filling the gaps in the public sector.
Italian public healthcare spending is 6.9% of GDP, compared to 9.4% in Germany, 9.5% in France, and 11.5% in the United States. Italians have one of the lowest preventable mortality rates in Europe—a sign that the system still works—but conditions are rapidly deteriorating.
|
CRITICAL DETAIL: WAITING LISTS In 2024, the average waiting time for a specialist appointment in the National Health Service is: cardiology 84 days, orthopedics 92 days, oncology 47 days, dermatology 71 days. For an abdominal CT scan: 68 days. These delays have direct consequences on health and mortality. Those who have the money turn to private healthcare. Those who don't, wait or give up. |
In 2023, 34% of Italians had to forgo healthcare services for financial reasons or waiting times. Private healthcare, which generates profit, has captured a demand that the public sector cannot meet. This is neither a sustainable nor equitable model.
— PART II — THE DDS PROGRAM FOR ITALY —
The Italian institutional system is designed to foster instability, favor existing parties, exclude citizens from real decision-making, and protect the political class from the consequences of its own mistakes. Without profound institutional reform, all other reforms will be blocked, watered down, or reversed when government changes.
DDS proposes a pure proportional system with a 3% threshold, small multi-member constituencies (maximum 5 seats per constituency), and mandatory preference. Voters express a binding nominative preference. There are no closed lists. Members of Parliament are elected directly by citizens, not by party secretaries.
A direct consequence: parliamentarians must answer to their constituents, not to party bosses. This creates a structural incentive for competence and hard work, not for vertical loyalty.
DDS proposes abolishing the Provinces as elective bodies (reducing them to technical coordination bodies), reducing the number of Regions from 20 to 12 through mergers of the smaller regions, and eliminating all public bodies with fewer than 50 employees that duplicate functions already performed by existing bodies.
Estimated savings: €4-6 billion annually during the full-scale phase, with reduced bureaucracy and increased efficiency.
DDS proposes introducing a propositional referendum into our system, to be extended nationwide, based on very detailed implementing rules, which would be binding, and a quorum-free abrogative referendum (replacing the 50%+1 quorum with a 33% quorum, a threshold that can be achieved and not manipulated through organized abstentionism). The propositional referendum allows 500,000 citizens to bring any proposed law to a direct popular vote.
We also propose introducing a recall mandate for all our political representatives: after the midpoint of their term, if 30% of voters in the constituency sign a petition, a recall procedure will be activated by popular vote in the constituency.
DDS proposes: total incompatibility between political office and paid professional activities for the duration of the mandate; an absolute ban on transferring from the public sector to the related private sector for five years (revolving door); complete and real-time transparency of all party budgets and campaign expenses; reformulation of the crime of abuse of office with clear definitions and clear penalties; and a reform of the statute of limitations that no longer applies to crimes against public administration after indictment.
The 2020 cut in the number of parliamentarians (from 945 to 600) was made without the reforms needed to make parliament more efficient. DDS maintains the 600 parliamentarians but radically reforms procedures: elimination of perfect bicameralism (the Senate becomes the Chamber of Regions with limited functions), limitation of the number of parliamentary committees, complete computerization of the legislative process, and mandatory impact assessments for each bill.
|
CONCRETE EXAMPLE — SINGLE OFFICE CASE An entrepreneur wanting to open a shop in the center of Turin must currently interface with the Revenue Agency, the Chamber of Commerce, the Municipality (SUAP), the Local Health Authority (ASL), the Fire Department, INPS (National Institute for Social Security), and INAIL (National Institute for Insurance against Accidents and Injuries). Seven different bodies, seven different procedures, seven different timeframes. With the DDS reform, the integrated digital one-stop shop, all these procedures converge on a single platform, a single process, a single contact, and a maximum of 10 working days. This is already a reality in Estonia, Denmark, and Portugal. It's not a dream: it's organization. |
The Italian tax system is a labyrinth of 800 types of taxes, exemptions, concessions, brackets, rates, and special regimes. It is costly to manage, easy to evade for those with the means, and devastating for those who cannot. DDS proposes a structural tax reform based on three pillars:
Reduction of over 800 taxes to no more than 15 main categories. Elimination of all tax expenditures that cannot demonstrate a social or economic return greater than their cost. Approximately 742 tax expenditures have been identified in Italy; a serious assessment would eliminate at least 60% of them, recovering €25-35 billion annually.
