France - Liberté, égalité, fraternité to bypass the people

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Bluesma
9 question-marks for Captain Obvious, really? What's next, Am I supposed to explain the meaning of 'work' to you?

Is that the tone we're going to take in this discussion? The nine year old type?
Okay, then maybe I'll have to explain to you slowly the difference between Germany and France? Why put up a link to a report, and quotes, about the situation in Germany? These are two different countries. Google and you can see them on a map. They have different cultures, speak different language, have different political and economic systems.
Also the EU is made up of many countries besides France.
But let's try discussing like adults, shall we?



source

This is for FRANCE. The working poor has not actually gone up. -Not amongst full time year around employees.
(It is going up drastically for "other inactive". They are not unemployed, not students, not retirees, not under 15.... so what do you think they are....?)

Two things did go up in the last few years- part time work, and short term contracts. Working poverty, in this country is highly linked to precarious jobs. This is the problem with the over protected full time long contracts which are making for non-productive employees, and making businesses fail financially.
To save themselves they have to give small contracts, part time, short term. (the CDD I was talking about).

Heavy absenteeism of the full time long contract employees that cannot be fired allows only for small term contracting replacements. You can be a replacement for someone else for YEARS.
I was a replacement employee, with repeated three month contracts for many years- the person I replaced was retired! But officially and legally the post was still considered theirs as they were receiving retirement pay.
I am older, own a home, have raised children and have a husband who earns enough,
but my coworkers in my situation who were young, had young kids, and wanted to buy a car, buy a house, provide security for their family? They couldn't. Each three months they found out whether they were going to be kept another three months.

From the perspective of the indicators, the use of the category “working poor” thus poses several problems. First, the category hides the role of unemployment and inactivity as determinants of poverty; by its very name, it highlights one important determinant of working poverty (“work doesn’t pay”) in relation to other determinants (“small number of hours worked” or “heavy family responsibilities”).

(source same as for graph above).

This is why this came about earlier this year-

On 18 January, French President Francois Hollande presented a plan to boost employment in the face of what he termed 'a state of economic and social emergency'. Under the plan, which is backed by a budget of €2 billion, companies with fewer than 250 workers will receive an annual €2,000 pay-out over two years for every full-time worker they hire on contracts lasting more than six months.

[url=http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/emcc-eurwork/articles/labour-market/france-president-launches-new-plan-to-boost-employment]source[/u rl]

His plan is stupid- as the socialists love to imagine that the government has this magic treasure chest that never empties...they just need to give out more money and all problems will be gone!
The problem is, this system, which has a private and public sectors, (which I like) has to acknowledge that the money for the public sectors is generated by the private sector! All this social aid, and the medical care, needs a healthy private sector as well. It is a delicate balance that must constantly be searched for. It waivers back and forth.

But in any case, it is not simple. I like that at least the french are willing to try things, and when it looks to be not so good, they try something else. They call us "psychorigide" for a reason.

a reply to: Bluesma

But...but...but there is no rising number of working poor?

Two things did go up in the last few years- part time work, and short term contracts. Working poverty, in this country is highly linked to precarious jobs. This is the problem with the over protected full time long contracts which are making for non-productive employees, and making businesses fail financially.

According to different scientists this development is actually part of the bigger picture, the working poor. You completely ignored the second link regarding the whole of Europe, maybe you should start there before you blaim me for providing actual numbers from Germany.
And I stand with my comment until you can show me I'm wrong, which I'm obviously not. From your source:

From the standpoint of public policy, the change in poverty based on employment status in France and Germany emphasizes that an effective fight against poverty requires addressing all forms of poverty. For the working-age population, in economies where dual-earner couples have become the norm, this means putting in place policies on full-time work and full employment policies that do not foster atypical forms of work. This requires, from a macroeconomic point of view, growth or job-sharing (and the associated income-sharing) and, from a microeconomic point of view, meeting needs with respect in particular to childcare, training and transport. While these policies are costly, more economical measures, such as strengthening financial incentives, have failed to demonstrate that they can actually reduce overall poverty.

You did get that, right? They stated years ago, that this new 'reform', which got boxed through the parliament, is deemed to fail as well. It won't fight poverty but produce more, as costly (but effective) policies are off the table by now. And now you should be able to realise why we have this huge opposition. I'm not saying you should agree, but you do see the problem now. Don't you?

