A new party's pitch: what to promise to win votes

What a new party must promise to earn your vote

What would a new party have to promise to win your vote? The question, posed in a forum, generated a catalog of proposals ranging from drastic public spending cuts to abolishing the Constitution, including free rural gasoline and a 32-hour workweek. This is not an electoral program: it is a portrait of disaffection.

The starting point was simple: five or more measures that would convince a skeptical voter. The majority response was not a list of policies, but prior distrust of any promise. "What's the point of what they promise," summarizes one participant, recalling that Italy promised to stop landings but blamed Europe and agreements. Another notes Podemos promised a universal payment, which went only to the usual recipients. The implicit conclusion: the problem is not the program, but the credibility of its signatories.

Cutting the State: the most repeated theme

The most frequent proposal is drastic reduction of public spending and the state apparatus. One participant suggests cutting spending by 50%, eliminating politicians and civil servants; another wants to reduce ministries to eight, abolish autonomous communities, and limit the civil service to 10,000 nationwide, outsourcing the rest. A third proposes auditing the public sector and eliminating protected contracts and unjustified supplements.

The arithmetic is the problem. A circulating calculation holds that a 50% spending cut would reduce pensions by 40%, and combined with requiring only 25 years of contributions, would leave a standard pension of about €300 per month. The rebuttal was immediate: supporters argue that eliminating corrupt spending would allow €1,000 pensions with 25 years of contributions, dismissing the contrary as demagoguery. The disagreement is not about the goal, but whether the numbers add up.

Pensions: from pay-as-you-go to the Austrian backpack

One area of consensus is changing the pension system. Several participants advocate moving from the current pay-as-you-go system to capitalization, citing the Australian model or the Austrian backpack. The argument is that the current system is unsustainable and that the transition would be the only acceptable excuse to not reduce public debt by more than 2-3% annually. The proposal is presented as a way to avoid the future awaiting young people.

Housing and land: building anywhere

Another current proposes modifying the land use law so all land is buildable by default, except for archaeological sites or natural parks, eliminating VAT on new housing purchases, and repealing the property tax (IBI). The declared goal is a sharp drop in rents and sales. The technical objection arises immediately: if you can build anywhere, who pays for electricity, water, sewage, and roads?

Taxes, borders, and EU exit

The fiscal and geopolitical chapter concentrates the most disparate proposals. Some call for 15% VAT, income tax, and corporate tax, suspending autonomy, and a contract between citizen and State. Others propose leaving NATO, the EU, and the UN, joining BRICS, and nationalizing strategic sectors. Still others suggest eliminating the minimum wage, cutting all taxes by 60%, and building five million social housing units. The range spans radical liberalism to economic sovereignty.

The underlying problem: no one reads the budgets

The conversation shifts to a practical issue. Would a voter read the General State Budget before voting? The majority answer is no. One participant notes Switzerland holds referendums, but they are occasional and allow studying information; with everything else, he argues, very few would read the texts, and the rest would vote randomly or based on media.

The closing: promising is easy

In the end, the most repeated proposal was not economic but contractual: that anyone breaking the program must resign immediately. This confesses that the problem is not what to promise, but that no one believes the promise anymore. With this material, any new party has an easy program to write and difficult to sell.