Currently, employment and pensions account for nearly 80% of personal income tax (IRPEF) revenue. Capital gains, annuities, and professions with high levels of tax evasion contribute much less in proportion to actual income. DDS proposes: a flat proportional rate on capital gains (25%), a reformed land registry tax on real estate based on actual market values (currently, land registry values are often 30-60% of market values), a structural fight against tax evasion through mandatory electronic payment for all transactions exceeding 50 euros, and full interoperability between tax databases.
The Italian tax wedge (the difference between the employer's labor costs and the net paycheck) is among the highest in Europe: 45.9% for the average worker, compared to the OECD average of 35.8%. DDS proposes reducing the wedge by 8-10 percentage points over five years, financed by combating tax evasion, structural spending review, and income taxation. The goal is to increase net wages without increasing costs for businesses.
|
Year |
Tax wedge target |
Estimated tax evasion recovery |
Savings spending review |
Net balance |
|
2026 |
-2 points |
+8 billion |
+5 billion |
+1 billion |
|
2027 |
-4 points |
+15 billion |
+10 billion |
+3 billion |
|
2028 |
-6 points |
+22 billion |
+15 billion |
+5 billion |
|
2030 |
-8 points |
+35 billion |
+22 billion |
+7 billion |
|
2035 |
-10 points |
+50 billion |
+30 billion |
+10 billion |
Tax evasion in Italy is worth between €90 and €110 billion a year, according to the most reliable estimates. It's not a problem of mentality, but of the system: when the probability of being caught is low and the penalties are mild, tax evasion is rationally convenient. DDS proposes changing the cost-benefit equation of tax evasion:
|
CONCRETE EXAMPLE — PORTUGAL Portugal introduced a tax receipt lottery in 2014: every electronic receipt is entered into a monthly draw. The result: a 17% increase in VAT revenue in three years and a 23% increase in restaurant revenue. This measure, costing the state nothing, is highly effective in incentivizing consumers to request receipts. DDS proposes adopting it immediately in Italy as well. |
The Italian labor market is characterized by a paradox: it is simultaneously too rigid (dismissals are difficult for those on standard contracts) and too precarious (millions of workers in atypical employment contracts with no protections). DDS rejects both extreme solutions—neither maintaining the current dualism nor completely liberalizing dismissals.
DDS proposes replacing the proliferation of atypical contracts (co.co.co., fictitious VAT numbers, fixed-term contracts renewed indefinitely, seasonal, and intermittent) with a single contract offering increasing protections: in the first 12 months, easier termination for both parties; from the 13th to the 36th month, increasing protection; and after 36 months, full stability. This eliminates the incentive for companies to keep workers in perpetual precarious employment.
DDS proposes the introduction of a legal minimum wage of €10 gross per hour (indexed annually to inflation), with collective bargaining only able to improve it. Currently, the lack of a legal minimum wage creates wage dumping in sectors not covered by strong collective agreements. The minimum wage does not replace bargaining; it protects it.
DDS proposes a radical transformation of the currently useless Employment Centers: each center must have qualified personnel with measurable re-employment objectives (currently, 4% of the unemployed find work through Employment Centers; the DDS goal is 35% within five years, aligning with the European average). The basic income, as tested in Italy, has been a partial failure: it hasn't truly activated people into work. DDS proposes a transitional income system conditioned on active participation in certified training programs and an active and documented job search.
Italy boasts a unique industrial fabric of SMEs: flexible, creative, and export-oriented. However, Italian SMEs suffer from three main problems: difficulty accessing credit, too small to compete on global markets, and insufficient investment in technology and innovation.
Italy's public debt of €2.9 trillion is the second highest in the eurozone, after Germany (which, however, has a GDP almost double ours). The debt-to-GDP ratio of 137% means that every Italian, from birth to death, virtually inherits approximately €49,000 of public debt. Interest payments consume approximately 4.2% of GDP each year—more than we spend on defense and more than we invest in research.
Debt reduction cannot be achieved through brutal austerity (which curbs growth and worsens the debt-to-GDP ratio) nor through intentional inflation (which would hit the middle class and savers). The only sustainable path is GDP growth combined with a sustained primary surplus (revenue > expenditure net of interest).
DDS proposes a three-track parallel strategy:
|
PROJECTION: CREDIBLE OPTIMISTIC DDS SCENARIO If the DDS reforms produce an average additional growth of 0.8% per year compared to the baseline scenario, a recovery of tax evasion of €30 billion over five years, and a spending review saving of €20 billion, the debt-to-GDP ratio will fall to 122% by 2035. This isn't the solution to the problem, but it is a credible and verifiable trend reversal. Debt cannot be eliminated in a decade: it can be brought under control and gradually reduced. |
DDS proposes increasing public healthcare spending from the current 6.9% of GDP to 7.5% by 2030 and to 8% by 2035. This equates to approximately €12-15 billion in additional annual funding at full capacity. The primary source of funding is recovery from tax evasion and the rationalization of unproductive spending, not new debt.