The more I think about it, the more I'd suggest we actually agree on most parts. The thing I don't understand is why you don't read the things you post, especially the important ones.

Now, could you elaborate on why more of the same old same old should actually have a positive effect this time?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion

From the standpoint of public policy, the change in poverty based on employment status in France and Germany emphasizes that an effective fight against poverty requires addressing all forms of poverty. For the working-age population, in economies where dual-earner couples have become the norm, this means putting in place policies on full-time work and full employment policies that do not foster atypical forms of work. This requires, from a macroeconomic point of view, growth or job-sharing (and the associated income-sharing) and, from a microeconomic point of view, meeting needs with respect in particular to childcare, training and transport. While these policies are costly, more economical measures, such as strengthening financial incentives, have failed to demonstrate that they can actually reduce overall poverty.

You did get that, right?

Yes, you have repeated what I said.

You even repeated my assertion that Hollande's idea of throwing more financial incentives at the companies is "stupid" and will not work.

Great, we are on the same page.

Now, could you elaborate on why more of the same old same old should actually have a positive effect this time?

I don't think it is the same old-same old.
In the 26 years I have lived here, the same-old was always throw more money out. Give more aid, more social programs, just keep dishing it out to fix things. While simultaneously the over protections and rights of those with a CDI grows and grows and grows. I watch the businesses close in my town and the owners end up working for the state, just as I did.

THis is a radical change from the same old socialist programs. I am right in the middle and front of the people who are abusing these previous programs, as well as those who are suffering from them- the people on CDI's or state employees talking about where they are going on vacation next week and laughing at how they got out of work this week, and the young people scrambling and stressed because they are only able to get little temporary contracts, no security, no credit and barely enough to live, as replacements for the first group.

I LOVE how the people in France have retained their power here. But believe it or not, even that can get to an extreme which is detrimental. The system is being abused and EVERYONE is suffering because of it. There is time to insist the kids stop trashing the house.

(ETA- you do understand that those propositions of Hollande I referred to are not the ones the OP is about ...right? In the OP, the reforms are not his and are vastly different!)

a reply to: Bluesma

THis is a radical change from the same old socialist programs. I am right in the middle and front of the people who are abusing these previous programs

Which Front, Front National? Buckloads of Bollocks don't change a thing either. Look, I'm tired of dogmatic viewpoints and your mantras of "this time it will work". I'm completely with Einstein here.

You've seen the diagnosis, if you really think more poverty would be great for the economy we're obviously not on the same page. You can't possibly suggest, paying people less for more work (while not improving transport, training and childcare due to austerity cuts) won't have drastic impacts on the (working) poor. You can rant all day about what went wrong thus far, but jumping head on into the next neoliberal trashcan is no sane solution either.

If you'd like to continue with prayers for this mankind-saving Ermächtigungsgesetz, filled with strong hopes to save the economy, go ahead! It's quite amusing to see prejudices at work and I'm happy to attack them as often as I can.

the reforms are not his and are vastly different!

Well. Who on Ceres cares about Hollande anyway? I've added some links to roughly illustrate the background and development of this story, you're invited to add as much as you like. I'm looking forward to clean up with more prejudices, no matter which ones they are.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Bluesma

Which Front, Front National? Buckloads of Bollocks don't change a thing either. Look, I'm tired of dogmatic viewpoints and your mantras of "this time it will work". I'm completely with Einstein here.

For one, I did not say "this time it will work". I have repeated many times-
this is different from what they usually try, and the good thing in France is that if it doesn't work they will try something else.

You can't possibly suggest, paying people less for more work (while not improving transport, training and childcare due to austerity cuts) won't have drastic impacts on the (working) poor.

There are people who are working VERY LITTLE and getting a lot of pay and support. Yes, I can affirm that. I am in that catagory. I still feel for the people who did not, despite their hard work.
My own daughter has a one year old, and I can bear witness that there has been no austerity cuts- she still gets aid from the state, paid childcare, and the abiility to work at 80% for the same salary as 100%.

The biggest impact they can have on the working poor is to stop giving the people on CDI (or titulaires) so much rights that they can abuse them with impunity and cause others to be put in a position of precarity.

a reply to: Bluesma

this is different from what they usually try, and the good thing in France is that if it doesn't work they will try something else.

