PSOE and three measures that reopen the economic debate

Minimum wage, IMV, and pensions: the core of the clash

Three concrete measures support the argument that the PSOE has not done so badly: the increase in the minimum wage, the Minimum Vital Income (IMV), and the rise in minimum pensions. Those who defend this thesis add a fourth element, foreign policy, and an uncomfortable nuance: housing remains the point where the narrative breaks. The discussion is not whether these measures exist, but who pays for them and what happens when the source runs dry.

The starting argument is simple. An ordinary worker lives better than in previous stages, there is more employment, and those at the bottom have a safety net that did not exist before. Against this, the most repeated response does not deny the data: it neutralizes it. It is argued that these guarantees are not a conquered right but a credit, financed by years of cheap money from the ECB, and that the bill will come later. The discussion thus becomes a tug-of-war over sustainability, not goodness.

What concrete measures support the argument that the PSOE has not done badly?

The minimum wage, the IMV, and minimum pensions are the three levers cited as key to the idea that "we do not eat our own misery." Added to this is a reading of foreign policy: opposition to war and the shift in the Sahara, with the enmity with Algeria and Algerian gas as the backdrop. The balance drawn is that today's Spain is better than under Rajoy and Zapatero, with one exception highlighted in red: housing.

The criticism of Rajoy appears early with a concrete figure: he raised VAT. The creation of a TV channel and support for certain presenters are also remembered. The comparison does not look favorable for the former president, accused of having an absolute majority and doing nothing with it.

The counterargument: cheap money, clientelism, and a new assisted class

The most elaborated objection does not dispute short-term effects, but their nature. It is argued that the State could distribute because the ECB maintained zero or negative rates for a decade, and when this source closes, the nature of these guarantees will be seen. The conclusion is harsh: they are a credit, not a right, and children will pay.

There is a second front, the IMV. The French experience with the RMI is cited as a precedent: it is argued that this type of minimum income creates a layer of recipients who combine aid with undeclared work. This is not verified data, but a prediction based on a previous case, and it is presented as such.

The third front is the minimum wage as a concept. It is compared to setting a minimum price for any good or service, warning that raising it without productivity gains is a bad long-term idea. The response from the other side is that hospitality workers earn more today than before the labor reform, and the idea that collective bargaining was abolished is false.

The problem no one disputes: housing

Even those defending the balance acknowledge that housing is the dark spot. It is described as "Spain Usuror 100%" and points to a narrative pitting owners against tenants, including threats and pressure on inheritances. It is the only point where both currents approach a tacit agreement: there is no star measure to exhibit here.

The discussion then shifts to the labor market and immigration. It is argued that no one is more exploited in Spain than a migrant worker, and that most seek nationality to subsequently work in other European countries. The response from the other side is that inviting millions to the party is a problem, not a solution. The exchange heats up and loses precision.

The right has no program, according to its critics

The challenge launched at the start of the debate remains without a clear answer: what concrete alternative does a PP and VOX government propose for real improvements. Three suspicions are listed — cutting minimums for freelancers, repealing the gender violence law, imposing tolls on highways — and the face-off between Sánchez and Feijóo is recalled, where the latter apparently took for granted that tolls would have to be implemented. The conclusion drawn is that the right lives off empty opposition and serves only as a fiscal limit.

The counter-reply does not come in the form of a program, but as weariness. It is answered that voting for the PSOE is also not the solution, that no current party is worthy, and that the reasonable thing is to vote for blank seats. The exchange closes with a startling fact: in Catalonia, the PSOE has aggregated non-nationalist votes, both right and left, and it is speculated that Catalan Alliance will absorb votes from Puigdemont and the socialists.

---

The balance remains where it started: three measures that work in the short term, a bill no one knows the cost of, and housing that destroys any narrative of improvement. With these elements, the discussion on whether the PSOE has done so badly is not resolved with data, but with confidence in who pays the next round.