Waiting lists aren't a resource problem in the strict sense: they're a problem of organization, incentives, and governance. Concrete solutions:
Italy trains excellent doctors and nurses who then emigrate for better economic and working conditions. DDS proposes: increasing national contracts for NHS staff (which have been at a standstill for years), adequate and increased specialization scholarships (currently 20,000 specialists are short), mandatory five-year service in the NHS for those trained with public scholarships (with the option of reimbursement of the scholarship as an alternative), and no longer unsustainable working conditions.
The Electronic Health Record exists on paper but is fragmented and unused in practice. DDS proposes a single, truly interoperable national EHR, accessible by all doctors and healthcare professionals within the National Health Service with the patient's consent, and by the patient themselves via an app. This eliminates duplicate tests, reduces medical errors, and enables real-time epidemiological surveillance. The model is the Danish system (MedCom), recognized as one of the best in the world.
The Italian education system has structural problems that ripple throughout the chain: insufficient preschool (only 27% of children aged 0-3 have access to nursery school, compared to 56% in Denmark), primary and secondary schools with outdated curricula and 20th-century teaching methods, underfunded universities with few doctorates and little research, and a public research system with some of the lowest salaries in Europe.
Italy has high-quality universities, but they are systematically underfunded and have outdated governance. DDS proposes:
Italy suffers from a severe infrastructure gap in the South and a growing obsolescence of infrastructure in the North. High-speed railways connect the major cities of the North well, but the South is almost completely excluded. Water infrastructure loses 42% of the water it delivers to the network. State and provincial roads are poorly maintained in many areas. Ports, despite their enormous potential (Italy is at the heart of the Mediterranean), are underutilized due to logistical shortcomings.
Italy imports over 80% of its energy needs, with annual expenditures of €70-90 billion abroad. This is both an economic problem (cost to families and businesses) and a strategic one (dependence on unstable or hostile countries). The transition to renewables is therefore both an environmental, economic, and geopolitical necessity.
In Italy, 5.7 million people live in absolute poverty (2024), the highest figure in the last thirty years. Poverty has shifted: it no longer affects just the elderly (who are relatively protected by the pension system), but above all children (1.3 million in absolute poverty, 13.8% of all children) and young adults. A society that allows its children to grow up in poverty not only commits an injustice: it destroys its own future human capital.
DDS proposes to abolish the fragmentation of the current welfare system (over 30 different, often overlapping and inefficient measures) and replace it with:
The Italian pension system is the most expensive in Europe (16% of GDP), with overall low average pensions but extremely unequal distribution: golden pensions for those who worked under the old pay-as-you-go system and paltry pensions for young people with intermittent careers under the new contributory system.
Housing prices in Italy's major cities have become unaffordable for middle- and low-income earners. The rental market is dysfunctional: limited rental housing, high prices, and unbalanced protections that create both abuse for tenants and excessive fears for landlords. DDS proposes:
The Italian civil justice system is the slowest in Europe: 1,120 days on average for a first-instance civil trial. Criminal justice is slow, uncertain, and sometimes unfair in its distribution. The judicial backlog amounts to over 3 million cases. This isn't just a simple inconvenience: it's a huge economic cost (the IMF estimates that reducing civil justice times would increase Italian GDP by 0.8-1.0% annually) and a social injustice (those with resources resist legal proceedings for years; those without resources capitulate).
Italy cannot afford to ignore its demographic crisis. With 1.20 children per woman, the Italian population is expected to decline from 60 to approximately 50 million by 2050 in the absence of immigration, resulting in a dramatic aging population. This isn't just an opinion: it's actuarial mathematics. The consequences are economic (fewer workers, fewer taxpayers, less consumption), social (welfare crisis), and cultural.
Decades of symbolic birthrate policies have failed. The countries with the highest birthrates in Europe (France, Sweden, Denmark) have not handed out symbolic bonuses: they have built welfare systems that make it practically possible to have children without sacrificing career and income. DDS proposes:
Immigration is essential for the Italian economy both in the short term (workers in underserved sectors) and the long term (demographic sustainability). But unmanaged immigration creates real problems: pressure on services, social tensions, and the exploitation of migrants themselves. DDS rejects both the demagogic approach of a "total ban" (impossible and economically suicidal) and the approach of indiscriminate acceptance without integration.