The more you repeat that mantra, the more I'd have to giggle it away. This is not a Game of Trial and Error either, we're talking about the lifes of millions affected. You actually don't give a damn at all, right?

I can bear witness that there has been no austerity cuts

And I'm the bear called wits_ness, calling your BS again. Austerity cuts don't mean 'no wellfare at all', slowly there.
The only thing that happened, was a delay of more auterity cuts for a brief period.

"It would be wrong to take measures that put another brake on consumption and investment," Hollande said at the annual Paris farm show on Saturday. "There is no need to add more austerity in 2013. A lot has already been asked of the taxpayer."

France to pause austerity, cut spending next year instead: Hollande

It's not wrong this time? Sure. Not.
Lets take a short glimpse on what exactly is supposed to change now, first link from my OP:

...
Cap on compensation for unfair dismissals

One of the most controversial changes is to limit the amount of compensation paid out those who were found to have been dismissed unfairly after an employment tribunal.

The minister plans to cap the pay-out to three months' salary, if the worker has less than two years of service, six months' salary for those who have worked between two and four years, nine months' salary for between five and nine years of service and 13 months for 10 to 19 years on the job. Over 20 years and it will be capped at 15 months' salary.

Referendums at work

While the reforms do not plan to ditch the principle of getting unions to give their seal of approval on changes at a company, the government plans to allow for referendums to take place in a company if unions refuse to agree to changes. If a majority of workers are in favour, unions will not be able to oppose it.

How working life in France is set to change (for the worse?)

Sneaky trick, isn't it? You'd just have to pay said 50% a little bonus or apply other means of pressure, well played. Unions - the former glory of a distant past.
I cherry-picked just the last two points to make this one thing abundantly clear: nothing of this actually reforms labour for the good, it just takes away the rights of many for the alleged common good (aka more profits for a few). Same old same old, yes indeed!

Now please do me a favour, put your sacred beliefs aside for a second and try to actually digest the plain facts. And if you doubt anything I presented at all - go ahead and share your source. That's why we're all here, innit?

Right now I'm just having a blaze, wondering if you even bothered to read more than the headlines linked in my OP. C'mon!

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: nerbot
You can't possibly argue with fair taxes when the really big players store their tons of cash offshore. It's just pathetic, but kinda funny in a retarded way.

I'm not arguing about fair taxes. PLEASE DO NOT TRY TO PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH. In fact I never even mentioned the word "TAX" so stop being obtrusive.

Did you actually read my post?

I'm saying that those who work such short hours need to do more TO BENEFIT EVERYONE.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Bluesma

The more you repeat that mantra, the more I'd have to giggle it away. This is not a Game of Trial and Error either, we're talking about the lifes of millions affected. You actually don't give a damn at all, right?

I think it is good that movement continues and that they are willing to explore different approaches and ideas when searching for solutions to problems. I also feel a little less panicky than I used to when I was first here from America, because I have learned a bit more about this fluid and flexible quality of how the french do things. It is much less rigid , harsh, black and white- instead they are intuitive, moderate, adaptable. They are not fond of hard lines, ultimatums, or explicitness.

So when there are rules and laws, and I used to expect them to be suddenly enforced cold, hard American style - I kept being surprised to find that wasn't the case. For them, only a "con" (stupid ass) takes things to the letter, everything is adaptable... Because they don't go into dramatic harsh extremes, they can still change again tomorrow rather easily.
This is a bit complex to describe... but I guess it is normal that someone from a different culture would see that as lacking care. But it is not. Is is a lack of fear.

So we agree, austerity cuts are not going on, the people are not being hit by any of that.


On the changes in compensation.
I watch too much abuses there to be against it. I know a couple people who were put out of business because of all the accusations to Prud'homme. The interest for employees is that the trial can go on for years, and during that time, the employer is obligated to continue paying a salary to them. Even if it is eventually determined that the employer did nothing wrong. So people really have nothing to lose by going this route!
I know personally someone who was stealing money from her employer, and when they found out, she rushed to make some sort of accusations against them first.
I am sitting here shaking my head, because my anecdotes can go on and on, and I am sure they mean nothing to you.
The culture here has some other angles to it- like no one ever wants to accept responsibility for anything- it is passed around and around and there is not the same values on things like honesty, and personal responsibility, that the anglo saxons have.

