Jump to content

Lawless France


betty
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My four pennyworth, for what it's worth. (You can't sit on the proverbial fence on this, though when you read it, you may think otherwise).

Let's assume a retirement pension of €5k (I'm not sure of the exact number over here, but from memory its not wildly different to the UK). Further assume 10M state pensioners at any point in time.  Unless my maths are wrong, that's €50bn p.a.  To put that number in perspective, today's 'shock / horror' cuts in the UK total £81bn over 4 years, say €19bn p.a.

I'm quite sympathetic towards the protests. I used to sit heavily to the 'right of centre', but I've seen over the years what uncaring & unscrupulous employers have done to loyal employees. All this, is to say nothing of what Government (of all parties) have done to shaft most of us. All the western European countries have stuck their heads in the sand for years over a problem that was coming at them (and us) like an express train. The Trade Union movement in the UK has moved on in the last 30 years, away from being a confrontational dinosaur, to being an organisation there to effectively help it's members in cases of genuine employment abuse. I have some personal experience of that positive move.

Back to the numbers, which I freely concede are 'back of a fag packet' stuff & I'll stand corrected if I'm miles out . However, maybe not far away from reality. Opposition is totally understandable, but it's futile and compromises the future for the youngsters. I asked the 40yo plumber who was with us today what he felt about things. (I paraphrase) - "Well, I'm 100% sympathetic with the strikes, but I haven't heard from anybody opposed to the Govt action what they would do to deal with the shortfall". "If we do nothing, where does it leave 'le jeune' here?" (le jeune = the 15yo lad who was with him on work experience).

Sadly, it's a no brainer.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Frenchie"][quote user="Etoile"]

[quote user="crossy67"]Yes so back to the topic. 

I admire the French for their willingness to demonstrate to influence their government.  It will be an inconvenience I am sure but what's a week or so's inconvenience when compared to another 2 years working life if you want to retire.  What will be next?  Another 2 years, then another?

We all here the slur, cheese eating surrender monkeys.  Well what's worse?  Cheese eating surrender monkeys of one that eats egg and chips?  We don't even stand up to the people we appoint to carry out our bidding.  Good on them for having more spine than us.

[/quote] If they had spine they would perhaps be willing to work properly like the rest of Europe. Every Euro we earn in France has to support this massive raft of public 'servants' who are only interested in lunch, their rights, going home, and going on strike. Trying to deal with them in our town is a nightmare, they are surly and rude. It is time for these people to be dragged into the modern world.

Edited to remove html 'Q'

[/quote]

I am one of them ( civil servants) , and I do like my job, and I ve worked hard to get it ( 5 years at UNi, then a competitive exam).

Yesterday I gave  two lessons ( though not paid because I was on strike), then I left the school to demonstrate with the others. 10 000 in Niort. I am not an exception, we do like ou job and want to protect the rights our grand parents fought for.

And I have no lesson to get from people like you, who seem to understand nothingabout what's going on, and feel they have a right to insult us. 

 

[/quote]

BRAVO !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh Normie, this is hardly intelligent analysis.

Things have changed since the time of Frenchie's grandparents. She has had a short contributory career and can hardly expect to retire on a big pension if she hasn't contributed, though teachers are experts at getting laid off for stress related conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frenchie, the money for the banks was either directly or indirectly borrowed.

I understand where you are coming from but I do have a couple of questions to ask if I may.

If the French government, like many other European governments, has run up such big debts what should they do to pay back the debt's?

Lets say they back down with the pension thing where else can they get money from considering the government has all this debt?

How would, for instance, people react if you said something like "well keep the pension age as it is but to cover the money we need you all to work a minimum of 40 hours a week and not 35".

Another alternative might be perhaps to reduce the number of public sector workers by natural wastage, by that  I mean as people retire or leave they are not replaced.

Perhaps another alternative could be to close some schools and hospitals, I mean we are served by 7 hospitals within an hours travel, 3 of which are under 20 minutes away. I can't talk about schools as being older we don't know much about them in our area.

Perhaps the number of Gendarmes could be cut, we have 21 in our local town of just over 3,000 residence because I am told only 7 work at any time, another 7 sleep when the first 7 are working and the third 7 are backups for gendarmes going sick or on holiday. This sounds an incredible amount to me and perhaps some could be cut. Not to mention we hav a rather splendid new Gendarmarie with new houses for all the officers plus ancillary buildings, I can't even guess at how much this must of cost.

I am interested to know how (French) people would react to any of the above.

The other serious question I would like to ask is have the 'unions' come up with any alternative ideas as to how the countries deficit can be cut. I mean 'it takes two to tango' and should not the 'unions' and the government be working together on this?

PS. I am not having a dig or tying to start trouble, I though as we had a couple of 'live' French people in the thread I would ask to try and understand more 'from the horses mouth' as it were how people are really feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two articles from the British press are worth looking at:

The right wing view which focuses on the damage to industry rather than the public outrage, and uses terms like 'socialist filibustering'

And this from a left-wing newspaper which attempts to look at the reasons for the strikes.

Whichever you agree with, there are facts behind the reforms. Every country (with the possible exception of some former eastern bloc countries where raising the retirement age above 60 would mean that few would actually live into retirement) is suffering from poor investment performance which impacts on pension funds, combined with longer life expectancies, and thus a need for a bigger pension 'pot'.