Italy is one of the European countries most exposed to climate change: drought risk in Southern Italy, increasingly frequent floods in the North, rising sea levels threatening the coasts (42% of the Italian coastline is at risk), and hydrogeological instability affecting 82% of municipalities. Extreme events cost Italy an average of €3-5 billion annually in damages, with peaks much higher.
Italy is a leading Mediterranean country, a founding member of the EU and NATO, and the world's seventh-largest economy. Yet its foreign policy voice is often weak, inconsistent, and ineffective, due to a combination of government instability and a lack of strategic coherence. DDS advocates a foreign policy based on clear values, well-defined national interests, and an active role in multilateral institutions.
DDS is staunchly pro-European not out of dogma but out of rational self-interest: alone, no European nation can compete with the US, China, or other emerging giants in the geopolitical and economic dynamics of the 21st century. But DDS's pro-Europeanism is critical: the EU must be reformed towards greater democracy (reducing the power of national governments and increasing the power of the European Parliament), greater solidarity (a larger EU budget with its own fiscal capacity), and greater decision-making efficiency (abolishing unanimity in foreign and fiscal policy).
Italy must be a key player in EU reform, not a spectator. It must build alliances with countries with similar interests (France, Spain, Greece) and not simply complain about German rules.
DDS proposes increasing defense spending to 2% of GDP (NATO's target; currently, we're at 1.5%) but, at the same time, radically reforming the armed forces: reducing the number of senior ranks (Italy currently has more generals than Germany), increasing investment in technology, cyber defense, and intelligence capabilities; and actively participating in the construction of a common European defense that will reduce costs for each member state in the long term.
Italy has a natural area of influence in the Mediterranean and Africa that it has never exploited strategically. DDS proposes a real Mattei Plan for Africa (not the current propagandistic version): concrete investments in infrastructure, energy, and training in African countries, created not out of abstract generosity but for strategic interests: reducing irregular migration flows, creating markets for Italian companies, and ensuring stable and diversified energy supplies.
— PART III — IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND EXPECTED CONSEQUENCES —
Reforms influence each other. The order of implementation is crucial. DDS doesn't propose doing everything at once: it proposes proceeding by priority, respecting interdependencies, and being honest about the real timeframe. None of the reforms described produces results in six months. Some require 10-15 years to unfold. Saying this isn't pessimistic: it's respect for the citizens' intelligence.
|
Phase |
Period |
Main priorities |
Necessary condition |
|
1 — Foundations |
Years 1-2 |
Electoral reform, tax evasion fight, public administration digitalization, and bureaucracy cuts |
Stable parliamentary majority |
|
2 — Acceleration |
Years 3-5 |
Tax reform, labor market, healthcare, education |
Phase 1 results verified |
|
3 — Consolidation |
Years 6-8 |
Major infrastructure, pension reform, active foreign policy |
Growth > 1.5% per year |
|
4 — Maturity |
Years 9-10 |
Constitutional reforms, European integration, debt reduction |
Political and institutional stability |
|
Long term |
Years 10-15 |
Demographic targets, carbon neutrality, debt reduction < 100% GDP |
Programmatic continuity |
DDS is honest about the risks. Structural reforms always generate resistance, transition costs, and sometimes short-term negative effects before producing medium- to long-term benefits. The main risks of the DDS program are:
If Italy continues on its current trajectory, without significant structural reforms, the consequences over the next 10 years are highly likely:
With the implementation of the DDS program in the time and manner described, the realistic (not optimistic) projections are:
|
Indicator |
Situation 2025 |
Projection 2030 |
Projection 2035 |
|
Average annual GDP growth |
0.5% |
1.4% |
1.8% |
|
Debt / GDP |
137% |
130% |
118% |
|
Youth unemployment |
20.3% |
14% |
10% |
|
Estimated tax evasion |
~100 billion |
~65 billion |
~40 billion |
|
Health expenditure / GDP |
6.9% |
7.5% |
8.0% |
|
Education Spending / GDP |
4.1% |
4.8% |
5.5% |
|
Renewables on electricity production |
42% |
68% |
85% |
|
Fertility rate (projection) |
1.20 |
1.35 |
1.50 |
|
Corruption Index (Position) |
42° |
32° |
25° |
|
NOTE ON THE PROJECTION METHOD These projections are based on econometric models that combine the estimated impact of each reform (data from academic literature and international comparisons) and assume an international context free of exceptional shocks. They are central projections: reforms could produce better results (optimistic scenario) or worse results (pessimistic scenario with delays and resistance). DDS is committed to monitoring and publicly communicating the gap between projections and actual results on a semi-annual basis. |
The DDS system relies on micro-groups of five people as the basic unit of political participation. Applied to Italy, this means: every municipal district, every neighborhood, every professional community can organize itself into micro-DDS groups that develop proposals from the bottom up, aggregate them towards higher-level structures, and participate in defining the program in a genuine, not merely decorative, way.