I was faced with the decision of joining the unions where I worked for a long time.
They fought for some things I was against. For example, they went into an uproar because at some point the administration began considering giving CDI's (the long term contracts, making people "titulaires" state workers- when you get that, you cannot be fired, EVER. It is for life. They can move you around into different jobs, but never fire you).
To people based upon their work instead of how long they had been there. People who working hard, doing consistantly good work, being present and dependanble started to be considered.

This made the unions furious, and they fought to stop that. Only the amount of years working there could be considered after that. So it didn't matter if you were absent half the year , did crappy or no work, you would still get that prized golden egg, while the person who worked super hard next to you would not because they came in a year after you.

The Union was representative of the concerns of a small percentage of the employees- mostly the males who had been there for over ten years and had that protection. That was my impression.
For things such as that issue, I would have liked a referendum! There was a larger population of people (a lot of women, and younger men) who were stuck working their hearts out with these little repeated temporary contracts, who were not being represented, and who DESERVED some recognition of that, and they had no voice.


And come on... most of us have some idea of the sorts of problems that happen in socialism, with the lack of individual merit and responsibility! It can be a problem. It leads to a degradation of the employees attitudes and efforts.


After many months or years, even the strongest work ethic begins to crumble. You end up joining them because you cannot beat them and those higher up are so scared of a possible uprising. It's like living in a family where the parents are being steamrollered by belligerent children.

a reply to: Bluesma

What you say above is oh so true. thanks for supporting a realistic view of the world WE live in.

The bit you said about the French not admitting responsibility for anything rings in my ears.

Vive La Revolution! (pt2)

a reply to: nerbot

I'm saying that those who work such short hours need to do more TO BENEFIT EVERYONE.

Yeah, I know. The better good yadaya, same old same old trickle down trick. It's BS and we all ought to know that by now. A fricken lie, check the facts if you don't believe a thing I say. No words were put anywhere, I clearly stated my point of view.

But I like the way you used that to state I did put anything into your mouth. How could I, there is no way near that thing with all that foam involved!



Where is the actual data that explains how for example... Greece... didn't go to hell, literally? Those 'reforms' actually kill people, is that the common good? Did I just get you wrong?

...mounting evidence of a Greek public health tragedy.

Greece's health crisis: from austerity to denialism

a reply to: Bluesma

So we agree, austerity cuts are not going on, the people are not being hit by any of that.

No, we don't. Read again.

And come on... most of us have some idea of the sorts of problems that happen in socialism, with the lack of individual merit and responsibility! It can be a problem. It leads to a degradation of the employees attitudes and efforts.

That's the part I liked the most. Those pesky slaves really get on the nerves sometimes, don't they?

Make no mistake, it's a dangerous game. The social contract is a common good as well and given the need for dictatorship to pass this law, there's an obvious necessity to talk.

A degredation of democracy, that's what it is. But we're already in some weird form of oligarchy by now, are we not? Who on Ceres cares anyway, that's right. Suggestions?

No, we don't. Read again.

Done. Same result. No austerity measures touched the benefits of childcare, transport, or other aid. The quote said that measure had been taken earlier for the tax payers.
Remember you are referring to the "working poor", who are exempt from that catagory. They are the ones who receive the benefits and aid for transport, childcare, etc. That has not gone down at all. On the contrary.

That's the part I liked the most. Those pesky slaves really get on the nerves sometimes, don't they?

You didn't read anything I wrote, did you?
I am in support of the people who are working too hard with part time or short term contracts, that cannot support their families correctly, because of a percentage of the population that is abusing their rights and taking advantage of the lack of recognition of individual merit to ride on the backs of those hard workers in precarious positions!

These measures proposed are directed towards them. It gives more possibility for the "slaves" as you call them, to get their foot in the door, get some recognition, get some better contracts (and rights), get a right to vote on what kinds of things their company is doing!!

A degredation of democracy, that's what it is. But we're already in some weird form of oligarchy by now, are we not? Who on Ceres cares anyway, that's right. Suggestions?

"We're" ....are you in France? It doesn't seem like you are very familiar with the situation.
I am sure you have good intents, but I think you are bit ignorant of some aspects of this particular context, and are making mistakes.

a reply to: Bluesma

The quote said that measure had been taken earlier for the tax payers.

