Strike, Tuesday 19th October

[Will]

Frenchie,

This sounds to me like England in the 1950s and 1960s when a large proportion of the population, no doubt fuelled by the right-wing press, dismissed all trade union members, and all students, as communist trouble-makers in the pay of the Soviet government (in fact like McCarthyism in the USA). In reality, there were genuine grievances behind their protests. Particularly a little later in the 1970s when it was mostly poor management, rather than the so-called restrictive practices of the unions, that killed off so much of Britain's industry.

I had thought that the British had moved on from that sort of prejudice, but there seems to be a fair number of them who have just moved to France, old-fashioned thinking and all.

Ironic, isn't it, that not long ago some of those same people were saying how they admired the French for not allowing themselves to be trampled on by the government. But now the action is affecting them, the story has changed. [;-)]

[Frenchie]

I don't know if I find it more ironic or sad......

Anyway, good to see some people have an understanding of what's really happening..

[woolybanana]

[quote user="Will"]Frenchie,

This sounds to me like England in the 1950s and 1960s when a large proportion of the population, no doubt fuelled by the right-wing press, dismissed all trade union members, and all students, as communist trouble-makers in the pay of the Soviet government (in fact like McCarthyism in the USA). In reality, there were genuine grievances behind their protests. Particularly a little later in the 1970s when it was mostly poor management, rather than the so-called restrictive practices of the unions, that killed off so much of Britain's industry.

I had thought that the British had moved on from that sort of prejudice, but there seems to be a fair number of them who have just moved to France, old-fashioned thinking and all.

Ironic, isn't it, that not long ago some of those same people were saying how they admired the French for not allowing themselves to be trampled on by the government. But now the action is affecting them, the story has changed. [;-)]

[/quote]

Ah, Will, the voice of patronizing reason!

[Will]

[quote user="Stan Streason"]

It is only anecdotal from this site but the taxes levvied on setting up your own business in France seem to be punative.  [/quote]

Not anecdotal, some of us have personal experience of being in business in France (but see below). Anyway, it's not the taxes that are the killer, it's the social security charges.

[quote user="Stan Streason"]

...the greater the freedom of labour movement ultimately the greater the number of people employed.

...creating a situation where employee movement is much more fluid ultimately creates more jobs and keeps more people in work than effectively preventing small potential employers from expanding ...[/quote]

This is precisely the thinking (along with offering a more favourable regime for small businesses to pay charges) behind the autoentrepreneur scheme, though admittedly it has not yet addressed the cost and bureaucracy involved in taking on employees. In fact rumour has it that in some cases employees have been sacked and re-employed as autoentrepreneurs in order to get round the charges and strict employment laws.

[woolybanana]

[quote user="Frenchie"]

I don't know if I find it more ironic or sad......

Anyway, good to see some people have an understanding of what's really happening..

[/quote]

Thank you Frenchie, I do!

[Frenchie]

You 're sooooooooo funny ............

[Stan Streason]

Frenchie, please believe me, this is not a personal attack.  It comes from someone who is self employed and who's pension pot is solely what I have put away myself.  When starting my pension planning 40 years ago I thought I would have enough put away to retire by 60.  Trouble is (the good thing is)  I am in good health and I dont know when I will die and in order to provide myself a decent living for my revised life expectancy together with the fall in the value of my pot, my estimated retirement age has gradually increased and I now estimate this to be about 66 if I am lucky.

When people died at 70 then retiring at 60 to have a few relaxing years after working all your life was no bad thing.  But now if you get to 60 the chances are you will live to 80 or more.  Perhaps to keep the same rights it should be worked the other way and taken back to when this was all introduced. 

Your right is 10 years (on average) post retirement pension.  Therefore perhaps you should not get this till aged 70.  Your rights will not have changed.

There you go - all sorted.

[Frenchie]

I will be back on here to read the right wing rant, [;-)], I must go and work, as I have the privilege to have 55 papers to mark this pm ... [:)]

Sincerely, I think these may be the last days for me on the forum, it s all getting nonsense and most peole wear blinkers, you can't have an interesting chat.

Enjoy the food, the wine, the sun, but the French ....   [;-)]

[woolybanana]

Ah, she does understand!

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Frenchie"]

Sincerely, I think these may be the last days for me on the forum, it s all getting nonsense and most peole wear blinkers, you can't have an interesting chat.

[/quote]And without those like you the forum will become more nonsensical.  Don't let these people drive you away, Frenchie, we are not all the same and would miss your insight - we need those with a first hand view of what is going on to inform us and maybe, just maybe,you will change somebody's view, or make them see things differently.

