Defenders of the current German pension system argue that the principle of equivalence remains the most reliable way to maintain long-term fiscal stability. This principle dictates that pension benefits should reflect the contributions paid into the system during one's working life. By linking payouts directly to earnings, the state ensures that the system remains predictable and avoids the risks associated with unfunded, tax-financed universal benefits that could strain the national budget.
Proponents emphasize that the system has already been adapted to recognize non-work periods. Specifically, the state provides pension credits for child-rearing years, which effectively boosts the retirement accounts of parents. These adjustments demonstrate that the system is not static but capable of evolving to acknowledge the societal value of caregiving without abandoning the core requirement that benefits must be earned through participation in the labor market.
Furthermore, supporters point out that the pension system is only one pillar of old-age security. They argue that the responsibility for retirement planning should be shared between the state, employer-sponsored schemes, and private savings. By maintaining a clear link between work and pension, the system encourages labor force participation, which is essential for funding the benefits of the current generation of retirees.
Ultimately, those who back the current structure believe that radical changes could undermine the incentives that keep the economy productive. They maintain that the focus should remain on improving labor market conditions for women—such as expanding full-time childcare and promoting equal pay—rather than dismantling the insurance-based logic of the pension system itself.