As it says "3 years old news": you missed the context, our tiny intermission from 2013. If you think there hasn't been any austerity cuts since you're pretty far off the radar. Put up or shut up maybe?

benefits of childcare, transport, or other aid

Look, the problem is rather easy to understand. There's no additional budget for further development on those sectors either and that resonates with the alarming result from your study.
The poverty risk is quite obviously rising when you don't update the system and keep demanding more from the people. Said 'slaves' will have fewer (more expensive) services and they will bring in less for more work. Still don't see the problem by now?
Well, just keep your focus on my person - not on the topic at hand - and you'll do fine! Nobody saw that cop-out coming, really.

These measures proposed are directed towards them.

Spoken like a true politician. Of course they are! All barrels are directly pointed at the people. Circumventing unions must be for the common good then, I'm such an ignorant fella!

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
As it says "3 years old news": you missed the context, our tiny intermission from 2013. If you think there hasn't been any austerity cuts since you're pretty far off the radar. Put up or shut up maybe?

Your insistance on trying to oppose me is making you go in ridiculous circles. I said No benefits were cut or taken out in the name of austerity. The TAX PAYERS were asked to pay more. The taxpayers are NOT the poor. They are exampt from paying taxes.

Look, the problem is rather easy to understand. There's no additional budget for further development on those sectors either and that resonates with the alarming result from your study.
The poverty risk is quite obviously rising when you don't update the system and keep demanding more from the people. Said 'slaves' will have fewer (more expensive) services and they will bring in less for more work. Still don't see the problem by now?

Good you finally get what I wrote three posts back - the social services and aid of the Public sector are financially supported by the Private sector. We continue to give more and more aid , and there is no more money for that, it is not fixing the problem. There has to be more money produced. We cannot continue to just tell everyone - we will pay you more and more and more to stay at home or go on vacation, while the working poor are used and abused to pay for that.

In any case throwing more money at them is not helping, that is clear. We have so much benefits and aid right now that it is being abused!
-Keep in mind, the system is not like in the US were only the most poor get aid. Here ALL the middle class gets the same benefits. I'm pointing at the middle and higher-middle class that is abusing this.

Spoken like a true politician. Of course they are! All barrels are directly pointed at the people. Circumventing unions must be for the common good then, I'm such an ignorant fella!

These dramatics are like speaking with a borderline teenager.
The union continue to have their power and influence. The employees just gain a little power to speak up too.

Have to pay for the Muslim invasion somehow eh..

ATSliens? Is that an Outkast reference? ATLiens?

There's a difference between a fight and debate.
When someone holds an opposing opinion on an issue, debate can be beneficial and interesting.
But it takes a little concentration and attention.

Can't put anything up?

I have put up links, articles, quotes.... I have written paragraphs and paragraphs, which you "argued" with by re-stating what I said.

In discussion forums, it is very often that you will come across people who disagree with your opinion, and might put forth argument for debate, as I have. The complaint that somebody disagreed with you is not going to be met with much sympathy.
It is usually acknowledged that when one starts a thread and includes their personal opinion on events or issues, they can expect some responses that are not in agreement.

A friendly suggestion- if you can accept that idea (expect to come up against disagreement and differing opinion, and see it as a potentially fun and interesting thing) then you will be able to debate with more efficiency.

a reply to: Bluesma

I have put up links, articles, quotes

You posted a study regarding poverty risks and we discussed the obvious consequences. Semantics are not very compelling after all, you should try to put up some facts in support of your statements. Is there anything else you'd like to debate?

Gimme more names if you wish, maybe that will add anything of value to this thread? You've lost me there, simple as that. Go and lecture somenody else with your opinions about their person, instead I'd prefer sticking to the topic at hand.

SO the French will have to work more then a 20 hour work week? They won't be able to close EVERYTHING down by like 7 PM? I mean if you need something you are just out of luck in France after 7 PM. You mean EVERYONE won't get every holiday off and grind the economy to a halt every time? Ya sounds pretty good. Welcome to the rest of the world France. a reply to: PublicOpinion

a reply to: LordDraconia

Welcome to the New World Order!

The French authorities have used the anti-terror state of emergency to ban several activists from joining demonstrations against the government's labour reform this week. Unions have planned two days of protest and called strikes in the air transport, road freight, rail and oil sectors.

France's state of emergency used to ban activists from labour law protests

Anti-terror-pro-economy-pre-crime, eh?