The UK's situation has been well documented, but I don't think it was until comparatively recently, when Sarkozy highlighted the need for reform, that people realised just how big the crisis was in France. Previous governments have tended, when faced by a funding crisis in the health and social security sector, to merely throw more money at it. That may make it look better in the short term, but does nothing to address the real issues, and of course, one day, the money will run out. That is the issue Sarko has attempted to address. It appears, from the outside, that many French people are refusing to accept the need for reforms, or even that there is a crisis. They see it as an erosion of human rights, and (not without some justification) blame the banking crisis rather than the inadequate system.

Somebody has to do something to stop the pension costs spiralling completely out of control - it's difficult to see what, though. Sacrifices must be made - if not by raising the retirement age, by reducing pensions (which is likely to prove even less acceptable) or by cuts in other areas, like health, education, or defence. No doubt many will suggest getting rid of fonctionnaires, but when jobs (which many French still see as a right, to last for life) are threatened, this also brings about industrial action. Even Sarko's proposals for scrapping the 35 hour week were deeply unpopular.

It's difficult to see how, or why, he was elected. Maybe his promises of reform were seen as a breath of fresh air (like Blair, or, from the other wing, Thatcher before him) which has now backfired?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which reminds me of something I left out in my post, how about putting an extra 1% or 2% on 'income' tax that way everyone, including the bankers, pay towards reducing the debt. How would the French react to that idea? Again not a dig but a serious question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we're not supposed to be comparing countries, but I wonder if there will be strikes etc in the UK, now that the age for claiming a state pension is going to be raised to 66?

It's going to be especially hard on women, whose retirement age will go up from 60 to 66 in 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be strikes over the number of public sector jobs that are supposed to be culled in the next couple of years. Why is dieting always so difficult?  I guess if you are used to living on fatty food and just getting bigger and bigger then reducing is against your instincts, even though your members would be healthier for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Quillan"]Which reminds me of something I left out in my post, how about putting an extra 1% or 2% on 'income' tax that way everyone, including the bankers, pay towards reducing the debt. How would the French react to that idea? Again not a dig but a serious question.[/quote]

Interesting post Quillan, but could possibly lead to tanks replacing c/s gas.

 

Although unions have their place, I personally do not have much time for them since the Gormley/Scargill days which heralded the phrase “Everybody OUT.”

 

Protest or strike if disgruntled workers find it necessary, but peacefully please. Surely there is no need for all the violence, vandalism and looting?

As France is presently on a ‘red’ terror alert, the country should be vigilant and on the lookout for terrorist activity. However, some of these rioters have their faces covered just like the Taliban, it’s disgraceful. It would be SO easy for bombs to be placed in high activity areas, especially abandoned stolen cars. At the end of the day who suffers? Joe public, who else! Who pays?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will and without wishing to distract return to Betty's posting a bit later in that I am the son of a Welsh miner know something about Scargill was there during the miners strike of 84/85. Betty I am a lawyer and worked for the NUM during the strike. I do not and will not support Scargill. However think long and hard about this and as I say I will return to the French concept a bit later in the day having hopefully collected my thoughts.

In the Rhondda we had someone who had a baby during the strike the Social Services were involved and they asked them for some emergency aid as in nappies and their response 'You should have thought about that before you had a baby' I soon had that particular Civil Servant on his back and not literally. When Russia supported the miners Baroness Thatcher reduced their payments based on what they thought was the value of the boxes of food and the like. I am not left or right I just believe in the difference between what I perceive as right and wrong. But miners have nothing to do with this posting. Of course Betty is was Mitterand who changed from 65 to 60 the age for retirement. No one else.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="dragonrouge"]I forgot Betty they also said to rip up blankets and towels and make do as nappies. Again it was Churchill who put the troops into South Wales in the General Strike and shot miners.[/quote]

That was the year 1911!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, as long as the comparisons are both constructive and relevant. All too often people draw comparisons between France and Britain for negative purposes, and try to compare parts of the culture and systems which are totally different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again it was Churchill who put the troops into South Wales in the General Strike and shot miners.

Edit - my original post was inaccurate and unnecessarily sarcastic.

This is a matter about which there is much dispute. The Wikipedia article on the subject of the Tonypandy riots in 1911 seems to broadly support this. Even so, no miners were shot.

However, an alternative view - outlined by others - (including Harold Wilson) is that it was the Chief Constable of Glamorgan who demanded armed troops be sent to Tonypandy. Churchill heard of his demand and stopped the train they were on.

I wonder.

Edit - This is from Wikipedia, perhaps it is the source of the belief that miners were shot:

Purported eyewitness accounts of alleged shootings persisted and were relayed by word of mouth, though there are no records of any shots being fired by troops, and the only recorded death was that of Samuel Rhys.[from a truncheon blow] In the autobiographical 'documentary novel' Cwmardy, a contemporary communist trade union organiser Lewis Jones presents a stylistically romantic but closely detailed account of the riots and their agonising domestic and social consequences. In a chapter Soldiers are sent to the Valley, he narrates a fictional incident in which eleven strikers are killed by two volleys of rifle fire in the town square, after which the miners adopt a grimly retaliatory stance. In this account, the end of the strike is hastened by organised terror directed at mine managers, leading to introduction of a minimum-wage act by the government—hailed as a victory by the strikers.

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...