This is not a mechanism of symbolic consultation (like traditional online forums where opinions are collected and then ignored): it is a mechanism of binding participation, where decisions made at higher levels must be justified with respect to input from lower levels.
In DDS, those who assume responsibility must have the skills to exercise them and are accountable for their results. The Meritocratic Points system creates a verifiable record of each member's contributions, balancing seniority, quality of contribution, and demonstrated ability. Applied to Italian governance, this means: no appointments based on political loyalty to technical positions; every appointment to public office must be accompanied by a verifiable skills profile; every public official has measurable objectives and is publicly accountable for their results.
DDS operates under the principle that everything related to the management of public power and resources must be public and accessible. Applied to Italy: full open data on all public budgets in machine-readable format; real-time transparency on all public contracts; mandatory publication of all public body documents within 24 hours of adoption; and a general right of civic access without the need to justify the request.
Mutual respect in DDS isn't rhetoric: it's an operational rule. In Italian governance, it means: respect for citizens' rights in bureaucratic procedures (public offices exist to serve citizens, not the other way around); respect for public sector workers as professionals, not as bureaucrats to be humiliated; respect for minorities in majority decisions; respect for winners by losers (acceptance of the democratic outcome); respect for future generations in budgetary decisions (not passing the debt on to children).
Every ambitious program must answer the question: where is the money coming from? DDS does so transparently.
|
Source of funding |
Estimated operating profit (billion €/year) |
Production times |
Certainty |
|
Tax evasion recovery |
30-50 |
3-7 years |
High (with appropriate tools) |
|
Structural Spending Review |
15-25 |
2-5 years |
Medium-High |
|
Abolition of unproductive tax breaks |
20-30 |
1-3 years |
High |
|
Reduction of political-institutional costs |
4-6 |
2-4 years |
High |
|
Carbon tax (net, after dividend) |
8-12 |
2-4 years |
Average |
|
Health efficiency (waste reduction) |
5-8 |
3-6 years |
Average |
|
TOTAL sources |
82-131 |
— |
— |
|
Program costs (additional investments) |
60-90 |
Gradual |
— |
|
ANNUAL NET BALANCE UNDER FULL SOLID STATEMENT |
+22 / +41 billion |
From 2030 |
Average |
The transition is not painless: in the first two to three years, some reforms require investment before generating savings. DDS envisages a transitional financing gap of €5–10 billion annually for the first three years, covered by long-term debt issuance (not increasing the structural deficit) and by using available European funds (NRRP and structural funds, of which Italy uses only 60–70% of the available resources).
— CONCLUSION —
Italy is not a country doomed to decline. It is a country that has forgotten how to harness its extraordinary resources: the creativity of its entrepreneurs, the talent of its researchers and artists, the beauty of a unique landscape, the depth of a millennia-old culture, the strength of a network of local communities and human connections that no statistic fully captures.
The DDS program doesn't promise miracles. It promises honesty, method, consistency, and respect. It promises to tell the truth even when it's uncomfortable, to propose solutions even when they're complex, to admit mistakes when they're made, and to correct course when the data shows something isn't working.
The Italy of 2035, if this program is implemented, will not be perfect. It will be better: more equitable, more efficient, more honest, more competitive, more participatory. A country where the son of a worker from the South has the same opportunities as the son of a professional from the North. A country where starting a business takes days, not years. A country where healthcare works for those without money, not just for those with it. A country where young people find reasons to stay and contribute, rather than reasons to leave and build their lives elsewhere.
This is not a dream: it is a goal that can be achieved with intelligence, determination, and mutual respect.
|
DIRECTDEMOCRACYS — OUR COMMITMENT DirectDemocracyS is committed to publicly monitoring the implementation of each point of this program, to transparently communicating results and deviations from objectives, to correcting proposals that reality proves inadequate, and to involving its members and Italian citizens at every stage of the process. Direct democracy is not an electoral mechanism: it is a way of living together, with respect, competence, and mutual responsibility. |
DirectDemocracyS
directdemocracys.org
May 2025 — Version 1.0
When you subscribe to the blog, we will send you an e-mail when there are new updates on the site so you wouldn't miss them.
Comments