[Braco]

Woolybanna

World War part one 1914-1918 and part two 1939-45 was fought between imperialist partners looking to either cement or advance their domination of territories. The effect of destroying a vile group such as the Nazi’s was a great benefit but never the primary reason for going to war. Given better diplomacy skills and softer demands I am sure that an accommodation could have been reached between all and any of the main combatants.  

 

Each side used the same propaganda, and a docile population blinded by nationalism provided the cannon fodder.

 

The next evolutionary step after the eventual demise of all empires is an educated population that will question the PM as to why he wants to project power – I am not holding my breath.

 

Please explain the justification and benefits of holding onto the Malvinas, Gibraltar, and other assorted rocks.

 

[Stan Streason]

[quote user="cooperlola"][quote user="Frenchie"]

Sincerely, I think these may be the last days for me on the forum, it s all getting nonsense and most peole wear blinkers, you can't have an interesting chat.

[/quote]And without those like you the forum will become more nonsensical.  Don't let these people drive you away, Frenchie, we are not all the same and would miss your insight - we need those with a first hand view of what is going on to inform us and maybe, just maybe,you will change somebody's view, or make them see things differently.[/quote]

I feel a little aggrieved if I am considered to be one of "these people".  I thought I put up a descent argument based upon my own position as to why I feel less than sympathetic to someone who expects to retire at 60 and be provided for at state expense for the rest of their life.  For my point of view no one has put up a reasoned, costed justification of keeping the status quo.  I totally refute that that is a right wing rant or that I am wearing blinkers.

And from the spending review just announced it looks like I wont be getting my state pension till 66 now.  62 = untold luxury.

[cooperlola]

Stan, did anybody mention any names?  I just think it's a pity if somebody with an opposing point of view feels so victimised that they want to leave the forum.  My only reason for posting was to let Frenchie know she has friends here (and that some of those friends agree with her.)

[5-element]

[quote user="Frenchie"]

I will be back on here to read the right wing rant, [;-)], I must go and work, as I have the privilege to have 55 papers to mark this pm ... [:)]

Sincerely, I think these may be the last days for me on the forum, it s all getting nonsense and most peole wear blinkers, you can't have an interesting chat.

Enjoy the food, the wine, the sun, but the French ....   [;-)]

[/quote]

 

I know what you mean Frenchie, but without people like you, most of the France Forum will be about the UK and how it's gone to the dogs!

[Gardener]

[quote user="Stan Streason"]

I feel a little aggrieved if I am considered to be one of "these people".  I thought I put up a descent argument based upon my own position as to why I feel less than sympathetic to someone who expects to retire at 60 and be provided for at state expense for the rest of their life.  For my point of view no one has put up a reasoned, costed justification of keeping the status quo.  I totally refute that that is a right wing rant or that I am wearing blinkers.

And from the spending review just announced it looks like I wont be getting my state pension till 66 now.  62 = untold luxury.

[/quote]

I agree with you Stan, early retirement and retiring at 60 cannot be sustainable with people living longer and in the difficult economic climate . But with people staying in jobs (those lucky enough to have one) longer, there will be a deficit of jobs at the other end of the age scale and that is being glossed over.

[Richard51]

Discussing this at length with French friends, their 'bugbear' isn't that civil service / public sector pensions should be reduced (they agree with that whole heartedly). Their issue is that the reforms, as they are currently proposed, don't propose to reduce government pensions but require  non public sector employees to work longer to pay for the inflated government pensions.  The civil servants etc won't care what the state retirement age is as they will still have their employment related retirement benefits and so aren't dependent on the state old age pension.  In addition they see the extended working life taking employment away from younger people - for whom the unemployment figures are already horrendous.  I think the UK has at least acknowledged the public | private sector pension divide.

They also feel that the proposals circumvent the 'Fillon' law.  The 'Fillon' law limited the number of years that any individual had to contribute before they became entitled to a pension - so you didn't have the scenario where a 14 year old school leaver had to work 50+ years to 'earn' their right to a pension.

Mrs R51

[NormanH]

What a disgusting thread this has become, with no evidence by any poster of the least idea of how the French pension system works ( although one can take it as read that 5e nd Frencie know , as French people) but plenty of judgemental comments based on ignorance.

Yet another sad example of inability of British immigrants to adapt to the local culture (exactly what the rabid Right, well represented here) complain about in Britain

[Richard51]

[quote user="NormanH"]What a disgusting thread this has become, with no evidence by any poster of the least idea of how the French pension system works ( although one can take it as read that 5e nd Frencie know , as French people) but plenty of judgemental comments based on ignorance.

Yet another sad example of inability of British immigrants to adapt to the local culture (exactly what the rabid Right, well represented here) complain about in Britain

[/quote]

Maybe, instead of ranting, you could participate in the discussion?

[NormanH]

I believe that I did, but as I cited sources in French (surprise surprise those funny little Disneyland people who inhabit the landscape to be figures of fun ) I am not too astonished that you didn't bother to read it.

http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/3/2295337/ShowPost.aspx#2295337

[Quillan]

Come on Norm you don't want this thread to degenerate in to "I know considerably more about France than you" competition. Just because some people have said nothing or hold a different opinion to you does not always mean they don't understand. Likewise, and I agree with you, you can't compare France to the UK. We learnt that a long time ago and I do get fed up when I hear Brits saying "well we don';t do it that way in the UK", they are not in the UK, they are in France and it's different you just get on with it.

[Stan Streason]

[quote user="NormanH"]I believe that I did, but as I cited sources in French (surprise surprise those funny little Disneyland people who inhabit the landscape to be figures of fun ) I am not too astonished that you didn't bother to read it.
http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/3/2295337/ShowPost.aspx#2295337
[/quote]

Norman.  You are so proud of your French that you are getting your English muddled.  You didnt cite a "source", your first link was merely to someone elses opinion.  Worth no more nor less than yours or mine.

Comments about "the French have always done it this way" are just as bad and pointless as "its not like the UK".  There is clearly a problem so something has got to change.  Arguing for the status quo is the one answer it cannot be because it clearly isnt working.

[Will]

[quote user="NormanH"]What a disgusting thread this has become, with no evidence by any poster of the least idea of how the French pension system works ( although one can take it as read that 5e nd Frencie know , as French people) but plenty of judgemental comments based on ignorance.

Yet another sad example of inability of British immigrants to adapt to the local culture (exactly what the rabid Right, well represented here) complain about in Britain

[/quote]

Norman, please don't lump us all into the same pigeonhole. Having paid a lot of money into one particular part of the French pension system over a number of years (for which I have been promised about 30€ in return) I made it my business to see how the system works. And I don't think I'm alone in that. As a professional journalist I do at least try and check facts before committing anything to writing publicly - even on a forum like this.

I have never had any desire to become French, but having lived in the country for a while I for one became fascinated by the mindset and culture of the locals, admittedly at the other end of France from you, and in the rural north they see many things very differently from the urban southerners. Their manifs and grèves are more about milk prices and THT pylons than pensions. But all seem united in their mistrust and dislike of Sarkozy (the majority in our bit of France voted for Bayrou - and before my neighbours get dismissed as militant lefties, Ségolène Royal in fact got no votes at all).

[Pommier]

I don`t think British and French people are so very different; both dislike and distrust whichever government is in power, no-one wants to give up rights/privileges they`ve gained over the years and everyone thinks they could run the country better!

[Quillan]

The way I see it is that the world evolves, it changes, peoples lives change, everything changes. When the current pension laws were 'knocked out' they were probably the best deal at that time. Nobody could foresee the future (bit like English moving to France on a pension, bet they never foresaw the current exchange rates, I doubt anyone did). We are now in a situation in France where there is a huge deficit. People look around, well politicians probably, and see that they offer a  more generous pension system and earlier retirement age than many of the other EU countries. I understand that many French feel that not to fight to retain the status quo is an affront to their grandparents who fought so hard for present system and benefits they have inherited but I wonder how their grandparents would have reacted if they had the same economic climate then as we have now. Of course so long has passed it would probably be impossible to get and answer.

But, is it the pensions today and other things tomorrow, do we really know the grand plan for France and the future. Is this just Sarkozy trying to get revenge for being shafted a few years back, only he will know. The other issue is suppose this law does get finalised, will that be a step to far for Sarkozy because I doubt he will get re-elected if what we read in the French press is true, but, will a new president reverse what has happened, I doubt it? So many questions but few realistic answers.

I tried to get an answer to some questions in another thread on this issue and have failed. They were not 'trick' questions, I wanted to genuinly find out a few things and thus understand the situation better from the French in general. What I fear is whilst the union are holding these strikes and some politicians have asked them to come to the table and discuss matters they really don't have any alternatives, or not from what I have read. I think it rather naive of the unions not to do this. The unions in France have a lot of power and command a large amount of the French populous and rather than both sides keep saying 'Non' perhaps a heart to heart and some ideas on how to fix the financial problems France faces whilst giving as much protection to their members as possible might be more helpful.

Next week will be interesting what with half term and the threat of further strikes. Will support dwindle away as Sarkozy predicts or will the strikes get bigger. The only current indication I have is that I have absolutely no French reservations for next week when traditionally it is our last full week of the year. Based on just that I rather fear that Sarkozy is in for a shock.

To misquote Churchill "what we want is more jaw, jaw and not more war, war" from both sides.

[Gardengirl]

I've just been on the Midi Libre website.Today's question for voting on was:

'Le vote de la reforme devra-t-il faire cesser les manifestations?'

Oui: 59%

Non: 48%

Sans opinion: 1%